Then they aren't attractive enough. Truly attractive men can do pretty much anything they feel like and get whole armies of women fawning over them. Yes, over time any of the women an attractive men spends time with will learn to hate him and she'll "expire" in this way such that he'll need to ditch her but he will ditch her and have millions of new women lining up that will excuse all his past behavior and attack his ex gf as being the problem.

If this isn't the outcome for a man, it's because he isn't attractive enough.

Quality Whites don't but there's a lot of trash us Whites still need to take out in our own ranks.

X censors and they censor in the worst way possible, because they aren't transparent about it. X will limit your reach and hide your posts without you being told this is happening and their algorithms can send you to X purgatory with a few posts after making a new account.

I actually think the leftist form of censorship where they just ban you is more honest and better. X's form of censorship where they pretend to be pro free speech but then isolate your account from being able to engage with anyone else while claiming to be for free speech is deceitful and worse.

I don't think that's the proper use of poison pill.

Nukes are a deterrent.

Also, if you've got the firepower to level all of Israel and you haven't leveled all of Israel then you've proven you have no intention of leveling Israel thus any preemptive attack against you is plainly obvious to be the aggressor in the confrontation and then you can use nukes to defend yourself.

Without having nukes, Israel+USA can just claim you're about to get them and then you'll use them to destroy the world so they have to attack you to save the world.

Not having nukes puts you in the position to always be attacked whenever another nation feels like it.

Honestly, no country can survive in the modern age without nukes.

Modern leftist aren't superior to anyone. Fact of the matter is, if you require someone else to survive and that someone else doesn't care to help you survive then they deserve to die. If you don't want people aborting, you adopt the kids then.

Nah, if the people dying are inferior then they shouldn't exist anyhow.

Women don't need to be controlled if no government is oppressing men and stealing men's resources to prop women up. Women will thus be controlled because they'll need men to help them. As long as we ensure it's individual men helping them instead of a monopolistic and oppressive government helping them by harming the individual man, then women's behavior will be controlled in their negotiation with man.

And you are proof society is dysgenic. Keep at it, loser.

Absolutely not. You're just enslaving men to women in this case. Eliminating child support motivates women to act in a manner that makes it so men want to keep them and it removes the motivation women have to leave men. 80% of divorces are initiated by the women which will come way down if child support is eliminated. Child support gives incentive to breakup families.

You're the one who doesn't understand how to fix the issue.

I only have to look to our society over the last century to know we live in a highly dysgenic society. Yes, many quality men do not procreate because of child support whereas men without jobs, living on welfare, etc... and your low life types without ability to properly gauge risk/reward procreate in droves while the quality men weigh the risks and decide against it. The net impact has without a doubt been dysgenics for the last century.

Child support must be abolished if you want abortion but frankly let people abort, it's also eugenic. The most abortions per capita in the USA are by black people which just proves this point. You don't need to control women, you just need to stop taxing men, stop having men pay child support and stop discriminating against men with the Civil Rights Act and women will start behaving better. The ones that don't shouldn't be procreating anyhow.

I don't care to control women in this way and especially in a society with child support. You create single moms, turn men into slaves and you still get whores. If you abolished child support in its entirety then perhaps you'd have a point and trying to control women then in this way might make sense.

Child support + no abortion is definition dysgenic because only the men with bad genetics have nothing to lose and knock women up while the highest quality men barely procreate.

I still don't understand why people care? Anyone who aborts their baby has inferior genetics and therefore we don't want them procreating anyway. Abortion is eugenics and that's a good thing.

If I was a country, the very first thing I'd do is get nukes. It's so obvious that countries without them are completely disregarded and disrespected on the world stage. You cannot have sovereignty without nukes. Might is right.

A woman, who is a divorced whore, being wrong about politics. What? The bible couldn't have predicted this.

It's not that things changed. Trump straight up said he doesn't believe the report. So, we're going on Trump's gut or rather what Israel tells him.

Personally, I think Iran would be fools not to get nukes. Look at how the USA has treated every country without them. Iran has every right to acquire nukes for their sovereignty.

Non-Whites lack the capability to understand the distinction between Whites and Jews. It takes a high IQ White person to get it so most nons have virtually 0 chance. There's a reason jews chose White people to hide amongst.

Don't try to correct for this. Just understand that you can't turn to nons to back you against jews. It's Whites against everyone else and even then it's only the non-Shabbos Goys.

Lmao, so true.

Jews have no legitimate land of their own except hell.

Yeah, this sounds like exactly what they'd say. Good post, lol.

I've read Marx's work and I prefer that to Carney's book. Modern leftists are way worse than older ones. Modern leftists write like they're an authoritarian dictator whom only a fool wouldn't believe and accept their drivel while older leftists write like they're actually trying to convince you of something.

Have you read them both? Yes, I realize Trump didn't write it but the stories he tells in them align with the history to date available online that happened after the book was written. Stuff like his non-compete clause with the Hyatt that he got sued over 5+ years after the book was written, etc... The author must have consulted Trump and wrote what Trump dictated. Carney's book might have been entirely written without even consulting Carney, tbh.

Sounds like a smart guy /s (for the other PhDs that didn't get the sarcasm).

It would be funny if he was being ironic and not serious.

Probably many such cases.

I can't wait for the next JBP story-arc where he admits he converted to Talmudism.