Oh c'mon now, it's also anti Christian.
American soldiers call Kurds good people because they treated us well and were the only ones not trying to kill us in Iraq. When every piece of trash on the side of the road could be second away from exploding and killing you, having a small region where that isn't the case tends to go a long way with people. Now realistically, were the Kurds friendly to us because they are genuinely great people who really liked us and wanted to be BFFs? No, of course not. They were friendly to us because we were killing people who had been trying to kill them for decades. Playing nice with Americans was beneficial to them, and playing nice with the Kurds was beneficial to us. They're still Mohammedans. They'd still cut our throats for being infidels the second not doing so was no longer practical. But for for a decade or so in the early 2000s, smiling and not cutting our throats was still practical. So we were more of less nice to each other while we both got something out of it. Not everything is intricately tied to Jews you know.
That problem would be miniscule, still present but hardly any impact, if only White men could vote.
I wouldn't even call it good. Just not total shit like the rest. I'd put every season of the real 5 ST series, TOS, TNG,DS9,VOY, and ENT above Season 3 of Picard. Yep, even Move Along Home and Threshold are more watchable than Season 3 of Picard. But Picard S3 is leaps and bounds better than all other nu-Trek. It's at the top of the list for everything post Enterprise, but still below everything Enterprise and prior. S3 of Picard still suffers from the awful single story "8 hour movie cut into 10 segments" type of story telling, it's still overly grim and dark, still uses overplayed and hackneyed plot points, ignores massive amounts of previously established lore and character development, only tried to capture the essence of real Trek maybe two or three times in the whole series, but doesn't even pull it off because it relies too much on surface level emotion tugging memberberries, and at the end of the day it's still forced to pretend the previous two seasons happened, so that thousand ton boat anchor dragged it down no matter what it tried to do.
I pirated it and didn't hate watching it. That's about all the praise I can give it. I'll never rewatch it and I don't consider it or any other part of Picard canon. It had a handful of "I guess it's neat seeing that mentioned again for the first time in 20 years" moments, but overall it repaired about 1% of the damage the rest of nu-Trek inflicted on the franchise. I appreciate the effort Terry Matalas made in trying to make something that wasn't smugly and deliberately trying to shit in the mouth of Trek fans, but it was too little too late.
It's a shame, because there could have been a really compelling story in Picard with better writers who know and respect what came before. DS9 gave them a perfect setup for that kind of story. You write it so that the Dominion War changed the Federation and Starfleet for the worse. The younger generation grew up and joined Starfleet when it was nothing but fighting the Maquis, then the brief war with the Klingons, then years of war against the Dominion. It made it so the older generation of explorers and diplomats like Picard are edged out by cynical warrior type captains and admirals. Picard is "gently encouraged" to retire as Starfleet command no longer respects his optimism. Same with the rest of the crew moving on to more "out to pasture" roles like Geordi taking command of the museum. Introduce a new threat that the militarized Starfleet reacts to with wanting to use force, but Picard is somehow aware that diplomacy is the only solution, and go from there. Throw in some Bajor joining the Federation, the rebuilding of Cardassia post-war, an appearance of Chancellor Martok to get a Klingon angle, the truce with the Romulans starting to show cracks now that the war is over, etc. There's plenty there for a good writer to work with. End the series with a new crew on a new Enterprise (and not stupidly renaming a tiny obsolete Constitution class v3, but a real top of the line flagship), maybe ask a few of the Voyager or DS9 actors who haven't had steady work if they want to be in it. Maybe a Captain Harry Kim or Tom Paris. Throw in an adult Jake Sisco as a civilian in some sort of role documenting the new journeys. Round out the crew with some fresh faces and then have that series go back to classic 1 episode 1 plot storytelling adventures.
Absolutely follow the law. That's the smart thing to do. But when we're talking about perception, emotions, how we see people, etc, it's just not that cut and dry. You're on the beach and you see a 5'7", 125lb girl with C cups and a tiny bikini walk by. You're a healthy adult male so you watch her ass as she walks away. Are you you some degenerate weirdo creep just for that? Fuck no and we all know it. Your friend walks up and tells you that's his high school junior sister Tiffany. Did you suddenly retroactively turn into a weirdo degenerate creep because you stared at her ass? No, and I'm not going to pretend otherwise.
If she's 6 or 7, by all means, the slow march up the gallows. But if she's 16 or 17, you laugh it off and say "hey man, maybe in a year or two" and move on. That'd the sensible, sane, rational response.
Yep. You end up with the British cobra problem every time
To be fair, her being a woman and the massive societal bonus built into that like had the lion's share of the credit for it working out for her. Put a single man into the same situation, and even with the same honest effort on his part, there's a massively bigger chance he's gonna end up dirty and alone in the street.
The Boys has always been a poison pill. The entire fucking premise has been proudly and openly subverting the idea of traditional heroism from day 1. The fact that they're just now starting to just be worse at subverting traditional values via bad story telling isn't the problem. The initial premise was always the main problem. And that so many fell for it.
Is it weird? Probably
I wouldn't even go that far. You have ancestors who had 2 or 3 kids by the time they were that age and managed an entire household, cooked 3 meals a day, did all of laundry, ground their own grain into flour, sewed and repaired the whole family's clothes, were on their knees scrubbing the wood floors with borax, etc. We all do. Every single last one of us has ancestors, and a fucking lot of them, who were having whole families by 14,15,16,etc. And not just 10,000 years ago. More like 90 years ago. 17yos were fully capable adults for 99% of human history worldwide. The fact that the West in the past 100 years has infantilized them is the weird abnormality.
Ever single human male from 100,000BC until like 1920, had considered a 17yo woman to be fair game. The fact that in the West we just suddenly and arbitrarily decided "you can't do that anymore. You can't think that anymore" is the weird thing.
Your great grandma, my great grandma, all of our great grandmas would be thinking "a 17yo? Where was her husband? Why didn't he stop her from talking to another man?". They sure as shit wouldn't think he's weird for talking to her.
We can agree that it's stupid for him because he should know the fucked up modern age we live in. But I'm not gonna call him a creep for something 99.999% of human males worldwide for all of recorded history would have thought was entirely normal. I'm just not willing to accept that much modernism. I think modernism is the weird creepy abberation.
I view this whole topic in the same way that modern society views the issue of "well of course women should have full rights and be able to make all of their own decisions". 99.999% of civilizations worldwide for all of recorded history knew that was stupid and didn't agree. The fact that the West in the past 100 years has suddenly decided to throw out that wisdom doesn't make the West correct.
Nevermind the fact that the average 17yo Western girl has had double digit sexual partners and engaged in some of the most kinky degenerate shit out there. When your uncle when to a strip club in 1971, the strippers there were less sexually experienced than the average high school freshman in 2024. Spend 10 minutes on TikTok or Snapchat and tell me I'm wrong. I'm just not gonna sit here and wring my hands fretting and pretending that this 17yo was having a stuffed animal princess tea party before Dr.Disrespect corrupted her. I was born, but it wasn't yesterday. I'm not ignorant enough to go along with that lie.
At the end of the day, women are biologically incapable of loyalty. Their genes will always drive them to extract what they can then move onto the next resource vein. Or ancestors worldwide knew this, that's why ever advanced civilization on the globe for all of human history limited what women were allowed to do, because they knew women will always choose to be heartless parasites if allowed. Marriage as an institution can only exist in a society where men decide and women obey, with all social, cultural, religious, and legal mechanisms enforcing these roles.
Sulu literally had a whole family. His daughter became the helmsman in the Enterprise B.
Anyone who understands the actual real history of Islam doesn't need to even consider any Jewish aspect to still hate Palestinians.
Just look up demographic distribution maps, which are still available elsewhere online. It's basically the same as crime rate distribution. Avoid negro, hispanic, and middle eastern areas, in that order.
This. Rolling in, wiping out a few hundred thousand Mohammedans, then leaving a few weeks later with a "don't piss us off again or the rest of you are next" would have be the right answer. But we like pretending to be nice too much.
Sure there is. We're just no longer willing to do it because it makes other globalist nations feel icky. Notice how the US stopped winning wars as soon as we gave up effective WWII/Korea tactics? Turns out carpet bombing a population into total submission does indeed work, and quite well. You just have to be willing to do it. We're not, so we stopped winning wars.
You can win any war if you're willing to kill enough of the enemy, and that doesn't just mean uniformed soldiers. If we told the saracens that we'll erase a city for every ship they attack, the attacks would stop tomorrow. And we are more than capable of doing that without million dollar a pop surgical strike missiles. We can. We just don't want to do the mean things that are necessary.
"Modern war" is just nations trying to win with one hand and 4 fingers of the other tied behind their backs because they're afraid of looking like bad guys in the media. Cut the rope, tell the media to get fucked, and fight with total war tactics again and we'd win every time.
I bet that's what he said