1) I have a working theory that my tweeting is because liberal tweets are so devoid of thought and logic that I am trying to fill the void by instinct, as nature abhors a vacuum.
That being said, I want to discuss a strategerific concept. Attacks by proxy.
That being said, I want to discuss a strategerific concept. Attacks by proxy.
2) I've established that a core concept of strategery is to be on the offensive. Attacking your opponents ability to attack you.
3) You could also boil it down to offense is the best defense, but I digress. What is attacking by proxy? How does it fit into strategery?
4) Attacking by proxy is essentially creating an entity you do not have to directly command to attack your opponents for you.
5) You are the 5 star general of your own life. But you can only attack in so many directions at once. You can only generate so much aggression. So, to hit all the targets you need to, you create proxies to do the attacking for you.
6) We see this happening on a global scale; look at Iran. What people really don't want to talk about with Iran... is that Iran is WEAK.
7)
8) Yeah. Iran has never been some top tier powerhouse. To hear @Debradelai tell it and upon further research myself, Iran was basically a feudal undeveloped society 'til well after WW1, and the 79 revolution killed the developmental progress they had up 'til that point.
9) So, they're too weak to attack their opponents. What do they do? Attack by proxy. Iran created the IRGC and Quds Force as first tier, or directly connected, proxies. These are proxies where the connection is clear and defined. They spread worldwide, and attack.
10) Then they have their second tier proxies, where the connection is there but not immediately apparent. The Houthis, Hamas, and Hezbollah are 3 such proxies. newsweek.com/iran-renew-fun…
11) The Houthis are a proxy meant to attack Saudi Arabia, while Hamas and Hezbollah attack Israel. Yeah. The current protests we're seeing? Notice they started riiiight when Israel started hitting Iranian assets in Syria.
12) Iran's good at attacking by proxy. Thing is, that's ALL they do. They're too weak to attack themselves.
13) Machiavelli said it best speaking of mercenaries: "he who holds his State by means of mercenary troops can never be solidly or securely seated." If holding your power means being reliant on proxies, on hired attackers, you don't REALLY hold power. You cling to it desperately.
14) So, we covered attacks by proxy on a global scale. Lets to go the individual scale. We saw this, we see this, a LOT.
15) Cnn, nbc, the NYT, WaPo, these are all obvious attacks by proxy for the Democrats. I call the rat list Journoperatives for a reason; they are hired guns pumping out hit pieces. cnn.com/2016/10/14/pol…
16) Every Journoperative on this list is a 2nd tier proxy attacker for the larger Democrat party. They don't have 'paid for by the DNC' as a tagline, but their targeting and tendencies to pump out raw bullshit mean they dont need to. It is a bit obvious.
17) Then you have the crew like John Kelly, Ben Rhodes, Clapper and Brennan, these are your first tier proxies, the ones tied to a central organization (the Dems) attacking for it. Lots of proxies, lots of voices, all attacking Trump.
18) John McCain? A second tier proxy. The tie isn't clear, but when he's high-fiving Schumer on the floor of the Senate after killing Obamacare repeal, well, it's not hard to deduce. Hollywood? So liberal it may as well be a first tier proxy.
19) How about Avenetti? Stormy Daniels? See, this is why trying to do a 'gotcha!' on them and who's paying them is dumb. We KNOW they're a proxy. It is blatantly obvious. But that's not illegal. Neither was Peter Thiel using Hulk Hogan to attack Gawker by proxy in a lawsuit.
20) But notice all these proxy attacks. Why? Why all the proxies?
Because the Democrats, like Iran, are weak.
Because the Democrats, like Iran, are weak.
21) The Democrats themselves are hilariously unpopular. Their younger crowd like Corey Booker and Kamala Harris are insufferable twatwaffles. Their leadership are fossils. Just look at how old Feinstein and Pelosi are!
22) They're losing their core constituencies, minorities and millenials. They lost the rust belt. They're losing the public opinion battle. They have to rely on proxies, on mercenaries, to attack for them!
23) But what about Trump? Where does he fit into all this?
24) He has his first tier proxies. People like @SebGorka who left the administration to go attack for him.
25) To note, the use of proxies is not in itself a sign of weakness. It is the RELIANCE on proxies that is a sign of weakness.
Does Trump seem like the kind of person that needs armies of people attacking for him?
axios.com/who-trump-atta…
Does Trump seem like the kind of person that needs armies of people attacking for him?
axios.com/who-trump-atta…
26) However, Trump always plays one step deeper than his opponents. It is a pattern with him I've noticed. The 4D chess meme made manifest; he has an extra dimension, an extra angle, he's using against his opponents at all times.
27) Third tier proxies.
Attacks that come from out of nowhere which take an opponent down with brutal efficiency, which cant be directly tied back to you.
Attacks that come from out of nowhere which take an opponent down with brutal efficiency, which cant be directly tied back to you.
28) Four women out of nowhere knocking Schneiderman out of his spot as New York's attorney general in a DAY. newyorker.com/news/news-desk…
29) A blitz of accusers against major Dem donor Harvey Weinstein bbc.com/news/entertain…
30) So it was revealed that 2 of the woman went to Michael Cohen back in 2013. Can Trump be proven to have caused all 4 to levy their accusations against Schneiderman a week ago?
31) Does anyone have a way of proving those actresses all came out against Harvey Weinstein with Trump's help?
32) The third tier proxy. It strikes out of nowhere, it knocks you out with one blow, and it can't be tied back to the source.
33) THAT, ladies and gentlemen, is how you attack by proxy.
/end
/end
