1. The Topic of the Month for October is "Make this the Perfect Bugout Location". Please join the discussion in the TOTM forum.

flunky's goobermint pandemic "sop" arrives:

Discussion in 'Freedom and Liberty' started by Tango3, May 5, 2008.

  1. Tango3

    Tango3 Aimless wanderer

    triage played up to be evidence of uber- evil by infowars...
    sucks to be old or injured... or mentally disabled.[booze]
  2. Seacowboys

    Seacowboys Senior Member Founding Member

    As much as I detest Bush and his minions, I don't have a problem with survival of the fittest. Natural selection has been denied for the past several generation, we have encouraged the athletic to survive over the intellectual, we have blue parking spaces at EVERY parking lot. We have to ask and have specific permission to engage in sexual behavior with other consenting adults (read: may I touch your breast?) SLAP!
    PC and care for the lesser fortunate has gone way beyond what human compassion would mandate. It is time to let the weak and elderly die when resources are stretched to the limit. I am becoming one of those elderly persons and this is my vote.
    BTW? If I see an attractive woman walking down the street, my usual impulse is to ask myself "Would I do her?" I know thats a chauvinistic thing and I am ashamed (right). But my question is directed to the PC monitors among us " Should I ask her permission to go home and fantasize about her or would it violate her propriety if I just took a hot shower and imagined her in the mist?
  3. RouteClearance

    RouteClearance Monkey+++ Site Supporter

    Have to agree with SC, a lot of the so called disabled should be called what they really are, LAZY. There are a lot of sheeple that cannot adapt to their immediate environment, these will be the ones that will suffer the most. I have seen this kind of individual from every walk of life, and because of their mindset, they will perish.
  4. Tango3

    Tango3 Aimless wanderer

    Sounds alot like standard wartime triage to me(not that I'm a field medic).wartime "ruthless" decisions applied to the civ pop. Things have changed.
    how old are chertoff and cheney????
  5. ghrit

    ghrit Ambulatory anachronism Administrator Founding Member

    I have less problem with survival of the producers, fit or not, than I do for survival of the fittest. Unfit or fit, non producers need culling. Unfit or fit, producers need preservation. The most fit are apt to be controlling types as often as not. For me, when my time comes, let me go. If that is triage, let it be so.
  6. RouteClearance

    RouteClearance Monkey+++ Site Supporter

    The key word is "producers", all the sheeple want to do is to consume. Well that will not work in the long run. Everyone has got to be able to carry their own weight regardless of class, smarts, athletics, and so forth. Some of us fit types have no inclination of controling anyone else's lives. From what I have experinced in my life, the fat and lazy types are the most controling. I have delt with a few of these types as employers, suffice to say that when they tried to pull their power trip on me, I quit right then and threre.
  7. E.L.

    E.L. Moderator of Lead Moderator Emeritus Founding Member

    I read this the other day and it sounded logical. If a 95 year old man in poor health and a 18 year old girl both needed a ventilator but there was only one........It's standard triage in a mass patient event.

    It's a [cow]that I hope is not opened for a long, long time.
  8. ozarkgoatman

    ozarkgoatman Resident goat herder

    In triage you do the most amount of good for the most amount of people. That means some are left to die. It's just the way it is. When resourses are limited you can not justify putting all those resourses into one person that may or may not live. If you use those same resourses on several people that are sure to live it just makes more since. It may sound cold but though choices have to be made some times.

  9. monkeyman

    monkeyman Monkey+++ Moderator Emeritus Founding Member

    How bad a situation is will define how far needs go but in a TOTAL long term collapse of society then practices similar to those whose (distorted) memory still shade hallowen could become escential again. It used to be that halloween was a time when the harvest had all come in and the 'elders' of the comunity would determine how many could be fed through the winter on what was available, if the number was less than the population of the village/tribe then those least likely to survive and/or those least able to contribute were 'sacrificed' for the sake of the rest based on the knowledge that if they had food for 75 and tried to carry 100 through the winter then very likely, especialy if it turned out to be a hard winter, then all 100 would starve to death before spring and at the least the weak would die slowly and the rest would be weaker come time to plant than if they had the extra rations through the winter.

    In LESS extreme situations it could still come down to a factor of while no need to 'cull', resources were only available to save so many and it only makes sense that you save the ones that CAN be saved first and if you can, come back to those who may not make it through anyway.

    Hard choices but disasters, especialy sever, wide spread and long term ones are hard times that MAY force such choices, try to save everyone and let them all die as a result or let those to weak to survive and/or unable to contribute go in order to save the rest.
survivalmonkey SSL seal        survivalmonkey.com warrant canary