Origin of Lampasse

[rupol2000]

This question was implicitly raised in one of the Russian films directed by Bondarchuk "9th Company". There was an artist who talked about the romance of war and there was a slave who hated war. As planned by Bondarchuk, the slave won. Although this did not prevent the slaves from shedding the blood of the peoples of northern Afghanistan. In addition, according to Bondarchuk, herd lust wins, while refined love loses. The soldiers fucked the girl in a crowd, and this, according to Bondarchuk, was right, and the soldier who could not be a lustful dog was presented as a loser.

 

[rupol2000]

They certainly did not endure all the hardships of war in a jungle for the $500 or so a month they were paid. That is bullshit.

They didn't mention romance, and you do. They actually went to war and were warriors. You sit on your ass and surf the internet

Which source do you think is more accurate?

It doesn't matter who sits where. I said that a warrior is a mentality and not a profession. Going to war does not mean being a warrior. People with a warrior mentality come from the eastern warrior aristocracy. They have warrior's spirit in their blood. Since childhood, they love to be the first, they love to be winners, they love films with fights, they love everything military and they love pure love, they love beauty. They are artists, poets and geniuses, but the society of slaves squeezes them out. They do not find themselves in modern life.

 

[rupol2000]

It is quite easy to distinguish a real warrior from a slave by his understanding of military honor and masculinity. A warrior recognizes only the duel and individual heroism. To be a warrior for him is, first of all, an individual feat and not a collective work. These values still remain, but they are disappearing, and for most it does not matter, they act collectively, they gather in packs and beat up opponents. And these are the descendants of slaves. They do not have a sense of honor inherent in the military aristocracy.

 

[rupol2000]

In the American tradition, the cult of individual heroism has until recently been the strongest among all cultures in the world. This suggests that most Americans are descended from aristocratic Apaches(Inde) and not from the British peasantry. The left has only broken America in the last decade. This is the most aristocratic culture of the modern world.

 

[WinterBorn]

It doesn't matter who sits where. I said that a warrior is a mentality and not a profession. Going to war does not mean being a warrior. People with a warrior mentality come from the eastern warrior aristocracy. They have warrior's spirit in their blood. Since childhood, they love to be the first, they love to be winners, they love films with fights, they love everything military and they love pure love, they love beauty. They are artists, poets and geniuses, but the society of slaves squeezes them out. They do not find themselves in modern life.

In other words, they believe all the myths of the glory of war, while never actually having fought in one. Yes, you fit that sad description.

 

[WinterBorn]

It is quite easy to distinguish a real warrior from a slave by his understanding of military honor and masculinity. A warrior recognizes only the duel and individual heroism. To be a warrior for him is, first of all, an individual feat and not a collective work. These values still remain, but they are disappearing, and for most it does not matter, they act collectively, they gather in packs and beat up opponents. And these are the descendants of slaves. They do not have a sense of honor inherent in the military aristocracy.

Yes, you watch too many movies. By the way, Rambo is a fictional character. This idea that one "great warrior" wins the war is nonsense.

 

[BlackSand]

. You sit on your ass and surf the internet

.

A caveat to that is that he is not looking for information when doing so ... He is only looking for things that validate his maligned ideology.

.​

 

[rupol2000]

In other words, they believe all the myths of the glory of war, while never actually having fought in one. Yes, you fit that sad description.

This is a typical response from a slave. A slave considers himself a "warrior" only because he wore a uniform. Even if a schoolboy breaks his jaw and his wife beats him on the head with a frying pan, he is still a "warrior", because he wore a uniform - this is his logic.

 

[BlackSand]

This is a typical response from a slave. A slave considers himself a "warrior" only because he wore a uniform. Even if a schoolboy breaks his jaw and his wife beats him on the head with a frying pan, he is still a "warrior", because he wore a uniform - this is his logic.

.

What the fuck are you doing criticizing someone else's logic.

If a warrior counts on the idea that putting wings on his back is going to make his horse run faster ...
Darwin is going to help that stupid motherfucker figure out where he is wrong ...

.​

 

[EvilCat Breath]

Most likely, the fringe was for sewing clothes, these are apparently cords that tied pieces of material, and they were not cut off. They didn't use thread.

On the wooden boots of the peasants, this is all the more useless lol

The fringe was for cleaning guns.

 

[WinterBorn]

This is a typical response from a slave. A slave considers himself a "warrior" only because he wore a uniform. Even if a schoolboy breaks his jaw and his wife beats him on the head with a frying pan, he is still a "warrior", because he wore a uniform - this is his logic.

Who said anything about a uniform? I wore a uniform and have not claimed to be a warrior. You just make shit up as you go along, don't you?

 

[rupol2000]

.

What the fuck are you doing criticizing someone else's logic.

If a warrior counts on the idea that putting wings on his back is going to make his horse run faster ...
Darwin is going to help that stupid motherfucker figure out where he is wrong ...

.​

did darwin have wings?

 

[BlackSand]

did darwin have wings?

.

Would it really matter if he did?

.​