Welcome • User Guide
ToS • Privacy • Canary
Donate • Bugs • License

©2026 Poal.co

936

It ended in 2015, so the youngest ones from that program are now 6 years old. Did china do this intentionally to create an army with no ties to families (more men than women)? If so, does that mean that china has 9 years to use this force (when the last of the boys are 15)?

It ended in 2015, so the youngest ones from that program are now 6 years old. Did china do this intentionally to create an army with no ties to families (more men than women)? If so, does that mean that china has 9 years to use this force (when the last of the boys are 15)?

(post is archived)

[–] • 2 pts

I was thinking about the opposite with American fighters. We will never do anything because we have plenty to lose even though we ironically have plenty to protect.

Only a true degenerate with nothing to live for or protect will have the best chance at fighting and so far the vast majority of those who are freely terrorizing Americans all share the same overlapping familial deficits.

[–] • 0 pt

That is along the same lines though. The chinese (or dark skinned "americans") have the upper hand because they have nothing to stay alive for, and don't have kids they care about.

White people with 1-3 children need to protect those at all costs, it isn't the days where we had 9 and so if 3 died for some reason you still had a line.

[–] • 0 pt

Lol, you people are such faggots.

[–] • 1 pt

No, it was just a big-brain chink-think that backfired.

It was about a government idea for limiting population growth running into the brick wall of the Chinese tradition of wanting sons to carry on your bloodline and care for you in your old age.

[–] • 1 pt

You are probably right, but sometimes there are people pulling strings that have (((other motivations))). For example the lockdowns might have been implemented by people afraid of "the virus" but the people pushing for lockdowns might have wanted to destroy businesses who weren't part of the plan.

[–] • 1 pt

True that. One man's disaster is another man's opportunity.

[–] • 0 pt

I don't think they were that smart to have the initial idea but that's how it's worked out. They could have stopped the policy or added incentives to birth female children but they never did.

[–] • 0 pt

It's the opposite, a giant weakness. A family with one kid are going to do everything in their power not to let him join the military, and they're going to be harping on him to never take any risks. In short, he'll be trained since birth to be a coward.

But for that matter, any war with the US would involve long range missile vs ship/plane attacks that are largely a numbers and equipment game.

[–] • 0 pt

There are 40 million chink men that have no hope of ever finding a bride.

[–] • 0 pt

that is my point, they would make better soldiers (in an offensive war) because of that. Someone pointed out they they grew up very protected, so i'm not sure which would win out.

[–] • 0 pt

The US is still miles ahead tech-wise...internet/EMP attacks will cripple the chinks immediately.

[–] • 0 pt

Lol, China is nothing. People who worry about have more idea how weak of a nation they are.

[–] • 0 pt

and I'm fine with that. They could have still have government policies planning ahead 40 years to start a war.

[–] • -1 pt (edited )

AH HA HA HA HA! China and planning? Are you fucking serious? HAHAHAHAHAHA! Have you seen their buss system?! Drivers get paid by the loop. You'll get a five 333 buses in a row. Oh good lord you poal people.

[–] [deleted] • 0 pt

Thank you.

They have potential to be a threat and it'd be best to make China break again, but they're largely a paper dragon.

[–] • 0 pt

They now have the world's largest navy, and are expanding into the South Pacific and Africa