Politics, terrorism, + Evolution = a better world? (Satire)

Tweet

Terrorist groups need people to fight their battles for them. The leaders, of course, are far too cowardly to go off and fight themselves. They need young men, easily duped, that can be sent of on this meaningless missions. Old men might be more expendable, but they are less physically fit, so less desirable as warriors. we want young men. Young men who should be getting jobs, getting wives, and raising families. So, if they put out a call for stupid, aggressive, young men, who are easily brainwashed into killing for no concrete achievable purpose, then these guys are pulled out of the gene pool when they are shot and killed. So, if we are efficient enough in eliminating people, we come out ahead. First, people really are expensive. You have to birth them, feed them, educate them, motivate them, give them guns, send them to war. That takes a long time to replace a 'spent' warrior. These guys get so angry and are so picky about their religion, that I'm sure.. given enough rope to hang themselves.. that they would have trouble organizing and mounting a reasonable army. As such, they can murder, maim, or kill, but they cannot really do anything significant like hold a country against us for long. Now, the big problem in Muslim nations is the misogyny. An excessive fear of anything with breasts. Especially anything with breasts which has a strong mind. I think, the more intelligent a Muslim woman is, the harder she is to control, the less interested Muslim men are in marrying her, the less successful her genes are in passing to the next generation. (This may explain the low reasoning skills and high frustration / hate spewing content of the Muslim misogynist.) So, if they want their women to be submissive, subordinate, and essentially stupid. This causes a diminution in the intellectual gene pool available as.. although Muslim men may not 'get it' the brainpower of their descendants depends on the genes inherited from both mother and father. This generates men who are stupid and easily controlled or brainwashed to go on pointless missions of death. So, the stupid guys who are prone to excesses of hatred and bigotry go off to war. They die. Being willing to go off to ware (and die) removes their genes from the gene pool. They still want submissive subordinate women. This doesn't change. However, the bravest and/or most emotionally unbalanced go to war and die. Therefor, the less aggressive population back home breeds. (They have to breed, they need new warriors for the 'cause.') So the less aggressive men left be hind breed with the less aggressive women left behind to produce successively less aggressive offspring. The only task that remains is to incite these radicals to fight on a low-scale war without providing the incentive to cohesion. We have to get efficient at killing them with a minimum cost, bleeding dry their reserves of young men with which to go to war. As we reduce the possible pool of young men they could put on the field of battle, we diminish the greatest risks they pose. By continually fighting low-level war, we provide a biological reproductive advantage to less emotional men. This provides a Darwinian evolutionary force towards less violent populations which are also self-selecting for submissive traits. Sooner or later, a stupid, docile, submissive population which we can make do our grunt labor. (This post was intended to be Satire, please take it with a grain of salt as an attempt to be humorous. I am not, really, a warmonger. I hate war.)