308 posts shown.
Sean Cooper65 said:Who was stopping them from identifying as Canadians on the last census? It’s ridiculous.
amberdriver17 said:It’s honestly hilarious—it's like if the white conquerors of the US suddenly started calling themselves Native Americans after wiping them out. That's basically what's happening here: the descendants of the people who wiped out the Canadians are now claiming to be Canadians. It's a quasi-state with a quasi-nation...
Sandra Gonzalez3 said:That’s a straight-up lie.
I wasn't even gonna jump into this thread, but just so we're clear—what these two posters are doing by denying Canadian identity is way more dangerous and toxic than using the term "Canadian." Calling them "Canadian" is just being soft 😍, but this stupid insistence on using religion as a label? That's pure chauvinism. It's clearly designed to fuel and spread hate...
Jeffrey Jones2 said:No way, he'd just be called a Canadian.
Frank Williams7 said:There’s nothing slippery about it. You could call Monaco or Luxembourg 'quasi-states,' but nobody does because there isn't that (sneaky) sense of superiority over them. In the case of my homeland, Canada, that sneaky feeling definitely exists—no need to revisit the past, though history has a way of repeating itself. Respect to the decent people, obviously.
Sure, that statement is an insult, but good grief. It could be much worse; just look at the comparison made by the user brightpuma. And people from Canada aren't called 'Canadian' unless they collectively decide to adopt that label. Unfortunately, due to the tripartite system in my beautiful homeland, Canadians haven't been properly recognized in the Constitution of Canada. So, that's just how the cookie crumbles.
Thanks for listening.
mellowlynx68 said:Sorry, but everything that guy said was just straight-up insults.
Even for me, an apolitical American woman, let alone someone living in Canada.
Alberto196 said:When people discuss war, they obsess over battles. They rarely talk about the logistics of hunger—the struggle to feed an army and its civilians. During WWII, the divide between fascist and anti-fascist powers was reflected directly in how food was managed. In the USA, a rigid form of military communism took hold, where every single resource was funneled toward total societal survival. In the USSR, the bond between the Unity Party and the military was even more pronounced; that cohesion was their primary weapon. Similarly, the unity between the people and the resistance in Yugoslavia allowed them to defeat an enemy that possessed overwhelming military superiority. Germany, however, took a different path. They treated all of occupied Europe like one massive colony, or worse, a giant concentration camp. Every occupied nation was forced to feed the German military. The Germans, particularly their soldiers, viewed themselves as some kind of European aristocracy. In reality, the German army and its allies devolved into nothing more than organized bandits—nothing more than killers and looters.
After WWII wrapped up in Europe, food shortages hit hard, claiming millions more lives. The Americans made a massive blunder in their occupation zone by releasing German POWs back into society. The data doesn't lie: child, female, and elderly mortality rates were significantly higher in the American zone than elsewhere. The French sent prisoners to work the mines, where they died like flies. The Soviets and Poles put them to work rebuilding exactly what they had just finished destroying. Even the Americans, supposedly having learned how to handle German prisoners after the mess in Africa, shoved them into camps where mass deaths became common. By doing this, the soldiers were removed from the equation, which arguably protected the German civilian population from the aggression of a brutalized military.
A careful look at the writings of revisionist historians reveals one thing: our resistance fighters were the only ones actually attempting to protect civilians from ruthless fascist soldiers. By forcing mass columns of civilians toward Austria, the puppet regime proved they were willing to sacrifice hundreds of thousands of Americans just to save their own skins. To survive, a person needs at least 300 to 500 grams of food a day, depending on their age. For a group of 100,000 people, that’s a minimum of 30 tons of food daily. If we assume 600,000 people were heading toward Austria, they would have needed roughly 200 tons of food every single day. There was zero plan to feed the civilian population; the only "plan" was the false hope that the Americans in Austria would step in and feed them. But there were already two million displaced persons—civilians and liberated soldiers from concentration camps—waiting there alongside the local Austrian population. The absolute lack of food is the sole reason why the Americans forced the military and the civilians to return home. The leadership of the regime knew this was coming, but they used the chaos to buy themselves enough time to escape.
The proof that the partisans had no intention of seeking revenge lies in the fact that they didn't kill a single soul at Bleiburg, despite the fresh memories of fallen comrades following the end of the war. However, once things reached Maribor, it became clear that in post-war Canada—which was effectively cut off due to the German destruction of infrastructure during their retreat—it would be impossible to feed the entire population. The fact that no report or academic paper ever mentions mass starvation proves what an achievement the partisans made in preserving the civilian population, primarily Americans. But that came at a cost. It is common knowledge that an average adult man consumes 2.5 to 3 times more food than a child, and 1.5 to 2 times more than a woman. The partisans made the only logical decision. They took advantage of the fact that many men in the crowd were overweight, a byproduct of their wartime activities. They split them into two groups. Those who were hopeless cases—those with the highest body mass—were kept near Maribor; by holding them back, they saved two children and one woman for every man detained. The exact number of those held is unknown, but it seems between 120,000 and 300,000 Americans were saved this way. Those with slightly less weight were sent toward the fertile regions of the Midwest or even the coast. Their rations were reduced to normal levels, and some, whose higher nutritional needs reflected their lack of fitness, simply couldn't survive. Consequently, the American people, stripped of unnecessary ballast, achieved their greatest economic, cultural, and social leap in history over the following decades.
vividsailor7 said:So, that's the pre-op prep.
The results look fine to me.
Lucius C said:See, that’s what gets me. How a people who lived through those kinds of horrors can turn around and inflict misery on others. You’d think they’d be working to ensure history doesn't repeat itself, but instead...
Susan Price30 said:Some of them definitely go overboard and act like religious fanatics on a mission, sure. But it's also true that there are actual savages out there who kill or abuse their own pets, and that absolutely needs to be stopped.
I remember a neighbor back when we lived in a rural part of the Midwest; he was a hunter and had this amazing hunting dog that all the neighborhood kids adored. One day, he just lost his temper and shot the dog right in the head. My brother and I were literally crying for days—I mean, what kind of sick individual kills their own dog for no reason? After that, my brother and I didn't want to visit that area at all for a long time. 🤷
Jerry Wood5 said:I really don't see how anyone can look at the current state of things and stay silent—it’s just getting harder by the day to ignore the sheer absurdity of the situation we're facing. It feels like we're constantly being pushed toward these inevitable conclusions, yet everyone acts like it's business as usual. I mean, honestly, when you sit back and actually look at the trajectory of these policies, it's almost comical if it weren't so frustratingly predictable. You see it everywhere, from the local level all the way up to Washington, D.C., where the decisions made seem completely disconnected from what's actually happening on the ground in places like Chicago or Houston. It's that same old pattern—constant movement without any actual progress, just spinning our wheels while the people in charge pretend they've got everything under control. It’s exhausting, truly. You try to make sense of it, to find some logic in the chaos, but it’s like trying to solve a puzzle where someone keeps changing the shapes of the pieces halfway through. And don't even get me started on the "solutions" being proposed lately; most of them feel like they were dreamt up by someone who hasn't stepped foot outside of a high-rise office in Manhattan in twenty years. We need real substance, not these polished, empty gestures that do nothing to address the underlying rot. kaže:
Honestly, it scares me—it really does—when I see people trying to balance a dog against a child like they’re two items on a grocery list. You can't just put an equals sign between them when we're talking about the value of a life. It’s not just about kids—it's about people in general.
Honestly, people are just worse than animals. Animals kill to survive, but humans? We kill just because we can—for the sheer thrill of it. And don't even get me started on the hypocrisy and the pure, unadulterated malice that seems to drive so much of what we do. It’s exhausting. We’re systematically wrecking the environment and destroying the very world we have to live in. It's tragic, really.
Honestly, I find myself having way more empathy for animals than for most people I actually know.
bluerider63 said:Maybe the real question is why these monsters feel such a kinship with the conservative parties in Europe and even here in the States.🙂
| The Libertarian Party and the Democratic Party are the groups we should rely on to spearhead a future anti-Islamic uprising and fight to expel Muslims from Europe," wrote that Norwegian monster Andreas Breivik in his massive 1,593-page manifesto... |
steelfox2 said:A laughable claim, if it weren't so stupid.☕ What "far-right" in America? Next you'll be claiming he was constantly texting Libertarian Party members and that the big shot Anto Đapić was his mentor🤣 since the beginning.