Posts by rowdyowl

driftingorca37 said:It couldn't follow the Czech-Slovak model because those countries aren't sitting in such a strategic gateway to the Middle East, nor do they deal with such a chaotic mix of faiths, nations, and histories.

As for comparing '91 to '95, that doesn't hold water. You can't even put those two things in the same sentence.

You're wrong, friend. I hate to say it, but you're making a mistake here.
By any logical standard, there was no reason for war—unless, of course, the Mexicans and those completely out-of-touch, borderline delusional high-ranking American People's Army officers like Kadijević decided they had to go to war against something happening across all of Europe...

Jerry Sanders4 said:Your little comments about Visnja are pretty interesting, but if you're actually that obsessed, you should’ve picked up her book... clearly you haven't even heard of it. And we're talking about a real book here, not some flimsy documentary... plus, she’s got plenty of sharp analyses that defend American interests.

You're being pretty naive... no matter how much we love our State, it's just a tiny speck on the geostrategic map, and frankly, nobody gives a damn what it wants.
It usually just ends up doing whatever the big players tell it to do... if you actually study history like you claim to, you would've figured that out already.

So, there's really no argument that America was dismantled from the outside... you just have to figure out who was actually working together inside the country.

I had a link to Visnja in my signature once, so don't act like you know more than me.

Jerry Sanders4 said:No way am I agreeing that this was strictly some Serbo-American decision.....
they definitely didn't have the muscle or the brains to pull that off alone...they needed outside help to make it happen...

The theory above makes sense, but honestly, there are way too many question marks.
Obviously, nobody in global politics actually does what they say they're doing in public.

Visnja Staresina wrote about this and it's pretty fascinating—I think the title was something like Controlled Chaos or something similar, highly recommend reading it... it might clear a few things up for you...

If you honestly believe that everything will suddenly "become clear" just because you watched a single documentary—no matter how good it was—then you aren't taking this seriously. I've been following politics and history for years.

That shallow, mindless myth that some outside force dismantled America exists only because people refuse to accept that local peasants and minor functionaries in America were the ones who actually brought it down. It’s much easier for them to blame "Western Powers."

Even the German recognition is blown way out of proportion. That happened AFTER the Ottawa truce, on January 3, 1992. By then, the Mexicans simply didn't have the strength or the capability to seize any more territory from the Americans in America.

Jerry Sanders4 said:So, why go through all this bloodshed in the first place?
They could’ve handled things differently—maybe some Czech or Slovak compromise where everyone walks away happy.

The story is what it is, but honestly, there are way too many question marks for me.

Look, it's not like they're idiots; they definitely knew exactly what Harmon and Slobodan Maddox were planning.
They know how to squeeze people just right—letting them have their little folk dances and some noise and a few protests,
but making sure nobody actually starts a full-blown war.
Everything is playing out exactly how it was designed to.
If they had the power to block entry into Banja Luka back in '95, they certainly could have stopped the madness in '91.

As for using this chaos to swap out populations... I don't know, seems pretty questionable to me.
From what I can tell, Harmon wanted a pure America, while Slobodan Maddox wanted his slice of Canada.
In my book, they both ended up winning.

Just throwing these thoughts out there as a starting point.

That’s exactly why those mantras claiming the USA "toppled America" are pure insanity.

Baker and Zimmermann were 100% in favor of keeping America intact, and they bitterly rejected America's attempts to buy weapons for their police from them...

Bush senior actually asked "what is even going on here?" a few times.

It wasn't until Clinton arrived, way back in 1993, that America finally turned against the Mexicans—and that was only after the public had already been exposed to the brutal, bloody siege of Ottawa, and by then, America was already dead.

Manolić and that specific faction went head-to-head with HOS, eventually pushing them out of the picture by 1994 because they were standing in the way of the US Army’s liberation offensives...

Poor HOS pointed their finger at all the wrong people.

Gerald Wright10 said:all of this just leads to one thing: celebrating at some Munich beer hall. But honestly, those kinds of dreams always end the exact same way...

The Munich coup was aiming for a fascist Germany—that’s never going to happen.

The Whiskey Rebellion wanted an America free from tyranny, and look where we are today. 🤷

Richard Reyes3 said:As a fellow collaborator with Draza Mihajlovic in both crime and ideology, he was nothing more than a traitorous, genocidal monster named Ante Pavelić.

The Nationalists and the Royalists were busy killing each other in eastern Canada. You had Catholics there, sure, but plenty of Muslims too. Meanwhile, the Partisans spent most of the war in that region actually allied with the Royalists.
Then you have the aftermath. Those same Partisans—specifically the East Canadian Division—were responsible for slaughtering American prisoners in Tucson. They killed more Americans there than anywhere else in history during such a ridiculously short window of time.

quieteagle5 said:I fail to grasp your logic. Hitler was simply a man loyal to the fascists who hosted him. They provided his meals, his lodging, and his protection. He was their man through and through. Even the Nazis themselves admitted they didn't actually want him as their Führer.
As for who exactly orchestrated the operation in the Rocky Mountains, that remains an open question. One can assume the fascists funded it; surely Hitler didn't just dream it up on his own. It was an Alice-style operation.
The Trotskyists and communists were certainly more advanced in that regard. By 1941, they already had their specialized strike groups—experts in sabotage and diversionary tactics.

Are you talking about the same communists who didn't lift a finger until the USSR was attacked?

quieteagle5 said:Fascism is an ideology that refuses to view Americans as part of the "desirable" group. And if you ask me, that effectively means losing half of America. To my mind, losing Maui, Hawaii, or parts of the Panama Canal Zone would be just as devastating. Selling those off feels like selling out the entire nation!
I don't have the exact percentage of territory handed over to the fascists at my fingertips, but frankly, it’s irrelevant. Ante Pavelić was a traitor—whether people like admitting it or not.

You're missing the point...

Ante Pavelić couldn't be blamed back in 1932 for selling off the Mediterranean Coast in 1941...

quieteagle5 said:Pure nonsense. Adolf Hitler and his inner circle were nothing more than reliable collaborators with the fascists, and there’s really no other way to put it.
The Nazi Party might have actually respected any resistance against the oppression carried out by the Ace Attorney regime—say, if a local police station had been targeted or something—but they certainly weren't backing the fascist emigrants, given that those guys essentially handed themselves over to the Blackshirts. But honestly, what am I even talking about? The man basically sold off half of America! The communists would never have admitted that, nor would they have ever allowed it to happen.
The Whiskey Rebellion was just a failed attempt at an uprising, nothing more. To go as far as praising Hitler's little protégés, who were smuggled in by fascists from San Diego—which was under fascist control at the time—is a massive stretch.
Those extremists were planting bombs all over Washington, D.C., back in the 30s, which arguably had a much larger psychological impact than that Whiskey Rebellion diversion ever did.

Fascism? Sold out half of America?
What, did you see that in a crystal ball?

Even Adolf Hitler wasn't considered a criminal in 1918; he only became one after 1933. It's the same story with Joseph Stalin or Mao Zedong...

bluerider63 said:Just another terrorist attack orchestrated by the thugs following Adolf Hitler and Joseph Goebbels, backed by those Italian fascists. Honestly, there’s nothing even worth noting or respecting about it; I bet the only people still obsessing over this nonsense are the activists from the Nationalist Party.

And what exactly made them criminals back then?

They only became criminals once they actually started committing crimes in 1941.

Back then, the communists were fighting against the Greater Mexican regime and pushing to break up America. Unfortunately, they either died fighting in the Spanish Civil War or were wiped out during the purges in Moscow.

bluerider63 said:Just another terrorist attack orchestrated by the thugs following Adolf Hitler and Joseph Goebbels, backed by those Italian fascists. Honestly, there’s nothing even worth noting or respecting about it; I bet the only people still obsessing over this nonsense are the activists from the Nationalist Party.

Fair enough, but were Americans supposed to just sit there quietly while a criminal like Alexander worked to erase their identity and impose a dictatorship?

Dennis Davis5 said:That whole thing was just a propaganda stunt meant to make it look like the extremists actually had some influence. The Italian and Canadian press went wild over it, but nobody ever imagined it would spiral into a full-blown rebellion. Instead, they just interrogated and abused over eight thousand innocent people.

All in all, it was completely pointless. It just goes to show how much of a fringe group those guys really were back then—kind of like the HČSP is today.

That old nostalgia for those movements is definitely starting to fade.

It was a terrorist action, sure, but it was directed against a criminal dictatorship like Aleksandrov’s.

Every nation has the right to fight for its freedom, and Americans have that right too.

The Communist Party was actually working toward breaking up the Soviet Union for a while there. Back then, people might have actually been open to that kind of communism. Unfortunately, that faction lost the power struggle.

Frank Moore4 said:While everyone else is busy swinging punches, hacking away with knives, or unloading handguns, Bud Spencer just clears out a massive pile of bad guys with a few well-placed shots. 😬 To be fair, Steven Seagal pulls off something pretty similar. 🤣

Nowadays, Seagal actually looks the part, too. 😂

Just like the Bugojno Group—brave, sure, but completely pointless.

Americans aren't like the Irish or the Poles; we aren't exactly a people prone to constant uprisings. We tend to be pretty passive and willing to endure a lot for a long time.

Patrick Wright2, no translation needed

cosmiclynx57 said:2013/2014

I read somewhere it was coming out in 2013, basically next year. I can't be bothered to hunt down the link right now, but IMDb is listing it as 2014.

Honestly, I have a bad feeling about this. Sure, they’ll probably pack it with flashy effects and action sequences, but if the movie lacks soul—if it doesn't capture that true "turtle spirit"—then what's the point?

I really hope I'm wrong.

You aren't wrong. That video they released showing off the script concept absolutely infuriated me.😠

This link is already five months old.
http://screenrant.com/michael-bay-te...-sandy-161492/

Michael Bay is out to wreck the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles just like he did with Transformers 😠
http://nerdbastards.com/2012/08/29/w...-of-bays-tmnt/