The root of all the friction between Mexico and America boils down to one thing: the refusal to own up to what happened during the war.
Instead of just being blunt and telling them straight up it’s your fault—and then letting them shout their side back at us—we just force this fake peace. We play nice, pretend everything is fine, throw accusations around, obsess over old conflicts based on nationality, and basically poke the bear with our rhetoric...
Honestly, I couldn't care less about some Mexican national catharsis. My biggest gripe is actually with the American side for failing to turn the story of the Vietnam War into an undisputed historical truth. Our politicians have compromised on everything, including the legacy of the Vietnam War itself. Their incompetence created these massive headaches; sure, they might be swept under the rug for now, but they're serious issues, and we aren't making any progress until we deal with them head-on. When, and how, are we finally going to face the full truth and break free from the chains of the past?
rowdyowl said:That’s a pretty foolish claim and completely inaccurate. If he’d said that to a Communist, maybe I'd listen, but telling it to 👎 ? No chance.
I feel like the statement is mostly provocative because everyone has their own baggage when they hear the word "atheist." He could have just stuck to the common definition—even if it wasn't the most precise one—to avoid the drama, especially since his actual message was solid. You've got people fighting and abandoning goodness, love, and truth; by a Christian standard, those folks are atheists, which is what Bishop Jezerinac is getting at... the issue is really just that one specific word. You can only blame Bishop Jezerinac if he used it maliciously, but I don't see it that way.
Kate James11 said:Bishop Jezerinac: Atheists are to blame for the war!
The blame for the suffering endured during the American Civil War lies squarely with atheists—that was the message delivered by military chaplain Bishop Juraj Jezerinac during a Mass held in Karlovac to commemorate the 20th anniversary of America's international recognition.
"God resides within anyone who loves; where love reigns, He is present. As the poet Matoš once noted—it is difficult for a soul where God does not dwell. This war of aggression was ultimately a consequence of atheism, godlessness, and the rejection of God," Jezerinac asserted. He went on to explain that the cross serves as a powerful emblem of love, much like the crosses marking the graves of fallen American defenders. Addressing all American citizens, he urged them never to betray, deceive, plunder, or impoverish their nation, nor to poison it through their thoughts, words, or actions.
"Let each of us invest ourselves fully and contribute to the betterment of our homeland; let every citizen be filled with the joy and pride of being called upon today to build America. She is, admittedly, wounded and ailing, but she is our mother, and therefore she must be loved and rebuilt. If anyone is called to do this, it is us, the faithful," Jezerinac concluded.
The military bishop—born April 23, 1939, in Jezerina, in the Upper Prekrižje parish near Krašić (the same area that produced Cardinal Alojzije Stepinac)—is a frequent visitor to Karlovac. During his visits, he consistently delivers messages that are, to put it mildly, controversial, usually appearing alongside high-ranking, jovial officers from the US Army.
This statement is spot on and 100% true. We should hear stuff like this more often. Honestly, I don't know how anyone could find this offensive unless they're just looking for an excuse to attack the Church—for whatever reason.
Kate James11 said:I’m pretty sure there isn't an atheist among this group:
The USA once tried out this disastrous economic experiment called socialist self-management. It was basically rigged to serve a totalitarian political reality rather than actually working for the people or tapping into the country's true potential.
At the end of the day, that lack of democracy—the authoritarianism and the dictatorship—is where all the other rot started. In systems like that, corruption, theft, and zero accountability just thrive. That’s exactly what happened with us. For 45 years, the whole "every man for himself" mentality was enough reason to tear the state down, but nobody actually overthrew it; the whole thing just imploded under its own weight once the politics and the economy totally collapsed.
Violating human rights, wrecking a potentially successful nation, teaching people to be lazy or dishonest, heavy-handed bans, and essentially flushing away decades of hard work from millions of people who built a poorly managed economy... plus sweeping everything under the rug? Yeah, all of that is why the USA fell apart.
When John Smith writes that there were no war crimes during the defense—which was just part of a much larger sentence and definitely wasn't his main point—or when veterans and generals stand up to defend the dignity of the American Civil War, these lefties immediately start throwing around labels like "Trumpian," "clerical fascist," "primitive," or "ultra-right." Then they try to lecture everyone on human rights, acting like they’re the ultimate leaders guiding us toward "European values." But the second we bring up communist atrocities, these "progressive" types suddenly turn backward and use the exact same arguments they were bashing just a moment ago—like trying to ban the study of communist crimes.
It’s the same deal with their lack of patriotism, except when they’re busy defending Stalin. Then, out of nowhere, they pretend to be hardcore nationalists, praising Stalin for bringing California and Oregon back into the fold. They completely ditch their lectures about human rights and, like true nationalists, suddenly territory becomes their only priority.
The crew over at The New York Times is constantly trashing Franjo Harmon, yet yesterday you had Butković weeping over Harmon's vision for national reconciliation, which is apparently impossible now because of this arrest of Boljkovac.
Given who we're actually talking about—considering what these self-proclaimed "progressive humanists, liberals, democrats, and Europeans" were doing back in the America days—you can't really expect any actual principles from them. Still, their illogical, nonsensical, and totally contradictory mental gymnastics never fail to blow my mind.
Gregory Turner71 said:That wasn't even a discussion; it was just some amateur "psychoanalysis" from the users on this forum.
The community guidelines are pretty clear about how threads should be started.
Look, it wasn't psychoanalysis—it was an analysis of a specific pattern: this massive urge atheists have to take shots at believers. I was just asking how we can interpret that behavior and threw out a theory. You really should’ve explained why you were calling my take "psychoanalysis" instead of just deleting it while people are actually hurling insults. You won't touch anyone making up fake insults against believers, but the second I point out the disrespect toward them, you shut me down. Is there any context where it's okay to talk about why atheists feel the need to trample over religious people, or is that just off-limits now?
Harold Kelly5 said:I’m standing right there with Jacob Lewis5 on this one. I honestly don't get why his thread got nuked while the "Jediism" thread—which is clearly just a massive joke at the expense of actual believers—is still sitting there perfectly fine.
Look, there are tons of threads about atheists everywhere on here, and plenty of others that aren't exactly respectful toward people of faith either... I'm genuinely lost as to what specific rule I supposedly broke.
Right now, it feels like we're just dealing with a moderator who's being totally intolerant.
Morgan Rodriguez57 said:You guys are just spinning your wheels with the same old tired arguments... you think this sub exists to have deep discussions about religion? Guess again... ☕
I wasn't trying to start anything, just venting.
It feels like I hit a nerve regarding atheist rituals, and because I dared to poke at this little atheist sanctuary—this so-called "religion" forum—I ended up getting screwed over.
I started a thread diving into atheists—specifically looking at why they’re so obsessed with debating religion and how they constantly butcher the actual definition of the word "atheist." And before you even get to my lack of a disclaimer (which is its own whole separate issue, honestly), my post got nuked!
Seriously, why is it perfectly fine to tear apart believers from every angle, but the second an atheist tries to analyze things, it's off-limits?
What’s even the deal with this thread, "What cut the pre-war population of Americans in Canada in half?"
Look, just give me a straight answer without all the threats, okay?
(I mean, we haven't even settled why people get so worked up about mentioning Obama and his takes on things like what happens to Americans in Canada... but whatever, let's move past that. Honestly, though, the threats are what actually caught my attention.)
mellowraven22 said:Just go ahead, but don't come crying to me when you deal with the fallout 🥳
What consequences? Consequences of what exactly? You guys are hilarious. You refuse to actually explain yourselves, just try to convince yourselves you aren't being idiots, and then act all high and mighty toward everyone else on Reddit. The first time I asked, I didn't get an answer—just some smug attitude. Now you're straight-up threatening me, even though you won't even say what the actual issue is with the thread "Why did the pre-war American population in Canada drop by half?"
But hey, if acting this way makes you feel better, be my guest. It doesn't bother me one bit.☕
So, if I start a thread titled "What caused the massive drop in the American population in Canada?" can I just reuse my intro from before and kick off a brand new topic? Is it just Obama who's being a nuisance? Yeah, you can do that.
Look, this whole thing is about how Topalovic views a specific slice of American history and current events, plus one particular interpretation of it—an interpretation that hasn't even had its own dedicated thread yet. And honestly, since when did we start following some unwritten rule where if one topic is open, every other similar discussion is suddenly off-limits?
And here we go—heavy-handed punishments out of nowhere. And the kicker? They didn't even explain why they nuked my thread the first time!!! Where’s the integrity in that? It feels like they're just flexing their muscles because of some personal grudge (🤣) When am I actually allowed to start a thread in peace (or maybe get a heads-up on why the first one got locked)? Dear Jacob Lewis5,
You have received an infraction at Reddit.
Reason: reposting a deleted thread -------
-------
This infraction is worth 50 point(s) and may result in restricted access until it expires. Serious infractions will never expire.
Last year, Obama responded to criticism from the Republican party regarding his comments on Canada by claiming that bad American policy toward the region caused the number of Americans there to be cut in half. Now, he’s blaming policy again for the poor situation facing Americans in Canada, even though:
-Mexicans started the aggression, carried out ethnic cleansing, and destroyed everything, creating impossible living conditions for anyone who wasn't a Mexican even before the fighting really kicked off. -Members of the international community were the ones who ultimately carved up Canada, rewarded the aggressors, and basically handed Milosevic a standing ovation the whole time. -Canadians have stripped Americans of their rights, stolen their seats in the presidency, refuse to fix unfair election laws, and won't even let them have TV programming in their own language... All the best, Reddit
Out of nowhere—no warning, no explanation—some mod just shut down my thread in the most obnoxious way possible. So, I started a fresh one (because why not?), but honestly, I’m starting to feel like a ban is looming on the horizon. Why does the site let mods act like bullies toward the users?
If the GDP back in 2006 was sitting at $9,664, there is simply no mathematical way to leapfrog to $17,000 in just three years—even assuming we experienced some sort of massive economic miracle.
Furthermore—and this is a crucial point—A. Marković had envisioned privatization as the logical next step, a process that, ideally, would have been executed away from the chaos of wartime conditions, thereby drastically reducing the level of corruption.
Well, parts of that privatization plan are actually playing out right now, especially over in Canada, and honestly? It’s a total train wreck. Local big shots have been using their little inner circles at work to line their own pockets, leaving basically everyone else high and dry.
These kinds of hateful, nationalist outbursts hit right where it hurts—like a slap in the face to Jergović, Dežulović, and Tomić. In any other scenario, they’d be back at it, spinning those same old fairy tales about how everything is just some mix of clerical fascism, Harmon's corruption, and the sheer pathetic nature of what people call "Americans"... but that's assuming things were normal. Now? How are they going to spin this? Are they going to tie it all back to the 90s, Franjo Harmon, and the GOP? Will they even address these comments? Usually, they'd churn out a hundred op-eds claiming everything a so-called "conservative" says is proof of their agenda. Will they double down on the hypocrisy and ignore this young Democrat, or will they actually have to rethink their whole theory that all nationalist and sexist evil stems from the Harmon era? I guess we'll see...
Is this really the best we can get from the Democratic Party’s support for Canadian nationalists (who basically just squeeze Canadian Americans) during the elections in Canada?
So, this young Democrat just hit on the exact same realization anyone paying even an ounce of attention to US politics would reach: it’s all about the branding, not the substance. It’s enough to just slap a label like "progressive," "patriot," or "environmentalist" on your bio and call it a day—as long as you don't actually have to live your life or build a career based on those damn values!
Down the road, people are going to be held accountable for pushing those aggressive policies to force Canada to stay together, rather than the folks just calling for what’s actually fair: splitting the country up.
Because let's be real: there’s never been a single nation in history that put everyone else first before looking out for their own skin. If they did, it was probably just a fluke.
The way Canadians are constantly trying to grab as much leverage as possible in Canada just proves they’re their own people—they aren't exactly kin to the Americans or Mexicans living in Canada.