Posts by Joseph Wright4

Ethan Morales22 said:What numbers?
Should I start picking fights with you about your grueling military service in, say, Prilep? Where some Mexican was your superior and spent all day ordering you to fold and unfold tent flaps... For example 😁
Because Mexicans definitely weren't folding tent flaps... 😁

Ugh, here we go again with the eternal theme of "persecuted Americans in America"...
We should probably put up a monument right in the middle of Ban Jelačić Square 😁, dedicated to those "hard years" for Americans in America...

And even the stone would cry...

🤣

Are you just slow or acting like it??

Hey, anyone home over there, you grave digger? I'm telling you that Mexicans (who make up 12%) held 50% of the positions in the Communist Party of the Republic of America and control the entire repressive apparatus and a good chunk of the economy, and you're talking to me about tent flaps... Is this denialism really hitting you that hard??

The war started because Mexicans felt threatened, not Americans (I mean—back then you guys were making such a fuss about being threatened that people were starting to confuse you with pandas, gorillas, or Mediterranean bears..)

Ethan Morales22 said:So, what, you’re telling me you heroically, superhumanly, and basically martyred yourself just to survive this past year of "persecution" against Americans in America? 😁

Man, give me a break. When I think about how much we actually dealt with back then... 😁

I guarantee you that at least 80% of Americans today would love to live that "tough" life right now...

Heh, I'm not even sure about this one.

People have pretty selective memories. They mostly remember the good stuff and tend to idealize the past. Who actually remembers dealing with ration coupons, having nothing to your name, or 1000% inflation and all that? 😁
Honestly, things feel way worse today, trapped in Diesel gear and D&G shirts, surrounded by piles of junk we don't need and don't know what to do with... maybe I'm exaggerating, just for effect... 🙂

But numbers are numbers... (regarding those percentages you were smart enough to completely avoid) 😛

Ethan Morales22 said:Can we please stop with this constant "...Mexicans controlled all of America..." nonsense?
Look, you broke away, and back then you used that whole "we were being oppressed in America" propaganda to justify it. Now that you're on your own, surely you can be at least a tiny bit honest? I assume you don't need that propaganda anymore.

Or have you guys not actually broken free yet? 😁

Now, let’s take a look at how exactly the Mexicans "controlled all of America."
Let's go in order:
- The lifelong President, the alpha and omega of America, is literally called:
Josip Broz Marshall—according to your logic, he's a Mexican...
- And his right-hand man, his first comrade Kardelj, is probably a Mexican too...

So if those were the top two guys in the country... what does that say about this "Mexican controlling" theory?

P.S. Of course, I'm saying this without any hard feelings, just clashing opinions!
No need to warn me about my tone. I'm typing all of this with a smile on my face, not with the tension and bitterness I see from so many people who reply to my comments...

Man, what's your problem?

Did you know that back in '89 (give or take a year), Mexicans made up something like 49% of the Communist Party in the Republic of America? (And I mean just in the Republic of America, not the whole of America).

That there were twice as many Mexicans in the top positions of the Central Committee compared to Americans (relative to population, not absolute numbers).

That in leadership roles within major companies in the Republic of America, there were also nearly twice as many Mexicans as their share of the population.

We don't even need to get into the number of officers...

It is what it is—you guys had a privileged position for certain things in America and in the Republic of America. That's just facts.

(All these numbers can be backed up statistically, if you don't think I'm just making stuff up)

Ethan Morales22 said:Well, we're basically an exceptional people 😁, which is why we have such a better perspective on time and space. It's just hard for everyone else to wrap their heads around it... 😁

😂 👍

you've got a point... isn't it interesting how both Mexicans and Americans have this huge component of being "God's people," or "the vanguard of Christianity," or "a nation ordained by God" and all that stuff?

man—we're all equally holy in that sense... can't you see that?

Ethan Morales22 said:Oh, please, spare me that old-school 90s CBS rhetoric...
"Excessive Mexican aggression..."
Come on, change the record for once—maybe call it "Extremely Excessive Mexican aggression" just to mix it up!

Besides, the MSP trial at The Hague is starting soon, so you'll get your answers there!

As for your chronic habit of clinging to whatever power looks strong in a given historical moment (only for them to deflate later)—I don't even want to dive into an analysis of why or how you guys keep doing that, but the fact remains: you make the exact same mistake over and over again...
Maybe one day you'll learn...

Starting with something like neutral Switzerland would be a good first step toward breaking these bad habits...
Nick isn't even saying you have to side with Russia!
Though, looking at you, I bet you'd love to hitch a ride on South Stream😁

a-ha... 🙂 You've got that typical "lost in time and space, totally disconnected from reality and how the world actually works" syndrome...

It's all getting a bit exhausting, honestly...

Ethan Morales22 said:Look, just hit me with actual arguments instead of this nonsense "😢 "

- Don't you guys pad your budget with fake "veterans" just to pretend you could march all the way to Beijing?

- Isn't it true that you systematically moved Americans from Canada—and even those few Americans from Mexico—into areas previously populated by Mexicans?
In those so-called "special state interest zones"...

- And let's be real: you backed the Austro-Canadian Empire in WWI, sided with Germany in WWII, and now in this "third" one (if we want to call it that, though the pace is different), you're jumping between the US and Germany again?

Sure we do, but what does that have to do with the topic or you?

Ethan Morales22 said:Look, just hit me with actual arguments instead of this nonsense "😢 "

- Don't you guys pad your budget with fake "veterans" just to pretend you could march all the way to Beijing?

- Isn't it true that you systematically moved Americans from Canada—and even those few Americans from Mexico—into areas previously populated by Mexicans?
In those so-called "special state interest zones"...

- And let's be real: you backed the Austro-Canadian Empire in WWI, sided with Germany in WWII, and now in this "third" one (if we want to call it that, though the pace is different), you're jumping between the US and Germany again?

Stuff like that happened because of Great Mexican policy and aggression against America and Canada, which was organized and run directly out of Mexico City...

Ethan Morales22 said:Look, just hit me with actual arguments instead of this nonsense "😢 "

- Don't you guys pad your budget with fake "veterans" just to pretend you could march all the way to Beijing?

- Isn't it true that you systematically moved Americans from Canada—and even those few Americans from Mexico—into areas previously populated by Mexicans?
In those so-called "special state interest zones"...

- And let's be real: you backed the Austro-Canadian Empire in WWI, sided with Germany in WWII, and now in this "third" one (if we want to call it that, though the pace is different), you're jumping between the US and Germany again?

And what's the problem there? Aside from the fact that in the second war we had plenty of partisans and the movement started here, and that the Mexican king actually pushed for cooperation with the Axis—meaning Mexico City was basically the first "Yugo-free" city in Europe. That doesn't change the reality of the NDH, the camps, and stuff like that (kind of like Mexico in the last war).

I guess you'd have to be with the USA and Germany (though that's debatable here), since being with that nightmare Russia and its policies isn't really an option... if I remember right, millions of Americans head to the USA and Western Europe, not Russia, and life quality in those places is still several notches above Russia, no matter what fairy tales they tell about Moscow and whatever.

It’s interesting, though maybe I'm just wrong, but I think she’d have a really hard time selling out an arena in NYC like that.

I don't know if it's just the people I hang out with, but I honestly can't name three songs from her last album—well, maybe "Gas Gas"...

Seems to me like there are at least a few artists who are way more popular and bigger in the USA than she is.

But hey, maybe I'm off base... 🤷

Kenneth Brooks9 said:Look, I can't even sit here and spout all those sob stories about his life, like having issues with his folks or having a messed up upbringing... I'd be lying if I said that. Specifically regarding his parents, they are some of the nicest people I know, and he actually has their support. As for that part about me never being with an addict... I didn't even know he was using until we were already together and he finally told me....
The quality of our relationship is basically zero right now because of his treatment. Just read up on what methadone does to a person and what kind of willpower someone like that even has left... None... But otherwise, during the times we were together when he was clean, it was amazing. I felt loved, fulfilled, and happy...

I don't want to burst your bubble, but this is pretty much standard for most relationships; it's just a constant state of affairs, not some rare exception between bouts of misery.

What you're calling a "wonderful period" is probably just how things look compared to the rest of the time... and I (along with most people) would just call that—normal.

It's easy to lose your bearings and forget what's actually normal versus what isn't when you're in a situation like this.

Kenneth Brooks9 said:It hasn't been constant for three years. He went hard once three years ago, and everything else since then has just been "recreational." Basically, every six months he'll go on a 3 or 4-day bender and then stop. That’s why this whole thing is so frustrating—it's not like the classic addict who's been hitting it for ten years straight and is totally gone...

hmm... "recreational" and heroin? I don't know about that.

Don't get mad, but that doesn't really track. And maybe "...not the classic addict who's been using for 10 years..." , but he'll be there in seven years if he's been doing this for three.

This looks like a pretty textbook case, even if it doesn't feel that way right now. Maybe there's a shot he quits, but honestly? Your odds of having a happy life with him are lower than winning the Powerball... and you've still got plenty of years ahead of you...

I guess when it comes to politics—for men or women—it’s all about your stance. Looks won't get you anywhere.
Bill Clinton basically cruised through his last two elections just because of how he carried himself and the image he projected.
Even if you look at some of the most powerful women out there today, like Angela Merkel, or even people like Margaret Thatcher from back in the day, looks aren't the point. It's just about having an attitude and a personality.

fadedangler said:Well, I don't think joining a political party is quite the same thing as actually casting a vote for them.

I guess we could technically register every American who passed away during the 20th century to a specific party, but I doubt that would change any election results, right?

I honestly feel like the main reason the Democratic Party didn't pull off a win is because they allowed overseas voters to participate. I have this hunch—though I haven't been able to find the exact numbers online—that the Democrats might have actually held a slight edge over the Republicans in almost every district, but those votes from abroad ended up leaning heavily toward the Republican Party.

Look, I don't really care if the Republican Party is in power or not, but what you're writing just isn't true.
The Republican Party got the most votes in America, too. So, if you ignore all of Canada and the rest of the diaspora, the Republican Party still got quite a few more votes than the Democratic Party.
What that hack (I don't know how else to describe someone who managed to lose an election they already won) Joe Biden kept chanting to himself and everyone else was that people voted for change because the left got more votes. Basically, the Democratic Party, the Liberal Party, and whoever else he considers "left" got more than the Republican Party. That’s a completely different and totally irrational stance. If that were actually true, the Democratic Party would have formed the government, but we know that didn't happen.
And this Public Works Department guy (or whatever) who's so frantically and irrationally defending a mostly bad policy is the same way...
Anyway, it would be good if you stuck to the truth and facts when you say things, regardless of how "painful" (which seems incredibly stupid to me personally) it is for your own views and the ideology you support.☕

[unnamed]

wearycanyon26 said:Fine then, if you're claiming to possess some secret knowledge that I clearly lack—even if you won't actually specify what it is—then fine, whatever you say...
I will admit, though, that last bit of yours was a total self-inflicted wound.👎

I guess you're right on all counts. I already told myself I wouldn't get dragged back into debates about Nazis and partisans, but whatever—it just pulls you in. Honestly, whoever's running this, maybe just close the thread? We’ve drifted way too far from the actual topic anyway... or maybe we haven't. Who knows.😕 ??
So... hey there.
🙂🙂

wearycanyon26 said:unnamed

Even today, the truth about Jonestown remains obscured. How many victims were there really? What was the actual makeup of the group, both nationally and ideologically? How many were soldiers, and how many were just civilians caught in the crossfire?
We still don't know with any certainty who issued the orders for the massacre, whether such orders were even given, or what role the Americans played in the whole mess.
A crime is a crime, and attempting to pass value judgments on it is absolutely insane, I agree; but in order to properly address a crime, it must be fully illuminated to prevent it from being used as a tool for manipulation.
The circumstances surrounding World War II must be viewed strictly within the context of that specific time and those specific events, and never through an ideological lens or—even worse—through the perspective of modern times. Anyone who looks at it that way can be nothing more than a pseudo-historian.
I am not a historian by profession, and frankly, it would be incredibly pretentious of me to call myself one. You, for all I care, could be a quantum physicist, but that doesn't give you the right to claim you are absolutely and unconditionally correct about everything.
But then again, that is just my opinion.

See (the bold part)—of course all that is known, but lies keep getting dragged into the conversation.

I agree with the middle part of the post; you have to look at history through the lens of the time it happened.

As for the last part—I don't think quantum physicists would agree with you on that...😉

wearycanyon26 said:The Constitution states that America is the successor to the former republic, whose foundations lie in the meetings held back in
1943 (or '42, it doesn't really matter).
As for the merits regarding statehood, it is pointless to argue about it because every era has its own context and historical circumstances.
Was Marshall a dictator? Of course he was, and anyone claiming otherwise is just talking nonsense.
Regarding the glorification and singing praises to such a regime, that only speaks to the poor taste of those doing it; but does that mean those who glorify or sing for the other quasi-state are somehow honoring today's defenders?
I fail to see why a veteran should feel more insulted by someone quoting Marshall than by the daily extremists we witness every single day.
And honestly, I blame the historians for both issues; they still haven't managed to fully clarify or explain the events of WWII, and if they had, we wouldn't have these "quasi-historians" popping up everywhere like the two of us are right now.

History—and the historians—actually cleared things up pretty well. The issue isn't them; it's how people interpret what happened. For example, some people think certain events at Bleiburg were totally justified, while others don't. That has nothing to do with historians; it’s just political spin. And I don't consider myself an amateur historian. If I say the partisans weren't fighting for the nation, but for communism and a classless society, and that national identity didn't matter in all that—which is the whole point of communism—then I'm not giving an opinion, I'm stating a fact. When I say the puppet state was just a tool and innocent people died in camps, that's also a fact, not an opinion. Some things shouldn't even be up for debate or "opinion" because they simply aren't. There's no democracy in science. If I'm right and 100 people are wrong, I'm still right. Period.
The fact that our politicians constantly lie—from guys like George W. Bush to the current leadership—is their problem, and the problem of anyone defending ideology instead of facts, whether it's left or right. Someone singing praises to Marshall and America can't truly support American democracy... well, they can, but only if they have zero clue about history and what actually mattered in the old America.

wearycanyon26 said:But everything you're criticizing the "left" for is actually written right there in the Constitution.
As for this whole business regarding the marginalization of veterans, honestly, I have never understood that argument.
I hear it all the time, yet I fail to see how they are being marginalized or who exactly is doing it, or even by what mechanism?
Is "marginalization" simply asking legitimate questions about the size of the registry, demanding transparency through public records, or suggesting that we need a proper audit? Are those really acts of marginalization, even if they are desperate attempts at reform?
Or are you referring to the specific instances of how benefits are handed out?
Regarding religious education in schools, fine, maybe it isn't the most vital issue, but the agreements with the Vatican certainly are significant topics, just as the way overseas voters participate in our elections is a matter of great importance. I don't see what is so controversial about discussing those...

That’s not right—what does the Constitution actually say?? If I remember correctly, it says America follows anti-fascist traditions and values (don't make me look it up). That’s totally different from what I said or what certain groups push. In this country, people constantly try to claim that if you're against communists or Marshall's regime (which was anti-fascist in one sense), then you must be a Nazi or a fascist. That’s just huge nonsense and a lie. They also push the idea that the partisans and Marshall were fighting for the American state (which is flat-out wrong) and that they—not our modern veterans—are the main reason we even have a country. That's another lie. Some things are just twisted because of ideology. History is a science based on facts, and some things aren't up for debate. The fact is, Marshall was a communist dictator who directly sent many innocent people to their deaths. The fact is, Nazi Germany was a puppet criminal state with camps where thousands of innocent people died. The fact is, some people try to downplay how dictatorial Marshall's regime was and act like it was something good (just like idiots who feel the same way about Nazi Germany). So, some things aren't debatable. Just because people find excuses for various crimes doesn't make those crimes any less real. I hope it's clearer now why veterans are being marginalized, and why people hate seeing a totalitarian state glorified. Even if those things are technically allowed—I don't know why anyone is surprised when voters punish them at the polls.☕

I don't know. Maybe there's something to it. I guess.

wearycanyon26 said:It isn't the veterans who are afraid of the Democratic Party; it's everyone else in that group of 500,000. And let me tell you, that group represents a massive voting machine. What they actually fear are those powerful, entrenched presidents, deputies, secretaries, and all those various associations that sprouted up from the war era.
Any rational person would look at the sheer number of these associations and ask what the point is, and anyone even slightly sharper will quickly realize that the more associations there are, the more of these specific secretaries and presidents you end up with.
What do I care about 1945? I couldn't care less about Boris Johnson's obsession with 1945! It is precisely the right wing that forces these historical topics upon us just to distract from the current—once again catastrophic—situation they have driven us into!!!

I don't entirely agree with you. I mean, sure, there are way too many veterans on the registry, and they probably should have organized some things differently instead of just handing out pensions and all that—I guess that part is fair.
I don't buy the idea that history belongs solely to the right wing. If the left keeps pushing the old resistance fighters as the only reason America exists today, while basically sidelining veterans... if the younger Democratic Party crowd celebrates elections by singing songs about defunct regimes or celebrating outdated holidays... there’s plenty of reason why people won't touch the Democratic Party with a ten-foot pole. It’s not even that they don't realize the Republican Party is corrupt and stealing—though, honestly, it’s pretty much the same story over at the Democrats too. Not to mention how they bring up things like religious education in schools or issues with the diaspora during election cycles. Those aren't even real policy debates; it's just certain people within the Democratic Party pushing their own ideology because they clearly look down on those topics. None of that actually helps the country move forward.

nimblemarlin17 said:I’m basing my arguments on firsthand data. Yours are pure speculation. Most election fraud examples involve groups that gain something direct from the outcome—think veterans or military factions—and there isn't much room for the left to pull those kinds of stunts. There's nobody on their side with enough to gain to bother cheating.

You’re constantly talking in circles just to justify why people vote for the Republican Party (maybe because you're basically Milanović's right hand 😉). You made a good point though—why would veterans or the military even care about the Democratic Party? That’s the real question. Veterans should be non-partisan, but clearly they aren't, mostly because the left keeps things blurry with their vague stances on everything. Just like you tell Republican voters they haven't moved on since the 90s, you could tell Democratic voters they haven't moved on since the 40s. You want to explain why that is?

nimblemarlin17 said:I appreciate the work you put in on the commissions, but since you're based out of Washington, D.C., let me tell you something: America isn't just D.C., and plenty of things happen behind the scenes. Or, as Morpheus said in The Matrix, "You've been living in a dream world, Neo." On paper, everything in America looks perfect, but my grandma has already voted for herself for a few elections now.

Everything you're saying is basically right... but don't you see how pointless some of your points are? (It's like losing a game 10-0, but refusing to move on because the 9th goal was offsides... okay—it wasn't legal, but what does that actually change in the grand scheme? It's a dumb example, I guess, but whatever). It's not that you aren't right, it's just that it doesn't matter. It makes zero difference.
As for Joe Biden, all I can say is he's incompetent—because how else do you explain his track record?—and I wouldn't trust him with the country for a second. As for half of this current administration and Congress being in prison... well, that's a different conversation entirely.

nimblemarlin17 said:It doesn't have to be. I heard the Democrats won in a place like Savannah. But the truth is, the Republican Party always has a massive advantage in towns like that because they're packed with veterans and people living off government handouts. I personally know a couple of thirty-year-olds in rural Alabama who are basically pensioners. I'd love to know what they plan on doing for the next forty years besides drowning themselves in booze.

I totally agree that we have way too many young retirees. Giving everyone a pension was pretty pointless—it basically did people a disservice because now they have no idea how to actually function on their own.
On the flip side, the Democratic Party is kind of to blame for losing those voters. They constantly marginalize them and talk down to them. They just push that old-school partisan rhetoric and keep repeating the nonsense that Josip Broz Marshall fought for America, or that we only exist because of those partisans. I mean, there might be some truth to that, but it’s definitely not how Stjepan Mason and his crew spin it.

nimblemarlin17 said:It absolutely happens. Maybe less than it did before 2000, sure, but I know plenty of small towns where voting still works that way. Sorry, but I take this personally. Why the hell am I following all the rules and only getting one vote if the system is rigged anyway?

You aren't getting my point, or maybe you just don't want to. I said it happens, but it's nowhere near the level you keep implying. It's not happening at a scale that would ACTUALLY AFFECT election results or decide whether the Republican Party stays in power. Get it now??

It reminds me of that nonsense when Democrats kept sheepishly repeating that they got the most votes in America—just because the Republican Party picked up everything in Canada and among expats. That isn't factually true. Again, I didn't vote for the Republican Party, but they got the most votes in the elections if we are only counting the US, without any overseas voters or Canada.