Posts by Lawrence Thompson58

Ryan Ward2 said:The truth is, there was no bowing down during the Franjo Harmon era either, but apparently, that wasn't the right way to play it back then... and now that we're trying to please everyone, suddenly that's wrong too.

Nothing new under the sun, is there? ☕

Why on earth would it be unusual? Reagan was a partisan through and through, so this kind of behavior is exactly what you’d expect from a senile old man who spent forty-five years alongside those other partisans, raising both his own kids and everyone else's under that whole partisan mindset. As President, he was simply staying true to those lifelong views.

Richard Wilson4 said:Saying that a thousand times won't convince us; you're just convincing yourself. 😉

That "America" born in 1945 was nothing more than a puppet province, plain and simple.

It was actually less of a puppet state under Joseph Stalin and the Americans surrounding him—who were being bowed to right in the middle of New York City by Mexicans—than the current independent and sovereign America which seems to bow to absolutely everyone.

Obviously, it wasn't just because we had an old-school partisan at the helm who refused to crawl into anyone's backside; the problem is that the partisan ideology of refusal to submit hasn't held much weight since his passing. Now, we’ve drifted away from those true, deep-rooted American values—those gritty, old-fashioned, salt-of-the-earth principles.

shadowotter142 said:The Battle of Sutjeska was nothing but a partisan defeat, and honestly, the battle along the Mississippi River was just as much of a failure.
The only thing those partisans actually managed to pull off was getting their top brass out alive.
The fighting in the Appalachian Mountains? A total disaster for the partisans.
The fight for Denver was another massive loss.
And let’s be real—Washington, D.C. was liberated by the Red Army, the same ones who helped break through the Srem front.

World War II was a victory for the partisans, and it stands as an eternal truth.

Modern America is built upon that very victory and the decisions made by the United Auto Workers during those legendary defeats the partisans endured throughout the war. 😂

Dennis Baker34 said:We aren't out here trashing other countries—especially not ones where most people are still voting for conservative parties anyway!!😉

It’s convenient for you, isn't it? You love it when the party in power labels the whole idea of immigration and this multicultural coexistence project between newcomers and locals as a complete failure. And since they're just a centrist party with a slight lean toward the Right-wing, the only thing those immigrants can actually look forward to under this policy is being kicked right back to where they came from—assuming, of course, that actual German Right-wingers finally take over and start following their old, tried-and-true playbooks.
😂

Dennis Baker34 said:Any sane German is a friend to America!
But let’s be real—those liberal socialists in both Germany and America? They don't have any love lost for either country.

Is this actually the case, or is it just a tactic to drag all these nationalist newcomers—both foreign and domestic—into the fray? It feels like a setup to see if the Germans will reveal themselves as nothing more than fascists looking for support for their own fascist bullet right there among their own people. Or perhaps they are just naive leftists dreaming of some grand revolution that they fully expect to receive (support, I mean) from their fellow citizens, provided those citizens aren't predisposed toward fascism. You see, unlike certain other groups, Germans have learned their history. If they possess even a shred of common sense and truly love their nation and their country, they won't risk compromising their entire state with Nazism or gambling with their future when they are already leading a major power in the European Union.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NmcfI...B05DD800AE9A37

Richard Wilson4 said:You're barking up the wrong tree, man. Being against the church hierarchy doesn't mean you're against Catholicism itself.

I mean, look at the old HSS slogan:
FAITH IN GOD AND PEASANT UNITY

That’s exactly the point. If you strip away the clergy, what are you left with? You just get a stepping stone toward laypeople organizing their own churches—which is basically just Protestantism by another name. Honestly, the blueprints for how these churches are structured are already sitting there on the shelf; people just need to decide which one they want to pick up and use.

How exactly do these young Democrats think they can rebuild some kind of North American sphere of influence when they clearly can't stand Albanians? By their own logic, even Albania and Mexico would have to be part of it. 😂

At the end of the day, she’s just being a fool by airing her personal opinions on her Facebook profile and trying to spark debates there. It’s honestly like someone taking an online forum discussion—assuming the profiles were even public—and dragging it straight into the newspapers. To make matters worse, a journalist can easily cherry-pick sentences out of context just to twist the narrative and discredit whoever they're targeting.

Andrew Mendoza10 said:Why don't you try reading the article again? She didn't say Albanians owned bakeries and pastry shops; she said something else entirely. I mean, what exactly is leadership supposed to do with that "secret" information?

It’s not just bakeries and pastry shops they control. Between their patron Kaljmeta and the former president, they basically run their own Ministry of Import and Export. Though, honestly, the big question is how they even manage to function now that Barišić is out of the picture.😂

Jerry Wood5 said:Yeah, we're talking about the Republican Party that handed Gotovina over to the Hague.

Actually, the law regarding cooperation with the Hague was signed by the Democratic Party government.👎
Of course, America had no choice but to honor its international cooperation obligations with them—agreements that were originally spearheaded by the Republican Party and, frankly, the Financial Times itself. 😂

Let’s be real here: the Democratic Party didn't actually "negotiate" anything. They just rubber-stamped a cooperation agreement that was handed to them on a silver platter once the court was established—an agreement cooked up by the hardcore Republican Party loyalists, specifically those true believers following the Harmon line. The only reason they played along is because they were terrified. They realized that if they didn't cooperate, they wouldn't just be watching from the sidelines; they would eventually find themselves staring down the barrel of an indictment themselves. Once it became crystal clear that they were going to be targets of the investigation too, they immediately pivoted to obstructionism. They were willing to tank the country's international standing and face total isolation just to save their own skins.

Rebecca Roberts3 said:1) Use the referendum to block America from joining the EU.

2) Punish the current ruling parties (Republican Party and Democratic Party/Liberal Party/IDS) at the polls by voting for anti-EU alternatives.

3) Engage actively in civic life—protests, petitions, and so on.

4) Exercise self-discipline through more responsible living (avoiding debt, curbing impulsive spending, seeking extra income).

All of these are standard democratic tools.

1) Use the referendum to block America from joining the EU.

2) Punish the current ruling parties (Republican Party and Democratic Party/Liberal Party/IDS) at the polls by voting for anti-EU alternatives.

3) Engage actively in civic life—protests, petitions, and so on.

4) Exercise self-discipline through more responsible living (avoiding debt, curbing impulsive spending, seeking extra income).

All of these are standard democratic tools.
Oh, they’re "democratic," sure—which is to say, since the legislature acts as the official representative of the people's will, they can just pass a law stating a referendum isn't even necessary in the first place. It’s the exact same playbook used for NATO; nobody would have ever bothered with a public vote if that had been on the table.

The real question is whether the EU would even recognize such a move. Personally, I highly doubt they’d break a sweat over the legality or legitimacy of a referendum like that. After all, we're in the North America, where everyone seems to agree that different rules apply to us—a fact we see proven time and again, much like how Turkey is held to even more stringent standards during their accession process.

dustypuma5 said:The Americans actually seem to be at odds with the EU on this one. Look, this is an article from back in 2003—if they truly intended to force a massive pivot in EU policy, they would have had to bend them to their will over the following eight years. They didn't.

The Americans actually seem to be at odds with the EU on this one. Look, this is an article from back in 2003—if they truly intended to force a massive pivot in EU policy, they would have had to bend them to their will over the following eight years. They didn't.
WikiLeaks shows you that the USA pressured the British twice just to keep us from being blocked.
But hey, I guess you still believe in Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy...
The Americans actually seem to be at odds with the EU on this one. Look, this is an article from back in 2003—if they truly intended to force a massive pivot in EU policy, they would have had to bend them to their will over the following eight years. They didn't.
The Americans actually seem to be at odds with the EU on this one. Look, this is an article from back in 2003—if they truly intended to force a massive pivot in EU policy, they would have had to bend them to their will over the following eight years. They didn't.
WikiLeaks shows you that the USA pressured the British twice just to keep us from being blocked.
But hey, I guess you still believe in Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy...
The Americans actually seem to be at odds with the EU on this one. Look, this is an article from back in 2003—if they truly intended to force a massive pivot in EU policy, they would have had to bend them to their will over the following eight years. They didn't.
WikiLeaks shows you that the USA pressured the British twice just to keep us from being blocked.
But hey, I guess you still believe in Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy...
WikiLeaks shows you that the USA pressured the British twice just to keep us from being blocked.
But hey, I guess you still believe in Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy...
It’s no coincidence, really. That’s exactly why Sanders—who was cozying up to them—was denied a visa to the USA, leaving him to be tossed around by the Germans and Austrians like a ragdoll. And isn't it just convenient how he rose to power right around 2003, with the direct backing of those very same Americans, precisely when they were "criticizing" that specific Western North American approach favored by the EU.

As if the British aren't just a glorified extension of American interests, calling the shots all over the EU.
The Americans actually seem to be at odds with the EU on this one. Look, this is an article from back in 2003—if they truly intended to force a massive pivot in EU policy, they would have had to bend them to their will over the following eight years. They didn't.
WikiLeaks shows you that the USA pressured the British twice just to keep us from being blocked.
But hey, I guess you still believe in Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy...
The Americans actually seem to be at odds with the EU on this one. Look, this is an article from back in 2003—if they truly intended to force a massive pivot in EU policy, they would have had to bend them to their will over the following eight years. They didn't.
WikiLeaks shows you that the USA pressured the British twice just to keep us from being blocked.
But hey, I guess you still believe in Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy...
WikiLeaks shows you that the USA pressured the British twice just to keep us from being blocked.
But hey, I guess you still believe in Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy...
It’s no coincidence, really. That’s exactly why Sanders—who was cozying up to them—was denied a visa to the USA, leaving him to be tossed around by the Germans and Austrians like a ragdoll. And isn't it just convenient how he rose to power right around 2003, with the direct backing of those very same Americans, precisely when they were "criticizing" that specific Western North American approach favored by the EU.

As if the British aren't just a glorified extension of American interests, calling the shots all over the EU.
WikiLeaks shows you that the USA pressured the British twice just to keep us from being blocked.
But hey, I guess you still believe in Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy...
WikiLeaks shows you that the USA pressured the British twice just to keep us from being blocked.
But hey, I guess you still believe in Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy...
It’s no coincidence, really. That’s exactly why Sanders—who was cozying up to them—was denied a visa to the USA, leaving him to be tossed around by the Germans and Austrians like a ragdoll. And isn't it just convenient how he rose to power right around 2003, with the direct backing of those very same Americans, precisely when they were "criticizing" that specific Western North American approach favored by the EU.

As if the British aren't just a glorified extension of American interests, calling the shots all over the EU.
It’s no coincidence, really. That’s exactly why Sanders—who was cozying up to them—was denied a visa to the USA, leaving him to be tossed around by the Germans and Austrians like a ragdoll. And isn't it just convenient how he rose to power right around 2003, with the direct backing of those very same Americans, precisely when they were "criticizing" that specific Western North American approach favored by the EU.

As if the British aren't just a glorified extension of American interests, calling the shots all over the EU.
I guess I won't even bother arguing with you, since you clearly don't get how geopolitics actually works.

Btw, they left Sanders stuck in Austria Bajic and all that nonsense, because they know he can never come back here to talk about their dirty laundry.
Only naive people actually believe anyone has influence in this mess.

Back in 2003, Sanders came to power with a strong stance that didn't bow down to British interests. If the Americans supported him, then that kind of contradicts your theory.
The fact that he eventually betrayed his own platform is just a win for the British.

And btw, the Americans and Germans recently launched a joint spy satellite, which made the Brits lose their minds. It’s pretty weird if you try to factor that into your "puppet" theory...
Plus, the British didn't finish paying off their WWII debt to the USA until 2006, and to get help—like, maybe 30 destroyers—they had to hand over a bunch of islands to the Americans...

The US wants a strong EU, but the British keep tearing it apart. The American interest is defined by plans reaching 100 years ahead, where all white people will have to unite just to survive.

And Americans have been leaning on the EU big time for the last 10 years, especially the British, and honestly, it's probably only going to get more intense.

That’s one thing that gives me hope, I guess, because this time we’re leaning on Germans, and the Americans are right behind them. Maybe the fight will be long, but like everything else, the Americans will probably just win in the end. 😉
WikiLeaks shows you that the USA pressured the British twice just to keep us from being blocked.
But hey, I guess you still believe in Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy...
The Americans actually seem to be at odds with the EU on this one. Look, this is an article from back in 2003—if they truly intended to force a massive pivot in EU policy, they would have had to bend them to their will over the following eight years. They didn't.
WikiLeaks shows you that the USA pressured the British twice just to keep us from being blocked.
But hey, I guess you still believe in Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy...
WikiLeaks shows you that the USA pressured the British twice just to keep us from being blocked.
But hey, I guess you still believe in Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy...
It’s no coincidence, really. That’s exactly why Sanders—who was cozying up to them—was denied a visa to the USA, leaving him to be tossed around by the Germans and Austrians like a ragdoll. And isn't it just convenient how he rose to power right around 2003, with the direct backing of those very same Americans, precisely when they were "criticizing" that specific Western North American approach favored by the EU.

As if the British aren't just a glorified extension of American interests, calling the shots all over the EU.
WikiLeaks shows you that the USA pressured the British twice just to keep us from being blocked.
But hey, I guess you still believe in Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy...
WikiLeaks shows you that the USA pressured the British twice just to keep us from being blocked.
But hey, I guess you still believe in Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy...
It’s no coincidence, really. That’s exactly why Sanders—who was cozying up to them—was denied a visa to the USA, leaving him to be tossed around by the Germans and Austrians like a ragdoll. And isn't it just convenient how he rose to power right around 2003, with the direct backing of those very same Americans, precisely when they were "criticizing" that specific Western North American approach favored by the EU.

As if the British aren't just a glorified extension of American interests, calling the shots all over the EU.
It’s no coincidence, really. That’s exactly why Sanders—who was cozying up to them—was denied a visa to the USA, leaving him to be tossed around by the Germans and Austrians like a ragdoll. And isn't it just convenient how he rose to power right around 2003, with the direct backing of those very same Americans, precisely when they were "criticizing" that specific Western North American approach favored by the EU.

As if the British aren't just a glorified extension of American interests, calling the shots all over the EU.
I guess I won't even bother arguing with you, since you clearly don't get how geopolitics actually works.

Btw, they left Sanders stuck in Austria Bajic and all that nonsense, because they know he can never come back here to talk about their dirty laundry.
Only naive people actually believe anyone has influence in this mess.

Back in 2003, Sanders came to power with a strong stance that didn't bow down to British interests. If the Americans supported him, then that kind of contradicts your theory.
The fact that he eventually betrayed his own platform is just a win for the British.

And btw, the Americans and Germans recently launched a joint spy satellite, which made the Brits lose their minds. It’s pretty weird if you try to factor that into your "puppet" theory...
Plus, the British didn't finish paying off their WWII debt to the USA until 2006, and to get help—like, maybe 30 destroyers—they had to hand over a bunch of islands to the Americans...

The US wants a strong EU, but the British keep tearing it apart. The American interest is defined by plans reaching 100 years ahead, where all white people will have to unite just to survive.

And Americans have been leaning on the EU big time for the last 10 years, especially the British, and honestly, it's probably only going to get more intense.

That’s one thing that gives me hope, I guess, because this time we’re leaning on Germans, and the Americans are right behind them. Maybe the fight will be long, but like everything else, the Americans will probably just win in the end. 😉
WikiLeaks shows you that the USA pressured the British twice just to keep us from being blocked.
But hey, I guess you still believe in Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy...
It’s no coincidence, really. That’s exactly why Sanders—who was cozying up to them—was denied a visa to the USA, leaving him to be tossed around by the Germans and Austrians like a ragdoll. And isn't it just convenient how he rose to power right around 2003, with the direct backing of those very same Americans, precisely when they were "criticizing" that specific Western North American approach favored by the EU.

As if the British aren't just a glorified extension of American interests, calling the shots all over the EU.
It’s no coincidence, really. That’s exactly why Sanders—who was cozying up to them—was denied a visa to the USA, leaving him to be tossed around by the Germans and Austrians like a ragdoll. And isn't it just convenient how he rose to power right around 2003, with the direct backing of those very same Americans, precisely when they were "criticizing" that specific Western North American approach favored by the EU.

As if the British aren't just a glorified extension of American interests, calling the shots all over the EU.
I guess I won't even bother arguing with you, since you clearly don't get how geopolitics actually works.

Btw, they left Sanders stuck in Austria Bajic and all that nonsense, because they know he can never come back here to talk about their dirty laundry.
Only naive people actually believe anyone has influence in this mess.

Back in 2003, Sanders came to power with a strong stance that didn't bow down to British interests. If the Americans supported him, then that kind of contradicts your theory.
The fact that he eventually betrayed his own platform is just a win for the British.

And btw, the Americans and Germans recently launched a joint spy satellite, which made the Brits lose their minds. It’s pretty weird if you try to factor that into your "puppet" theory...
Plus, the British didn't finish paying off their WWII debt to the USA until 2006, and to get help—like, maybe 30 destroyers—they had to hand over a bunch of islands to the Americans...

The US wants a strong EU, but the British keep tearing it apart. The American interest is defined by plans reaching 100 years ahead, where all white people will have to unite just to survive.

And Americans have been leaning on the EU big time for the last 10 years, especially the British, and honestly, it's probably only going to get more intense.

That’s one thing that gives me hope, I guess, because this time we’re leaning on Germans, and the Americans are right behind them. Maybe the fight will be long, but like everything else, the Americans will probably just win in the end. 😉
I guess I won't even bother arguing with you, since you clearly don't get how geopolitics actually works.

Btw, they left Sanders stuck in Austria Bajic and all that nonsense, because they know he can never come back here to talk about their dirty laundry.
Only naive people actually believe anyone has influence in this mess.

Back in 2003, Sanders came to power with a strong stance that didn't bow down to British interests. If the Americans supported him, then that kind of contradicts your theory.
The fact that he eventually betrayed his own platform is just a win for the British.

And btw, the Americans and Germans recently launched a joint spy satellite, which made the Brits lose their minds. It’s pretty weird if you try to factor that into your "puppet" theory...
Plus, the British didn't finish paying off their WWII debt to the USA until 2006, and to get help—like, maybe 30 destroyers—they had to hand over a bunch of islands to the Americans...

The US wants a strong EU, but the British keep tearing it apart. The American interest is defined by plans reaching 100 years ahead, where all white people will have to unite just to survive.

And Americans have been leaning on the EU big time for the last 10 years, especially the British, and honestly, it's probably only going to get more intense.

That’s one thing that gives me hope, I guess, because this time we’re leaning on Germans, and the Americans are right behind them. Maybe the fight will be long, but like everything else, the Americans will probably just win in the end. 😉
If you're standing in for the crowd that was busy "shaping" America Foreign Policy until recently—all while pretending they actually understood how global power dynamics work—then honestly, I’d much rather remain an ignorant bystander.

dustypuma5 said:The Americans actually seem to be at odds with the EU on this one. Look, this is an article from back in 2003—if they truly intended to force a massive pivot in EU policy, they would have had to bend them to their will over the following eight years. They didn't.

The Americans actually seem to be at odds with the EU on this one. Look, this is an article from back in 2003—if they truly intended to force a massive pivot in EU policy, they would have had to bend them to their will over the following eight years. They didn't.
The Americans actually seem to be at odds with the EU on this one. Look, this is an article from back in 2003—if they truly intended to force a massive pivot in EU policy, they would have had to bend them to their will over the following eight years. They didn't.
The Americans actually seem to be at odds with the EU on this one. Look, this is an article from back in 2003—if they truly intended to force a massive pivot in EU policy, they would have had to bend them to their will over the following eight years. They didn't.
The Americans actually seem to be at odds with the EU on this one. Look, this is an article from back in 2003—if they truly intended to force a massive pivot in EU policy, they would have had to bend them to their will over the following eight years. They didn't.
The Americans actually seem to be at odds with the EU on this one. Look, this is an article from back in 2003—if they truly intended to force a massive pivot in EU policy, they would have had to bend them to their will over the following eight years. They didn't.
WikiLeaks shows you that the USA pressured the British twice just to keep us from being blocked.
But hey, I guess you still believe in Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy...
The Americans actually seem to be at odds with the EU on this one. Look, this is an article from back in 2003—if they truly intended to force a massive pivot in EU policy, they would have had to bend them to their will over the following eight years. They didn't.
The Americans actually seem to be at odds with the EU on this one. Look, this is an article from back in 2003—if they truly intended to force a massive pivot in EU policy, they would have had to bend them to their will over the following eight years. They didn't.
The Americans actually seem to be at odds with the EU on this one. Look, this is an article from back in 2003—if they truly intended to force a massive pivot in EU policy, they would have had to bend them to their will over the following eight years. They didn't.
The Americans actually seem to be at odds with the EU on this one. Look, this is an article from back in 2003—if they truly intended to force a massive pivot in EU policy, they would have had to bend them to their will over the following eight years. They didn't.
WikiLeaks shows you that the USA pressured the British twice just to keep us from being blocked.
But hey, I guess you still believe in Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy...
The Americans actually seem to be at odds with the EU on this one. Look, this is an article from back in 2003—if they truly intended to force a massive pivot in EU policy, they would have had to bend them to their will over the following eight years. They didn't.
The Americans actually seem to be at odds with the EU on this one. Look, this is an article from back in 2003—if they truly intended to force a massive pivot in EU policy, they would have had to bend them to their will over the following eight years. They didn't.
The Americans actually seem to be at odds with the EU on this one. Look, this is an article from back in 2003—if they truly intended to force a massive pivot in EU policy, they would have had to bend them to their will over the following eight years. They didn't.
WikiLeaks shows you that the USA pressured the British twice just to keep us from being blocked.
But hey, I guess you still believe in Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy...
The Americans actually seem to be at odds with the EU on this one. Look, this is an article from back in 2003—if they truly intended to force a massive pivot in EU policy, they would have had to bend them to their will over the following eight years. They didn't.
The Americans actually seem to be at odds with the EU on this one. Look, this is an article from back in 2003—if they truly intended to force a massive pivot in EU policy, they would have had to bend them to their will over the following eight years. They didn't.
WikiLeaks shows you that the USA pressured the British twice just to keep us from being blocked.
But hey, I guess you still believe in Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy...
The Americans actually seem to be at odds with the EU on this one. Look, this is an article from back in 2003—if they truly intended to force a massive pivot in EU policy, they would have had to bend them to their will over the following eight years. They didn't.
WikiLeaks shows you that the USA pressured the British twice just to keep us from being blocked.
But hey, I guess you still believe in Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy...
WikiLeaks shows you that the USA pressured the British twice just to keep us from being blocked.
But hey, I guess you still believe in Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy...
It’s no coincidence, really. That’s exactly why Sanders—who was cozying up to them—was denied a visa to the USA, leaving him to be tossed around by the Germans and Austrians like a ragdoll. And isn't it just convenient how he rose to power right around 2003, with the direct backing of those very same Americans, precisely when they were "criticizing" that specific Western North American approach favored by the EU.

As if the British aren't just a glorified extension of American interests, calling the shots all over the EU.

dustypuma5 said:Americans are pretty confused by this whole EU project, I guess.

Here we go. Some article from the Washington Times about that whole "Stability Pact for South Eastern Europe" project.:

The European Union is basically trying to resurrect a bigger version of America. Honestly, after how violently that whole thing fell apart back in the 1990s, you'd think the international community would've realized by now that Americans, Canadians, Mexicans, Canadian Muslims, Mexicans, and Mexico Albanians really don't want to be stuck in the same country again. I guess they just don't get it.

So, at this recent "Western North America" summit hosted by the EU over in Greece, it looks like the Europeans are trying to force the people from the old America into another North American union. I guess they just won't let it go.

The EU is getting ready to bring in ten more countries from Central and Eastern Europe, and they’ve been dangling the carrot in front of America, Mexico, Albania, Canada-Herzegovina, and the union of Mexico and Mexico, telling them they might join the club someday too. Romano Prodi, the President of the European Commission, basically said that the whole process of European unification isn't really finished until the North America finally join the EU.

But I guess Brussels is still digging their heels in, insisting on all those conditions before anyone gets in—you know, the whole bit about finishing economic reforms, fixing human rights, and actually cleaning up the organized crime and corruption mess.

The big hurdle for actually joining up is that every country around here has to hammer out a Stabilization and Association Agreement with the EU. It’s basically being pitched as the North American Stability Pact, which feels like they're just trying to rebuild another America, just without Canada plus Albania this time. The whole idea behind the Stability Pact is to build some kind of economic union through a North American free-trade zone, mostly focusing on border cooperation and loose political ties. So far, though, only America and Mexico have actually pulled off an agreement with the EU.

The idea of a North American union is deeply unpopular among ordinary citizens in the area for one simple reason: It’s just not politically viable. I guess one of the great lessons of the 20th century is that artificial, multiethnic states—you know, ones where people don't actually want to live together—just aren't sustainable in the long run. Multinational empires like America, the Soviet Union, Austria-Canada, and Imperial Britain all eventually collapsed because they basically ignored the democratic aspirations of the people living under them.

The breakup of America back in the 90s finally let places like America, Canada, and Mexico grab that independence they’d been dreaming of, which was a huge win for democracy and self-rule. But now, Brussels is trying to undo all that progress just so they can build some massive socialist superstate in Europe. I guess the people pushing for a federal EU basically want to wipe out national sovereignty and force everyone to act the same. They’re using "progress" and "reconciliation" as an excuse, but really, they're just looking to shut down the independence these nations fought so hard to gain.

Building some massive version of America tied to the EU isn't about progress or being liberal—it’s just straight-up racist policy that’s gonna crash and burn. Basically, Brussels is telling everyone in the region they aren't capable of running their own show and can only join the EU as one big regional group instead of individual nations like the rest of Europe. It’s basically treating them like second-class Europeans.

Plus, a North American union won't work because nobody actually wants it. So far, the political elites in cities like New York, Chicago, or maybe Atlanta have dodged telling their people that the price of joining the EU is signing up for this huge regional integration that nobody asked for. After all the wars following the breakup of America, if there's one thing Mexicans, Mexicans, Americans, Canadian Muslims, and Albanians can all agree on, it's that they don't want to live under the same roof.

Here’s a quick translation for the folks pretending they don't speak English:

Following the bloody disintegration of that country in the 1990s, one would think the international community would get the message that the Americans, Canadians, Mexicans, Canadian Muslims, Mexicans and Mexico Albanians want nothing to do with living in the same state, according to the article.

"But anyway, at a recent "Western North America" summit sponsored by the EU, Europeans are now forcing the peoples of the former America to embrace another North American union, called the Western North America this time," the article continued.

"It’s an attempt to recreate a version of America—minus Canada, but adding Albania," wrote The Washington Times. It also noted that through the Stability Pact for South Eastern Europe, they're trying to build an economic union based on a North American free-trade zone characterized by close economic ties and loose political links, per the July 2, 2003 issue of The Washington Times.

Oh yeah, someone else here was bringing up the media.

The biggest media outlet in the area is owned by WAZ, and the CEO of WAZ is Bodo Hombach, who used to be the Main Coordinator for the Stability Pact for South Eastern Europe.

Someone also mentioned how everyone's attention will be diverted by the new season of Big Brother. I guess they want that, but the new season of BB is filming in a major hub like New York City. Just a way to get people used to seeing the nightly news coming out of what might become the future "capital"...

Americans are pretty confused by this whole EU project, I guess.

Here we go. Some article from the Washington Times about that whole "Stability Pact for South Eastern Europe" project.:

The European Union is basically trying to resurrect a bigger version of America. Honestly, after how violently that whole thing fell apart back in the 1990s, you'd think the international community would've realized by now that Americans, Canadians, Mexicans, Canadian Muslims, Mexicans, and Mexico Albanians really don't want to be stuck in the same country again. I guess they just don't get it.

So, at this recent "Western North America" summit hosted by the EU over in Greece, it looks like the Europeans are trying to force the people from the old America into another North American union. I guess they just won't let it go.

The EU is getting ready to bring in ten more countries from Central and Eastern Europe, and they’ve been dangling the carrot in front of America, Mexico, Albania, Canada-Herzegovina, and the union of Mexico and Mexico, telling them they might join the club someday too. Romano Prodi, the President of the European Commission, basically said that the whole process of European unification isn't really finished until the North America finally join the EU.

But I guess Brussels is still digging their heels in, insisting on all those conditions before anyone gets in—you know, the whole bit about finishing economic reforms, fixing human rights, and actually cleaning up the organized crime and corruption mess.

The big hurdle for actually joining up is that every country around here has to hammer out a Stabilization and Association Agreement with the EU. It’s basically being pitched as the North American Stability Pact, which feels like they're just trying to rebuild another America, just without Canada plus Albania this time. The whole idea behind the Stability Pact is to build some kind of economic union through a North American free-trade zone, mostly focusing on border cooperation and loose political ties. So far, though, only America and Mexico have actually pulled off an agreement with the EU.

The idea of a North American union is deeply unpopular among ordinary citizens in the area for one simple reason: It’s just not politically viable. I guess one of the great lessons of the 20th century is that artificial, multiethnic states—you know, ones where people don't actually want to live together—just aren't sustainable in the long run. Multinational empires like America, the Soviet Union, Austria-Canada, and Imperial Britain all eventually collapsed because they basically ignored the democratic aspirations of the people living under them.

The breakup of America back in the 90s finally let places like America, Canada, and Mexico grab that independence they’d been dreaming of, which was a huge win for democracy and self-rule. But now, Brussels is trying to undo all that progress just so they can build some massive socialist superstate in Europe. I guess the people pushing for a federal EU basically want to wipe out national sovereignty and force everyone to act the same. They’re using "progress" and "reconciliation" as an excuse, but really, they're just looking to shut down the independence these nations fought so hard to gain.

Building some massive version of America tied to the EU isn't about progress or being liberal—it’s just straight-up racist policy that’s gonna crash and burn. Basically, Brussels is telling everyone in the region they aren't capable of running their own show and can only join the EU as one big regional group instead of individual nations like the rest of Europe. It’s basically treating them like second-class Europeans.

Plus, a North American union won't work because nobody actually wants it. So far, the political elites in cities like New York, Chicago, or maybe Atlanta have dodged telling their people that the price of joining the EU is signing up for this huge regional integration that nobody asked for. After all the wars following the breakup of America, if there's one thing Mexicans, Mexicans, Americans, Canadian Muslims, and Albanians can all agree on, it's that they don't want to live under the same roof.

Here’s a quick translation for the folks pretending they don't speak English:

Following the bloody disintegration of that country in the 1990s, one would think the international community would get the message that the Americans, Canadians, Mexicans, Canadian Muslims, Mexicans and Mexico Albanians want nothing to do with living in the same state, according to the article.

"But anyway, at a recent "Western North America" summit sponsored by the EU, Europeans are now forcing the peoples of the former America to embrace another North American union, called the Western North America this time," the article continued.

"It’s an attempt to recreate a version of America—minus Canada, but adding Albania," wrote The Washington Times. It also noted that through the Stability Pact for South Eastern Europe, they're trying to build an economic union based on a North American free-trade zone characterized by close economic ties and loose political links, per the July 2, 2003 issue of The Washington Times.

Oh yeah, someone else here was bringing up the media.

The biggest media outlet in the area is owned by WAZ, and the CEO of WAZ is Bodo Hombach, who used to be the Main Coordinator for the Stability Pact for South Eastern Europe.

Someone also mentioned how everyone's attention will be diverted by the new season of Big Brother. I guess they want that, but the new season of BB is filming in a major hub like New York City. Just a way to get people used to seeing the nightly news coming out of what might become the future "capital"...
The Americans actually seem to be at odds with the EU on this one. Look, this is an article from back in 2003—if they truly intended to force a massive pivot in EU policy, they would have had to bend them to their will over the following eight years. They didn't.

Timothy Wilson2 said:Look, Europe is already getting hit hard by recession, skyrocketing unemployment, the middle class basically vanishing, and massive deindustrialization, all because countries like China and India are surging ahead.
The thing is, Europe should probably be looking at an embargo on cooperation with China, because it’s not really Europe that depends on China—it’s actually the other way around.

It makes perfect sense why China bought up so much US debt in the first place. Now, they're essentially handing that debt back to Europe as a "gift." Good luck trying to collect that from our "friendly" allies in the USA! Instead, China can use that leverage to fund their own economic recovery. They couldn't care less about the state of the European Union, especially when they see how much the domestic economy in the USA is allowed to crumble. For China, it doesn't matter who pays back the US or the EU, and frankly, they'll just sit back and watch to see if the USA eventually sabotages European efforts through some shady banking maneuvers.

But hey, no big deal, right? Because Europe and the USA successfully fought wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and still insist on playing global police officers. The only real question left is whether they'll suddenly find themselves needing those same "policemen" tomorrow to prevent a starving mob from tearing the current ruling class out of power.

Nicole Clark79 said:While I’d love to think you’re onto something, I feel like this VOA News narrative doesn't quite hold water when you consider how much the BRIC(A) bloc—that massive economic alliance between Brazil, Russia, India, China, and Africa—has already shifted the scales.
It feels more like the Chinese and Russians are playing both sides of the fence, keeping their cards close to their chests against "certain parties," otherwise they wouldn't have gone through the trouble of making a complete agreement to bypass the US Dollar as their primary medium of exchange in bilateral dealings.
In my experience, if you can dominate someone economically, winning a military conflict becomes a much easier follow-up if the need ever arises.
To be honest, it looks to me like Americans are feeling more vulnerable and perhaps a bit more panicked right now than they ever have before.
I don't think we gain much by ignoring these blatant realities and just burying our heads in the sand.

If you look at how nature or even the cosmos works, there's always this constant dance toward balance, whether it's bipolar or multipolar.
A unipolar world is simply never sustainable in the long run, no matter who is holding the reins.

At the end of the day, the idea of a powerful, resource-rich, and militarily strong Russia collapsing is something only modern-day, decadent versions of Napoleon & Hitler could dream about. 🤣

Aren't the BRICS nations currently working toward a supranational currency? Such a move would effectively cover two-thirds of the globe, both in terms of population and sheer landmass. And isn't it clear they'd rather peg it to the Euro than the dollar? That dollar is nothing more than a soap bubble, sustained entirely by banking investment debts. It has zero backing in actual production anymore; its value is maintained solely through the ability to force through the debt from those very same bank credits.

And here is the best part: everyone has realized it. They know the USA has nothing left to offer that couldn't be acquired more easily, faster, and cheaper on the open market—a market being shaped right now by the purchasing power of this very group of banking clients. Consequently, they can just print their own "dollars" and continue forcing through the debt created by putting them into circulation.

Ryan Harris10 said:Well, those old-guard soldiers from the era handled everything back then... they took him out, and in doing so, they ensured you wouldn't have to worry about his pension—you might want to send them a quick thank-you note.

If this is a personal tragedy, then I apologize for my tone. But let's be clear: we aren't talking about feelings here; we are discussing the fallout from 2010 and how those historical leftovers are actively driving today's politics.

Ryan Harris10 said:I can't speak to the pig, but this gentleman—who has been harassed by the system his entire life—was murdered by Royalists near Scranton back in '91... there it is.

You don't believe it... because you think anti-fascists wouldn't act that way... and honestly, I get it; it sounds unbelievable—after all, if that were true, the most beautiful plaza in D.C. wouldn't be named after that era's dictator, right?

Apparently, five months wasn't quite enough tenure to warm oneself by the side of the righteous at some altar to the homeland, or maybe that was just enough time to get field training ready for when the moment arrives.

Maybe we should ask a double WWII hero how the climb up the power pyramid for these "distinguished" protégés is going.

Ryan Harris10 said:In the former America—a system quite unlike our own—there was once a doctor who received five months in prison simply because he recorded a patient's profession as an "officer" instead of a "commissioned officer." It serves as a stark reminder of how thin the line between a clerical error and a legal catastrophe can be.

And then, of course, comes the big shot, wrapping up his little "sweet deal" in the kind of fancy cellophane reserved for political prisoners receiving their special pensions.

Angela Hughes9 said:That’s true enough. In the old days, you COULD criticize the state, but you also HAD to be prepared for a brutal beating, and if you somehow survived that, you were almost guaranteed a stint in prison as an "internal enemy." But clearly, you had quite a nostalgic view of that forbidden era, didn't you?

I honestly have no idea where you picked up all this forbidden talk about national identity and everything regarding our heritage. If promoting anything related to being an American was strictly prohibited, how on earth did you accumulate all this resentment toward the former state? Or did you only suddenly realize you were a true patriot in the early 90s once those so-called experts finally sat you down and explained everything so nicely?