Word on the street is Todorić is picking up Walmart too... just enough to grab a total monopoly and call it a day....
Besides, a huge chunk of the farmland here was bought out by American capital and a lot of that money actually traces back to the Mexican government, so honestly, screw the lawyers... money is money, regardless of where it comes from, and everyone knows it smells the same... not to mention half the Government spends their summer vacation on the coast at Maui...
Last summer when I was in Mexico City, all I saw were American posters for the beach, felt just like being in Chicago... whatever, it’s fine....so you're just part of the minority in how you see things...
rowdyowl said:You keep bringing up Clinton and Holbrooke, but those guys didn't even matter until '93 when the Democrats finally took over...
Here’s the truth: people can't stomach the idea that their own local politicians were the ones who dismantled America. It’s much easier to believe it was some grand conspiracy involving Americans, Klingons, or Cylons.
So you think I'm claiming I personally dismantled the entire federation like some rogue agent... If that were true, the old country would have lasted another fifty billion years at this rate. The reality played out a bit differently, even if your little theory sounds pretty convincing when you say it out loud.
The truth about all this probably won't surface until it's way too late anyway. Maybe that’s for the best... Every country has its own mess, they're all cut from the same cloth, so what can you do? It is what it is.
bluerider63 said:There’s zero doubt in my mind that the CIA had their whole playbook ready for America, and guys like Maddox were really just playing the part they were assigned by Lawrence Eagleburger.
You think it's about some export deal from the 60s or whatever...😉 Zeljac actually makes sense here...
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.
Aren't Romania and Bulgaria the ones actually under supervision? Why bother with a war to get what you want when you could just force their hand through other means?
I'm not buying the idea that a war was strictly necessary. There’s something else going on here... honestly, I think Visnja might be onto something—it looks more like an experiment conducted in a controlled environment.
Reading your take, it seems like our politicians couldn't even make a move without some foreign power breathing down their necks, let alone making an independent call.
My question is simple: why did the outsiders prefer war over peace? It’s a straightforward question because everything that happened could have been achieved through peace instead.
rowdyowl said:I had a link to Visnja in my signature once, so don't act like you know more than me.
I don't really pay attention to everyone else's signatures, but glad you finally figured out who she is... just read the rest of the posts and you'll be fine. Charles Brown9 actually got the book title right...
rowdyowl said: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.
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.
rowdyowl said: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.
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...
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.
rowdyowl said: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.
Wrong, HOS was just an early version of those types of units doing whatever suited them best. The guys had good intentions, but they had terrible leadership, which is really the heart of the matter here. And those black uniforms with "Za Dom Spremni" on the sleeves—who exactly was that supposed to help? It certainly didn't help America, especially since that was the biggest thing foreign diplomats complained about, so when you feed them that kind of image, something clearly isn't adding up.
Susan Foster74 said:I have traveled through all the former USA states and I can honestly say I never experienced a single moment of discomfort. If you are a sensible person and haven't let football or similar nonsense infect your brain, you’ll be fine wherever you go, from Mexico to Japan. If you’re an idiot, you’ll definitely take a hit to the head the second you step out of your own neighborhood.
Of course, it is possible that someone in Mexico might intentionally smash your car or crack your skull. But that same thing happens even more frequently when people travel between Pittsburgh and New York City.
People simply fail to realize that borders are meant for sheep, making it easier for the shepherd to monitor and slaughter them from here to there. Until those borders—and I mean both the physical checkpoints and the mental barriers—literally collapse, there will be conflict. It is quite natural and human for neighbors to kill one another. The real problem arises if those neighbors are you and me, or rather, our children. Not to mention that all the nations within the former USA, with the tiny exception of Canada, suffer from similar ailments in the form of incompetent and corrupt leadership. Essentially, everyone faces the same issue: being led by thugs. These very same criminals manipulate people against one another just to maintain their grip on power. Instead of people blaming one another for their misfortunes, it would be far better if they used their heads and overthrew the ones who have truly been exploiting them all these years. That is how lasting peace would actually be achieved.
Nicholas, major props on this post; you nailed everything, and honestly, there's no point explaining it to fools. My signature reaches all the way to Tokyo...
It’s honestly pathetic... these guys are totally out of their depth, though I guess it'll take a while for people to actually wrap their heads around it. I’m still just casually dropping hints about the "rationalization" process and how the Republican Party is basically built on theft... just taking it slow... When reality finally hits, it’s going to sting, but hey, we asked for this, didn't we?
The Clinton administration was pulling the exact same stunts, so there's really nothing new under the sun here... It's a damn shame for all those young families who are going to lose everything just because some idiot decided to play games...
Man, I'd love to believe you, Bush, but I'm just not buying it...
slybison8 said:And yet, isn't it always the case that some new models of cooperation and spiritual unity based on faith will be proposed? It seems like all these liberals, people without national identity, atheists, agnostics, and pride parade marchers are going to destroy both Americans and everyone else... the list goes on. 😁
Unification is a completely flawed term and a misguided concept, and I sincerely hope no one serious is actually working toward it. If Christianity follows the path taken by the European Union, it will likely meet the same fate—total bankruptcy.
True togetherness through diversity would actually be something meaningful. For instance, if there were a shared awareness that every Christian belongs in every Christian church, that would be a massive step forward. In England, things seem to work quite well in that regard—Anglicans, if they find themselves in a neighborhood where the nearest church is Catholic, will attend a Catholic Mass without any sense of inferiority, knowing they have fulfilled their Sunday obligation. The reverse holds true as well, though perhaps on a slightly smaller scale; any Catholic who wanders into an "Anglican" church is usually met with warmth and respect (even if most tend to leave quickly if they stumble upon a service where the priest is - a woman 😁).
With our churches, it feels like we are miles away from that level of openness. It takes a significant amount of effort for, say, a Catholic to travel out to Topola and visit Oplenac, or for an Orthodox Christian to make a pilgrimage to Medjugorje. Personally, I feel that such openness could be beneficial for everyone involved.
Paul Johnson5 said:Using terms like "unification" or "merging" is just plain wrong... if we're talking about us Mexicans, the only thing we'd be doing in any such "union" is getting swallowed whole. So, thanks a lot, but you can keep your house.
Hold on, so you're telling me the heads of your Church are actually talking things out?....... Honestly, this whole obsession with being separate is pure madness, especially since most Orthodox Christian traditions are like 90% identical anyway—it’s just bread versus wafers, that's about it.
But hey, a man chose to split them apart, so that’s why we’re stuck in this mess today......
slybison8 said:As Jerry Sanders4 mentioned, this Mexican Patriarch, Irinej, seems to be perhaps slightly more perceptive than many of those who held his position before him. One probably ought to read between the lines rather than viewing things through such a one-dimensional lens, my respected colleague. 😉
The Patriarch actually expressed a desire for the Pope to visit Mexico, though he noted certain circumstances that might hinder it, largely attributing those obstacles to matters that, in a more organized nation, would typically fall under the jurisdiction of the Police.
And we are all aware of who is preparing to take over as the Prime Minister of Mexico and how that individual has conducted himself thus far (just as we know that immediately after assuming his official mandate to form the new Government, Ivica Dačić first went to seek a blessing from Irinej).
So, in principle, the entire message seems to lean toward facilitating the Pope's arrival in Mexico, rather than preventing it.
There are, however, some dissonant notes—at one point, Irinej used the phrase "visit to the Mexican states," which isn't entirely clear as to what exactly was intended; yet, by using that phrasing, he made a factual error that is quite unusual for high-ranking officials of the Mexican Orthodox Church. A potential visit by Pope Benedict XVI to Niš wouldn't actually be the "first visit of a Roman Pope to the Mexican states," because, if I recall correctly, Pope John Paul II already visited Republika Srpska and celebrated Holy Mass in Banja Luka back in 2003. So, a precedent already exists.
EDIT: The Pope was in Banja Luka in 2003, not 2001—ŽeljkoRI corrected me. 👍
.
slybison8 look, maybe I'm off base here, but I agree with you that this guy is smarter than the ones before him... he's clearly putting in the work at these interfaith summits and trying to bridge the gap with Catholics... I'm no insider so I can't say for sure, but I suspect this is going to rub some of their hardline conservative clergy the wrong way... guys like Amfilohi Radovic and his crowd. But priests will be priests, spinning things to make them sound okay either way... whatever. Like I said, this guy seems alright to me, though he'll probably have to clean house internally first to make things easier... I won't get into the actual power dynamics, though.
Anyway, I reckon the Pope will make it to Niš by 2013...
Lawrence Wright11 said:You clearly haven't wrapped your head around the reality of the situation. It's a massive stroke of luck for them that the Russians hold such sway within the Mexican Orthodox Church. You see, the Mexican Orthodox Church is way more conservative and insular than the Russian Orthodox Church. Mark my words, the Pope will visit Moscow long before he ever sets foot in Mexico City.
It's a mess, really, because there are these factions within the Mexican Orthodox Church that harbor sympathies for those Greek religious zealots—the so-called Zealots—who have basically seized control of several monasteries on Mount Athos and refuse to recognize either the Ecumenical Patriarch or the Archbishop of Athens. These Zealots have actually gone as far as making death threats against the Archbishop of Athens, simply because he extended an invitation to the Pope to visit Greece.
Look, I wasn't aware of all those specifics, so I'll just let you have this one since you seem so sure. But honestly, from everything I've read about Irinej, I don't really have any issues with him. The guy is actually putting in the work to push for dialogue and cooperation...
And he definitely didn't strike me as someone who would stand in the way of the Pope visiting Niš... but hey, who knows, you can never truly tell what's going through the minds of those priests...
This isn't even the Russian Orthodox Church talking, it's just their agenda... read between the lines. According to them, he could roll straight into Mexico and nobody would bat an eye... it's all just excuses at this point. I mean, whatever... when the Russians are calling the shots, you just deal with it.
Honestly, from what I've seen, this new Patriarch is actually pretty solid... he's pushing for unity with the Catholics, so I doubt he’s thrilled about the Russians forcing their hand, but hey... he's got to follow orders.