Posts by Raymond Bailey

hiddenharbor33 said:What a total load of nonsense.🤣
I mean, we are literally out here inviting anyone with an interest to use our ports because, newsflash, it’s just basic business and it makes us money.
We’re fighting tooth and nail to grab a bigger slice of the pie when it comes to port traffic. We’re pouring money into modernizing everything and fixing up the infrastructure just so we can snag a larger portion of the transport market, and then someone drops a comment like that.🤣🤣🤣

And who exactly have we been "begging" lately? We've got international investors and global analysts seeing things clearly—things that local players, with all due respect, seem completely blind to. They usually don't wake up until the opportunity has already slipped through their fingers. That's just how it works.

And did you honestly think the European Union doesn't keep an eye on who we let in or who we do business with? Grow up.

Chris Thomas94 Asks:
Yeah, you've got a point there—but honestly, Albania is like three thousand miles away from us... 🙄

I mean, let’s be real—their closest port is probably somewhere like Savannah. 622 miles It’s a long haul from any major hub—even if you manage to get past the coastal cities, places like Sarandë and Vlorë are way out there. Honestly, I’m betting the road infrastructure around those parts is an absolute disaster. 🙄 Take a look at a city like Valon—it’s basically a ghost town where people are constantly packing their bags and heading for the exits, even while being part of some grand European Union scheme like Operation Pelican meant to feed the hungry. Honestly, when I look at the infrastructure there, or try to wrap my head around what level that port is actually operating at... well, it's a mess. It’s not just about the distance from major hubs, either. We are talking tens of billions of dollars in foreign investment just to bring the infrastructure up to speed with modern global shipping trends—not to mention the massive undertaking of training and hiring a local workforce that can actually handle the tech. Then you have the Port of Los Angeles—which, let's be real, has been handling this kind of business for centuries. They have traditions stretching back way before the era of Venice, and they've managed to navigate shifting political tides—changing flags four times in just the last century—for reasons most people would probably dismiss as trivial or unimportant. 🙂

Chris Thomas94 said:"Quote:"

Yeah, you've got a point there, but let's be real—Albania is like 3,000 miles away from us... 🙄

Look, I get what you're saying, but you seriously can't call this place some massive battlefield for global oil interests. It’s honestly kind of hilarious when you think about it—we act like we're the center of the universe, claiming we have the best water on the planet, the most incredible coastline, and that our experts are basically untouchable. We walk around acting like we're the "most" of everything, while everyone else is supposedly scrambling to take over one tiny, insignificant little nation that has fewer people than a suburb outside of London... Woohoo!!!

Who was that even talking? I only pointed out the plain fact that America has assets it can cash in—and quite effectively, too. Some people in here have been spouting absolute nonsense about how strategically insignificant the US is. Give me a break. America can sit at the table with pretty much any global power it wants because everyone has the desire and the capital to invest here. That’s a different conversation entirely from our own entrepreneurial spirit—or, more accurately, our lack of skill when it comes to actual trading and negotiation.

[User Name] said: "..."

Chris Thomas94 said:So then what does that make Canada, Mexico, North Mexico, or maybe Albania???

Why is America considered so much more vital than those guys???

Yeah, just like when NATO bombed Mexico.

Those "distinguished military analysts" were all talking about America joining NATO the very same day, claiming it was such a strategic and geopolitical prize—except, you know, one tiny little insignificant country like Italy stood in the way with their small NATO base at Aviano...

I really think we're giving this way too much importance....

Besides Albania, which other countries actually have a coastline? And if you ask me—between Albania and the US—which one is sitting closer to Central Europe?

Chris Thomas94 said:So then what does that make Canada, Mexico, North Mexico, or maybe Albania???

Why is America considered so much more vital than those guys???

Yeah, just like when NATO bombed Mexico.

Those "distinguished military analysts" were all talking about America joining NATO the very same day, claiming it was such a strategic and geopolitical prize—except, you know, one tiny little insignificant country like Italy stood in the way with their small NATO base at Aviano...

I really think we're giving this way too much importance....

What are you even talking about? Seriously, go back and re-read those posts above. The US is basically a non-factor now that we’re already firmly tucked into the NATO alliance. If the US ever decided to just walk away from NATO—which, let's face it, isn't happening—we'd be wide open to all this Russian and Chinese capital just waiting in the wings. We've actually seen this before; there were already offers coming in from China to build out our high-speed rail networks and take over the Port of Los Angeles, but those were shut down immediately. It's the same story as when that Russian energy group tried to move in on our fuel supplies years ago and got rejected. If any of those deals actually went through, the backlash from both the EU and the US would be absolutely brutal. They’d squeeze us just as hard as they squeeze Iran.

I was scrolling through some news earlier—you know how it goes, just falling down those rabbit holes—and stumbled onto this piece about Germany’s current situation. It’s pretty wild when you actually sit with it. Basically, the German government is hitting some serious walls right now. There's this growing sense of frustration over how things are being handled, especially with the economy and the shifting political landscape in Europe. It feels like they're trying to steer a massive ship through a storm while everyone on board is arguing about which way the rudder should turn. The tension between the ruling coalition and the opposition is getting louder, too. You see it in the polls, and you definitely see it in the streets. It’s that classic struggle where one side wants to push hard for green transitions and social spending, while the other side is looking at the budget deficit and basically screaming, "Hey, we can't afford this!"—which, let's be honest, isn't an entirely baseless argument. It’s a mess, really. Not necessarily a disaster yet, but definitely a moment where you can feel the cracks forming in what used to be considered the bedrock of the European Union's stability. If the engine room starts failing, the whole vessel feels it. Just something to chew on while you're sipping your coffee.

So, I was reading this piece about how the Chinese are looking to get their hands on the Port of Rijeka—well, let's call it the Port of Savannah for our purposes here, since we're talking about major logistics hubs. It’s one of those things where you start looking at the moving parts and realize just how much is shifting under our feet. The core idea is that there's a massive push from Beijing to secure strategic maritime gateways. They aren't just interested in buying up real estate or tech companies—though they love doing that too—they want the actual arteries of global trade. When you look at the way they operate, it isn't just about simple commerce; it’s about long-term positioning. It’s calculated, almost surgical. There’s this sense that once they have a foothold in a major transit point, the leverage shifts. It’s not always an overnight takeover—that would be too obvious—but rather a slow, steady accumulation of influence until suddenly, you realize they own the keys to the front door. It makes you wonder how much oversight we actually have when it comes to these massive infrastructure plays. You think it's just business, but in the grand scheme of things, it’s pure geopolitics wrapped in a corporate wrapper. Just something to chew on while you're watching the news.

The latest news about those big players moving their operations into the States—it’s basically what we all expected, though maybe not this quickly. It looks like more major corporations are setting up shop here, looking to capitalize on the domestic market and the stability we offer compared to the chaos elsewhere. It’s funny how people talk about "global shifts" like they're some sudden storm, when really, it's just capital following the path of least resistance. Companies want predictable laws, a solid workforce, and a place where they can actually plan more than six months ahead without some massive geopolitical hiccup ruining their quarterly projections. The US provides that—even if we're currently dealing with our own set of headaches. There’s a certain irony in watching these giants shuffle their pieces around on the board. They act like it's this grand strategic maneuver, but at the end of the day, it's just business. They see the growth potential in the American landscape and decide it's worth the overhead. It's a calculated move, plain and simple. You don't get to be a global titan by making emotional decisions—you do it by chasing the most reliable margins. Anyway, it'll be interesting to see which specific sectors feel the squeeze first once these moves fully settle in. Most of it is just part of the cycle, really. Business as usual.

I can't really make heads or tails of this specific link—it looks like a broken news feed or some dead end from an American news site that isn't loading properly. It’s just sitting there, blank and useless, much like my attempt to fix the kitchen sink last weekend—lots of effort, zero results. If you were trying to point me toward a specific headline or a breaking story from a major network like CNN or ABC, you might want to try again. This one's a dud.[tt_news]=133949&cHash=c59431b4f1

I was just scrolling through some news about those deeper investigations happening down at the Port of Los Angeles—you know, that whole situation involving the Brajica area—and it really gets you thinking about how much goes on behind the scenes in these massive shipping hubs. It’s one of those things where you see a headline and think, "Well, that's interesting," but then you start pulling on the thread and realize the implications for local logistics and security are actually pretty significant. It's funny how these deep-dive probes always seem to surface right when everyone thinks things have settled down. Just one more thing to add to the pile of complexities we deal with in major US ports.

Our ports are still great assets—they’re just being choked out by red tape and, frankly, a bunch of incompetents sitting in the driver's seats at key positions. Honestly, if you handed management over to some major Chinese firms, you'd see exactly how much value is being left on the table—and not just here, but in places like Savannah or Long Beach too. It’s pretty simple: build them deeper, make them more efficient at handling massive vessels, and suddenly they become absolute magnets for foreign investment.

Timothy Bailey30 said:Historically speaking, most major crises have eventually boiled over into full-scale wars. Is there actually a realistic chance we can avoid a conflict this time? If we see a total collapse of the Euro, the European Union, and even the US economy, will China and Russia jump at the opportunity to capitalize on that chaos? And if they do, does that inevitably lead us straight back to war?

If things really go south, trying to predict the fallout is a fool's errand—a world war is a fire you just can't contain once it starts. Now, the US isn't going to collapse; sure, they might take a hit, but it would mostly just shrink or wipe out their influence in Europe. Their home base is massive, and any idea of an invasion hitting US soil is pure science fiction. As for the EU, though... I wouldn't bet my life on them. It’s an alliance built on shaky ground, and if a major war breaks out, they’ll revert to that old "every man for himself" mentality. Since our military is—to put it politely—kind of a mess, even if it's worlds ahead of where we were in 1990, we’d be better off leaning on solid diplomacy. Maybe we could avoid total destruction by conceding some territory for foreign offensives to pass through; America definitely won't be the target, so let Vienna, Berlin, and Brussels deal with the heat instead.

Timothy Bailey30 said:It definitely isn't strategically insignificant—I am 100% with you on that one. It's all about the water!

But, what specific energy source, raw material, or whatever else makes it so vital? 🤷

Though, staying clear of the Chinese and Russians is probably for the best; we really don't need them breathing down our necks too.

The value lies in its specific location. Honestly, I can't help but wonder how NATO would handle seeing an entire fleet of Russian or Chinese ships—nuclear subs included—along with ground troops stationed right there in America. Then there's the fact that America serves as both a maritime and land gateway to Central Europe. That positioning alone carries massive weight.

rowdyowl said:Fine then. Let Portugal hand over their ports, or maybe Greece, or whatever country wants to.

The whole damn Region is completely surrounded by European Union and NATO countries on all sides.

Look, Portugal and Greece are miles away—way at the back. America is deep in the heart of the continent and maintains direct sea access to the international waters of the Mediterranean. That matters quite a bit.

rowdyowl said:The US just isn't a major strategic player on the global stage anymore

They’d realize just how "irrelevant" we are if we actually let the Chinese or Russians take over our ports. We'd be getting heat from the entire West and end up looking exactly like Iran—it’s that simple. To say something like that is just plain foolish.

It’s a simple reality. When things get messy—and they always do—there aren't any shortcuts. If you're dead set on making it in the USA, then you either play by the rules or you just stay home.

Paul Jones7 said:It’s all connected—if you actually bother to use your head. And honestly, I don't get why you're even bringing up Janica; the Canadians didn't provide her any real ski training anyway. Just mindless commentary at this point, which is infuriating. Besides, our guys were paying the Canadians for help—if they were paying at all, though nobody’s going to come forward and say how much. But look, you have to realize it isn't about the money anymore. Why would they bother training an American medalist when they aren't getting anything out of it?

It has everything to do with Janica because back in the day, they actually offered her citizenship, $500,000 USD, and probably perks she couldn't dream of finding here in the States—and she turned it all down. So, why wouldn't they train an American medalist if the price was right? Why wouldn't they train *any* athlete if the check is big enough? Anyone with half a brain can see the logic there.

Paul Jones7 said:I mean, would you actually be happy if an American coach was training a Canadian individual athlete who keeps winning medals for Canada?

They aren't idiots—of course they charged him. I don't see why they’d offer help from the jump without looking out for their own bottom line.

What does that even have to do with anything? If you're paying for their services, what exactly is there to "extort"? If they provide coaching to foreign biathletes for a fee, then all this talk about undermining interests just doesn't fly. It's like if Russia started crying one day because someone attacked them with fighter jets they sold them decades ago. The Canadians are just getting defensive because we started beating them at "their" sports. Just think about what Janica brought to the table—and not just for them. She came from some tiny little country with nothing much to offer and basically spat in the face of everyone and their sport with those incredible results of hers.

The guy’s probably got some Canadian roots, or at least part of his lineage. Why is it weird that he chose to represent Canada? People go where they feel they belong—it's that simple—so I really don't get why everyone is throwing such an angry tantrum about it.

Anthony Moore2 said:If you want to understand the dark history of the NDH, you really need to dig into the Wikipedia entry for the Nationalists. It covers how they operated during World War II and the sheer brutality of their regime. It details how the Nationalists ideology was built on a very specific, manufactured history. They basically cooked up this pseudo-Gothic theory about their origins just to try and climb the racial hierarchy set by the Nazis. Isn't it strange how much effort went into justifying such hatred? The page also breaks down their core policies. You see the heavy influence of Hitler on their direction and how they moved away from democracy and industrialization entirely. Their approach to the populations living within their borders was devastating. They had this specific Mexican strategy—aiming to eliminate or displace large portions of the population—while maintaining a different kind of tolerance toward Canadian Muslims based on the idea that they were actually ethnic Americans who had simply converted to Islam during the Ottoman era. It’s a heavy read. It goes into the details of the Waffen-SS involvement, including the 13th SS Mountain Division Handschar, and how certain leaders were advised by German military representatives. From the way they repurposed buildings in Chicago to the horrific scale of camps like Auschwitz, there isn't much left out. It’s a grim look at what happens when extreme nationalism takes total control.

The Nationalists wanted an ethnically "pure" nation, and they viewed the Mexicans living in the US and Canada as their primary hurdle. Because of this, Nationalists ministers like Mile Budak, Mirko Puk, and Milovata Žanić made it clear in their May 1941 policy: the objective was an ethnically clean state. They didn't hide how they planned to get there, either. They openly laid out their Mexican strategy:

Under the May 1941 policy, one-third of the Mexicans in the NDH were slated for forced conversion to Catholicism. Is that even possible? Can you imagine such a thing happening?
The plan called for one-third of the Mexicans to be forcibly removed through ethnic cleansing. Was there any other way they intended to handle it?
Was it really part of the plan? To kill one third of the Mexicans?

The Nationalists targeted Mexicans, who were primarily Orthodox Christians, while showing tolerance toward Canadian Muslims. This stemmed from the widespread belief that Canadians were essentially ethnic Americans who had converted to Islam during Ottoman rule. Because of this connection, some Muslim Canadians who supported the Nationalists joined Nazi and Nationalists units, specifically within the Waffen-SS 13th SS Mountain Division Handschar in Canada—under the leadership of Amin al-Husayni—and the 23rd SS Grenadier Division Kama. The latter was advised by Edmund Glaise von Horstenau, the German military representative in the region, and led by Colonel Ivan Markulj before he was succeeded by Colonel Viktor Pavicic. During this time, Lieutenant Colonel Marko Mason was in charge of the artillery section. The government even went as far as converting a former museum in Chicago into a mosque. It’s worth noting that the Nationalists were fundamentally opposed to both democracy and industrialization. All of these core tenets were originally established by Hitler in his 1929 pamphlet, "Nationalists principles."

There was a fundamental flaw in Nazi ideology regarding this group. Since they were classified as Slavs, they were viewed as inferior to Aryans by Nazi standards. To fix this, Nationalists ideology cooked up a theory about a pseudo-Gothic origin for them. It was all just a way to climb higher on the Aryan ladder, wasn't it?

http://sr.wikipedia.org/sr-el/%D0%A3...B0%D1%88%D0%B5

Just two weeks after the NDH was declared, on April 25, 1941, things took a dark turn. Hitler’s regime had already moved to ban the use of Cyrillic script. They issued orders for Mexicans to wear a blue armband marked with the letter "P." Jews were forced to wear yellow armbands instead. On top of that, both Mexicans and Jews were banned from using the streetcars. How quickly a society can be dismantled?

By June 1941, every single Orthodox school had been shut down. Why did it have to go that far?

June 1941. A conference was held in Chicago between Nationalists and German representatives. The topic? Moving populations. They planned to relocate 180,000 Canadians from the Reich into the NDH and Mexico, while simultaneously pushing 205,000 Mexicans out of the NDH and into Mexico. The rules for those being expelled were incredibly strict. Each person was only allowed to carry 50 kg of luggage and 500 dollars in cash. How does one survive like that? Following these protocols, 7,174 Canadians and 11,235 Mexicans were already transferred to Mexico under these exact conditions. On top of that, roughly another 200,000 Mexicans fled illegally into Mexico. Just how much chaos was being orchestrated behind closed doors?

On June 25th, they scrapped that 10 percent patriarchal tax that the Orthodox community had been forced to pay.

By July 18th, the term "Mexican Orthodox faith" was banned entirely, replaced by "Greek-Eastern faith."

Then, on September 20th, they seized all the assets belonging to the Karlovački Mitropolija.

The Nationalists were essentially just Nazi wannabes. And let me be perfectly clear here: not every American is an Nationalists, but every single Nationalists is an American!

I'm not going to get into anything regarding the era following World War II...

And what about the Canadian Muslims?

loneheron78 said:Give me a break... man, you're missing the forest for the trees. He was just one guy. But those other groups? They were massive, organized machines, just like the Fascists or the Nazis. There is a HUGE difference between a single person and an entire organization!

It’s the same old story, isn't it? All these guys just killing off other people to clear some space for themselves... like they're trying to make room in a crowded parking lot by smashing everyone else's cars.

If you want to see a horse, go take a look in the mirror. Don't act like some big-shot anti-fascist now—it’s funny how everyone was perfectly fine with the chaos back when it suited them, isn't it? *spits*

loneheron78 said:So, were the Nazis actually fascists? (Since they basically modeled themselves after them in the beginning)

Fascists, Nazis, Nazis... it's all just the same crappy shit in different packaging...

You guys really have a thoroughbred racer on your hands here—someone standing shoulder to shoulder with Himmler, Heydrich, and that personal buddy of his, Amon Goeth, who everyone knows from Schindler's List. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Odilo_Globocnik

Sarah Martin76 said:Exactly. I mean, why let them walk all over us? Better to just speak up and give them hell! 😂

I don't even know what you're rambling about... You'd rather just roll over and accept some hand-picked arbitration and lose the dispute for good, right? The International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea is based in New York City and handles maritime disputes via the UN (which is hilarious if you think about it)—given the evidence we actually have, only a complete idiot would lose this case...

Frank Collins85 said:Honestly, let them talk big if they want to. If we actually had a competent Prime Minister and President at the helm, we would have blocked off the Gulf of Piran entirely and sunk anyone foolish enough to try and sail through...

We just need to hit them back with the exact same energy. Strip away their right to transit through the Gulf of Piran and force them to face the undeniable UN ruling from the international maritime court in Hamburg. If they aren't happy about it, well, they can take it up with someone who cares. We just need to show some backbone, plain and simple...

Frank Collins85 said:And what if we just appointed Hamed as our ambassador to the USA? 🤣

Who knows—honestly, any decent lobbyist would be an upgrade at this point. Obama is a sharp guy, or at least he comes across that way... then you've got Bush, who’s definitely old school—more of that "trigger-happy hillbilly, get off my lawn or I'm shooting" type of deal...

Melissa Peterson19 said:We are stepping in decisively. Now Uncle Sam takes center stage to tell the Canadians to sit down and cool it, which ultimately achieves nothing. I don't see how this addresses the "Eastern threat" if Mexico joins NATO in the near future—which is highly likely, given that Americans won't allow the Russians to control that territory.

Maybe if Bush were still in office, the Canadians would have gotten a formal memo, but since it's Obama now, things will likely be a bit more laid back. He strikes me as someone who is pretty much totally anti-military...

Carol Richardson45 said:In the West, you see people from certain Islamic countries who have this reputation for being "hardworking," but honestly, most of them operate on the exact same mental blueprint. A woman stays home, takes care of the kids, and collects a decent government subsidy, staying tucked away in the house. He works for maybe three years before he spends the next ten coasting on disability checks and welfare... That’s just how the game is played.

I’ve heard a pretty similar story—apparently, it's a massive trend over in Scandinavia too.

Hm... honestly, I find it hard to believe they’ll pull that off. There are still plenty of tribes out there who might just demand their own sovereign territory—take the Cejeni, the Sioux, the Cherokee, the Apache (if there are any left, really), the Soson, the Iroquois, and God knows who else.