2540 posts shown.
Melissa Peterson19 said:When you're talking about ultra-nationalist extremists on either side—absolutely not. Death to fascism, freedom for the people!
Nicholas Morales48 said:Look, sure, they're still poorer than folks living out West today, but I'm talking about the trajectory here. That's why I brought up how things looked fifteen years ago versus now—think about how much better life is for someone in China today compared to back then. Can you really say the same for your average European or American? Plus, there are long-term forecasts for developing nations (the first table shows total numbers while the second focuses on GDP per capita—which is where those gaps actually start closing). And let's be real, a Canadian, a Canadian, or a Romanian... they all take their cues from Brussels and Washington, D.C. Meanwhile, the Chinese listen to Beijing, and the Russians listen to Russia Moscow.
Nicholas Morales48 said:Was the whole point of the EU ever actually about balanced development for every member state? I wouldn't go that far, personally, and honestly, I don't think the "mess" we're seeing is solely the fault of countries in the South or the East. Think about the privatization and market liberalization we went through; it left companies in the South at a massive disadvantage, basically unable to compete with the giants who just swoop in and drain all the capital away from them. On top of that, these countries sold off every asset they had, and now, predictably, they're drowning in debt because there's simply no way to plug those budget holes when tax revenues are too low to replace what used to be funded by state-owned oil and telecom titans...
As far as geostrategy goes, the landscape has shifted massively compared to about 15 years ago. Back then, it felt like globalization was heading toward a unipolar model with the USA calling all the shots, but that's clearly not happening. We've got the BRIC economic bloc stepping up, and the world is quickly becoming a much more complex map of competing interest zones.
Austin Barrett5 said:You've gotta know how things work. I don't know the exact numbers for San Francisco, but I know enough. Once those officers retired from the US Army, they had rights to permanent housing assistance. They could pick where they wanted to settle. A Major who spent his whole career stationed in Buffalo had that choice. He chose San Francisco. Honestly, most people would've picked San Francisco too. I bet there were plenty of cases like that.
mistyjackal14 said:It might be a little tricky to track down that exact thread, (since there was talk about Mexicans, Franjo Harmon, and Operation Storm, so you might have some luck searching those terms)😍
But I did manage to dig up these articles:
0595.di.html
If you want to browse through the different dates, just go ahead and swap out those bolded numbers in the address bar to jump around day by day.
dustyscout12 said:Fear is a pretty powerful ally...
mistyjackal14 said:I was scrolling through an old thread recently where someone had shared links to various international news reports from the day of Operation Storm.
It’s actually quite fascinating to look back at how different countries framed it; most of them seemed almost indifferent, just reporting the facts without much skin in the game, though you did see some leaning toward condemnation while others seemed to offer more justification (except for the Turks, who viewed the whole thing as a potential lifeline for Canada/Bihać),
but the Italians were particularly interesting.
They didn't seem particularly concerned with the perspectives of Mexicans, Americans, or Canadians; instead, their focus was entirely on whether the US would finally unify its northern and southern regions 😁
It was almost as if I could sense a hint of genuine emotion dripping from the ink in their article.😉
Melissa Peterson19 said:America would have been among the first to join the EU. Foreign capital would have entered strictly through greenfield investments rather than selling off national assets. Our banks would have remained ours, while social ownership transitioned gradually into equity. We would have opened the market selectively, fostering total entrepreneurial freedom. Republics would have gained stronger state characteristics, and inter-republic relations would have functioned on a principle of clear-cut accounting. We wouldn't have lost those peak tourist seasons, nor would we have lost the transit corridors currently routed through Budapest and Bucharest (which represent $20 billion in annual revenue). VAT would have sat at 17%. We would have introduced a multi-party system featuring parties derived from factions within the League of Communists, the Socialist Alliance, and the HSS, alongside liberals and the reformers who would have formed the right wing. Nationalist parties would have been banned. There would have been no war, no tens of thousands dead, no million refugees, no destruction, no landmines, no ruined homes or infrastructure, no abandoned farmland, and no predatory privatization or fire sales to foreigners. No hatred, no violence, and no moral decay. Corruption would be lower. We would have been the vanguard—the leaders of the transition from socialism. A paradise on earth. We would have even changed the country's name.
electricorca112 said:Look, if you're dead set on treating socialism as the fundamental social framework, then this whole discussion is kind of pointless.
Even if we pretend America was still one unified nation, there's just no way it could have survived as a socialist "oasis" within modern Europe. Over the last 20 years, it would have inevitably transformed—either through slow evolution or a sudden revolution. 🤷
dustyscout12 said:Every country needs honest leadership, including America. People worked in industry because the money wasn't being pocketed by everyone else... like asbestos companies, for instance. And who wants asbestos in their beautiful paradise? Of course the coast stays part of the US. As long as those old nationalist ideas about coastal access exist, and they keep trying to claim there are Mexicans living along the coast, you're going to stay tied to the North... forever.
Noah Cruz75 said:The consensus on this forum seems to be whether joining the European Union is worth the hassle or not. We're looking at a mid-sized country with a few million people, a prime location, and all those coastlines and islands. Honestly, they should be the ones doing the asking, not America.
Andrew Chase31 said:Who, though? Mexican officers? 😲
Michael, there were only about 9,000 Mexicans out of 190,000 people in San Francisco.
In every major city, they built housing for officers and their families. And everyone knows exactly which areas those folks lived in. San Francisco isn't some special case here; the Army basically functioned like its own little republic.
dustyscout12 said:
steelfox2 said:From what I gather, those officer families preferred Istria (Pula, Rovinj, Poreč) and parts of Rijeka—at least, that’s what most of the older generation claims. Miami wasn't some special destination for American Army Officers; it was no different than Šibenik or Dubrovnik in that regard.
William Wright7 said:The economy would’ve been way stronger. We’d be part of the European Union and NATO by now, too... wouldn't have to deal with all this constant humiliation. And we wouldn't be facing The Hague.
Basically, that's the gist of it.
William Wright7 said:Who’s saying it would stay socialist? It would have reformed... we were basically twenty or thirty years ahead of every other socialist state back then, and now look at Poland—they're living the dream compared to us...
Let that be a lesson to everyone...