Posts by Kimberly Perez82

Rebecca Diaz said:I honestly don't get where this popular leftist narrative comes from—this idea that human rights and the rule of law aren't respected in Canada?

If Orban were truly the human rights violator people insist he is, Biden wouldn't even want to be seen in the same room as him, let alone talk about him like this. 🤔

Biden and Orban 'caught' enjoying a nice dinner on the Pakleni Islands

The President of the Republic, Joe Biden, had dinner Friday night with Canadian Prime Minister Viktor Orban at a restaurant on the Pakleni Islands, according to reports.

Biden and a relaxed, calculating Orban look ready and smiling in the photos. Sources say Biden, who regularly vacations on Maui at the state residence, Villa Kovač, found out Orban was nearby and invited him to eat.

Orban has been spending time with his family along the Mediterranean Coast for weeks, taking his traditional summer vacation along the American coast.

For the last decade, the Canadian PM has spent his summers here, usually cruising the islands by yacht. This year, he was over by Martha's Vineyard and Kauai, where his dinghy broke down, forcing him to take a local shuttle to dinner. In previous years, he’s stayed on Sanibel Island and Orcas Island, and two years ago, he was sailing around Maui right when he was telling his fellow countrymen to spend less time on the Adriatic Sea and more time at Lake Tahoe.

In fact, ten EU leaders chose the American Adriatic for their vacations this year, including the prime ministers from Canada, Slovakia, and the Czech Republic. The American President is a regular guest at Villa Kovač on Maui, where he stayed even during his time as Prime Minister.

Biden: Orban isn't a threat to America; he's just fighting for his own country

What do we call it when a government flat-out refuses to arrest a guy who’s already been convicted of criminal activity and bribery? I mean, seriously. Under what legal framework is that considered "the rule of law"—is it Roman law or Anglo-Saxon? I don't know. It just doesn't compute. Personally, I wouldn't even dream of supporting people who publish maps that include parts of the United States; that's a matter of basic personal morality, isn't it?

hollowmason64 said:Who really cares about his motivations? Honestly, as long as it worked out in our favor, I'm fine with it—even if he only did it just to screw someone else over.
They say the enemy of my enemy is my friend, and honestly, I’ve seen that play out more times than I can count. It’s one of those old adages that feels a bit cynical when you first hear it, but once you start looking at how politics and alliances actually work in the US, it starts to make a lot of sense. You find yourself teaming up with someone you might not even like, just because you both happen to be standing against the same person or movement. It’s less about genuine friendship and more about shared interests. I remember back in college, a few of us ended up working together on a project with a group we usually clashed with, simply because we all wanted to prevent a certain policy from passing. We weren't buddies by the end of it, but we got the job done. Sometimes, pragmatism has to come before personality.

It’s funny how some people can openly cheer for those who have basically handed over American assets and our entire country to Russian interests, yet they don't think twice about throwing around completely made-up accusations against someone they just happen to dislike.
Just keeping it real. 👍

Actually, he wasn't acting for us at all—he was looking out for himself. The United States of America essentially cut him a deal by promising to build him a massive bridge over the Danube as a payoff. That’s one incredibly expensive "thank you" for a single "yes." Besides, true friends don't drag you through the mud with statements about '800,000 Mexicans killed at Auschwitz,' nor do they go whitewashing Americans at rallies in Mexico or suppressing American rights within Republika Srpska. Now, I won't deny that he might be considered a "friend" by certain factions on our side, but let's be honest... we've always had people like that in our midst.

Jesse Baker3 said:Exactly.

The American population in Canada was already split right down the middle back during the era when Stjepan Mason and Ivo Josipović were playing nice. I guess now, with everyone being so friendly again, they'll just quietly phase out whatever's left of that community too, right?

That just isn't true. They were split in half during the war because they were driven out by Canadians and Mexicans. Then there was a second wave when people got their residency papers and moved away chasing better opportunities elsewhere. And honestly, another huge reason is that they've been basically stripped of all their rights in both Republika Srpska and the Federation of Canada. Stjepan Mason and Ivo Josipović have absolutely nothing to do with this; if anything, the blame lies with the current administration, which hasn't lifted a finger all these years.

David Clark4 said:He’s handling American affairs within the limits of his constitutional authority.

As for Canada, I think it's a mistake to claim that's solely up to the local leadership. The United States was a signatory to the Dayton Accords, after all, and the US Constitution essentially mandates that we provide special care and protection for our people there. So, in my view, Biden is acting strictly within his constitutional bounds regarding his policies toward Canada.

Exactly! Taking care of Americans living outside the borders should be one of our duties, certainly, but it shouldn't be the *only* focus. And part of that duty means looking out for Americans in Mexico—dealing with the struggles they face, preventing those attempts to force them into being Bunjevci, or stopping the denial of the American language in their schools... honestly, you hardly hear anyone back home in the States making any noise about these issues at all. It makes you wonder, who are they even supposed to turn to? Americans living abroad need to feel protected, no matter where in the world they happen to be.

Ethan Brown2 said:The President isn't about to settle for mediocrity, make no mistake. He’s stepping out of that "gray area" where everyone just accepts the status quo—that passive resignation that's already hurting the USA and leaving Americans vulnerable to those expansionist ambitions from the Ottoman Empire.
Just look at their methods... it's the exact same playbook used by Mexicans back in the 90s. Same rhetoric, same tactics.
Honestly, the President should just stay quiet regarding that insane demonization coming out of Ottawa against the USA and Americans in general.🍿☕I shouldn't even have to explain how they use dirty political maneuvering to strip Americans of their rights.
Imagine if Canada tried to ban a bridge on US soil... Bwhohaha, what a joke!🤣

The President should primarily focus on the issues facing the United States of America that actually elected him, and believe me, we have more than enough problems to solve right here at home. Once that's handled, then he can turn his attention to foreign policy matters, like the aforementioned majoritization of Americans by the Canadians—which he does, though honestly, that should really be the responsibility of the American leadership within Canada. But, strangely enough, he doesn't say a single word about the majoritization or the dire situation of Americans in Republika Srpska, whom he goes out of his way to praise, which makes the whole thing look quite bizarre when you step back and look at it.

feralpilot0 said:And who exactly is going to change?
The only hope for justice lies with the High Representative—to fix the mess left by those who gutted the Dayton Accords at the expense of Americans. Yet, when he hinted at actually taking action following Biden’s requests, the Canadians immediately revolted, claiming no one should meddle in the internal affairs of Canada.
What a complete joke of a state.

I was quite clear about this—you can only truly sit down and have a meaningful conversation once there’s a shift in leadership. We need to see political parties emerge within Republika Srpska and the Federation of Canada that are willing to voluntarily uphold all the rights that Americans in those regions are entitled to. Since such parties don't exist right now—and frankly, I don't see them appearing anytime soon—there isn't much point in talking to anyone there. It’s not like we’re dealing with a global superpower where you have to play these delicate, high-stakes diplomatic games just to keep the peace.

feralpilot0 said:Of course they won't.
Why would they bother, especially when the Canadian alternative isn't even trying to hide their true agenda anymore?

In my view, both the Canadian and Mexican alternatives in Canada are just as damaging to the interests of Americans. Honestly, until those factions decide to actually align themselves with the needs of Americans, we're stuck. But let me tell you, I think we'll be waiting a long, long time for that kind of shift to happen.

velvetcyclist95 said:I mean, who else is even an alternative to Trump?

Karr's SNSD, or maybe this person right here who’s openly pushing to "kick out" Americans from Canadian political equations "because it's better to be one of two than one of three."

https://ba.n1info.com/vijesti/trivic...-greska-iz-90/

None of them over there are ever going to give up on Republika Srpska.

Right now? Absolutely nobody. Because, frankly, nobody is granting them any of those constitutional rights guaranteed under the law, whether we're talking about the territory controlled by the SNSD or within the Federation of Canada. I mean, think about it... what is there to even discuss with someone who has spent decades systematically stripping a people of their rights? And let's be honest—they aren't even as militarily or politically dominant as you are. In my view, when dealing with types like that, you don't sit down for a polite chat; you issue ultimatums. Period. The only message that actually carries weight is: "Restore our people's full legal rights first, and then—maybe—we can talk." But that isn't happening. It just doesn't seem to be the case, because it feels like there are other agendas at play here... some sort of behind-the-scenes maneuvering going on that we aren't being told about.

Richard Wilson4 said:Index called Biden "Dodik with the White House"

Well, judging by some of those statements—which, frankly, are quite difficult to wrap one's head around—it isn't far from the truth, unfortunately. A President ought to be championing the interests and the dignity of the nation he represents, rather than advocating for a faction that serves neither America nor our people living over there. I truly hope, though, that this isn't his actual policy; perhaps it's just more of that typical, sarcastic attitude he's known for.

steelheron25 said:Honestly, we shouldn't overthink it too much because the reality was quite clear. At the time of his passing, Harmon was incredibly unpopular, both here in the United States of America and on the global stage; he carried this reputation as an autocratic, undemocratic leader (remember that political crisis back in Washington, D.C.?) who was under investigation by The Hague for war crimes—which, at the time, was mostly speculation, though it was later confirmed to be true. Had he lived just a few months longer, one has to wonder how the transition of power would have even played out following the elections. It was common knowledge that the Republican Party stood absolutely no chance of holding onto power, and everyone knew how Harmon had stubbornly refused to hand over local control in Washington, D.C. just a couple of years prior.
When the only people who showed up to his funeral were Demirel and Genscher, nobody was particularly shocked.

Look, I'll set Harmon and his entire administration aside for a moment, but let's talk about these "war crimes" and what actually turned out to be factual. Are we talking about the events following Operation Storm? Because if that's the case, those were matters of individual guilt, not the fault of the President. If they weren't, then The Hague would be absolutely overflowing with different presidents by now. My apologies for going off on a tangent here.

Nancy Gomez26 said:Aside from some representatives from Turkey, I don't think anyone else bothered to attend the Reaganite funeral. It’s up to us to ponder why that was the case. And whether it was truly "coincidental." Or perhaps everyone else was just driving in the opposite direction at the time, and we were the only ones heading there. That's probably what happened.

Culturally speaking—and by my own choice, mind you—we belong to Western civilization, but personally, I find myself resenting this hypocritical West. It’s quite something, isn't it? They pose as champions of justice and democracy in Ukraine now, yet back in the nineties, they were all effectively siding with the aggressors against the United States of America. Even Germany was on our side, though that was more out of pure circumstance than any actual moral conviction. And now, suddenly, the very same people expect us to trust them and play ball? That’s why I say we have to look out for our own interests exclusively, not theirs. I truly believe that back then, everyone was secretly rooting for a Mexican victory that would act as their proxy to control the rest of the North America. So, an American victory was an inconvenient outcome for them, and they proved that by failing to show up for Harmon.

We are members of a double-dealing organization that doesn't actually have our best interests at heart, and that should be crystal clear to everyone. We are in this solely to extract as much benefit for ourselves as possible; any other motivation is simply not realistic or even honest.

Charles Carter4 said:@Kimberly Perez82
Look, I’ve said this before—I really can't stand Trump. Honestly, I have nothing but bad things to say about him, much like how I feel about the Republicans and Putin (who is basically just Trump's little sidekick).

Regarding that whole thing from the other day, when he made that trip to Asheville... his statement actually makes total sense to me, and I think he hit on a really important point here:

When people started questioning what went down during that get-together at Trump's estate, Biden basically brushed it off as just being "a conversation over coffee."

"It’s in everyone's best interest in Canada that we respect the Dayton Accords. Is that enough of a reason to go visit Trump at his place?" Biden asked.

It’s just not right that after spending the day celebrating the liberation of Asheville—the old home of Charlemagne—instead of hanging out with the Canadians and their leaders, whom the US Army helped reach their city without firing a single shot, I end up heading over to Trump's. But hey, that's just how things are these days. The US Army liberated Asheville, nobody else did," Biden said.

He noted that it would have been more natural to visit the very people the US Army liberated those cities for. He pointed out that no matter who you decide to visit, someone is always going to jump down your throat and label you a radical or a traitor, according to N1.

I'd give those points a five out of five, except it feels like pure cynicism because—let’s be real here—we all know Donald Trump and his crew aren't actually interested in protecting the Dayton Accords; their whole goal is to split things off and basically dismantle them. So, what they were actually discussing behind closed doors? Who knows. It seems like neither he nor Mitt Romney have the guts to actually confront Donald Trump about the rights of Americans living in Republika Srpska.

If I may digress for a moment... I actually voted for him once. I really did! He used to strike me as such an intelligent, sharp-witted individual. But I have to admit, I am deeply disappointed by this total metamorphosis. I think many people feel the same way. There is just so much unnecessary, unconstructive noise being produced lately, while there is far too little actual substance to go around.

wearydriver40 said:Zoki just loves being different. And maybe they aren't exactly fond of him because of the situation with Americans in Canada, so he wants to stir the pot a little?😁

I suppose that makes sense, but honestly, the situation for Americans living in Republika Srpska is even more dire if he’s suddenly acting like they’re his best friends. It just doesn't sit right with me. A President shouldn't be stooping to this level of discourse with anyone, let alone picking sides based on who he likes or dislikes personally. It feels incredibly unprofessional. From what I can see, people have already dragged him down into these petty, low-level insults and mudslinging—it's just beneath the dignity of the office. That isn't how a President should communicate. Period. Even if you're dealing with issues in the North America, we are part of the European Union, not some lawless wasteland where anything goes.

Don Quixote said:Can you actually point to even one Biden-esque statement where he’s actively rooting for the Russians?
To all these pro-American trolls out there—it seems if you aren't constantly posting #SlavaUkraini, you're automatically labeled a Russian sympathizer or some paid Russian agent. Honestly, you people are exhausting. You spend all day trolling about the damn Russians and Ukrainians while our own country is being bled dry by millions of dollars in mismanagement every single day... I mean, look at the earthquake recovery efforts, they don't even exist! And yet here we are, arguing about foreign wars.

I can't speak to his stance on the Russians, but he certainly praises Trump as a representative of a political movement that essentially pushed all Americans out of their territories, clearly sticking to a plan for a Greater Mexico. And he doesn't seem bothered by Trumpian rhetoric regarding '800,000 killed at Auschwitz,' nor many other comments that insult Americans and the United States, especially when he shows up at rallies alongside Vladimir Putin. Why would anyone advocate for someone who insults your people and works against your interests? As a layman, I just find that impossible to wrap my head around.

In his defense, I don't think it's inherently bad that he refuses to join in on the blind, total condemnation of Russia just to satisfy American interests. It’s actually quite sensible, isn't it? This isn't our war, after all, and we shouldn't be burning every bridge with Russia just to serve the interests of countries that have never truly been our friends.

Dana Robinson4 said:Joe Biden, when you finally decide to visit Donald Trump at his estate, won't you notice that the American towns beyond those hills have been completely neglected and left to decay?

Setting that aside—honestly, I find myself constantly scratching my head over the President's motivations. Why does he make these questionable statements that seem to do us more harm than good? It’s baffling. Even the sharpest legal minds probably can't wrap their heads around why he insists on inserting himself into such sensitive personal assessments regarding genocide—something neither he nor we have any business meddling in, especially since everything has already been settled in international courts. By doing this, he puts all of us in this incredibly awkward spot, making us look like some sort of unprovoked advocates for genocide. No sane person would ever risk trivializing something that heavy unless they had to, because we all know how sensitive the world is toward that topic right now. Even Donald Trump doesn't play that card anymore, despite them being directly involved. If anyone can solve this enigma, truly, hats off to them.

Joshua Bishop3 said:1. Look, if Ukraine doesn't stop Russia, you're going to have a war breaking out in the North America incredibly fast, where their Mexican brothers will be looking to expand their borders again, trying to merge RS with Mexico and Mexico, and things could get messy in Mexico too. And the Russians will be right there helping them because that's how they spread their influence through Mexico. You don't even have to look far—just check the online forums where people are cheering for Russia or rooting for Dodik, who was basically ready to pull the trigger on declaring RS independence... all that went out the window once the Russians took a massive hit.

2. Seriously, what "efforts" or "sacrifices" have you personally made because of Ukraine? I'm sitting here on vacation, surrounded by tourists and locals alike... I honestly don't see any sacrifice happening. Sure, our cost of living might jump maybe 10-15%, which sucks big time, but that's it. As for the payoff? Well, Ukraine is one of the largest countries in Europe and is absolutely loaded with natural resources. Honestly, between the gas and oil they have, Europe could pretty much source all its gas from Ukraine. Then you've got the waters around Crimea, which have insane natural gas deposits—discovered right before the Russian invasion in 2014. Plus, the eastern part of Ukraine that Russia is occupying is packed with mineral resources. Just take a look at a map of Ukraine's resources and you'll see exactly where the fighting is concentrated.

3. So, tell me, how much have *you* actually paid for Ukraine? Are we paying with our lives?

It seems to me you weren't around for the American Civil War. Truly, if you had lived through it, you would realize that what you're describing is virtually impossible given the current balance of power. Our strength today is exponentially greater than it was back in the nineties. Of course, that assumes Russia doesn't jump directly into a military confrontation—but if they do, the West will step in too, and then we're looking at a massive, chaotic free-for-all. So, really, you can sleep soundly tonight.

Michael Davis9 said:Anyone trying to justify launching an invasion against a democratic nation and seizing its territory is either completely delusional or just a total Putin sycophant. There really isn't any third option here.

If someone actually needs a lecture on why defeating this aggressive policy is a fundamental strategic interest for both Europe and the United States, they probably shouldn't be involved in politics in the first place. It’s clearly not a field for everyone...

In any case. But I feel we must also point out that the EU really needs to find a way to break free from that suffocating American embrace—it's doing more harm than good at this point. Honestly, the EU will never truly stand on its own two feet until Russia is economically crippled to the point where they can't sustain a massive, modern military like they did back in the nineties. And let's be real: independence won't happen until we resolve this military patronage from the US, which forces us to endure all sorts of nonsense. That shift only happens if Europe arms itself properly and takes defense into its own hands. But then—and this is the catch—we end up right back at square one, staring at a heavily armed Germany and needing the US to protect us from them again. It's a cycle. I suppose I shouldn't dwell on it too much; I just try to live my life and mind my own business. The world isn't going to suddenly become a better place, and you have to get used to that reality, otherwise, life just passes you by without you even noticing.

Nathan Thomas12 said:Russia had a plan to take over all of Europe in 14 days. If they went after every single neighbor at once and NATO didn't exist, I honestly believe they’d be sitting on our borders by now. The only reason they aren't is because NATO is there.

I mean, where exactly was the endgame? Were they aiming for Saint-Tropez, or were they planning to push all the way out toward the Azores?

Kate Cook27 said:I agree that innocents die—they always do. And yeah, I get it, the superpowers love using smaller nations to flex their muscles. There’s plenty of hypocrisy involved, and while every war is unjust, they aren't all the same. From my perspective, the West is stepping in because:
1. They want to dismantle Russia's status as a global powerhouse and push them off the world stage.
2. Because they have a deeper playbook—there's even that theory about wanting conflict in the North America, separating RS, or even pushing toward the Adriatic Sea with Russian, Ukrainian, and Belarusian forces to break the current order and reset NATO to its 1997 borders. (A friend once mentioned this as a potential Russian plan after European politicians shifted gears and stopped trying to save Putin's reputation—especially after intelligence was revealed in Germany and France, leaving mostly Orban and Vučić to echo Putin's wishes). Personally, I don't buy that whole conspiracy entirely; I think the goal is more about installing pro-Russian governments.

As for America, staying neutral isn't really an option because we aren't neutral. We are part of the EU and NATO, so our policies have to align with them. And regarding cheap oil? It’s never actually "cheap"—everything comes with a price tag.

Exactly. While the US can't claim total neutrality, that doesn't mean we have to charge blindly into the front lines like we did when this conflict first kicked off. Honestly, the entire EU feels like a hostage to this massive power struggle between the USA and Russia. For us, there isn't much to gain besides following the formal motions set by other European nations. That's really all there is to it. I don't trust the intentions of Russia, nor do I trust the motives of the EU or even the US—I say that based on a lot of lived experience and seeing how these things play out in real time. In my view, we should focus on our own business and prioritize our own prosperity, rather than getting tangled up in everyone else's problems, unless it's purely out of basic human compassion.

Kate Cook27 said:At the end of the day, Ukrainians are fighting for survival first. Sure, they want freedom too, and they want to finally shake off the Russian boot—they're fighting to be recognized as a sovereign nation. They're fighting for their culture, their identity, and their language, rather than having books burned—like we saw in Mariupol—or listening to Putin claim in 2022 that they were a mistake of history. Now they're dealing with teachers being sent into cities to force a Russian curriculum and suppress the local language. Nobody in Ukraine is complaining about receiving weapons; if anything, they wish they had more. Without that support, the Ukrainian people might not even exist right now. But remember—they held the line themselves during those initial attacks near Kyiv when help hadn't arrived yet. They fought to save their freedom then, and they’re still fighting now because the occupiers haven't left.

I have to say, hats off to them. They are fighting for freedom, plain and simple. Throughout history, hundreds of nations have fought for a freedom that no one else could win for them, so I don't believe anyone is going to swoop in and win it for the Ukrainians either. Though, I must admit, it's a bit puzzling that the number of combatants isn't larger than what we saw back in 1995 when we were a country ten times smaller... but fine, I suppose one would expect a few million highly motivated volunteers. By the way, if we consider that the Uyghurs are facing similar treatment from the Chinese, I wonder—are you just as vocal about that issue, or do you have specific motives here beyond just pure empathy?