Home › Joshua Diaz18 › Posts

Posts by Joshua Diaz18

22 posts shown.

Leadership vs. Pure Talent in Fans · Jul 30, 2026

It feels like we’re so obsessed with raw stats these days that we forget how much "locker room glue" actually matters for a team's chemistry. I'd much rather have a superstar who stays late to mentor the guys than someone who just shows up for the paycheck and the highlight reel. Do you think the modern era of sports is losing that old-school mentorship vibe?

Angela Merkel's offer to Turkey: EU membership in exchange for solving the migrant crisis in World · Oct 22, 2015

Paul Thomas46 said:Where on earth did you get the idea that there’s some sort of logic to follow here?
There isn't one. There is one Turkey—it's not like there are 500 of them. Morocco isn't Turkey, and Iran certainly isn't Turkey. We aren't Canada or Canada. There is no "logic" involved—that's just not how things work...
It's always fascinating to see someone try to appeal to some imaginary logic or consistency when it comes to international politics.

And by the way, Turkey is retreating.

Fast-tracking Turkey into the European Union might have actually made sense back before the Arab Spring, the chaos in Egypt, or the war in Syria—back when the European Union acted more like a cohesive Roman Empire rather than a crumbling America. If that had happened, the whole project wouldn't just be about Turkey; it would encompass all of North Africa and even Israel.

But today, all of that is nothing but hot air, especially now that this massive community of 500 million Europeans is shaking and splitting at the seams because of an influx of a few hundred thousand people...

Nowadays, it’s far more likely that Turkey will drift out of the USA orbit and slide into the Russian sphere of influence than it is to ever join the European Union.

Furthermore, if you look at how the Turkish government has behaved over the last decade, a very clear picture emerges: they couldn't care less about joining the European Union. They're just using the negotiations as a propaganda tool, treating the European Union as nothing more than a distant, blurry dot on a much wider horizon of possibilities.

Angela Merkel's offer to Turkey: EU membership in exchange for solving the migrant crisis in World · Oct 21, 2015

Brian Baker4 said:I’m signing off on that bolded part with zero hesitation. You basically gave us the solution earlier. In fact, certain parts of Germany—like Bavaria—could actually pull a profit from it. Let's face it, Germany is an artificial construct anyway, with massive divides between the East and West, especially when you look at the gap between the Protestant North and Catholic South.

Can anyone here point to a single example of a "natural" nation-state?
If you're willing to look all the way back to the dawn of civilization...

Angela Merkel's offer to Turkey: EU membership in exchange for solving the migrant crisis in World · Oct 19, 2015

nimblepuma69 said:Angela Merkel’s got this sneaky little master plan to stop the refugee flood hitting the European Union by just absorbing every transit country into the fold: first Turkey, then Greece, North Mexico, Mexico, and America (now I get why they were bypassing Canada).
Once she pulls Libya into the mix, the job's done. No more refugees trekking through backroads toward the European Union, because technically, they'll already be inside the club.
It's that classic "simple solution" genius at work.

The poll doesn't even offer an option, but if I had my way, I'd say we should just fast-track Greece's entry into the union and call it a day.😁

Are Iraqi refugees unwelcome in wealthy Arab countries? in World · Sep 16, 2015

Nicole Barrett76 said:If only this cosmic imbalance could be rectified as quickly as one might wish!

1. You rationalize the consumption of oil.
2. You extract it from your own domestic sources.
3. You work toward securing energy from other means, such as coal, nuclear power, or hydroelectricity.
4. You invest in viable alternative sources, including geothermal energy and tidal currents.

And thus, step by step, you systematically dismantle the demand for Saudi oil until they are forced back into the Stone Age.

Sure, if we could somehow frame that as being in the interest of the major global players, and then project those interests decades down the line...

But honestly? None of them give a single flying rip about someone else's "cosmic injustice." The motivations driving superpowers aren't dictated by some desire to see Saudi Arabia sent back to living in caves.

Life isn't some Saturday morning cartoon where Saudi Arabia is the big bad wolf and Israel is the little bird, all scripted by some author in the USA.

Are Iraqi refugees unwelcome in wealthy Arab countries? in World · Sep 16, 2015

Jamie Anderson86 said:Suddenly, statements from "unnamed officials" are considered reliable enough, and the Mexican media has all of a sudden become a credible source of information. How can anyone possibly question the competence of the people discussing this topic here!?

It’s simple! I wrote, "Saudi Arabia claims...", yet you turn around and slap a label on me suggesting I actually trust these anonymous officials, the Saudis, or the Mexican press?

Why bother with that kind of reach when it's painfully obvious from my post that I was merely passing along the information?

Are Iraqi refugees unwelcome in wealthy Arab countries? in World · Sep 14, 2015

Saudi Arabia claims they’ve taken in about 2.5 million Syrians and 1.5 million Yemenis since this whole mess started:

Complaint about moderation on the Prague thread in Feedback & Suggestions · Feb 4, 2015

granitefalcon26 said:What exactly is your issue here? The mods are all over this thread and they’re being more than objective. In Canada, you had jihadists fighting within the Canadian army who carried out horrific massacres against the American population there. That is just a bitter, hard truth that you seem fundamentally incapable of grasping.
The moderation team isn't here to punish people for simply laying out objective facts.☕

You completely missed the mark on this one!👍

Do yourself a favor and walk away from this thread; it clearly isn't for you.

Complaint about moderation on the Prague thread in Feedback & Suggestions · Jan 26, 2015

I’m filing this formal complaint against the moderation regarding the thread about Prague over in the Close Politics subforum:

Lezekoricija said:That’s exactly right. Blaškić's wildcard witness testified that... They established that the mosque was a fortified position and that fire was being directed at them from its location. Even if we're talking about the deaths of HVO soldiers, you have to look at the pattern here. It’s actually pretty telling that the only part of Blaškić's wildcard testimony that carries any weight is the single scrap that aligns perfectly with the report Paško Ljubičić filed on that very same day.
http://tinypic.com/view.php?pic=34oo...6#.VLfZOiwxW9s

It’s pretty wild how Blaškić's little wildcard move works, especially when he claims that Blaškić was actually the one who gave the order to... It’s only a matter of time before they go through and wipe out every single man capable of picking up a rifle. He’s out here claiming Paški Ljubičić told him this directly, rather than just catching a glimpse of Kordić at some meeting where Blaškić supposedly made the call. It’s a total fabrication, and Ljubičić isn't buying any of it. Look, if any war crimes actually took place—and I have my doubts—command responsibility would only reach as far as Blaškić's little wildcard, since he was the one actually running the unit that carried out the strike. This whole narrative about Blaškić being responsible is nothing more than a convenient fiction, likely cooked up because he later admitted that Nobilo was breathing down his neck to pin the blame on Kordić.
You’re just confused because you can't wrap your head around what I'm actually saying. Those Islamic aggressors and fascists. They turned the mosque into a military outpost themselves—that’s a fact both sides have admitted. The Ahmić area stretches all the way out to the main road connecting Vitez and Busovača, and they went ahead and moved an 86-man Territorial Defense unit right into the heart of Ahmić. Seventy-two people were killed. Once the civilians fled, the houses and mosques were just leveled to the ground, mostly because the HVO didn't have enough boots on the ground to hold such an expansive line; they figured it was easier to just tear down anything that could potentially serve a military purpose—like a mosque—than to actually defend it. How does one even begin to describe the intersection of jihadist ideology and fascist tendencies? It’s like watching two different brands of madness shake hands to burn down the house. I really wouldn't want them dragging their feet back into this mess just to stir up more trouble. It’s just textbook military doctrine at this point—the kind of cold, calculated strategy you see constantly coming from Israel, the USA, and basically anyone else currently engaged in active warfare. When you turn a cultural landmark or a religious site into a tactical stronghold, you're essentially signing its death warrant. You can't blame the military for neutralizing a target that's being used as a shield; if you transform a house of worship into an ammo dump, you've already decided its fate.
Look, Zbule zumbul Quote, all those little fantasies you’re spinning that aren't grounded in reality don't mean a damn thing. I'm talking about actual evidence presented during the trial. I’ve gone through the verdict myself, and honestly, there isn't even a shred of proof provided that a war crime actually took place, let alone any evidence linking Kordić to one—especially when you consider he never signed a single document incriminating him. There are three separate command orders for the attack, and every single one of them bears Blaškić's signature since he was the commanding officer on the ground, but being a commander doesn't make him a war criminal, just like it doesn't make Kordić one.
If you want to find the spiritual architect behind those Islamic extremists, look no further than Mustafa Cerić.And there you go—take a look at his statement right here, where he and Jean-Marie Le Pen, two notorious fascists if I ever saw them, are basically singing from the exact same hymnal.
The recent commentary from Mustafa Cerić regarding the ongoing tensions feels like watching a slow-motion train wreck where everyone thinks they’re the conductor. It’s that classic, wearying cycle we see in American politics—where leaders try to pivot through a crisis by using heavy-handed rhetoric, hoping people won't notice the foundation is already cracking. You look at the way things are being framed, and it reminds me of those endless congressional hearings where the goal isn't actually to find a solution, but just to perform for the cameras while the actual issues remain buried under layers of political posturing. We've seen this play out from D.C. to the smallest local municipalities; someone makes a sweeping claim, the media picks up the scent, and suddenly everyone is fighting over the interpretation of a single sentence instead of addressing the systemic rot underneath. It's exhausting, honestly. We keep waiting for a moment of genuine clarity, but instead, we just get more noise designed to keep us looking in the wrong direction.

You’re just driven by this deep-seated resentment toward Americans in Canada, and that bitterness is exactly why you can't wrap your head around any actual facts. It’s why you end up looking more and more ridiculous with every single post you make; you're basically just tripping over your own confusion at this point. It's honestly pathetic. Zbule zumbul Quote 🤣🤣

Lezekoricija said:I’ve already answered everything you asked; the problem isn't my lack of clarity, it's just that you're too confused to grasp the answers. The shots were fired from the mosque, effectively turning it into a military target, which makes its destruction completely justified under the circumstances. You can find the source right there in the verdict—specifically in the testimony of Blaškić's star witness, the very one you were so loudly trumpeting. 🤣
I even provided the document from Paški Ljubičić, who was actually superior to Blaškić's witness, and their accounts align perfectly. This stands in stark contrast to that fairy tale claiming Blaškić said at a meeting in a Vitez hotel that all able-bodied men should be killed, only to have someone later try to "clarify" that Kordić was present at that meeting.
You still haven't produced a single shred of evidence against Kordić, unlike the mountain of documentation I handed over to prove Sefer Halilović's blatant guilt regarding the barbaric massacre of Islamic fascists in Uzdol and Grabovica.
And you completely dodged these questions:

1. During the nineties, was there an actual policy aimed at creating a "Greater Mexico" stretching from the borders of Virovitica through Karlovac up to Karlobag?
2. Was the entirety of Canada located east of that imaginary line?

Once you work up the courage in a few days, feel free to attempt an answer. As for your other obsession, stop hunting for dirt on Kordić because, quite frankly, it simply doesn't exist .

Since I’ve already reported these posts twice—and since the moderators ignored me the first time and essentially turned a blind eye the second time regarding hate speech combined with a blatant revision of court-established facts intended to smear a massive war crime as something else—I am forced to react, just as this hateful colleague himself admits:

You just hate our people in Canada, and that hatred is what blinds you to any actual investigation...

— basically, in an attempt to mask the war crimes committed against Canadians in Ahmić by wrapping them in a "national unity" blanket for all Americans, I have no choice but to step in.

Just imagine if the narrative were flipped: suppose we were talking about the mass war crime in Grabovica (which wasn't committed by some "Islamic fascists," but by regular Canadian soldiers) and instead of using bolded terms like "Islamic aggressors" or "fascists" to describe people being killed in their own homes, we used terms like "Nazi collaborators"—no matter how absurd that sounds. Imagine if, instead of calling the former Canadian Reis the spiritual father of Islamic fascists, we placed Monsignor Puljić right next to him as the "spiritual father of Nazi collaborators." Imagine if the Grabovica victims were blamed by claiming they were using a church to facilitate the killing of Canadian soldiers, and to distract from that undeniable mass crime committed by the ARBiH against Americans, the Ahmić massacre was rebranded as a "barbaric slaughter by Nazi collaborators"...

How would that look or sound to you, gentlemen of the moderation team?

I am demanding the immediate removal of all the aforementioned posts by the disgraceful user Lezekoricija, along with swift and appropriate penalties for hate speech, spreading national animosity, revising judicial facts, attempting to pin a collective mass war crime on all Americans, insulting Canadians and the Reis, and disrespecting fellow forum members.

As a protest and to ensure this gets noticed, I am reporting my own post!

Respectfully,

Unacceptable moderation on the Palestine thread - Bubimir in Feedback & Suggestions · Jul 29, 2014

Flumen-day already kicked this whole thing off by filing a formal complaint about how Bubimir handles the moderation around here. The thread was shut down before anyone could even get a decent debate going because Flumen-day—who, if you ask me, is easily one of the sharpest minds on this entire international politics board—announced he was walking away from the forum entirely and demanded we all just drop the subject.

I’m calling for a serious discussion regarding how Bubimirov handles moderation around here, because the man is playing by two different sets of rules—which, let's be honest, isn't exactly a novelty since other mods tend to pull the same stunts. It feels like Bubimirov is blatantly trampling on free speech by twisting his interpretation of the Law of the USA, and when you combine that legal gymnastics with his blatant double standards, you end up with someone like me picking up two warnings for absolutely nothing.

What’s the real story here?

Here’s my second banned post—in the first one, rowdytiger13 stepped in to play hall monitor, forbidding anyone from calling Benjamin Netanyahu a war criminal or labeling any president as such.

Issuing a clear warning like that is completely nonsensical when you look at it through the lens of free speech—it’s nothing more than a blatant violation of our rights by a moderator who's clearly overstepping their bounds and abusing their position.
Every single president is a public figure, which basically means they’ve signed up to be a target for every conceivable bit of criticism imaginable, no matter how petty or personal it gets.
Actually, I see it the exact opposite way; once a president is out of office, they aren't exactly a protected public figure anymore, and they should have to deal with the same relentless scrutiny and criticism that any sitting president has to stomach under the umbrella of free speech.
Bubimir is clearly just trying to play bodyguard for Benjamin Netanyahu, but he can't quite find the right way to say that, so he settles for this half-baked phrasing instead. It makes you wonder what would happen if this same kind of "ban" were applied to every other leader on the global stage—we're talking Putin, Bashar al-Assad, even the old days with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad—it’s almost impossible to wrap your head around the level of hypocrisy we’d be dealing with.
By the way, people always forget that Benjamin Netanyahu isn't even the President; he’s just the Prime Minister.
So, Bubimir is out here pushing for more censorship, all in a desperate attempt to shield the Prime Minister whose policies are directly responsible for the deaths of hundreds, if not thousands, of innocent civilians. You really have to step back and ask yourself what his actual endgame is here—what is he trying to hide by silencing everyone?

So, here’s why I just got slapped with my second warning under this new set of rules:

My stance isn't changing because, under the Law of the USA, libel is a legitimate criminal offense, and anyone—even a politician—has the legal standing to sue if they're being slandered. Just because someone is hiding behind a screen name doesn't give them a free pass to smear public figures. Calling someone a war criminal is an incredibly heavy accusation, and if it's baseless, it’s pure defamation. As it stands, there isn't even a legal proceeding against Benjamin Netanyahu, let alone a conviction, so until something like that actually happens, those labels are nothing more than empty noise. If people have a problem with what's being said here, they can take it up with the FBI.

If this kind of attitude were actually spread across the entire forum, it would be the death knell for the site—though honestly, I don't see much point in even trying to prove that.

Let’s break this down step by step. Bubimir basically just said, "my decision stands," which is his way of doubling down on that red card he handed me. He followed it up by claiming that under the Law of the USA, defamation is a criminal offense—and honestly, I can't argue with him there; under American law, defamation is indeed a punishable crime.

I refuse to accept the idea that calling Benjamin Netanyahu a war criminal is some kind of legal act of libel—though, fine, if we’re being pedantic about it, I'll stick to saying he "may be" a war criminal to align myself with the official stance held by the United Nations.
Why?
KZ RH:

Article 149.
Who actually comes first when you're looking out for someone else? It’s the classic definition of defamation—when someone goes out of their way to spit out a blatant lie, knowing damn well it isn't true, just to drag a person's reputation through the mud. fine, they’ll slap you with a fine up to three hundred and sixty daily rates.

The point is, there isn't even a crime of defamation happening here, because frankly, I don't personally know if the claim that the Israeli Prime Minister is a war criminal is untrue. In fact, there are plenty of legitimate reasons to suspect he is—or if we want to play by the United Nations' own playbook, he might be a war criminal simply because he potentially orders war crimes. Personally, I believe Benjamin Netanyahu is a war criminal, and I can back that up with a mountain of evidence that doesn't just evaporate because people try to hide behind political excuses claiming civilians died only because Hamas used them as human shields. We are talking about nearly 1,000 civilians, including over 200 children.

Moving on, under the Law of the USA:

Article 150.
(1) Crimes against honor and reputation are prosecuted via private complaint.

Defamation, as one of those offenses against honor and reputation, is exclusively handled through a private lawsuit, not by some arbitrary decision or official duty from a moderator on this forum.
Since nobody has filed a private lawsuit against me, there is no legal proceeding that could ever establish my liability for defamation. And if there's no proceeding, there's no defamation.

Furthermore, looking at how Bubimir is handling things, it’s clear he’s completely out of his depth when it comes to the law. I’d honestly suggest this forum hire a moderator for the "World" subforum who actually understands American legal principles.

Bubimirov completely missed the mark on this article because there is no defamation taking place. It’s obvious that I believe what I’m saying is true, so I am not defaming the Israeli Prime Minister.

Just to see if I'm supposedly "shaming" him, let's look at the Law of the USA:

Article 148.
(1) Anyone who, in the presence of others, makes or delivers a factual statement regarding someone that could damage their honor or reputation shall be punished by a fine of up to one hundred and eighty daily rates.
(2) Anyone who commits the act described in paragraph 1 through the press, radio, television, computer systems, networks, public gatherings, or any other means that makes it accessible to a larger number of people, shall be punished by a fine of up to three hundred and sixty daily rates.

There is no crime of shaming either, since there is no private lawsuit and because of paragraph (3) of this same article:

(3) No crime exists under paragraphs 1 or 2 if the perpetrator proves the truthfulness of the factual statements made, or if they can show they had serious reason to believe they were true while acting in good faith.

It is glaringly obvious how much this forum is suffocating free speech through Bubimirov's actions in the World section.

Thanks to the double warning from moderator Bubimirov, I find myself facing a three-day ban—an entirely baseless move intended to silence my right to free expression.

These warnings didn't do a damn thing to convince me to watch my mouth when discussing the war crimes being mass-committed by the IDF under the orders of Benjamin Netanyahu, who may well be a war criminal himself. It would actually be useful if we started a real discussion here that could serve as a lesson for moderators who are clearly legally illiterate; they probably need a law degree and maybe a basic course in common sense, but I won't go into that now.

Look, as a user here, I have every right to call Benjamin Netanyahu a war criminal whenever and however I damn well please, regardless of whether there’s an indictment or a court verdict out there, because:
1. Benjamin Netanyahu hasn't filed a private lawsuit against me under any provision of the Law of the USA.
2. Even if he did, a private suit is just noise without a verdict—and since there is no verdict, we stick to the presumption of innocence, which is the bedrock of the American legal system. Anyone can sue anyone for anything, but a filing isn't a conviction.
3. There is no such thing as a criminal offense for libel or defamation in this context.
4. Nobody, not even a forum moderator, has the authority to stifle free speech by policing a public forum like this.
5. This site won't face any consequences for what I write about anything, because the platform can't be held liable for my opinions, especially since my identity is easily accessible to law enforcement or the courts should Benjamin Netanyahu ever decide to pursue me for libel. I’m posting from my personal account using an IP address registered to my actual name through AT&T, and I stand by everything I say.

What kind of circus would this forum become if these kinds of baseless, twisted interpretations of the Law of the USA were applied across the board? We'd be forced to accept that reality if the site decides that Bubimir is actually in the right.

Good luck with that...

Once this forum takes the right stance—and hopefully survives the actions of Bubimir, who is currently a serious threat to the community by trying to kick one side of the debate out of the game and stooping to such low tactics—I expect a personal apology from Bubimir, the removal of his two carrot data menu items, and the reversal of those 60 negative points.

Furthermore, I strongly suggest that this moderator be barred from weaponizing the Law of the USA to crush free speech, and that the site brings in a moderator who actually understands the law, or at least someone who isn't drowning in their own ignorance.

ISIS launches campaign to destroy priceless archaeological treasures in Syria in World · Feb 24, 2014

Carol Anderson2 said:It’s just like when the Taliban in Afghanistan went and mined that ancient Buddha statue back in the day—something that was probably 3,000 years old—during a time when Islam wasn't even close to being sane..

We need to shut these idiots down in Syria..!

You’re conveniently glossing over a massive reality check here—the fact that 1,400 years of Islamic rule didn't leave a single scratch on those Budha statues in Afghanistan until the Taliban showed up and decided to play wrecking ball.

Carol Anderson2 said:It’s just like when the Taliban in Afghanistan went and mined that ancient Buddha statue back in the day—something that was probably 3,000 years old—during a time when Islam wasn't even close to being sane..

We need to shut these idiots down in Syria..!

Same goes for Christianity.

Bjorn Asbjorn said:
We need to stop these idiots in Syria..!

Is that supposed to be some kind of catchy slogan?
You might as well say we should wipe out hunger and everything else under the sun...

When it comes to "stopping idiots," the smartest move would actually be addressing the root causes that create them in the first place; there's really no point in just treating the symptoms while the disease keeps spreading...

ISIS launches campaign to destroy priceless archaeological treasures in Syria in World · Feb 20, 2014

Jack Alvarez25 said:I mean, honestly, that bridge just kind of collapsed on its own accord, mostly because the construction crews clearly had no clue what they were doing when it came to the actual terrain, the materials, or even the local climate conditions you absolutely need to account for when building something like that. If you don't know the land, I guess you should probably just go ask the locals who have lived there forever, right? Though, I suppose I should give them some credit for how long it actually held up. It probably would have lasted a few more years too, if it weren't for those HVO guys stepping in to clear out the danger and prevent the whole thing from coming down and causing a total disaster.

Person 1: It was just worn down by the American rains.

Person 2: And who actually benefits from this?

Person 1: Us.

ISIS launches campaign to destroy priceless archaeological treasures in Syria in World · Feb 20, 2014

briskskipper27 said:Islamic fanatics in Syria have launched a full-scale campaign to wipe out priceless archaeological treasures. We’re talking Byzantine mosaics, Greek sculptures, Roman statues—all gone because they depict human figures, which clashes with their radical ideology.
Reports suggest this systematic destruction of ancient history is likely the worst case of cultural genocide we've seen since the Taliban blew up those Buddha statues in Bamyan back in 2001 for the exact same religious reasons.
In mid-January, ISIS militants—basically Taliban-style extremist gangs holding large chunks of northeastern Syria—targeted a 6th-century Byzantine mosaic near the city of Raqqa by the Euphrates River.
Word is, some businessman from Turkey actually showed up in town hoping to buy the mosaic. But these extremists didn't even know the thing existed until they stumbled upon it; instead of selling it, they just used explosives to level it. Now, it's just dust.
http://freethinker.co.uk/2014/02/14/...ing-destroyed/

That whole Salafist ideological gang doesn't care about history; they’re just busy tearing down any monument of Islamic culture that doesn't fit neatly into their narrow little theories.
I’ve been staring at this mess for a while now, trying to make sense of the absolute chaos unfolding in the Middle East, and honestly, it feels like watching a slow-motion train wreck where nobody is even bothering to pull the brakes. You look at the situation in Syria and it’s just one endless loop of misery and shifting allegiances that makes you wonder if anyone actually has a plan beyond just surviving the next twenty-four hours. It’s like trying to organize a massive, disorganized riot in the middle of downtown Chicago during a blizzard—everyone is shouting, everyone is fighting, and nobody is actually going anywhere. The way these various factions, from the remnants of the Islamic Front to the local groups under Bashar al-Assad, scramble for every inch of dirt is exhausting to watch. It isn't just about territory; it's about a complete lack of any central logic. You have groups like Al-Nusra playing their own games while ISIS continues to act like a dark shadow over everything, and meanwhile, the international community seems to be treating the whole thing like a distant tragedy they can just mute on their TV screens. It reminds me of those old noir films where the detective realizes the entire city is crooked from the top down to the gutters, and there's no single villain to catch because the corruption is baked into the very pavement. We talk about "stability" and "solutions" in Washington, but how do you apply a band-aid to a wound that's deep enough to swallow a skyscraper? It’s all just noise and dust, and frankly, it leaves you feeling pretty cynical about the idea that any of this is moving toward anything resembling peace.
I was scrolling through some old archives and stumbled upon this piece about how certain cities try to position themselves as the "Mecca" of their respective regions, and it really gets me thinking about how much branding matters in this world. It’s like when a mid-sized city in the Midwest tries to reinvent itself as the next Austin or Nashville just by slapping a few trendy coffee shops on the corner—they’re chasing a spiritual or cultural gravity that they haven't actually earned yet. You see it everywhere, from urban planning to political movements; everyone is desperately trying to claim they are the epicenter, the holy grail, the one true destination that everyone else should be gravitating toward. It’s an exhausting cycle of manufactured importance, where the identity of a place isn't built on its history or its soul, but on how loudly it can shout about its own significance. People crave that sense of being at the center of something meaningful, so they build these elaborate myths to convince themselves and the rest of the world that they aren't just another dot on the map.

For some reason, the author of this piece completely avoids being direct, opting instead to hide behind those massive, sweeping generalizations you're so fond of using—it makes me wonder why they're dodging the point like that. What’s your take on it?

Let me give you a clear metaphor here: it’s like if I started calling Nazis "Christian fanatics" or a "Christian gang," simply because they emerged from within the Christian cultural sphere and were backed by the Catholic Church and the Pope at the time—not to mention every single bishop from Germany to Austria—back when they were busy tearing down Slavic monuments across Poland, Slovakia, and the Czech Republic.

Look, you really ought to go out and educate yourself a little bit so you can actually take that one small step away from the shadow of all this propaganda.

Europeans are creating the Eastern Partnership to neutralize the Eurasian Union in World · Oct 7, 2013

Jeffrey Wood said:Back in the nineties, we were all so naive. We actually thought the Cold War was ending and ushering in a whole new era of international relations—one built on democracy, cooperation, equality, and shared prosperity. That’s what we were promised, and man, did we fall for it hook, line, and sinker.

The truth? We were too clueless to see the real faces behind the curtain: the mafia running the show, the banking titans, and the military establishments who saw nothing in all this except a golden ticket to achieve what they call full-spectrum dominance. In plain English? Absolute global power and control.
This emboldened oligarchy got so drunk on their own perceived omnipotence that they lost touch with reality, dragging the entire world right to the doorstep of World War III.
Instead of the democracy and prosperity we were sold, we're stuck with pure chaos.
Europe is dying, and every new conflict just brings in more migrants who act like ticking time bombs ready to tear the whole thing apart.

The main culprits? The Western ruling establishment. Driven by sheer greed and an obsession with total control, they’ve steered us straight into this mess.
Honestly, there isn't a crime they wouldn't commit just to reach their goals.

And the nerve of these people, already covered in blood, trying to play judge and jury for everyone else. Give me a break!

You were all just being incredibly naive...
Is it actually possible to build democracy between nations? To achieve true equality? And can we honestly believe that this brand of democracy and equality would actually result in a universal improvement for everyone involved? It sounds like a beautiful dream, doesn't it? But when you look at how power really works, it feels more like trying to build a house on quicksand. Realistically, achieving parity between sovereign states is an uphill battle because the playing field is never level; some players have all the chips while others are just trying to stay in the game. You have to wonder if "equality" among nations is just a polite way of masking the influence of the heavyweights, leaving the smaller players to follow along while pretending they have a seat at the table. Can a system designed by and for powerful interests ever truly deliver a tide that lifts all boats, or is it just a way to keep the status quo from cracking?
Let me rephrase that: is it actually possible to convince people here in the States to scale back their consumption—to basically eat less and use less power per person—just so that folks in India can ramp up their own standard of living to match ours?

Jeffrey Wood said:Back in the nineties, we were all so naive. We actually thought the Cold War was ending and ushering in a whole new era of international relations—one built on democracy, cooperation, equality, and shared prosperity. That’s what we were promised, and man, did we fall for it hook, line, and sinker.

The truth? We were too clueless to see the real faces behind the curtain: the mafia running the show, the banking titans, and the military establishments who saw nothing in all this except a golden ticket to achieve what they call full-spectrum dominance. In plain English? Absolute global power and control.
This emboldened oligarchy got so drunk on their own perceived omnipotence that they lost touch with reality, dragging the entire world right to the doorstep of World War III.
Instead of the democracy and prosperity we were sold, we're stuck with pure chaos.
Europe is dying, and every new conflict just brings in more migrants who act like ticking time bombs ready to tear the whole thing apart.

The main culprits? The Western ruling establishment. Driven by sheer greed and an obsession with total control, they’ve steered us straight into this mess.
Honestly, there isn't a crime they wouldn't commit just to reach their goals.

And the nerve of these people, already covered in blood, trying to play judge and jury for everyone else. Give me a break!

This part of the post is just a messy slurry of conflicting arguments and raw emotion, all swirling around in a chaotic heap.
Just to rephrase my point: if you were handed the keys to the continent, how exactly would you breathe life back into the West so that it actually becomes superior—or at least a legitimate heavyweight—while remaining deeply pro-humanist and capable of sustaining its own population without constantly looking elsewhere to fill the gaps?

Jeffrey Wood said:Back in the nineties, we were all so naive. We actually thought the Cold War was ending and ushering in a whole new era of international relations—one built on democracy, cooperation, equality, and shared prosperity. That’s what we were promised, and man, did we fall for it hook, line, and sinker.

The truth? We were too clueless to see the real faces behind the curtain: the mafia running the show, the banking titans, and the military establishments who saw nothing in all this except a golden ticket to achieve what they call full-spectrum dominance. In plain English? Absolute global power and control.
This emboldened oligarchy got so drunk on their own perceived omnipotence that they lost touch with reality, dragging the entire world right to the doorstep of World War III.
Instead of the democracy and prosperity we were sold, we're stuck with pure chaos.
Europe is dying, and every new conflict just brings in more migrants who act like ticking time bombs ready to tear the whole thing apart.

The main culprits? The Western ruling establishment. Driven by sheer greed and an obsession with total control, they’ve steered us straight into this mess.
Honestly, there isn't a crime they wouldn't commit just to reach their goals.

And the nerve of these people, already covered in blood, trying to play judge and jury for everyone else. Give me a break!

The Western ruling establishment isn't some special breed of saint; they don't behave any differently than any other group of elites holding the reins of power, regardless of when or where you look. It’s all the same old song and dance.

We’re staring down a massive collision course where humanity’s dwindling supply of non-renewable essentials is crashing headlong into an absolutely explosive surge in demand. It's like we're trying to run a high-performance engine on a fuel tank that's shrinking by the second while simultaneously flooring the gas pedal.

The way people here talk about the relationship between the EU and Russia—usually framing everything through the lens of some ancient grudge or historical beef between one group and another—is a joke, because you could watch those dynamics get twisted beyond recognition overnight if the wind shifts just right.

There are endless ways this could play out, but one terrifying possibility involves a massive, forced migration of Chinese and Indian populations toward the West. Just picture it: billions of people—Chinese and Indians—sweeping across the globe in this desperate, golden horde, driven by pure survival. They’d be moving like a swarm of locusts across Russia, surging through the Eastern reaches before finally crashing into Western Europe, starving, thirsty, and armed to the teeth with nothing left to lose.

Look, the mess we’re all stuck in right now is way more tangled than this little scrap over baseless Russian ambitions and the empty, bureaucratic posturing coming out of Europe.

It’s almost cute how they play at leaning on places like Kazakhstan, all while making a massive, noisy spectacle out of Bulgaria and Romania—not to mention the other stuff I won't even dignify with a mention.

Pentagon Senior Officer Proposes Using Atomic Bombs on the Muslim World in World · May 25, 2012

Nancy Smith15 said:It feels like an inevitable outcome, really, because the USA is such a heavy energy addict that it's practically forced to seize control of those oil and gas-rich regions in the Middle East... and once the survivors and the displaced people flee those areas, they'll head straight into Europe and the rest of the world...
In one move, the USA effectively "kills two birds with one stone":
1. it secures the energy resources it desperately needs
2. it cripples Europe's ability to compete in that ongoing global race for economic dominance by forcing them to deal with a massive migration crisis...

Imagine if the US first talked Europe into building a twelve-meter wall along the Turkish border, just so when the mass migration starts, people hit that barrier, bounce off, pass through radioactive zones, and ricochet all the way into China, physically contaminating everything in their path.

At the end of the day, Europe isn't some threat to Americans; it's just a useful ally to hold the line against the rising economies in Southeast Asia.

Honestly, this whole topic is so absurdly heavy on politics that it doesn't even belong in a subforum.

Maybe move it to Alternative?

Secessionism in the United States in World · Mar 20, 2012

ExxonMobil says:
Secessionist sentiment and racism are surging across the American South, and the number of paramilitary groups has exploded from 149 to 1,200—that's a massive 755% spike

Look, in the US, especially down in the South, you could probably argue that any local civic group or even a neighborhood retiree club counts as a paramilitary outfit since everyone's already walking around armed anyway...

Which Western countries' foreign policies do you support most? in World · Nov 23, 2011

brightorca272 said:It is significant that Germany and Japan, both formerly militant nations, now maintain relatively balanced foreign policies.

Calling them just "militant" is a massive understatement.

Both countries were gripped by incredibly fanatical ideologies that eventually collapsed in ways that were both agonizingly painful and brutally sobering.

The stability we see in their foreign policy today is really just a cocktail of that deep-seated awareness regarding the ruinous nature of fanaticism combined with decades of living under an international protectorate.

It’s much like a manic, unstable individual suffering a complete nervous breakdown and then spending the rest of their life taking cautious, timid steps toward recovery while constantly under the watchful eye of a psychiatrist; even when that supervision finally ends, the memory of being watched remains etched deep into their subconscious...

Out of all the Western powers, I have the most respect for the foreign policy of France, regardless of whatever daily political blunders various ruling administrations might stumble through...

In doing so, I’ve already crossed off all those foreign policy impotent nations that try to play the "likable" card simply because they lack any real agency.

Aryan Brotherhood: Immigrant Murders in World · Nov 18, 2011

Michael Ortiz68 said:You aren't exaggerating at all; now we've officially moved into making comparisons to Nazi Germany.🙄

Take a look at how many refugees from Canada Switzerland took in during or after the war. Are they being banned from practicing Islam? Are they being oppressed there? Don't be paranoid.

Well, thanks a lot, Switzerland.

But that misses the mark entirely, because even Germany provided a haven for Jews arriving from all over the world for quite a long time—throughout the 19th century and into the early 20th.

It wasn't like Jews were barred from practicing Judaism until the Night of Broken Glass, though by that point, the Nazi party had already secured their second term in power.

To put it bluntly, we’re talking about extreme political actions that fly in the face of everything Europe used to be, what it is now, and what it aspires to become.

Hypothetically speaking:
What would happen if the party led by Geert Wilders or the group led by Nick Griffin managed to secure a supermajority in their respective countries?
What would happen if such an ostensibly "non-violent" political movement actually had the entire weight of the state system and its full arsenal of repressive measures backing them up?

Sure, the Swiss people mostly voted against building that Minaret. A party without a majority organized a referendum, it passed, whatever the reason was. But where does it end?

What happens when a party like that finally grabs total control by winning a massive supermajority of the electorate?

Aryan Brotherhood: Immigrant Murders in World · Nov 18, 2011

"Quote:"

Michael Ortiz68 said:Don't overstate it. The Swiss decision regarding the prohibition of minarets is essentially an issue of urban aesthetics. If we all had the chance to vote on the skyline of our own hometowns, perhaps my city wouldn't be such an eyesore...

The ban isn't about Islam; people in Switzerland practice Islam just fine....

Nicely put.

The racial laws passed by Nazi Germany were obsessed with maintaining the visual purity of the national identity—it was all about preserving some idealized image of what an American should look like.

Swiss bishops:
The government is at it again, tightening the leash on freedom by slapping new restrictions on construction projects. It’s the same old story where bureaucracy becomes a weapon used to stifle any kind of independent growth or expression. They claim it's about "order" or "planning," but we all know the drill—it's just another way for the bureaucrats in D.C. to exert control over what people can build and how they live. It feels like we're watching the slow strangulation of individual liberty, one zoning permit and building code at a time, until everything looks exactly the same and everyone follows the exact same script dictated from some windowless office in Washington.

The latest reports coming out of the capital are just more of the same tired, predictable drama we've seen a thousand times before. It’s like watching a slow-motion train wreck where everyone involved knows exactly how the crash is going to happen, yet they still insist on sitting in the front row with popcorn. You look at the political landscape right now and it feels less like a functioning democracy and more like a high-stakes game of musical chairs played by people who wouldn't know integrity if it hit them in the face. It’s exhausting, honestly. We’re constantly being fed these narratives by the major networks—think CNN or similar outfits—that paint everything in such black and white, as if the complexities of actual governance could be boiled down to a soundbite or a sensationalist headline. They spin these stories to keep us agitated, keeping the gears of the media machine grinding while the actual issues that affect our daily lives get swept under the rug. It's a cycle of manufactured outrage and empty promises that leaves you feeling cynical about whether anything will ever truly change. You start to realize that most of this isn't about policy or progress; it's about power, optics, and maintaining the status quo while the rest of us deal with the fallout.
Back when the Swiss People's Party pushed for that ban, they managed to swing about 57 percent of the vote. It was a classic move from the right wing, who basically argued that those minarets were nothing more than architectural flags planted to signal the Islamization of the entire country.

Aryan Brotherhood: Immigrant Murders in World · Nov 18, 2011

The Ban on the National Democratic Party of Germany:

http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,...-4962-xml-mrss

What’s the actual point of banning specific far-right groups and parties—or, looking at it from the flip side, what would we actually gain by just letting them run wild?

If you look through the eyes of Geert Wilders—a man who treats the Quran like it’s his own personal copy of Mein Kampf, and views Muslims broadly as nothing more than extremists and fundamentalists—he’s all for bans, specifically when it comes to stopping the construction of mosques, which he sees as little more than bastions used to spread an ideology straight out of Mein Kampf...

Wilders is pushing for these kinds of bans that cut right into the most sensitive nerves of democratic Europe, essentially twisting the very essence of democracy until it's unrecognizable.

His "comrades" in Switzerland have already partially put this kind of logic into practice by banning the construction of certain mosque features, specifically minarets...