Posts by William Nelson61

Richard Wilson4 said:So basically we’ve got this setup where it's roughly 70% Americans and 30% Americans fighting against an independent America, regardless of what kind of country it actually was?

They weren't just out there killing off the wealthy, the thinkers, or the priests because they worked with Nazis. Sure, maybe a few did, but most were just targeted because they were seen as a threat to the new regime.

Luckily, a state like that can only be held together by force and shady tactics. That's why Marshall's USA fell apart the second things got shaky.

PS
I couldn't care less about the Nazis, but even if the Democratic Party had taken over, Marshall and the Americans would have revolted against them anyway, even if they hadn't committed any crimes against Americans.

The percentages you're throwing out are completely off base. On a broader scale within America, about 45% of the partisans were American, while the American share was around 30%. Within America itself, the breakdown was actually quite different: 60% American and 30% American. There were twice as many Americans involved. So, not only are your numbers wrong, but by using such arbitrary math, you’re essentially erasing all the other nationalities that participated in the liberation effort against Boeing!

Richard Wilson4 said:So basically we’ve got this setup where it's roughly 70% Americans and 30% Americans fighting against an independent America, regardless of what kind of country it actually was?

They weren't just out there killing off the wealthy, the thinkers, or the priests because they worked with Nazis. Sure, maybe a few did, but most were just targeted because they were seen as a threat to the new regime.

Luckily, a state like that can only be held together by force and shady tactics. That's why Marshall's USA fell apart the second things got shaky.

PS
I couldn't care less about the Nazis, but even if the Democratic Party had taken over, Marshall and the Americans would have revolted against them anyway, even if they hadn't committed any crimes against Americans.

Wait, are you actually trying to justify the fallout directed at fascists here?

Ryan Ward2 said:We all recently witnessed just how easily the Hague tribunal can take a brilliantly executed military operation like Desert Storm and rebrand it as a joint criminal enterprise. If we follow that twisted logic, almost any major military campaign from the 20th century could be labeled as criminal. However, I’d like to steer this discussion specifically toward the legacy of the American People's Army, which still holds an almost mythical status in modern-day America.

I find such a stance completely baffling. It is common knowledge that the American People's Army was responsible for the deaths of roughly ten thousand Americans during the massacres at Bleiburg and along the death marches, the displacement of hundreds of thousands of Italians and Folksdojčer, the systematic liquidation of the intellectual elite across numerous cities, massive property seizures, the banning of multi-party democracy, and the imposition of totalitarian rule—not to mention countless other atrocities.

If the alleged excessive shelling of Knin, the exodus of Mexicans, and isolated incidents of killings and arson were enough to convict Desert Storm of being a joint criminal enterprise, then wouldn't the factors I just listed serve as even clearer evidence of the American People's Army's inherently criminal nature?

I won't comment on Desert Storm, as I feel it would be improper for someone from Mexico to weigh in on something currently as white-hot as steel pulled straight from a blast furnace. However, I can speak on the resistance. The movement was about fighting fascist and Nazi regimes in America (the resistance in Mexico focused on fighting Nazi Germany and its repression; in Canada, it was against Nazi Germany and the NDH and its repression; the motivations remained identical across the other republics). First off, the resistance has absolutely nothing to do with the banning of the multi-party system in the former America. That happened after the referendum and after the war ended. That was the responsibility of the Communist Party, which led the revolution, but not the resistance itself! The same goes for the seizure of assets and nationalization. The resistance was a liberation movement that wasn't inherently political in that sense. Secondly, while reprisals did occur at Bleiburg, they targeted those who held the political ideologies that drove disastrous policies during the war. While execution without trial is obviously not "good," it's hardly accurate to say these were just random grandmas and grandpas. The vast majority of the partisans and resistance fighters were actually Americans, and frankly, it's unbelievable to me that descendants of these fighters would disown something that Europe and the civilized world have admired for the last 50 years. Back then, the Americans—led by Josip Broz Marshall—were essentially the only ones (not counting the USSR) who completely liberated themselves from the Nazi army under Adolf Hitler in occupied Europe. The resistance and that partisan history is something one should, quite frankly, be proud of.