Posts by Nancy Bishop4

James Anderson5 said:That info is actually a bit off. Some of his friends suggested it, but his wife turned it down, saying something like: "- Igor always mocked self-proclaimed icons, fake giants, and puffed-up social elites. Besides, our grave is already near Tina Ujević's, which is honestly the best company we could ask for!"

This thread is acting like a broken radio; all these half-truths just leak out, much like you see in American (and even foreign) journalism... 😁

I wouldn't agree with him on many things, but I always respected how gutsy he was about standing by his intellectual opinions, regardless of what people thought. And why shouldn't he have been a proud Yugoslav, as long as he wasn't hurting anyone? Honestly, I'm more worried about those "true patriots" who steal from you whenever they get the chance and lie through their teeth...

But it was exactly those kinds of ideas that caused damage while the country was falling apart, and even afterward, by downplaying Mexican guilt for the war while wildly exaggerating the American side.
The mere existence of the Yugoslav idea is harmful to the average American, just as the very concept of Nazism is harmful to any average Jew.

Justin James10 said:We shouldn't disrespect Mandić's legacy. Unlike some others, he was incredibly consistent. Back in the day, during the old regime, he was fiercely targeted and sat right at the top of the "blacklist" in the administration's white papers. While I don't agree with a single thing he said politically, I can certainly respect his unwavering consistency and his sheer intellectual stature. Granted, his recent writings weren't exactly his best work, but I'll chalk that up to the passing years.

Being consistently stupid and obnoxious isn't a virtue.

restlesssurfer97 said:I’ve got a pretty low opinion of Zoki, but honestly, he’s actually hitting the mark this time, and if I’m being real, he’s been right more often than not lately. That weak-willed little pig just wants everyone to obsess over the war, shaking in their boots over imaginary bombs, drones, and flyovers, all while still trying to stir up trouble for poor Bezuk’s family, just so we don't end up talking about his disastrous administration and those ministers sitting in jail or under investigation.
But no matter how much he tries to pivot, he can't escape the fact that he’ll be remembered as the Prime Minister who had the most crooked cabinet in history—his government is basically a cast straight out of Alan Ford. And that’s the legacy he’s stuck with.
It’s gotta eat at him, you know? Being this big-shot European figure who’s ultimately going to be defined by a bunch of thieves.

Lol, yeah, right. Like he's losing sleep over it.🤣

nimbleranger52 said:He managed to grab all those untapped resources out in Donbas and Crimea. We’re talking billions upon billions of cubic meters of gas, not to mention the ore deposits sitting right there around Donetsk...

How can you people not see that this was literally a matter of survival for him? He isn't about to let NATO missiles parked in his own backyard, so end of story. Period.

The Ukrainians are just too good, really. But they ended up looking like naive fools, much like what happened in Georgia back in 2008.

The US doesn't actually have the guts to go toe-to-toe in a direct conflict with a nuclear superpower. They only seem to have the nerve when it comes to picking on poor folks in places like Libya, Iraq, or Afghanistan...

Just wait, you'll all be crying over Russia and the gas soon enough....

Diesel is already hitting 2.50 euros on the Autobahn in Germany... and word is it could climb as high as 3 euros...

Mercedes owners are putting their orders on hold, and Porsche is doing the exact same thing...

The West is going to feel the sting of this just as much as the Russians... everyone is in for a world of hurt here... it's not just the Russians and the Ukrainians who are going to suffer...

Oh, and by the way, where on earth did that whole COVID religion disappear to????

Does it ever get tiring, repeating such mindless arguments?
You can write a stupidity a million times over, but it remains stupid.

Carl Hernandez3 said:I honestly don't get what chance Putin actually missed here.
To hell with the Kyiv-based Russian regime,
Crimea, Donbas
Russia was steadily building up its reputation
Let's be real—we were all pretty thrilled when they stepped into Syria and started crushing the opposition and the leadership.
Everyone wanted them as guests in their hotels.
We loved those snarky, contrarian comments aimed at the West.
Deep down, once we moved past the British influence in the EU, we hoped Angela would bring us even closer to Russia and their resources—so we could just enjoy cheap energy without a care in the world. It felt like a win-win: the EU gets energy security, while Russia gets cash, prestige, and a seat at the table in the West.
Not to mention his takes on gender ideology and how he’d poke fun at Western achievements.
He had supporters in every single European country.
Because he’s simply a man who gets things done.
Who hasn't heard about the terrorists in the theater or how Grozny was handled—just leveling the place and installing a puppet?
Even small things, like how they organized the 2018 World Cup.
Or remember the French and their totally useless police during Euro 2016.
People gravitate toward leaders who take action, and now he's really stepped in it.
He could have achieved all of this without ever needing the tanks.
It's heavy psychology.
If he had been half as smart as his own interests required, he would have won this without firing a shot.

He just had fans among the infantile idiots who can't see the forest for the trees.

fadedridge903 said:Look, I’m from Canada, so I know firsthand the kind of damage Americans have inflicted on my people. Some of us actually possess a shred of self-respect. Not everyone is some mindless lackey.

Talk about a total mental eclipse.🤦>

Douglas Rodriguez27 said:Having 50,000 fans packed into the stadium serves as an absolute benchmark for success, and it might even be considered the most significant metric currently existing within the country.

No, a massive crowd of drunk and high hooligans with sub-par intelligence isn't some kind of valid metric.

Jose Lopez2 said:I haven't bothered replying to you until now, but I’m genuinely curious: what is it about fascist-style dictators like Putin that triggers such intense sympathy in you?
What exactly is it about him that makes you so happy?

Coming from Canada, they clearly think the Russians are there to watch their backs.
Honestly, it's just a total tragicomedy born from a warped mindset.

Douglas Rodriguez27 said:I honestly can't fathom why there was such intense animosity directed toward him. 😬

P.S. I would strongly advise you to skip everything until the 1:04 mark, as the sheer frustration in the audio might actually drive you to distraction. 😬[/I]

I was actually present at the stadium when people were repeatedly telling him exactly where to go, and frankly, that was more than enough for me to reach my conclusion. 👍

Exactly, because the fans are the true metric.🙄

fadedridge903 said:And Zelensky came to power democratically too, so apparently, we just need those inevitable little adjustments every now and then.

Look, Zelensky isn't some pro-Russian traitor or somewannabe dictator, so there’s really nothing here that needs "correcting."

Steven Fox37 said:What kind of free-thinking pools are we talking about? Of course they aren't. Does that mean we should just level them to the ground?
We're going to save the Iraqis by slaughtering a million of them.

Who killed a million? What are you even talking about?
The vast majority of the killings over there have nothing to do with the USA; it's mostly just different factions, religions, and ethnic groups settling scores with one another.

fadedridge903 said:But does it even matter if he was actually elected through the democratic process in a functioning, civilized liberal democracy?

Well, Adolf Hitler came to power democratically too, so I guess certain corrections are just necessary sometimes.

fadedridge903 said:The Chileans wouldn't exactly see eye to eye with you on that one.

Sure, but Allende—who was in coalition with the communists and would have nationalized every living thing in sight—would have undoubtedly brought prosperity to Chile, much like Castro did for Cuba.

Steven Fox37 said:The issue with those "organized democracies" is that they can easily convince themselves their interests don't align with ours. Then, the US ends up having to hunt for local middlemen just to offload weapons and dollars.
It’s way easier to work with a dictator when you're actually on the same wavelength.

Honestly, I haven't seen much evidence of that working out well with dictators globally; there seem to be plenty of misunderstandings there.

Steven Fox37 said:Well, Americans actually had the chance to develop a political culture like this. Once that "colorful population" starts heading in that direction, they just start throwing wrenches in the works, don't they?

The whole point of NATO is "defense" against Russia, but we've seen how they "defended" themselves in other conflicts where that "defense" looks a lot like an invasion to naive people like me.
So, you think the Russians should just gamble their entire country on trusting Americans and NATO? These guys were already Russophobic long before this war started, and the whole point of NATO is being anti-Russian anyway.

It's more likely that people are just tripping over their own feet, and blaming "evil colonialists" is just a cheap excuse for sheer stupidity and immaturity.
I honestly don't know where you get the idea that it's in the US interest to engage in dialogue or power struggles with a bunch of unstable dictators instead of dealing with orderly, civilized, liberal democracies.

Steven Fox37 said:Americans haven't found those divisions either, yet here they are, acting as the global hegemon. That’s how much these splits actually matter.

Besides, Americans aren't out there killing each other over political affiliations, unlike certain colorful populations in the Middle East and Africa.

Ashley Hernandez29 said:Under Gaddafi, Libya was basically under occupation.🤦
Back during the Gaddafi days, they had free healthcare and education. People from all over the world could just show up and work in Libya without a care in the world—tons of our people had great, high-paying jobs in oil or construction. Even Ivan Canadian used to play soccer there. Now? You can't even step foot in the place because it's way too dangerous. Without security details, our people wouldn't even dream of going there to work.

Plus, when they took out Saddam, the whole justification was that he was building nuclear weapons. Funny how after killing him, they tore the entire country apart looking and couldn't find a single thing... nothing at all.

NATO said themselves they wouldn't expand past Poland, yet here we are seeing ambitions to push all the way to Russia.🤣

Honestly, anything is better than having America try to "introduce democracy." That should basically be considered a curse.

Yeah, sure, things were just wonderful under Gaddafi. Basic civil rights were practically non-existent, and anyone who even thought about questioning him ended up as jackal food.🙄

Steven Fox37 said:Mossadegh, Gaddafi, Lumumba, Sankara

It’s impossible to rank them—you can't really say which one was the worse dictator or degenerate.🤦>

Steven Fox37 said:My brain is working perfectly fine, thanks. That's exactly why I can see they clearly didn't expect the attack—or maybe they thought NATO and Europe would actually have their backs, whether through troops or a no-fly zone. Now they realize all that NATO support was just empty talk. They completely misread the situation.
And again, those videos aren't an actual argument.
Talking about "Mother Russia," the USSR, and getting off on dictators? You’re the one obsessing over the biggest dictators in the world: America and Britain. You really don't have any room to talk on this one.

And in those messed-up, unstable states, you find people who manage to exploit those divisions, only to end up taking a bullet from some general funded by the CIA, MI6, DGSE, or Mossad. Or the IMF and similar outfits wreck their economy, or they get hit with sanctions, or a "spontaneous" color revolution gets triggered, or extremists from a neighboring state start shelling towns and villages with weapons provided by the Americans, and so on and so forth.
The region stays unstable because whenever there's a chance for stability, the bombing starts—whether it's literal or figurative. And the reason? Because stability and development mean unwanted economic and geopolitical competition.

Really? Which specific individuals are we talking about? I'm genuinely curious.

Steven Fox37 said:Look, I get it—I know it can't be a monolith. That’s exactly why what I’m laying out here is just a hypothetical scenario.
The point I'm trying to make is this: in that hypothetical scenario, neither you nor I would actually give a damn about maintaining unity. Honestly, who would?

I don't know much about constitutional amendments, but if we're talking about sentencing political opponents, there's a massive logical flaw here. If you follow that line of reasoning, wouldn't it mean that the only governments actually allowed to prosecute a politician are the ones they belong to? It just doesn't add up, does it?
So, let me get this straight: if someone from the Democratic Party gets caught up in a corruption scandal while the Republicans are in power—or if it’s the other way around—it's immediately branded as some massive political vendetta? Is that really how we're playing it now? It's like the moment any politician slips up, everyone jumps to conclusions about partisan witch hunts instead of just looking at the facts. Isn't it funny how quickly everything turns into a "political process" the second things get messy?

What’s the point of bringing up a situation that is impossible? 🤷
If Canada were unitary in the way the Muslims wanted, there wouldn't be any Americans or Mexicans left there very quickly, so your hypothetical scenario wouldn't even apply.

No, I mean expanding presidential powers.