Posts by Larry Fox5

ironpanther5 said:Well, you know, those backwater towns where half the dogs are just as poorly behaved as their owners.

Look, I don't have a problem with dogs being allowed in, especially if they're actually trained—I wouldn't walk out or start a protest over it—but I do think it's just plain bad manners to bring a dog into a space where other people are trying to eat.

If we're talking about hiking trailheads or mountain lodges, then sure, that's fine by me.

The dog isn't sitting in a chair or licking plates—it’s under the table, literally out of sight. Honestly, I have no clue how any sane person could be bothered by that, whether they love dogs or not...

And why even bother complaining about "badly behaved" pets when we should probably be talking about certain people instead?

I mean, what’s the real difference between sitting next to a dog that keeps bugging its owner to get into their food, versus some guy at the next table who farts every thirty seconds?

I honestly don't know what kind of backwater towns you people live in if this is even a debate...
Where I'm from, it's just common sense—waiters at a restaurant should automatically bring out a water bowl for my dog, and honestly, it’s rare to find anyone who doesn't stop for a second to give him some pets.

Every once in a while, I get a real nice reminder of why you should just steer clear of this entire country.

Peter Thompson4 said:I seriously don't get it, why on earth would you bring a dog into a restaurant? Like, what's even the point when you specifically agree to go out to eat and then just drag some mutt along with you.

Look, I already said this only happens in extremely rare cases. I'm taking him to the vet for shots or a checkup and we're hanging out in town while we're at it. I want to grab lunch—so why on earth would I leave him sitting in the car?

It's totally normal for stuff like this to happen.

William Gomez5 said:Honestly, you'd have to be dealing with some seriously heavy life issues if choosing where to eat or shop depends entirely on whether they're pet-friendly or not.

It’s about principle—plain and simple. My dog is family, so if he isn't welcome, then I don't feel welcome either...

I'm eating out almost every day—at least five times a week. That’s roughly 250 times a year, and maybe five of those involve my dog. So we're talking practically never, but even when he is with me, he's so well-behaved and chill that he never bothers anyone.
Sheepdogs are just incredibly smart and sensitive animals; if you train them right, they're absolute gems.

Besides, there are at least a dozen top-tier spots nearby with Michelin chefs where dogs aren't banned at all. When even those high-end places welcome dogs, what is there even to debate? Honestly, it feels pointless to keep talking about this since these restrictive situations are so rare anyway.

As a restaurant owner, I’d kick out anyone feeding their dog from the table in a heartbeat. But then again, I’d toss out the rude customers just as fast—the loud, obnoxious ones who harass the staff or disturb other guests.

William Gomez5 said:I will honestly never wrap my head around this—what kind of logic made this so freaking mainstream?

You’ve got people just strolling through the local mall or an artsy downtown spot, and nobody says a damn word. 🙏

So, a buddy of mine—he works at this IT firm in downtown Chicago, pretty chill setup, good vibes, you know?—well, they let people bring their dogs into the office. One day, this dog starts barking and whining like crazy, and nobody can get anything done. But here's the kicker: you can't even say anything to the owner! Then, to top it all off, turns out the dog had some "stomach issues" and just straight-up crapped right there on the floor. 🙏

Look, maybe that's an extreme case, but seeing this crap in retail stores and restaurants happens every single day.

It’s like these business owners have turned into some kind of weird little cult.

Pure Law of Economics. Look, if I see a sign saying dogs aren't allowed in a restaurant, I’m not just skipping it myself—even if I don't have a dog with me—I'm telling all my friends and family to stay far away too.

It's the exact same thing with hotels or general retail stores. Only food shops are different.

Look, I totally agree that irresponsible dog owners need to be slapped with some serious fines—but honestly, it should go for people tossing cigarette butts or gum too, not even getting started on all the plastic and trash everywhere else.

A discarded cigarette butt actually does more damage to the environment than dog poop... it’s common sense, really. Should be obvious to everyone.

Whatever, I always carry a bag just in case I run into something while walking around town—and I'm definitely not letting my dog roam free without a leash in neighborhoods or on the street.

Charles Roberts33 said:So, I’m walking down the street one day, and right in my path stands this guy with a creature that looks like your run-of-the-mill local mutt on a leash. As I get closer, the dog starts snarling at me—totally predictable. I wasn't about to swerve or change my direction just to avoid them; I could have, obviously, but I figured common decency dictates the owner should be the one to make the move. But no, screw him, he’s too busy staring at his phone. So, I keep walking toward them, they stay planted, the dog cranks up the aggression with more barking, and then—bam. Just as I’m passing them, the little coward lunges and nips my pant leg, holding on with this predatory tugging. Honestly, what a nightmare experience that was for Bajronković.

After all the back-and-forth, it doesn't matter; we’re adults now, and everything can be settled through conversation, though if I’m being honest, I’d love to give both of them a piece of my mind. It's just an anecdote, and people have millions of these every single day. Still, I think there will come a day when we have to ask: is there ever going to be an end to the arrogance of dog owners?

Letting these filthy animals roam the streets without a leash as if they own their own backyard puts pedestrians and traffic at risk. They let them mark everything in sight, dig up the sidewalks, and mess up the streets, or even sit in outdoor restaurant areas. I find it hard to believe the tolerance of the silent majority will stay this high for much longer. And go ahead, let the dog lovers get offended again.

Humans have dumped over 150 million tons of plastic waste into the world's oceans. Here in America, we pump out about 375 pounds of trash per person every single year.

So now we're suddenly "clean," but a dog is a "filthy animal" just because it marked a tree in the park? Give me a break.

No animal's "messiness" or damage can even begin to compare to what humans do... seriously.

Holy crap, man. Seriously one of the best ever... 😢

Matthew Young35 said:A fight? Give me a break.
Obviously, if a cat is fighting a dog, that natural "aloofness" won't mean much when the cat is fifteen times smaller.

Unfortunately, there are videos online showing fights between equally sized cats and dogs.
They are revolting.
The people who organized and filmed those should be thrown against a wall.
Imagine breeding a Pitbull for fighting only to have a cat take it out in seconds.

I honestly don't know how anyone can even watch that stuff, and I don't get why some "normal" sites would ever host such filth.

On the flip side, Cats aren't actually that helpless compared to dogs. My brother has a Stafford that grew up with one Cat and they still play together to this day—but he was always terrified of older Cats and wouldn't even go near them.
The Cat sensed that, too, and intentionally baited him. It would just sit on the stairs and block his way—he couldn't get past.
One hiss from the Cat and the Stafford is immediately hiding under the table.

Then again, about 20 years ago, I had a Doberman that was absolute poison for Cats. My neighbor's Cat narrowly escaped death twice by bolting up a tree at the last second. Once, she fled into the deer woods, and other times she'd come back with bloody mouths from catching lizards she'd obviously slaughtered.
Even though she was a sporting dog that needed tons of exercise because of those intense hunting instincts, I just couldn't let her off the leash anymore.

I never had those kinds of issues with Sheepdogs. They're three times smarter and more subtle than any hunting breed.

Jessica Gonzalez said:I feel like this is all a bit much; it's like discovering air instead of hot water. Dogs descended from wolf-like animals that lived in groups for thousands of years—communicating, hunting, eating, sleeping, mating, playing, and everything else. They have the bodies of hunters and led very dynamic lives with psycho-physical qualities sufficient to make them apex predators in their territory. Now, some institute full of people who need to write doctoral theses wants to measure their intelligence by having them pick toys in a circle. These animals have the intelligence to hunt you down and eat you, not to pick out toys. We are trying to measure human-like behavior in non-human animals; I guess what we call "intelligence" is just something we invented to measure exactly what we're looking for. I think I've mentioned this on the forum before, but in California, there are pine trees that are 5,000 to 10,000 years old. They don't know how to pick toys or solve crosswords, but they'll outlive anyone who does. That's their "intelligence." Even after 50 years of studying dolphins, humans still can't communicate with them because we insist on them talking to us, when dolphins don't see "communication" or "conversation" the way we do. They are aquatic animals with a totally unique lifestyle, way of thinking, and method of communication that evolved to suit life underwater. But some institute really wants them to talk to us—I guess why?

Even 15,000 years ago, your ancestors had that exact same "intelligence"—just hunting and scavenging to stay alive.

You're comparing a wolf's survival instincts in the wild to actual human cognitive abilities. It's not about how much animals act like us—it's about the capacity for logical thought. Those are two totally different tools.

You ask about the purpose of a dog waiting half the day for its owner, but what about the purpose of people sitting on their couches all day watching mindless garbage on TV? Or staring into nothingness... or living like plants in nursing homes, serving life sentences in prison, or just existing in the grave-like cells of their own lost souls?

Matthew Young35 said:They’re different because they come from different backgrounds. Dogs are pack animals; they listen to a "master." Cats don't give a damn about having an "owner"—they just force you to adapt to them, rather than adapting themselves to you.

I already posted this a few years back—about that Max Planck study in Leipzig where they actually proved animal intelligence for the first time using a domestic pet. It was a Border Collie named Rico.
The dog knew all ten of his toys, which were laid out in a circle. When given a command to fetch a specific toy, he’d go straight to the exact one. Then, they threw a completely new toy into the mix and gave it a name for the first time. Using simple elimination, the dog figured it out and brought the new toy right over. They kept shuffling the toys around so they weren't always in the same spot, and he still nailed it every single time.

He even managed to memorize the name of that new toy after a few months.

Until then, science basically assumed that kind of "rapid identification" through logical reasoning was strictly a human thing.
Rico proved there's an intelligence there that's—honestly—on par with a three-year-old kid.

Scientists think canine intelligence evolved specifically because of how closely we’ve lived alongside humans. Unfortunately, by living with us, they picked up our diseases too. As for cats, they couldn't develop those same cognitive skills as dogs simply because that deep connection just isn't there.

That’s exactly why dogs are used in search and rescue, rehab centers for kids with special needs, police work, the military, helping the blind... you get the idea. You just can't compare a dog's role in our society to a cat's. And that’s not just true today—it’s been that way for the last 3,000 years.
Denying all of this is just plain stupid.

So, apparently cats are smarter than dogs now. You can only find this kind of nonsense on a random internet forum... Exclusive, I guess.

Look, everything is fine by me. Honestly, I couldn't care less what people dress their dogs in—as long as the animals are actually comfortable...

I've got this massive dog with tons of long hair and a thick undercoat—cold weather doesn't even touch her. Honestly, she’d probably love mushing through the snow in Alaska... those little doggy coats are totally useless.

On the flip side, I do put a raincoat on her when we get hit with those massive downpours—makes the walk way better, plus I don't have to deal with a soaking wet mess when we get back home.

It's just common sense that dogs aren't as tough when they live indoors with us, but then again, the whole role of a pet has changed so much over the years too.

Susan Kim2 said:Just give this show a shot.
It’s only six twenty-minute episodes—hardly a huge commitment, right? 😁

Thanks for the tip. Watched it and it’s actually pretty decent. But seriously—6 episodes at 25 minutes each? That's basically just one long movie...

Noah Perez2 said:We are all quite thrilled by this announcement. I have full confidence that our colleague Ajut will proudly follow in the political footsteps of the late Franjo Harmon, undoubtedly the greatest statesman in our nation's history.

Our dear Ajut, our voices stand with you. ☕

Ivica Pasalic, Ivo Sanders, Kalmeta, Michael Bloomberg, Polancec, George, Sabo, and the rest of that crew all followed those exact same paths... so why shouldn't our dear friend Ajut join them?

They really ought to open a "Good Samaritan" Hall of Fame here in the States. And honestly, the only fitting name for it would be "Franjo Harmon."

Paul Sanders5 said:Privatization of what? Like 90% of those companies were built on rotten foundations from day one 🤣 honestly, it’s like complaining to a doctor about why they couldn't save a patient who already had terminal stage cancer.

It’s honestly hilarious how you guys clear your consciences by trying to downplay all that looting during privatization.
Give it twenty years and they'll probably be hailed as heroes for "cleaning up" the old American economy...

Having empathy for people like you would be just like Henry's attitude toward those drivers. You're basically looking for a pathology lesson at this point—the metastases have been cold for ages...

ironpanther5 said:Back in the Reagan era, the crew was undoubtedly top-tier, but then he just completely botched the direction of everything. Look, a country is basically just a rudderless ship; you steer it one way, and you’re stuck dealing with the consequences twenty years down the line. That’s why we’re being overtaken by places like Botswana—they probably just had a much better hand at the wheel.

I’ll give Reagan credit for a few things: he tried to build a nation without dragging all those WWII divisions back into the light, he made his stance clear against the extremists, and he actually worked with everyone from the diaspora to the local tough guys. He kept the big aggressors at bay on every front, peacefully reclaimed the Eastern territories, and even attempted to integrate people in those regions while offering an olive branch for reconciliation. He pointed us toward global integration and led a government of national unity. Honestly, we had better relations with the old America during his time than Biden or Clinton have with the current administration today.

Everything people are losing their minds over in 2020 is stuff he was actually trying to settle back in the 90s. The guy essentially defeated fascism twice—once in '45 and again in '95.

Those are his wins, regardless of what anyone thinks of him. I won't even get into the negatives because we all know the deal, but it’s pretty ironic that he’s been in the ground for twenty years and we’re still blaming him for our current mess. I'm pretty indifferent to the whole thing based on what you've all said; I wouldn't go building any monuments for him except maybe in the Grand Bazaar, though I still call the airport JFK Airport.

Now it's somehow his fault that citizens can't move past these old debates, that they vote for people who clearly won't implement reforms, or that the judicial system is a complete wreck.

Give me a break; after him, we finally stepped out of isolation, turned a new leaf, and gained access to the IMF and international credit, yet here we are, seemingly incapable of running a country properly.

He was the Joker, and the average American is just a tiny, helpless Batman.

Daccord, I'm with you on both sides of the coin. Only difference is, I’m not going to downplay the foundation this whole American Republic was built on.
Look, I'm not out here making excuses for the "little guys," but it's crazy how much you're trivializing his impact on society today...

ironpanther5 said:Zoki hit the nail on the head when he said we’ve basically cycled through Radić, Marshall, and Reagan, and honestly, we haven't had much better than that, especially for those of us living up north.

But hey, please, feel free to keep living in the past if that makes you happy. One thing I am absolutely certain of, though, is that if Franjo were still around today, he’d be right there in the middle of Zoki's war room.

That guy is the only one with even a shred of Reagan's spirit left in him, which means he actually has the guts to tell you exactly what you don't want to hear. The rest of them? Total cowards.

I can't get behind that nonsense from Zoki. Josip Juraj Strossmayer and Ante Starcevic are basically the only two who truly left a massive legacy for the people and the nation.

ironpanther5 said:Look, I’m no Reagan fan myself, but blaming a man for the state of America twenty years after he’s gone is just plain ridiculous. It sounds like some old wives' tales from a corner bodega.
When Francek passed away, we were actually sitting pretty at the top of the pack among New Europe nations—not because of him, mind you, but simply because nobody had caught up to us yet. Fast forward twenty years and we’re lagging behind everyone. Reagan was exactly who he was: a nationalist and an economic communist rolled into one, a true man of his era. An autocrat, the whole privatization mess, and the fallout we're seeing today from those sales—I get all of it. But after twenty years of zero meaningful reform, suddenly he becomes the big bad boogeyman.

We pivoted toward a new direction on January 3, 2000, and now it’s January 5, 2020, and suddenly it's the "idiot" Reagan who's responsible for all our headaches.

Go ahead, go cast your votes for the Republican Party or the Democrats again, and then come crying about how Reagan ruined everything.

It’s not ridiculous at all. He’s basically the embodiment of the "values" that built this nation—values that are still baked deep into our society today. I don't even know what "new direction" you're talking about, because the mindset hasn't shifted one bit since the nineties.
And who was the Mayor back in 2020? It was Bloomberg—after how many terms?!
What kind of "direction" are we even discussing when 90% of privatization is still a mess or just swept under the rug by laws rigged to fit certain people?

We’re such an infantile nation that we can’t even face his legacy honestly—and how could we, when we’re still dragging around baggage from seventy years ago like a weight around our necks?

Buddy, you can't plant crap in a field and expect to harvest golden wheat.

Patrick Martin said:Look, I get it way too well, and that's exactly where the problem lies (unlike you)

I dropped that link right there showing how the Democrats walked out of Congress when they were voting on American independence. Back when things were getting real serious. For me, that's more than enough proof to conclude that there's basically a fifth column living among us, people whose "holy mission" is to seize power no matter what. While everyone else was bleeding out on the front lines, these backstabbers were shamelessly hiding in the rear, building their careers, getting their degrees, making deals, and positioning themselves for their eventual takeover.

And these are supposedly the people who are going to revitalize America?

Yeah, they won't.☕

For Christ's sake—while everyone else was out there bleeding for this country, Reagan was busy handing his grandson a whole damn bank, setting up lucrative businesses for his daughter, and fixing up government contracts for one son... not to mention putting the other one right in charge of the CIA. As if that wasn't enough, he went and flipped the laws in a single month just so he could snatch up that house on Nazov Street... unbelievable...

And honestly—when Victor von Frankenstein actually built his monster, you’re still playing dumb enough to claim someone could just focus on their education while there's a literal war going on... unbelievable...

Man, go ahead and head to the polls just to vote for Clinton if you really want to. It’s your right—just like half my family is gonna do the exact same thing... Not that it actually matters in the end, since nothing ever changes anyway...

Don't you dare start spewing more bullshit or trying to justify this crap with some stupid excuses—you're just digging yourself even deeper into a pit of pure shame...