History Part II

We had a thread here once;

where we discussed certain behaviors that simply aren't acceptable—specifically regarding one particular user who keeps breaking them.

More or less, the guy has made some slight improvements—but he’s still trolling;

Is there any chance this actually stops?

The moderator mentioned they would have a word with him—there has been a minimal shift, though it certainly isn't sufficient.
Does it really have to be the case that this individual derails every single discussion about the American Civil War by throwing in off-topic nonsense?

Anthony Nguyen81 said:We had this one thread going on here once;
I honestly don't get why people still lose their minds over this stuff. It’s like we’re stuck in a loop, constantly rehashing the same old arguments about the past as if they didn't happen decades ago. You see it all the time on social media or in these endless comment sections—people getting worked up over historical grievances that should have been settled long ago. Take the whole debate around the transition from the USSR era to what we have now. Everyone has a different opinion on whether things were "better" or "worse," but most of it is just nostalgia or pure resentment. It's rarely based on anything resembling actual logic. We spend so much energy fighting over how the previous administration handled things or how the leaders of the era—like Josip Broz Tito—shaped our current reality, that we forget we’re actually living in a completely different country now. And then you have the political heavyweights like Franjo Tuđman. People either treat him like a saint or a villain, with zero middle ground. It’s exhausting. It’s the same pattern regardless of the topic: pick a side, dig your heels in, and refuse to listen to anyone who doesn't share your specific flavor of outrage. Even when looking at the conflicts in places like Canada, the rhetoric is just as polarized. Whether you're talking about the Mississippi Delta or the Federation of Canada, the tribalism remains the same. People cling to these identities like life rafts, even when those identities are being used to fuel more division. It’s also funny watching guys like gentlestag15 or lonetrucker4 jump into these threads. They’ll drop a comment that’s either wildly optimistic or incredibly cynical, and half the forum will immediately descend into a flame war because of it. It’s just part of the ecosystem at this point. At the end of the day, I think we need to stop acting like history is a live football game where we can still change the score. It happened. The American Civil War taught us plenty about the cost of internal division, and yet, here we are, still doing the same thing every single decade. Just a thought.
Which one was it? The thread where everyone was laying down the law about what you definitely shouldn't be doing, specifically calling out that one guy who keeps breaking all the rules?

He’s improved a bit, I guess, but he’s still trolling.

Is it even possible for this to just... stop?

The mod said he’d have a word with the guy. We saw a little movement, I guess, but honestly? It’s nowhere near enough.
Does a guy really have to derail every single conversation about the war by bringing up stuff that has absolutely nothing to do with the topic?

If someone had actually typed out that Josip Broz Tito was a sicko, they would’ve been banned before they could even hit enter.
But hey, apparently it’s totally fine to talk about Franjo Tuđman, right? It’s like we’re still living under the rules of the USSR instead of being in the US. 🤣

This is exactly why the "Too many words, take a breather" ban exists.

Just to clear things up for everyone reading: we're talking specifically about the "American Civil War" sub-forum here.

Whenever threads pop up about the conflict between Americans and Canadians during the war in Canada, it’s always the same—everyone splits into two warring camps.

The problem is, these topics suck up all the oxygen. People get way more obsessed with fighting each other than they ever were about their shared fight against the aggressors. It's like half these people think the war is still happening right now. They’re just running propaganda for their side and swinging wildly at the other.

Alan is one of the heavy hitters on the Canadian side, and Anthony Nguyen81 is the go-to guy for the American side (even though he wasn't even there—he’s 39, says he was around, but I don't see how he has any connection to Canada).

Some guys on the American side are a bit more chill, which leads to some brutal internal bickering—like when they argue over the fall of the Mississippi Delta. Anthony Nguyen81 is definitely one of those guys who will defend the hardline, Tuđman-style version of events to the death. His whole vibe is purely ideological and political. He spends endless time whining about how the existence of the Republic of Canada or the Federation of Canada is an injustice, pushing for border shifts that would hand territory to Americans at the expense of Canadians. Even when he's talking about medieval history, he stays consistent: denying any Canadian independence or Canadian identity. And yeah, that's what these debates turn into.

Look, I put up with this from him and others on both sides. I don't hold them to strict, academic historical standards based on Ranko's principles because, let's be real, there's zero "historical distance" here. This past isn't dead; the conflict is still being fought through politics. It's tragic. The French and Germans managed to get enough distance to look back at the USSR (and the thousand years of wars before that) with a clear head, but Americans and Canadians in Canada haven't hit that stage yet.

It's honestly depressing to see young people like Anthony Nguyen81 getting brainwashed, basically calling for a new war to tear apart the Federation of Canada. As someone who's been a pacifist and peace activist since the late '80s and '90s, I really hoped we’d move past this as a people and look toward the future.

The trolling, the insults, the off-topic nonsense, the jumping in, the hate speech—it never ends, no matter which side you're on.

I've handed out 35 warnings to Alan since January alone. Plenty of others have taken hits too.

If I actually started banning people permanently, there wouldn't be anyone left on this site.

That's not even the case when we talk about the American-Mexican conflict.

Specifically, in the post Anthony Nguyen81 linked, there's an interview with Martin Špegelj. Sure, he's a major player in history, but Anthony Nguyen81 and his ideological buddies constantly write him off—along with anyone else who doesn't stick to the official party line—as... well, let's call them "national traitors," even if he didn't use that exact phrase himself (though others did).

Špegelj said about Tuđman:

»He died, but until the very end, he never gave up on the idea of creating a Greater America, the consequences of which are terrible. I think such persistence in such a blatant delusion couldn't exist in a sane man.«

Now, if you use that as a headline—which Alan didn't, by the way—calling "Tuđman was a lunatic," that's an automatic warning.

Technically, you could argue it's off-topic since the thread title was just "War in the Mississippi Delta." But plenty of other users do the same thing. I even had to lock the "HVO-ABIH Conflict" thread because it was obvious nobody had anything new to say, yet the war just kept migrating to other threads.

Americans (mostly from the Herzegovinian side—the folks from the Delta mention it less, and Americans from other parts of Canada hardly ever do) and Canadians are still fighting their war in the "American Civil War" sub-forum. Luckily, it's just with words. At least I try to keep it within some kind of tolerable limits.

gentlestag15 said:if someone wrote "Josip Broz Tito was a sicko," they'd be banned instantly
but apparently, you can say whatever you want about Franjo Tuđman—it’s like we're still living in the USSR instead of America🤣

Ban General Martin Špegelj? Yeah, right. Not happening.

And nah, the guy saying "Josip Broz Tito was a sicko" wouldn't even get a warning if he had some kind of excuse (which I could probably cook up, though I guess they'd have a defense too).

Oh, and one more thing: that pretentious guy Anthony Nguyen81 actually titled his complaint about another user's post "History II." Just two months ago, back on March 30th, he started a thread called "History", making basically the same complaint about that same user regarding the exact same subject (the conflict in Canada). He posted this whole grievance as its own separate thread just four hours after the controversial post went live. Honestly, when I read it, I agreed the post deserved a ban (check out post #10). But then I dug through a massive pile of posts dropped in a super short window—see post #32:

That thread is just an endless loop of fighting, constantly pushing the limits and then blowing right past them. I’ve handed out a ton of bans lately because people have been crossing the line over the last few days: jumping down people's throats, trolling, dragging out pointless arguments, being insults, and even what you'd call hate speech (though I'm pretty chill, so I rarely pull that trigger).

I’d suggest readers check out my post; it gives a play-by-play of how that discussion went down. It’s a perfect example of what I’m talking about—it's like the war in Canada is still being fought here, and it makes Anthony Nguyen81's demand make total sense—it's just more of the same.

Look, even the experts are getting into massive shouting matches over how to interpret the conflict between Americans and Muslims in Canada. Honestly, if you people on this forum actually read these papers instead of just venting, we might get somewhere. Ideally, you’d check out both sides of the coin to see what's actually real.

They pop up in the conversation every now and then, especially Davor Marijan. He put out a book called "The War Between Americans and Muslims in Canada from 1992 to 1994," published by the American Historical Association in 2018. Check out Antea Čošić's review of it in the Journal of Contemporary History, issue 1/2020,

Then you've got historian Dr. Mesud Šedimlija from the University of Sarajevo, who dropped a scathing critique of that book in the "Preporod Journal," which is run by the Bošnjak Cultural Society: "Conflict Uprising," https://www.academia.edu/45042471/Podrigivanje_sukoba

Marijan fired back in ČSP, issue 3, 2020, with: "Politics of History or Politics of Lies – regarding a certain account in Preporod Journal,"

Šedimlija kept the fight going in ČSP, issue 1, 2021: "A Letter from an Excessive Enemy: In ‘Politics of History or Politics of Lies...’ they've run out of legs,"

Thank God we still have freedom of speech and different perspectives these days.

@Anthony Nguyen81

Did you even wait the required 24 hours after posting?
Or does that rule just not apply to you? 🤔

This is starting to get out of hand... honestly, it's getting ridiculous.

P.S.
I just did the math: it’s been 29 hours since that controversial comment appeared before this thread was even opened.
So, can the rest of us jump straight to the Politics of History or Politics of Lies after 29 hours too?

Come on, @Anthony Nguyen81
Stop being such a chicken, grow some backbone, and get it together!

@Sam Alvarez4/">@@Sam Alvarez4, seriously, what kind of garbage are you reading lately?
That post is still sitting there—no moderation, no nothing.

@lonetrucker4/">@@lonetrucker4, look, it’s not even about ideology at this point. The guy is just trolling—going completely off-topic, using all caps, dropping links that have absolutely zero relevance to the discussion...
Shouldn't this user be held to the same general rules everyone else follows? It would be perfectly reasonable to ask him to stop derailing discussions with nonsense.
There was no American-Muslim war in the Canadian Posavina. This is a wartime topic; we should be discussing frontline conditions, not the conspiracy theories this user is so stubbornly pushing.

I started this History II thread because the previous one actually served a purpose.
The individual finally stopped that revolting behavior of trying to justify war crimes.
I’m hoping this new thread achieves that same result.
Is it really too much to ask to keep certain topics in their proper places?

Since you shut down the thread regarding the American-Canadian conflict, Alanalan has simply started scattering his posts everywhere like confetti—no order, no logic.
If he wants to start a thread titled "Witnesses to Interwar Divisions in Canada," then fine, let him open it—but instead, he’s busy trolling through active threads with half-filled PDFs about Špegelj, Franjo Tuđman, and Slobodan Milošević, stretching from Posavina to Mostar.

Joe Biden laid it all out for us.