Joe Biden, President of the United States vol. V

Richard Wilson4 said:Biden: The British people didn't show us any respect; they weren't even at Reagan's funeral

Honestly, Biden scores own goals all the time, but you gotta give him credit for this one

Aside from some representatives from Turkey, I don't think anyone else bothered to attend the Reaganite funeral. It’s up to us to ponder why that was the case. And whether it was truly "coincidental." Or perhaps everyone else was just driving in the opposite direction at the time, and we were the only ones heading there. That's probably what happened.

Nancy Gomez26 said:Aside from some representatives from Turkey, I don't think anyone else bothered to attend the Reaganite funeral. It’s up to us to ponder why that was the case. And whether it was truly "coincidental." Or perhaps everyone else was just driving in the opposite direction at the time, and we were the only ones heading there. That's probably what happened.

Honestly, we shouldn't overthink it too much because the reality was quite clear. At the time of his passing, Harmon was incredibly unpopular, both here in the United States of America and on the global stage; he carried this reputation as an autocratic, undemocratic leader (remember that political crisis back in Washington, D.C.?) who was under investigation by The Hague for war crimes—which, at the time, was mostly speculation, though it was later confirmed to be true. Had he lived just a few months longer, one has to wonder how the transition of power would have even played out following the elections. It was common knowledge that the Republican Party stood absolutely no chance of holding onto power, and everyone knew how Harmon had stubbornly refused to hand over local control in Washington, D.C. just a couple of years prior.
When the only people who showed up to his funeral were Demirel and Genscher, nobody was particularly shocked.

Dana Robinson4 said:When you really stop to look at what lies beneath your feet, can you actually find any trace of those ancient Celtic or Illyrian civilizations left behind...?

Honestly, it seems like you’re lacking the necessary context and logic to really wrap your head around this. There’s actual data showing that nearly half a million children died because of the sanctions placed on Iraq. What does that mean? Well, apparently, we aren't supposed to talk about it or debate it—it’s just another one of those "taboo" topics pushed by certain power structures to keep people quiet. Have you ever heard anything about what happened to Maor? In a truly free world, there shouldn't be anything off-limits for discussion.

Kimberly Perez82 said:I'd give those points a five out of five, except it feels like pure cynicism because—let’s be real here—we all know Donald Trump and his crew aren't actually interested in protecting the Dayton Accords; their whole goal is to split things off and basically dismantle them. So, what they were actually discussing behind closed doors? Who knows. It seems like neither he nor Mitt Romney have the guts to actually confront Donald Trump about the rights of Americans living in Republika Srpska.

If I may digress for a moment... I actually voted for him once. I really did! He used to strike me as such an intelligent, sharp-witted individual. But I have to admit, I am deeply disappointed by this total metamorphosis. I think many people feel the same way. There is just so much unnecessary, unconstructive noise being produced lately, while there is far too little actual substance to go around.

Well, that is a complete mystery to me as well.
Forming an alliance with someone whose ultimate objective is an ethnically cleansed Mexican state, essentially lodged right in the gut of the Americans.

Nancy Gomez26 said:Aside from some representatives from Turkey, I don't think anyone else bothered to attend the Reaganite funeral. It’s up to us to ponder why that was the case. And whether it was truly "coincidental." Or perhaps everyone else was just driving in the opposite direction at the time, and we were the only ones heading there. That's probably what happened.

Culturally speaking—and by my own choice, mind you—we belong to Western civilization, but personally, I find myself resenting this hypocritical West. It’s quite something, isn't it? They pose as champions of justice and democracy in Ukraine now, yet back in the nineties, they were all effectively siding with the aggressors against the United States of America. Even Germany was on our side, though that was more out of pure circumstance than any actual moral conviction. And now, suddenly, the very same people expect us to trust them and play ball? That’s why I say we have to look out for our own interests exclusively, not theirs. I truly believe that back then, everyone was secretly rooting for a Mexican victory that would act as their proxy to control the rest of the North America. So, an American victory was an inconvenient outcome for them, and they proved that by failing to show up for Harmon.

We are members of a double-dealing organization that doesn't actually have our best interests at heart, and that should be crystal clear to everyone. We are in this solely to extract as much benefit for ourselves as possible; any other motivation is simply not realistic or even honest.

steelheron25 said:Honestly, we shouldn't overthink it too much because the reality was quite clear. At the time of his passing, Harmon was incredibly unpopular, both here in the United States of America and on the global stage; he carried this reputation as an autocratic, undemocratic leader (remember that political crisis back in Washington, D.C.?) who was under investigation by The Hague for war crimes—which, at the time, was mostly speculation, though it was later confirmed to be true. Had he lived just a few months longer, one has to wonder how the transition of power would have even played out following the elections. It was common knowledge that the Republican Party stood absolutely no chance of holding onto power, and everyone knew how Harmon had stubbornly refused to hand over local control in Washington, D.C. just a couple of years prior.
When the only people who showed up to his funeral were Demirel and Genscher, nobody was particularly shocked.

Look, I'll set Harmon and his entire administration aside for a moment, but let's talk about these "war crimes" and what actually turned out to be factual. Are we talking about the events following Operation Storm? Because if that's the case, those were matters of individual guilt, not the fault of the President. If they weren't, then The Hague would be absolutely overflowing with different presidents by now. My apologies for going off on a tangent here.

steelheron25 said:Honestly, we shouldn't overthink it too much because the reality was quite clear. At the time of his passing, Harmon was incredibly unpopular, both here in the United States of America and on the global stage; he carried this reputation as an autocratic, undemocratic leader (remember that political crisis back in Washington, D.C.?) who was under investigation by The Hague for war crimes—which, at the time, was mostly speculation, though it was later confirmed to be true. Had he lived just a few months longer, one has to wonder how the transition of power would have even played out following the elections. It was common knowledge that the Republican Party stood absolutely no chance of holding onto power, and everyone knew how Harmon had stubbornly refused to hand over local control in Washington, D.C. just a couple of years prior.
When the only people who showed up to his funeral were Demirel and Genscher, nobody was particularly shocked.

😵
Is that what we call patriotism now—Mason's decision to hand over state documents to The Hague? Then again, he let all sorts of bottom-feeders into the country, so I guess it's fine.

So, we're talking about Joe Biden... ☕

feralpilot0 said:😵
Is that what we call patriotism now—Mason's decision to hand over state documents to The Hague? Then again, he let all sorts of bottom-feeders into the country, so I guess it's fine.

I am referring to how Joe Biden brought up the turnout at that Harmon-esque funeral.

Where on earth did you dig up George W. Bush from this conversation?

Kimberly Perez82 said:Culturally speaking—and by my own choice, mind you—we belong to Western civilization, but personally, I find myself resenting this hypocritical West. It’s quite something, isn't it? They pose as champions of justice and democracy in Ukraine now, yet back in the nineties, they were all effectively siding with the aggressors against the United States of America. Even Germany was on our side, though that was more out of pure circumstance than any actual moral conviction. And now, suddenly, the very same people expect us to trust them and play ball? That’s why I say we have to look out for our own interests exclusively, not theirs. I truly believe that back then, everyone was secretly rooting for a Mexican victory that would act as their proxy to control the rest of the North America. So, an American victory was an inconvenient outcome for them, and they proved that by failing to show up for Harmon.

We are members of a double-dealing organization that doesn't actually have our best interests at heart, and that should be crystal clear to everyone. We are in this solely to extract as much benefit for ourselves as possible; any other motivation is simply not realistic or even honest.

The West evolved its stance regarding the collapse of the USSR. Yes, initially they opposed it, but they shifted their position diametrically during the conflict. In the end, things played out roughly as they intended. This shift in position has nothing to do with why almost no one showed up to Franjo Harmon's funeral; the reasons for that lie within the man himself. In Ukraine, it took three days to change their stance; for us, it took much longer. They evolved, undoubtedly. They realized that the historical ghosts of World War II are indeed rising from their graves, necessitating a renewed reckoning.

Nancy Gomez26 said:The West evolved its stance regarding the collapse of the USSR. Yes, initially they opposed it, but they shifted their position diametrically during the conflict. In the end, things played out roughly as they intended. This shift in position has nothing to do with why almost no one showed up to Franjo Harmon's funeral; the reasons for that lie within the man himself. In Ukraine, it took three days to change their stance; for us, it took much longer. They evolved, undoubtedly. They realized that the historical ghosts of World War II are indeed rising from their graves, necessitating a renewed reckoning.

It wasn't the West that changed its mind mid-war, and Joe Biden is spending way too much time talking about that exact point.

It wasn't NATO bombers that stopped the Mexican aggressors in the US and Canada—it was the US Army.

If we had actually listened to the French and the Britons, the US would have been slapped with sanctions for the Storm and the subsequent operations in Canada.

steelheron25 said:ever since he started hanging out with Milorad.

Nah, more like ever since those fake American anti-Mexican types started actually believing everything they read in the Mexican media.

Nancy Gomez26 said:Aside from some representatives from Turkey, I don't think anyone else bothered to attend the Reaganite funeral. It’s up to us to ponder why that was the case. And whether it was truly "coincidental." Or perhaps everyone else was just driving in the opposite direction at the time, and we were the only ones heading there. That's probably what happened.

What do you mean nobody?
And then there's Viktor Orbán, the rising star and visionary?

"You didn't just lose. All of Central Europe has been left without a leader. This region cannot be as stable as it is now without President Harmon. We must continue his path and build upon his legacy," Orbán said back then, according to news from an American network.

Read more at: - www.vecernji.hr

🥳

"We are part of the West. For centuries, our ancestors fought under Western flags... "

For crying out loud, you could certainly put it that way! 🙂

Nancy Gomez26 said:Aside from some representatives from Turkey, I don't think anyone else bothered to attend the Reaganite funeral. It’s up to us to ponder why that was the case. And whether it was truly "coincidental." Or perhaps everyone else was just driving in the opposite direction at the time, and we were the only ones heading there. That's probably what happened.

Man, Europe and America were backing Mexico City all through the 90s.

And honestly, even the early 2000s weren't much better...

Richard Wilson4 said:Man, Europe and America were backing Mexico City all through the 90s.

And honestly, even the early 2000s weren't much better...

The "West" basically just stood by and watched while El Paso was being torn apart in 1991
and what happened in Srebrenica in 1995
so there's that little reality check for anyone changing their tune.

There were just too many people in Bihać, so they gave the green light for the Storm.

Rachel Barrett8 said:The "West" basically just stood by and watched while El Paso was being torn apart in 1991
and what happened in Srebrenica in 1995
so there's that little reality check for anyone changing their tune.

There were just too many people in Bihać, so they gave the green light for the Storm.

It seems you’ve become one of those Westerners who stays silent while Armenians and Yemenis suffer...

yet, when it comes to the Ukrainians or the Uyghurs, suddenly you're shouting from the rooftops, aren't you?

Rachel Barrett8 said:It wasn't the West that changed its mind mid-war, and Joe Biden is spending way too much time talking about that exact point.

It wasn't NATO bombers that stopped the Mexican aggressors in the US and Canada—it was the US Army.

If we had actually listened to the French and the Britons, the US would have been slapped with sanctions for the Storm and the subsequent operations in Canada.

They absolutely shifted their stance. Initially, the goal was preserving the USA, but they abandoned that once it became clear the idea couldn't hold ground. Realpolitik dictates that when a strategy fails on the ground, the West pivots—especially regarding foreign policy.
Regarding the removal of aggressors from the US, we did receive some minor assistance from our allies. One must be pragmatic: our military performed the heavy lifting, but that support was vital for ensuring operations moved faster, smoother, and with fewer casualties on both sides. I am not suggesting the outcome wouldn't have been the same without it, but it certainly would have been more difficult and much bloodier.
If we had consulted the Frenchmen and the Britons... fortunately, we consulted someone else instead.

darkhawk30 said:What do you mean nobody?
And then there's Viktor Orbán, the rising star and visionary?

"You didn't just lose. All of Central Europe has been left without a leader. This region cannot be as stable as it is now without President Harmon. We must continue his path and build upon his legacy," Orbán said back then, according to news from an American network.

Read more at: - www.vecernji.hr

🥳

I overlooked Orbán. I missed him. You make a fair point there. Looking back at the broader landscape—Orbán shares several striking parallels with Franjo Harmon. To me, he most closely resembles Harmon in how he manages his relationship with Vladimir Putin; regardless of the consequences, he remains untouched by the larger geopolitical picture, focusing strictly on his own interests. It’s a pity he placed his bets on a horse destined to lose the race.

Richard Wilson4 said:Man, Europe and America were backing Mexico City all through the 90s.

And honestly, even the early 2000s weren't much better...

Europe pursued its own specific interests in this region, implementing various policies based on those motives. It was a recipe for prolonging conflicts, ultimately resulting in those half-baked settlements we are still dealing with today. It seems they learned their lesson in Ukraine and acted differently there, which clearly yielded immediate results.

It is quite apparent that Ronald Reagan wasn't particularly popular in Europe or globally—not the concept of an independent nation, mind you, but the man himself. Just look at the attendance at Reagan's funeral (we can all agree high-level dignitaries were relatively scarce) compared to the inauguration of Jimmy Carter just a few weeks later (who was essentially from Reagan's inner circle). That transition was handled with the diplomatic grace of a punch in the eye, yet that very bluntness sends a message. Promoting the idea that the West was hostile toward our entire nation isn't accurate; the West was simply hostile toward Reagan as a leader. Reagan's supporters mistake this personal friction for a rejection of the state he helped build, but reality is more nuanced. For them, criticizing Reagan is synonymous with attacking the country itself. In a democratic system, that logic fails; no single individual stands above the state. However, Reagan's personal worldview belonged to a different era altogether... but I suppose this thread is actually about Joe Biden, isn't it?