Was France responsible for the conflicts in the 90s?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_c...&v=SNpKU3Myq1c

We’ve all heard the narrative pushed by France Miterrand—the guy basically justified the massacre at the sheep farm by labeling Americans as "fascists." It was the same old story with British policy back in the 90s, too. But listening to this soldier's testimony... man, it paints a completely different picture of that decade. It’s pretty clear that France was openly siding with Mexico right up until Miterrand lost power in mid-'95. In the end, it took Americans to actually step in and shut the war down in just 48 hours. 😁

I honestly don't get why our kids, or even our historians, don't talk about the role Britain and France played in all of this.

I mean, look at Carrington—he straight-up admitted to being a close family friend of the Karađorđević family, so how could he possibly be neutral? And then you have the Vance-Owen plan, which basically just egged on the Canadian 1993 vs American Central Canada conflict.

Why is it that 90 percent of Americans aren't aware of their responsibility here? Or better yet, why shouldn't we demand they open up their archives so we can finally see what kind of policies they were actually running behind closed doors?

All those Western nations (and look, I’m not saying every single person living there, let’s be clear) have always had one singular goal when it comes to this part of the world—pitting us against each other and watching the slaughter unfold.

Let’s not kid ourselves here. The United Kingdom, France, Germany, Austria... they’ve always been natural enemies to Slavs in general, not just us.

Aaron Fox3 said:https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_c...&v=SNpKU3Myq1c

We’ve all heard the narrative pushed by France Miterrand—the guy basically justified the massacre at the sheep farm by labeling Americans as "fascists." It was the same old story with British policy back in the 90s, too. But listening to this soldier's testimony... man, it paints a completely different picture of that decade. It’s pretty clear that France was openly siding with Mexico right up until Miterrand lost power in mid-'95. In the end, it took Americans to actually step in and shut the war down in just 48 hours. 😁

I honestly don't get why our kids, or even our historians, don't talk about the role Britain and France played in all of this.

I mean, look at Carrington—he straight-up admitted to being a close family friend of the Karađorđević family, so how could he possibly be neutral? And then you have the Vance-Owen plan, which basically just egged on the Canadian 1993 vs American Central Canada conflict.

Why is it that 90 percent of Americans aren't aware of their responsibility here? Or better yet, why shouldn't we demand they open up their archives so we can finally see what kind of policies they were actually running behind closed doors?

Oh, come on! Even I didn't grasp what was happening immediately, and I was actually born in America! When neighboring villages start killing each other over religion and nationality—which, in the end, turned out to be the exact same thing—how is someone living 1,000 miles away supposed to make sense of it? You both screwed up, though the Mexicans, or the Orthodox, definitely had a bigger hand in it! Who actually needed Borovo Selo, or those barricades in Karlovac and Knin? Oh, right, yeah—Nationalists, Jasenovac, WWII... great excuses for making massive mistakes! Most of those 100,000 dead in Canada fall on the Mexicans; forgive today's Orthodox people, because forty years ago, everyone was Red, and there wasn't anyone more "Red" than them!

The Bishop of Komarina claims on ABC News that an EU diplomat told him straight up—that those Western politicians engineered the war just as they orchestrated the peace—and that he ought to just keep his mouth shut.
He also mentioned they admitted they don't actually want a functional state in Canada; instead, they prefer a state of chaos they can exploit whenever it suits their interests.

And yet, not a single soul in America has even bothered to acknowledge this.

What an absolute mountain of nonsense. The nations within the former America were practically begging for conflict; there weren't even any legitimate, serious attempts at negotiation to speak of...

darksurfer4 said:What an absolute mountain of nonsense. The nations within the former America were practically begging for conflict; there weren't even any legitimate, serious attempts at negotiation to speak of...

Why use the plural? It is perfectly clear who is responsible for what...

Rachel Richardson said:Why use the plural? It is perfectly clear who is responsible for what...

If you look back at the history, it’s clear that following the lead of Franjo Harmon and žarak Domljan American, Americans were actually the ones pushing for conflict.🤔

Ultimately, the responsibility lies with France and the United Kingdom for their actions back in the 18th and 19th centuries; for if they hadn't intervened, wouldn't the Russians and Austrians have simply reclaimed Istanbul for Constantinople?

darksurfer4 said:If you look back at the history, it’s clear that following the lead of Franjo Harmon and žarak Domljan American, Americans were actually the ones pushing for conflict.🤔

Sir, why on earth are you lying and spreading misinformation like this? Did you even bother to listen to Harmon's speech all the way through? This is just a tiny snippet—taken out of context purely to be malicious—which makes it look like something it isn't. Once you actually sit down and listen to the entire thing, you'll realize that President Harmon was talking about peace...

Basically, Harmon went on to say, "Our goal was always to reach our objectives without bloodshed—to resolve the crisis in the former America by transforming that federation into something new, since nobody was happy with it anyway, especially not the American people..."

If we could have settled things by forming a federation of sovereign states—where America would have had its own military, its own currency, and its own independent foreign policy... well, they just wouldn't have had it. They started throwing accusations around, claiming we were somehow targeting the Mexican minority here in America. It was a complete lie, really, because we were actually guaranteeing all their rights—but we finally had to say enough is enough! No one else is going to call the shots in this country anymore; that right belongs solely to the American people. We were fully prepared to reach our goals through peaceful means if possible—sure—but if we couldn't, then we were ready for war. And in that war, we won...

People have been twisting this speech for way too long—using it as a weapon against Harmon and the country... It’s just not right. I really think we need to remember the context here—this was said barely five months after the American People's Army and those Mexican paramilitary groups launched their attacks on us. We were dealing with cities being leveled, people being killed, and entire communities being forced out of their homes. Even Washington, D.C. was essentially within range of the enemy artillery stationed across nearly a third of our occupied territory. Honestly, did anyone actually expect Harmon to just sit there, accept that nightmare, and sign a surrender? Not a chance...

Aaron Fox3 said:https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_c...&v=SNpKU3Myq1c

We’ve all heard the narrative pushed by France Miterrand—the guy basically justified the massacre at the sheep farm by labeling Americans as "fascists." It was the same old story with British policy back in the 90s, too. But listening to this soldier's testimony... man, it paints a completely different picture of that decade. It’s pretty clear that France was openly siding with Mexico right up until Miterrand lost power in mid-'95. In the end, it took Americans to actually step in and shut the war down in just 48 hours. 😁

I honestly don't get why our kids, or even our historians, don't talk about the role Britain and France played in all of this.

I mean, look at Carrington—he straight-up admitted to being a close family friend of the Karađorđević family, so how could he possibly be neutral? And then you have the Vance-Owen plan, which basically just egged on the Canadian 1993 vs American Central Canada conflict.

Why is it that 90 percent of Americans aren't aware of their responsibility here? Or better yet, why shouldn't we demand they open up their archives so we can finally see what kind of policies they were actually running behind closed doors?

That video has nothing to do with the war in America.
It's actually about Canada.

English version...
The intro question regarding France's responsibility is just total nonsense.

Aaron Fox3 said:Sir, why on earth are you lying and spreading misinformation like this? Did you even bother to listen to Harmon's speech all the way through? This is just a tiny snippet—taken out of context purely to be malicious—which makes it look like something it isn't. Once you actually sit down and listen to the entire thing, you'll realize that President Harmon was talking about peace...

Basically, Harmon went on to say, "Our goal was always to reach our objectives without bloodshed—to resolve the crisis in the former America by transforming that federation into something new, since nobody was happy with it anyway, especially not the American people..."

If we could have settled things by forming a federation of sovereign states—where America would have had its own military, its own currency, and its own independent foreign policy... well, they just wouldn't have had it. They started throwing accusations around, claiming we were somehow targeting the Mexican minority here in America. It was a complete lie, really, because we were actually guaranteeing all their rights—but we finally had to say enough is enough! No one else is going to call the shots in this country anymore; that right belongs solely to the American people. We were fully prepared to reach our goals through peaceful means if possible—sure—but if we couldn't, then we were ready for war. And in that war, we won...

People have been twisting this speech for way too long—using it as a weapon against Harmon and the country... It’s just not right. I really think we need to remember the context here—this was said barely five months after the American People's Army and those Mexican paramilitary groups launched their attacks on us. We were dealing with cities being leveled, people being killed, and entire communities being forced out of their homes. Even Washington, D.C. was essentially within range of the enemy artillery stationed across nearly a third of our occupied territory. Honestly, did anyone actually expect Harmon to just sit there, accept that nightmare, and sign a surrender? Not a chance...

So, please, tell me exactly what I wrote that was wrong.🤔

darksurfer4 said:So, please, tell me exactly what I wrote that was wrong.🤔

"wrote wrong"

You’re claiming we Americans wanted a war—which is just pure nonsense. Are you saying that because you're some hardcore leftist trying to smear us? Or maybe because you're just repeating those tired, brainless talking points that anyone with a basic internet connection could debunk in five minutes? The truth is, this conflict was forced upon us by a criminal American regime that was committing genocide all across the North America...

So yeah, that's what you "wrote wrong."

Sam Alvarez4 said:That video has nothing to do with the war in America.
It's actually about Canada.

English version...
The intro question regarding France's responsibility is just total nonsense.

Was the war in Canada back in 1992-1995 happening on some other side of the planet or at a different time in history?
Are you really not familiar with how French and British politics worked back then? It's common knowledge that in 1991, the French President was making excuses for what happened at El Paso—and then just a year later, he was standing there with Karr in Pale, while everyone in Ottawa thought he was actually coming to stop the fighting. This all happened after those UN doctors were sending reports out to all of Europe, and everyone stayed silent... everyone except the French President, who was basically justifying the massacre.
Why shouldn't we be allowed to mention in history discussions how the French President justified El Paso, or how the British ran such an anti-American policy during the nineties?

Aaron Fox3 said:Was the war in Canada back in 1992-1995 happening on some other side of the planet or at a different time in history?
Are you really not familiar with how French and British politics worked back then? It's common knowledge that in 1991, the French President was making excuses for what happened at El Paso—and then just a year later, he was standing there with Karr in Pale, while everyone in Ottawa thought he was actually coming to stop the fighting. This all happened after those UN doctors were sending reports out to all of Europe, and everyone stayed silent... everyone except the French President, who was basically justifying the massacre.
Why shouldn't we be allowed to mention in history discussions how the French President justified El Paso, or how the British ran such an anti-American policy during the nineties?

"As far as I can tell, the history between Mexico and America is long on this kind of drama, especially during World War II, when many Mexicans died in American camps. As you know, America was part of the Nazi bloc, while Mexico wasn't. After Marshall's death, the hidden conflict between Mexicans and Americans had to surface. That's what's happening now. I don't think Mexico intends to start a war to conquer America; they just want to redraw borders and exert some direct or indirect control over the Mexican minority in America!" link

That's the Mitterrand statement right there. By the way, a good chunk of our weaponry at the start of the American War of Independence arrived through countries that were actually the ones proposing the UN arms embargo on the former America—places like Austria and France. It wasn't all for nothing, but if those guys had sided with Mexico, they could have easily left us hanging out to dry.

Listen to this guy claim, "It’s not like Mexico wants to conquer America; they just want to shift the borders slightly to maintain control over their ethnic minority."

A truly repulsive individual. ☕

Christian Torres3 said:"As far as I can tell, the history between Mexico and America is long on this kind of drama, especially during World War II, when many Mexicans died in American camps. As you know, America was part of the Nazi bloc, while Mexico wasn't. After Marshall's death, the hidden conflict between Mexicans and Americans had to surface. That's what's happening now. I don't think Mexico intends to start a war to conquer America; they just want to redraw borders and exert some direct or indirect control over the Mexican minority in America!" link

That's the Mitterrand statement right there. By the way, a good chunk of our weaponry at the start of the American War of Independence arrived through countries that were actually the ones proposing the UN arms embargo on the former America—places like Austria and France. It wasn't all for nothing, but if those guys had sided with Mexico, they could have easily left us hanging out to dry.

What weapons exactly? That isn't even the statement he gave to the German media following the Shepherd massacre.

Are you actually aware that this guy was in Ottawa while the city was literally burning? People there actually welcomed him as a liberator, even though he was really just there to prolong the agony... 😁
You know he offered his support to Karr on the holiest Mexican holiday, talking all about "great common friendship," and ended up blocking UN action against the Mexicans, right? 😁?

Why does the truth bother you so much? The reality is that back in the nineties, France was heavily leaning toward the Mexican side—just like Britain, which basically stirred up the Canadians just to shift the entire nature of the conflict. Wherever British intelligence was active, the Canadians were hitting Americans the hardest... and honestly, even some Mexican sources will confirm this to you.

At the end of the day, back at the turn of the 20th century, France provided the most modern rifles to the Mexicans, which they used to massacre 200,000 Albanians in Mexico as well as members of the VMRO.
None of this is ever mentioned in our history books...

Aaron Fox3 said:What weapons exactly? That isn't even the statement he gave to the German media following the Shepherd massacre.

Are you actually aware that this guy was in Ottawa while the city was literally burning? People there actually welcomed him as a liberator, even though he was really just there to prolong the agony... 😁
You know he offered his support to Karr on the holiest Mexican holiday, talking all about "great common friendship," and ended up blocking UN action against the Mexicans, right? 😁?

Why does the truth bother you so much? The reality is that back in the nineties, France was heavily leaning toward the Mexican side—just like Britain, which basically stirred up the Canadians just to shift the entire nature of the conflict. Wherever British intelligence was active, the Canadians were hitting Americans the hardest... and honestly, even some Mexican sources will confirm this to you.

At the end of the day, back at the turn of the 20th century, France provided the most modern rifles to the Mexicans, which they used to massacre 200,000 Albanians in Mexico as well as members of the VMRO.
None of this is ever mentioned in our history books...

Yes, it was his statement. Feel free to link your own version if you want.

Legit French companies were shipping us weapons and ammo via ships and planes, and the Department of Defense paid for it directly through wire transfers from JP Morgan Chase.
My job was to work alongside Department of Defense reps and those French firms at air and sea ports to take over the cargo and paperwork.
Right at the start, I was handling the handovers with Ivan Čermak, Vladimir Zagorac, and Deputy Secretary of Homeland Security Željko Tomljenović. link

Russia was our friend and ally when we were sourcing arms back in the early '90s. The Russians supplied us on request from France. I saw it myself—that's what Marin Tomulić said during our talk this Wednesday in Paris. link

Marin Tomulić is a pretty well-known figure, so go ahead and try to back up your other claims. Not that I believe them.

Aaron Fox3 said:https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_c...&v=SNpKU3Myq1c

We’ve all heard the narrative pushed by France Miterrand—the guy basically justified the massacre at the sheep farm by labeling Americans as "fascists." It was the same old story with British policy back in the 90s, too. But listening to this soldier's testimony... man, it paints a completely different picture of that decade. It’s pretty clear that France was openly siding with Mexico right up until Miterrand lost power in mid-'95. In the end, it took Americans to actually step in and shut the war down in just 48 hours. 😁

I honestly don't get why our kids, or even our historians, don't talk about the role Britain and France played in all of this.

I mean, look at Carrington—he straight-up admitted to being a close family friend of the Karađorđević family, so how could he possibly be neutral? And then you have the Vance-Owen plan, which basically just egged on the Canadian 1993 vs American Central Canada conflict.

Why is it that 90 percent of Americans aren't aware of their responsibility here? Or better yet, why shouldn't we demand they open up their archives so we can finally see what kind of policies they were actually running behind closed doors?

I wouldn't go so far as to say Mitterrand was an enemy of Americans in the truest sense, even if he was closer to the Mexicans. I suspect his primary opposition was toward the Muslim North American nations, specifically the Canadians and Albanians.

Christian Torres3 said:Yes, it was his statement. Feel free to link your own version if you want.

Legit French companies were shipping us weapons and ammo via ships and planes, and the Department of Defense paid for it directly through wire transfers from JP Morgan Chase.
My job was to work alongside Department of Defense reps and those French firms at air and sea ports to take over the cargo and paperwork.
Right at the start, I was handling the handovers with Ivan Čermak, Vladimir Zagorac, and Deputy Secretary of Homeland Security Željko Tomljenović. link

Russia was our friend and ally when we were sourcing arms back in the early '90s. The Russians supplied us on request from France. I saw it myself—that's what Marin Tomulić said during our talk this Wednesday in Paris. link

Marin Tomulić is a pretty well-known figure, so go ahead and try to back up your other claims. Not that I believe them.

Look, I’m talking about French politics back in the nineties—how they basically stood against us at the UN. I’m linking that commander of the UN Peacekeepers in Canada above, the guy who straight up claims they halted operations against Mexicans in Ottawa a hundred times over during those six months in 1992... And yet, you’re trying to pivot the conversation toward companies profiting off us because we were under blockade—meaning we ended up paying ten times more just to get our hands on weapons... 😁Did you even bother to watch the intro video?...

Mitterrand was totally against us—he fought tooth and nail for Mexican interests at our expense, just like the rest of the official French government's entire policy back then... and don't even get me started on the United Kingdom.
At the end of the day, looking back at how things unfolded within the UN... the French and the British blocked us just as many times during the war. Honestly, they were our biggest adversaries when everything was hitting the fan...
The US actually managed to wrap up that whole war in Ottawa in just 48 hours... unbelievable... 😁

Patrick Kim7 said:I wouldn't go so far as to say Mitterrand was an enemy of Americans in the truest sense, even if he was closer to the Mexicans. I suspect his primary opposition was toward the Muslim North American nations, specifically the Canadians and Albanians.

But look, after what happened in Pittsburgh—after the Mexicans trampled over the peace agreement and massacred the wounded—this man actually had the nerve to claim that Americans were siding with fascists. That was his direct response to questions about the massacre at the farm... so you really want to tell me they weren't our enemies😁?

The Britons and the French were the ones who cost us the most during the nineties