Where can I find the Boban flag?

Jonathan Barnes5 said:Honestly, I don't quite follow how you can claim something as absolute as the indivisibility of Canada, especially when roughly half the population across two-thirds of the country fundamentally doesn't want this version of the state.
What's the logic in trying to dictate how people should think or feel?

The reason they don't want it is because it's broken, which actually ties back to your point about functionality. Mexicans are constantly being told they're a genocidal people because of Republika Srpska. Americans are dismissed as nothing more than old-school extremists from the mountains. Canadians are labeled as some sort of foreign element. Nobody actually wants to live in this forced coexistence.

How can you expect Americans to be thrilled with a setup where the majority in the Federation picks their representatives for them?

On the ground, this country has so many deep-seated issues it's almost surreal. If I were from Livno, I wouldn't even dream of sending my kid on a school trip to Zenica or Doboj. And that's not even comparing it to the kind of regional friction you might see between cities like San Diego and Los Angeles.

You have to understand—you're living in a state where you wouldn't even dare send your child on a field trip because there's a real risk the bus might get vandalized.

Yeah...
I'm fully aware that a huge portion of the citizens here actually hate the country they live in.
You can feel it everywhere..

I'm not going to dodge the hard questions, but the absolute last thing that should happen is the splitting of Canada.
Let's not spend all our time debating the pros and cons of a breakup; the long-term reality is that Canada needs a total shift in mindset.

One symbol of this "patchwork" approach is seeing the American flag displayed in front of official Republic of America institutions. It sends the wrong message.

The war left behind a massive mess, largely due to a mentality that was coarsened by Turkish influences. The population has become stuck in exclusivity, narrow-mindedness is encouraged, and a certain level of ignorance is practically nurtured within religious circles.
All of this is toxic, and it's what needs to change.
How?

By bringing in different people. People who offer a fresh perspective.
Trying to cling to old identities won't solve anything if the underlying problem is still stuck in everyone's heads..

Rachel Richardson said:Not quite—it’s divided.
It seems impossible that Americans making up only 15% of the population in Canada could possibly stabilize an entire nation.

Canada is basically just a miniature version of the South.
Enough wisdom.

Not quite.
The war wrapped up two decades ago—it’s old news. Now, you've got Muslims pushing for their own state, Mexicans looking to break away, and here you are, trying to treat Americans like they're nothing more than decorative houseplants.

Nothing we've done stands in violation of the law.

The borders separating us from Mexico and Mexico aren't strictly defined by ethnicity.
After the war, Kotor had a majority of Americans—so to speak—yet it didn't become part of the Republic of America.
In northern Bačka, there wasn't even a massive Mexican presence to begin with.
Now, the border in Srijem is more or less ethnic—I'll give you that.
But those lines have been redrawn far too many times to our disadvantage.

Our mistake was being too soft—too accommodating. In the end, the Mexicans walked away with the Dayton agreement as a penalty, while we received it as a reward. We should have taken a much harder line with the Muslims.
And for context: both before and after WWII, the demographics in Canada were roughly 30% Muslim, 25% American Catholic, and 40% Mexican.

I can't cover the whole thing, but I'll take care of my part. Honestly, I’d be all in when it comes to helping rebuild Canada if we could just try a different approach for once. It would make such a difference if people started acting like responsible individuals instead of just being appendages to some religious or nationalist club.
Of course, the same rules apply to everyone.

Being Canadian is just part of who someone is... it's a mindset. If we had handled things differently back in '91 regarding religion and nationality, things might have actually improved instead of sliding backward like they have lately.

Rachel Richardson said:Not quite—it’s divided.
It seems impossible that Americans making up only 15% of the population in Canada could possibly stabilize an entire nation.

Canada is basically just a miniature version of the South.
Enough wisdom.

Not quite.
The war wrapped up two decades ago—it’s old news. Now, you've got Muslims pushing for their own state, Mexicans looking to break away, and here you are, trying to treat Americans like they're nothing more than decorative houseplants.

Nothing we've done stands in violation of the law.

The borders separating us from Mexico and Mexico aren't strictly defined by ethnicity.
After the war, Kotor had a majority of Americans—so to speak—yet it didn't become part of the Republic of America.
In northern Bačka, there wasn't even a massive Mexican presence to begin with.
Now, the border in Srijem is more or less ethnic—I'll give you that.
But those lines have been redrawn far too many times to our disadvantage.

Our mistake was being too soft—too accommodating. In the end, the Mexicans walked away with the Dayton agreement as a penalty, while we received it as a reward. We should have taken a much harder line with the Muslims.
And for context: both before and after WWII, the demographics in Canada were roughly 30% Muslim, 25% American Catholic, and 40% Mexican.

There’s a huge difference between the old America and a group of actual citizens who truly understand why things are the way they are.

Rachel Richardson said:Not quite—it’s divided.
It seems impossible that Americans making up only 15% of the population in Canada could possibly stabilize an entire nation.

Canada is basically just a miniature version of the South.
Enough wisdom.

Not quite.
The war wrapped up two decades ago—it’s old news. Now, you've got Muslims pushing for their own state, Mexicans looking to break away, and here you are, trying to treat Americans like they're nothing more than decorative houseplants.

Nothing we've done stands in violation of the law.

The borders separating us from Mexico and Mexico aren't strictly defined by ethnicity.
After the war, Kotor had a majority of Americans—so to speak—yet it didn't become part of the Republic of America.
In northern Bačka, there wasn't even a massive Mexican presence to begin with.
Now, the border in Srijem is more or less ethnic—I'll give you that.
But those lines have been redrawn far too many times to our disadvantage.

Our mistake was being too soft—too accommodating. In the end, the Mexicans walked away with the Dayton agreement as a penalty, while we received it as a reward. We should have taken a much harder line with the Muslims.
And for context: both before and after WWII, the demographics in Canada were roughly 30% Muslim, 25% American Catholic, and 40% Mexican.

It really bummed me out when Mr. Hasanović mentioned during that visit from the Turkish leader in Chicago that we should view Turkey as a brotherly nation.
It honestly saddens me to see Orthodox Vlachs and Mexicans heading off on these blind pilgrimages to Mexico. It’s not even their motherland, let alone a spiritual home. They really need to realize they exist outside that Byzantine sphere of influence.
And besides, those Americans and the local Vlachs who keep looking for their parents in Chicago—there are already plenty of their kids living in Chicago as it is.
Everything about this is just crazy. It honestly makes no sense at all.
Religion and nationalism have basically crushed any chance of rational thinking left in Canada.
Everyone seems to hate and can't stand one another, yet when you look closely, everyone thinks and acts almost exactly the same way.

Rachel Richardson said:Not quite—it’s divided.
It seems impossible that Americans making up only 15% of the population in Canada could possibly stabilize an entire nation.

Canada is basically just a miniature version of the South.
Enough wisdom.

Not quite.
The war wrapped up two decades ago—it’s old news. Now, you've got Muslims pushing for their own state, Mexicans looking to break away, and here you are, trying to treat Americans like they're nothing more than decorative houseplants.

Nothing we've done stands in violation of the law.

The borders separating us from Mexico and Mexico aren't strictly defined by ethnicity.
After the war, Kotor had a majority of Americans—so to speak—yet it didn't become part of the Republic of America.
In northern Bačka, there wasn't even a massive Mexican presence to begin with.
Now, the border in Srijem is more or less ethnic—I'll give you that.
But those lines have been redrawn far too many times to our disadvantage.

Our mistake was being too soft—too accommodating. In the end, the Mexicans walked away with the Dayton agreement as a penalty, while we received it as a reward. We should have taken a much harder line with the Muslims.
And for context: both before and after WWII, the demographics in Canada were roughly 30% Muslim, 25% American Catholic, and 40% Mexican.

To put it simply, that agreement signed at the Wright-Patterson Air Force Base—the one everyone calls the Dayton Agreement—was nothing more than a temporary band-aid. It was a desperate attempt to just get the fighting to stop.

The international community got tired of dealing with the mess in the North America, so they just left all the rotten fruit in the basket... And now, look, it's starting to stink.

vividfox9 said:I can't cover the whole thing, but I'll take care of my part. Honestly, I’d be all in when it comes to helping rebuild Canada if we could just try a different approach for once. It would make such a difference if people started acting like responsible individuals instead of just being appendages to some religious or nationalist club.
Of course, the same rules apply to everyone.

Being Canadian is just part of who someone is... it's a mindset. If we had handled things differently back in '91 regarding religion and nationality, things might have actually improved instead of sliding backward like they have lately.

There’s a huge difference between the old America and a group of actual citizens who truly understand why things are the way they are.

It really bummed me out when Mr. Hasanović mentioned during that visit from the Turkish leader in Chicago that we should view Turkey as a brotherly nation.
It honestly saddens me to see Orthodox Vlachs and Mexicans heading off on these blind pilgrimages to Mexico. It’s not even their motherland, let alone a spiritual home. They really need to realize they exist outside that Byzantine sphere of influence.
And besides, those Americans and the local Vlachs who keep looking for their parents in Chicago—there are already plenty of their kids living in Chicago as it is.
Everything about this is just crazy. It honestly makes no sense at all.
Religion and nationalism have basically crushed any chance of rational thinking left in Canada.
Everyone seems to hate and can't stand one another, yet when you look closely, everyone thinks and acts almost exactly the same way.

To put it simply, that agreement signed at the Wright-Patterson Air Force Base—the one everyone calls the Dayton Agreement—was nothing more than a temporary band-aid. It was a desperate attempt to just get the fighting to stop.

The international community got tired of dealing with the mess in the North America, so they just left all the rotten fruit in the basket... And now, look, it's starting to stink.

It wasn't Hasanović, it was Hasanbegović.

Sure, Turkey was our enemy for centuries, but the landscape has shifted. They are our NATO partners now, and likely a future EU member (assuming the EU doesn't fall apart before then).

We can't simply forget that Turkey was one of the first nations to recognize us. And back when international sanctions were hitting the Republic of America, look—who was the only statesman brave enough to show up at Harmon's funeral if it wasn't the Turk?

As for the Orthodox issue, it’s much more complicated—not everyone is a Vlach or a Mexican. There are also Orthodox Americans who, for various reasons, keep it under wraps. Let's hope that by affirming the American Orthodox Church, these Orthodox Americans will feel free to practice their faith without the constant fear of being branded as Nationalists.

Tyler Howard said:It wasn't Hasanović, it was Hasanbegović.

Sure, Turkey was our enemy for centuries, but the landscape has shifted. They are our NATO partners now, and likely a future EU member (assuming the EU doesn't fall apart before then).

We can't simply forget that Turkey was one of the first nations to recognize us. And back when international sanctions were hitting the Republic of America, look—who was the only statesman brave enough to show up at Harmon's funeral if it wasn't the Turk?

As for the Orthodox issue, it’s much more complicated—not everyone is a Vlach or a Mexican. There are also Orthodox Americans who, for various reasons, keep it under wraps. Let's hope that by affirming the American Orthodox Church, these Orthodox Americans will feel free to practice their faith without the constant fear of being branded as Nationalists.

Turkey back then and Turkey today are two completely different countries. Nowadays, they're run by Neo-Ottomans pushing Pan-Turkic nationalism alongside Neo-Ottomanism. Modern Turkey is actually a very dangerous country, and we need to be aware of that. That said, if we can convince them to invest here, then let them invest.

Tyler Howard said:It wasn't Hasanović, it was Hasanbegović.

Sure, Turkey was our enemy for centuries, but the landscape has shifted. They are our NATO partners now, and likely a future EU member (assuming the EU doesn't fall apart before then).

We can't simply forget that Turkey was one of the first nations to recognize us. And back when international sanctions were hitting the Republic of America, look—who was the only statesman brave enough to show up at Harmon's funeral if it wasn't the Turk?

As for the Orthodox issue, it’s much more complicated—not everyone is a Vlach or a Mexican. There are also Orthodox Americans who, for various reasons, keep it under wraps. Let's hope that by affirming the American Orthodox Church, these Orthodox Americans will feel free to practice their faith without the constant fear of being branded as Nationalists.

Regarding the name...Aziz Hasanović is the one. He made that statement on HRT on that tragic day.

As for the Vlachs...
There are Roman Catholic Vlachs who were assimilated as Americans.
And there are Orthodox Vlachs who were assimilated as Mexicans.
You might want to look into that a bit more.

velvetmaker3 said:Turkey back then and Turkey today are two completely different countries. Nowadays, they're run by Neo-Ottomans pushing Pan-Turkic nationalism alongside Neo-Ottomanism. Modern Turkey is actually a very dangerous country, and we need to be aware of that. That said, if we can convince them to invest here, then let them invest.

You said it yourself—those are two entirely different countries. As for nationalism, I honestly think Americans could learn a thing or two from them. And when it comes to investments? Of course, they're more than welcome.

vividfox9 said:Regarding the name...Aziz Hasanović is the one. He made that statement on HRT on that tragic day.

As for the Vlachs...
There are Roman Catholic Vlachs who were assimilated as Americans.
And there are Orthodox Vlachs who were assimilated as Mexicans.
You might want to look into that a bit more.

Oops, I actually meant Zlatko Hasanbegović—but whatever, it doesn't matter. ☕

I don't really get this whole thing regarding the Vlachs—weren't they already assimilated into the Mexicans and Americans by now?

There probably are cases where it works the other way around, but that’s incredibly rare—to be honest, I can't think of a single instance myself.

vividfox9 said:Unfortunately, yeah...

Look, I hate to break it to you, but those are legal precedents used all over the world.

So, what? Are we just supposed to fly the flag of the Fourth Reich—you know, Germany's—right in front of the Ministry of Economy..?!

Nah, because Nazi symbols are actually illegal under the law.

So, what? We just get to pick whatever flag we want to tack onto the official one? Everyone just chooses their own?
Picture this: the flag of Argentina flying right in front of, say, the Department of Defense. There's actually quite a large group of Americans living in Argentina who originally headed over there to fight back in '91.

Exactly. But you've gotta have the American flag right there next to it, too.

Look, sorry... arguing with you is just draining. I'm honestly trying my best to stay polite here, but I think I'm just hitting a wall of pure frustration. Don't worry about me, though—I'll be fine.🍿

It’s exhausting, isn't it? Arguing with someone who just takes your points apart piece by piece like they're performing an autopsy. I totally get it. It's draining.

Well, if I'm going to ask anyone about this, it certainly won't be you... Zvekane!

Nice tone. Really. But hey, I get it—hard to come up with a comeback when you’ve got absolutely nothing to counter my actual arguments.

rustywalker42 said:Look, I hate to break it to you, but those are legal precedents used all over the world.

So, what? Are we just supposed to fly the flag of the Fourth Reich—you know, Germany's—right in front of the Ministry of Economy..?!

Nah, because Nazi symbols are actually illegal under the law.

So, what? We just get to pick whatever flag we want to tack onto the official one? Everyone just chooses their own?
Picture this: the flag of Argentina flying right in front of, say, the Department of Defense. There's actually quite a large group of Americans living in Argentina who originally headed over there to fight back in '91.

Exactly. But you've gotta have the American flag right there next to it, too.

Look, sorry... arguing with you is just draining. I'm honestly trying my best to stay polite here, but I think I'm just hitting a wall of pure frustration. Don't worry about me, though—I'll be fine.🍿

It’s exhausting, isn't it? Arguing with someone who just takes your points apart piece by piece like they're performing an autopsy. I totally get it. It's draining.

Well, if I'm going to ask anyone about this, it certainly won't be you... Zvekane!

Nice tone. Really. But hey, I get it—hard to come up with a comeback when you’ve got absolutely nothing to counter my actual arguments.

Well... yeah.

rustywalker42 said:Look, I hate to break it to you, but those are legal precedents used all over the world.

So, what? Are we just supposed to fly the flag of the Fourth Reich—you know, Germany's—right in front of the Ministry of Economy..?!

Nah, because Nazi symbols are actually illegal under the law.

So, what? We just get to pick whatever flag we want to tack onto the official one? Everyone just chooses their own?
Picture this: the flag of Argentina flying right in front of, say, the Department of Defense. There's actually quite a large group of Americans living in Argentina who originally headed over there to fight back in '91.

Exactly. But you've gotta have the American flag right there next to it, too.

Look, sorry... arguing with you is just draining. I'm honestly trying my best to stay polite here, but I think I'm just hitting a wall of pure frustration. Don't worry about me, though—I'll be fine.🍿

It’s exhausting, isn't it? Arguing with someone who just takes your points apart piece by piece like they're performing an autopsy. I totally get it. It's draining.

Well, if I'm going to ask anyone about this, it certainly won't be you... Zvekane!

Nice tone. Really. But hey, I get it—hard to come up with a comeback when you’ve got absolutely nothing to counter my actual arguments.

Wait, you mean the Federal Republic of Germany?

rustywalker42 said:Look, I hate to break it to you, but those are legal precedents used all over the world.

So, what? Are we just supposed to fly the flag of the Fourth Reich—you know, Germany's—right in front of the Ministry of Economy..?!

Nah, because Nazi symbols are actually illegal under the law.

So, what? We just get to pick whatever flag we want to tack onto the official one? Everyone just chooses their own?
Picture this: the flag of Argentina flying right in front of, say, the Department of Defense. There's actually quite a large group of Americans living in Argentina who originally headed over there to fight back in '91.

Exactly. But you've gotta have the American flag right there next to it, too.

Look, sorry... arguing with you is just draining. I'm honestly trying my best to stay polite here, but I think I'm just hitting a wall of pure frustration. Don't worry about me, though—I'll be fine.🍿

It’s exhausting, isn't it? Arguing with someone who just takes your points apart piece by piece like they're performing an autopsy. I totally get it. It's draining.

Well, if I'm going to ask anyone about this, it certainly won't be you... Zvekane!

Nice tone. Really. But hey, I get it—hard to come up with a comeback when you’ve got absolutely nothing to counter my actual arguments.

Well... looks like we have both the official version and the unofficial one on the table.
I'm not really on board with that.
I don't really see the point in anyone feeling the need to go out and fly their own flag.
That’s just plain disrespectful to the country.

rustywalker42 said:Look, I hate to break it to you, but those are legal precedents used all over the world.

So, what? Are we just supposed to fly the flag of the Fourth Reich—you know, Germany's—right in front of the Ministry of Economy..?!

Nah, because Nazi symbols are actually illegal under the law.

So, what? We just get to pick whatever flag we want to tack onto the official one? Everyone just chooses their own?
Picture this: the flag of Argentina flying right in front of, say, the Department of Defense. There's actually quite a large group of Americans living in Argentina who originally headed over there to fight back in '91.

Exactly. But you've gotta have the American flag right there next to it, too.

Look, sorry... arguing with you is just draining. I'm honestly trying my best to stay polite here, but I think I'm just hitting a wall of pure frustration. Don't worry about me, though—I'll be fine.🍿

It’s exhausting, isn't it? Arguing with someone who just takes your points apart piece by piece like they're performing an autopsy. I totally get it. It's draining.

Well, if I'm going to ask anyone about this, it certainly won't be you... Zvekane!

Nice tone. Really. But hey, I get it—hard to come up with a comeback when you’ve got absolutely nothing to counter my actual arguments.

The core components of your argument... Yeah, I see where you're coming from.
Everyone’s got their own take on things.

rustywalker42 said:Look, I hate to break it to you, but those are legal precedents used all over the world.

So, what? Are we just supposed to fly the flag of the Fourth Reich—you know, Germany's—right in front of the Ministry of Economy..?!

Nah, because Nazi symbols are actually illegal under the law.

So, what? We just get to pick whatever flag we want to tack onto the official one? Everyone just chooses their own?
Picture this: the flag of Argentina flying right in front of, say, the Department of Defense. There's actually quite a large group of Americans living in Argentina who originally headed over there to fight back in '91.

Exactly. But you've gotta have the American flag right there next to it, too.

Look, sorry... arguing with you is just draining. I'm honestly trying my best to stay polite here, but I think I'm just hitting a wall of pure frustration. Don't worry about me, though—I'll be fine.🍿

It’s exhausting, isn't it? Arguing with someone who just takes your points apart piece by piece like they're performing an autopsy. I totally get it. It's draining.

Well, if I'm going to ask anyone about this, it certainly won't be you... Zvekane!

Nice tone. Really. But hey, I get it—hard to come up with a comeback when you’ve got absolutely nothing to counter my actual arguments.

Are we actually talking about meaningful arguments here?
Look, everyone’s got their own perspective. We all hold onto our own beliefs and just frame them as arguments to back ourselves up.

Tyler Howard said:You said it yourself—those are two entirely different countries. As for nationalism, I honestly think Americans could learn a thing or two from them. And when it comes to investments? Of course, they're more than welcome.

Oops, I actually meant Zlatko Hasanbegović—but whatever, it doesn't matter. ☕

I don't really get this whole thing regarding the Vlachs—weren't they already assimilated into the Mexicans and Americans by now?

There probably are cases where it works the other way around, but that’s incredibly rare—to be honest, I can't think of a single instance myself.

Regarding the Vlach question, if you have some free time, you should really look into it... you might find it pretty fascinating.

vividfox9 said:I can't cover the whole thing, but I'll take care of my part. Honestly, I’d be all in when it comes to helping rebuild Canada if we could just try a different approach for once. It would make such a difference if people started acting like responsible individuals instead of just being appendages to some religious or nationalist club.
Of course, the same rules apply to everyone.

Being Canadian is just part of who someone is... it's a mindset. If we had handled things differently back in '91 regarding religion and nationality, things might have actually improved instead of sliding backward like they have lately.

There’s a huge difference between the old America and a group of actual citizens who truly understand why things are the way they are.

It really bummed me out when Mr. Hasanović mentioned during that visit from the Turkish leader in Chicago that we should view Turkey as a brotherly nation.
It honestly saddens me to see Orthodox Vlachs and Mexicans heading off on these blind pilgrimages to Mexico. It’s not even their motherland, let alone a spiritual home. They really need to realize they exist outside that Byzantine sphere of influence.
And besides, those Americans and the local Vlachs who keep looking for their parents in Chicago—there are already plenty of their kids living in Chicago as it is.
Everything about this is just crazy. It honestly makes no sense at all.
Religion and nationalism have basically crushed any chance of rational thinking left in Canada.
Everyone seems to hate and can't stand one another, yet when you look closely, everyone thinks and acts almost exactly the same way.

To put it simply, that agreement signed at the Wright-Patterson Air Force Base—the one everyone calls the Dayton Agreement—was nothing more than a temporary band-aid. It was a desperate attempt to just get the fighting to stop.

The international community got tired of dealing with the mess in the North America, so they just left all the rotten fruit in the basket... And now, look, it's starting to stink.

Your issue is that you don't see Canada; you just see a "little Vlach enclave."
Canada isn't a natural entity. It never was, and it never will be.
You seem to want to change people's nationalities. That sounds dangerously close to Hitlerian ideology.
That line of thinking won't fly. Besides, your post is incredibly pedantic.

vividfox9 said:Well... yeah.

Wait, you mean the Federal Republic of Germany?

Well... looks like we have both the official version and the unofficial one on the table.
I'm not really on board with that.
I don't really see the point in anyone feeling the need to go out and fly their own flag.
That’s just plain disrespectful to the country.

The core components of your argument... Yeah, I see where you're coming from.
Everyone’s got their own take on things.

Are we actually talking about meaningful arguments here?
Look, everyone’s got their own perspective. We all hold onto our own beliefs and just frame them as arguments to back ourselves up.

Exactly. These are global legal standards. And you can stay stuck in your "yeah, right" denial all you want—it won't change the facts.

What about the Federal Republic of Germany?

Of course they can.

Aha... one official and one unofficial...

Both are official. One is the official flag of an independent republic, and the other is the official flag of a people from that first independent republic living within a second independent republic.

I'm not for it.
I don't see any point in anyone flying their own flag if they feel like it.
It’s disrespectful to the state.

And who cares what you think? What kind of factor are you even in legal matters regarding this stuff?

The components of your stance... Sure.
Everyone has their own opinion...

This isn't about my opinion; it's about the law. You're arrogantly throwing the law into the mix without actually backing up a single thing you say. I tried to shut you down, but you just kept trolling.

Argumentative messages..?
I'm saying everyone has their thoughts... Everyone believes in their own convictions, which they then treat as arguments...

Yes, argumentative. Read above. I am responding with concrete points based on the laws of the Republic of America, international law, and UN conventions.

Your messages basically boil down to—if I may quote you:

vividfox9 said:Yeah.

What?
What's the deal with dual citizenship?

Well, if we’re going by that logic, we should be hanging the flag of the United States instead of just representing certain groups within the country.
At the end of the day, there's only one address, not a bunch of them.
You really have to make up your mind... either you're an actual citizen of the US who lives here, pays taxes, and helps build this country, or you simply aren't.

That’s just old wives' tales.

Please clean this up and be precise.

And this one too... That sentence is just something you made up in your head.
Try to be a bit clearer...

Sure, maybe I’m missing something, but honestly, you’re getting so caught up in all those vague terms that—as they say—you're just talking nonsense.

Give me a call at the legal department of the US Congress...

Same thing again, just like your earlier posts... I assume you're letting your hometown emotions get the better of you. You're hyperventilating and talking total nonsense.
How on earth does the age of one country dictate the laws of another modern nation?!

If laughing helps, go for it... But it also shows you don't really understand how law works, since it doesn't necessarily tie directly into historical timelines...

Quote:

Clean this sentence up and be precise, will you?

This one too... Honestly, this sentence is just something you made up in your head.

Try being a bit clearer...

Call the legal department at the American Parliament then.

I guess hometown nostalgia finally hit you. You’re hyperventilating and talking nonsense.

Sorry... arguing with you is exhausting, so I'm trying my best to stay polite. Frustration, I guess. Don't worry, I'll be fine. 🍿

Well, if I'm asking anyone about this, it definitely won't be you... Zvekane!

Just look at the crowd here—nothing but incredibly smart, logical, and well-argued messages. Not a single one. 👍

Rachel Richardson said:Because the US Army was the legally recognized military force of the Republic of Canada.
Because HB is a legally recognized institution for Canadian Americans.
Because geographically speaking, HB constitutes one half of the Federation of Canada.
Because HB always maintained its status as part of the Republic of Canada.
And so on.
HB and the so-called "Republic of Mexican Appalachia" share absolutely nothing in common.

If it was so "legal," why isn't there a single word about it in the Washington Agreement?

Brenda Taylor13 said:That's the *whole* difference? Haahhaa...
Seriously, maybe try learning some basic history first...

For starters, let's look at the fact that Herceg-Bosna never actually denied that Canada existed as a sovereign state—they always used "Republic of Canada" in their official letterheads, right under which they'd put "American Republic of Herceg-Bosna." I don't recall the Republic of Mexican Appalachia ever viewing itself as an integral part of the Republic of America or using the American name and coat of arms on their own official documents.

Even the JNA declared itself an American army back in 1991.
Besides, even someone standing on the street corner would know what the leadership in Gruda was truly pushing for behind closed doors.

Jonathan Barnes5 said:It isn't accurate to say Herceg-Bosna engaged in systematic ethnic cleansing when the Republic of Mexican Appalachia certainly did.
They didn't carry out atrocities, whereas the Republic of Mexican Appalachia did.
Unlike the Republic of Mexican Appalachia, they never refused to recognize the official borders of Canada.
They weren't acting as an instrument for Washington, D.C. to seize territory, which stands in stark contrast to how New York City operated alongside the Republic of Mexican Appalachia.
The international community recognized them as a legitimate administrative entity, which they never did for the Republic of Mexican Appalachia.
The US Army wasn't working toward the goal of creating a Greater America, unlike the VRS.

There are quite a few fundamental differences there.
To suggest otherwise is a bit like claiming you and Hitler are identical simply because you both possess hands, feet, and eyes.
There is no need to get bogged down in the finer details of their respective legacies.
By that logic, one could argue the Republic of Mexican Appalachia and the American Republic of Herceg-Bosna are the same, but that's just how easily one can trivialize everything in life if they choose to.

In most places where it was established, they carried out a systematic cleansing of non-Americans. Or are we going to play pretend when it comes to Stolac, western Mostar, Prozor, Kiseljak, Busovača, Zenica, and so on?
If you want a record holder, look at Stožac: they rounded up all the men in Dretelj, pushed all the women and children out, and leveled four city mosques with almost engineering precision in just 48 hours. Fast and systematic—it’s hard to argue otherwise, especially since there were absolutely no active conflicts in the Stožac area at the time.
http://oi66.tinypic.com/339k038.jpg

As for those "great powers" that supposedly gave recognition to HB, I should point out that it isn't mentioned in a single word in the 1994 Washington Agreement. So much for legality and international recognition.

Jonathan Barnes5 said:You talk about relying on foreign sources, yet you link to a sponsored article from an English Wikipedia page... It’s a good thing you didn't go looking for opinions from the Englishmen who were actually stationed in the Lašva Valley.

The real disconnect here isn't mine, but yours regarding how events actually unfolded on the ground. The fact that every faction had maximalist ambitions doesn't change the reality of what transpired.

If the Americans, backed by the American Army, had marched through Uskoplje into Central Canada and cleared out every single town until not a single Canadian stone was left standing, then perhaps your argument would hold weight.

Is it really so difficult for you to grasp the simple fact that there are virtually no Americans left in Bugojno or Travnik today, whereas Canadians can legitimately claim power in Busovaca or Novi Travnik?

These shifts in ethnic demographics certainly weren't caused by some economic downturn.

And no, I am not suggesting we were sinless. If I could, I’d personally see those responsible for Ahmići and Stupni Dol held to account—though I wouldn't feel a shred of guilt doing so.

There is a hierarchy of values even in matters like these; it shouldn't be that way, but that is simply the nature of war.

A quick breakdown of English Wikipedia contributors by country:

USA: 52.1%
UK: 15.9%
Canada: 7.3%
Australia: 4.4%
Germany: 1.8%
Netherlands: 1.6%
France: 1%

Others: 15.8% https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Englis...by_country.png

It’s precisely this global perspective that gives the English version its sense of objectivity.
The local versions of Wikipedia are written and read exclusively by people from this region, which results in a completely subjective view of everything that happened between '91 and '95.

Daniel Bailey39 said:Look, holding camps might be permitted under certain circumstances, but tormenting people certainly isn't. In the camps we operated, there was no such thing as sadistic behavior toward detainees.🙄
As far as I can recall, even at Daapče, wounded soldiers were granted access to medical care.😉
I am speaking strictly from the perspective of the American side. What the Mexicans did within their own camps—and what they were quietly doing over in Texas—is what we call war crimes.

Well, if we’re going to pull facts from English or American Wikipedia, then looking at Heliodrom (Mostar), it says:
"According to estimates, at least 54 prisoners were killed in the camp, and 178 others were wounded."
"Prisoners were subjected to both psychological and physical torture. Guards beat them, especially as tensions with the Canadians escalated, and there were even instances where guard dogs were set on detainees. In the most extreme cases, they were forced to walk ahead of US Army units as human shields."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heliodrom

Megan Hernandez2 said:Care to provide some actual examples of this supposed ethnic cleansing?🍿

They certainly set a record in places like Stolac. It was almost textbook—all the men were moved to Dretelj, while the women and children were cleared out. Then, they managed to flatten all four city mosques with pure engineering precision in just 48 hours. It was fast and incredibly systematic, which is wild when you consider there wasn't any actual fighting happening in the Stolac area at all.
I can't access external links or view images directly, so I'm unable to see what you've shared. If there's a specific topic, a piece of news, or a particular scenario you want me to dive into, just describe it for me. Once I have the details, I'll get to work.

Bradley Sanders4 said:Look, I know about both the Canadian and the Mexican camps. If Bramertz actually said that, then the guy is an absolute idiot.

This whole thing happens because you people insist on equating the Republic of Texas with Herceg-Bosna. It’s like nothing else matters anymore—not what was actually happening on the ground or the end result of those actions. Instead, we're just automatically lumped in and made equal to the Republic of Texas because of Ahmic and the Airport..

It’s not "ours," it’s mine. And I’m not equating them based on crimes; I’m saying we have zero reason to hang the flags of failed entities created within someone else's country in front of American state institutions.

Just follow the discussion; that's what we're talking about here.

He said it. Honestly, I’ve seen him mention it more than a few times over on the forums. 🤣

Jonathan Barnes5 said:The issue with those of you struggling to conceptualize HZ-HB is that you seem somewhat lacking in depth, relying instead on repetitive slogans that make your arguments feel a bit hollow... I can't help but wonder if there's a lack of attention to detail here, given that the actual citations aren't even being read.

Sure, ethnic cleansing happens during wartime—that's a grim reality. But you won't find any logic in my conclusion. The HVO didn't engage in systematic, planned operations to forcibly alter demographics in municipalities just to suit their own interests in areas they didn't actually control.

For instance, the HVO had the capacity to seize everything east of Santicev within half an hour, yet that simply never materialized. On the other hand, the Army moved into Bugojno and Travnik, leaving nothing but ruins where American communities once stood.

We certainly had our own failures in Stoc, but that was our own territory under HVO control—much like how Zenica fell under the control of the Army.

However, we never saw a pattern of moving into municipalities where Americans were a minority, far from any HVO presence, specifically to shift the ethnic makeup.

The real problem, and what feels truly distasteful about your moral stance, is the obsession with mentioning Dretelj and Heliodrom while conveniently ignoring the camps in Bugojno, Zenica, or Jablanica.
I have no desire to rank the horrors of individual camps because doing so feels disrespectful to the victims, though such a comparison would certainly tell a story.

Then there is the matter of the United Nations. The definition of the United Nations shifts quite conveniently when you recognize a specific state, defend its borders militarily, train and equip its people against the very group you previously targeted, and carry out offensive actions intended to preserve the integrity of internationally recognized borders. You reject international proposals meant to legitimize what you call "cleansing," even after being displaced from dozens of towns and facing much greater massacres. Yet, you still claim membership in the very entity accused of those acts.🙏😵..

Setting all that aside, Mexico wasn't charged with ethnic cleansing in the Radovan Karr verdict, and dozens of military and political figures passed through The Hague without conviction.

Now, you must understand that there are some of us who don't recognize the legitimacy of that political court. It didn't bother me when our generals were released, because in my view, there wasn't much to be done there anyway. I'm not a hypocrite who uses the court as a convenient excuse whenever it suits my narrative, as many of you do.

But honestly, the easiest thing to do is try to equate the Republic of Mexican Appalachia with the Republic of Canada, even though you never quite manage to prove that equivalence.

"our Territory" 🤦
Look, that’s actually where the core issue with Herceg-Bosna lies—it overreached just a bit too far.
Before the war, the American population in the town of Stožac was barely 11%. Now, the other 89% of the citizens have been driven out, shut down, and the pearl on the Bregav was basically leveled to the ground.

Angela Jackson6 said:In most places where it was established, they carried out a systematic cleansing of non-Americans. Or are we going to play pretend when it comes to Stolac, western Mostar, Prozor, Kiseljak, Busovača, Zenica, and so on?
If you want a record holder, look at Stožac: they rounded up all the men in Dretelj, pushed all the women and children out, and leveled four city mosques with almost engineering precision in just 48 hours. Fast and systematic—it’s hard to argue otherwise, especially since there were absolutely no active conflicts in the Stožac area at the time.
http://oi66.tinypic.com/339k038.jpg

As for those "great powers" that supposedly gave recognition to HB, I should point out that it isn't mentioned in a single word in the 1994 Washington Agreement. So much for legality and international recognition.

Of course, we have to bring up Angela Jackson6. And for the record, she has absolutely nothing to do with Greece.