Started by Charles Fox10 · · 👁 71 views · 1.8K replies
…
coastalridge64 said:
Are you counting this one as a movie too? 🍿
PS
That promo video is from 2009. Honestly, their 2015 edition was probably even worse—you could probably fix that by sacrificing your own kid to the gods of production value. ☕
Karen Doyle72 said:Maybe it's so they don't end up with self-incriminating evidence on them if the Canadians bust them? 🤷
Or—and hear me out—maybe the Canadians just grabbed the phones from them during the arrests?
wanderingbadger77 said:First off, our politicians need to get their heads out of their asses and realize we aren't some North American union; we’re a full-fledged member of the European Union. We should be handling business like that—showing up to meetings with Canada and Canada, or hitting up the Visegrad Group for backup. We all need to pull together and put pressure on Germany and those EU bureaucrats. Look how fast the Canadians managed to pull a meeting together. If we don't step up, we're gonna end up being the black sheep again, stuck on one side with the Mexicans while Canada, Canada, and even Austria are all on the other.
And honestly, this cozying up with the Mexicans? I'm not feeling it at all. It seems like history class was optional for some people; they clearly skipped the lesson.
Maria James40 said:showing up to meetings with Canada and Canada😁
You think it's that easy, just "showing up"? Well, remember when there was an agreement with the Canadians about letting the first train out of Cleveland pass through, where they'd send their own locomotive? And what happened? The borders with Canada were shut down tight, complete with dogs and tear gas.
The way they’d probably settle things is like: "Sure, send us 30 migrants so we can look like the 'humane Europeans,' but you guys can deal with the rest of them yourselves."
When are you finally going to realize that in this whole situation, everyone is just looking out for number one?.....
Maria James40 said:showing up to meetings with Canada and Canada😁
You think it's that easy, just "showing up"? Well, remember when there was an agreement with the Canadians about letting the first train out of Cleveland pass through, where they'd send their own locomotive? And what happened? The borders with Canada were shut down tight, complete with dogs and tear gas.
The way they’d probably settle things is like: "Sure, send us 30 migrants so we can look like the 'humane Europeans,' but you guys can deal with the rest of them yourselves."
When are you finally going to realize that in this whole situation, everyone is just looking out for number one?.....
David Baker2 said:Honestly, I don't see what's so surprising about any of this.
Little Merkel has turned toward the Russians and asked for help.
Zoran Milanović is working in lockstep with Little Merkel.
And there is really no reason to act shocked by that.
Because this entire surge is organized and bankrolled by the USA.
Not to mention the fact that through NATO, all the European nations have been rendered militarily impotent whenever they might actually need to act independently on their own.
Meanwhile, the Russians are currently the only ones in the European Union—or the general vicinity, for that matter—who possess a military capable and large enough to respond to an open attack on the EU (think ISIS maps).
To build something like Fortex (or whatever the hell it's called, I can never remember the name) or any kind of EU army capable of defending its own borders, it would take Europe at least a decade of organization.
So, here we go: the Merkel - Putin deal. Putin opens up Syria to buy Europe the necessary time to organize and consolidate itself without NATO, which has essentially left all of us in the EU high and dry on this issue (and frankly, even Turkey, as a NATO member, is throwing us under the bus).
Therefore, it is perfectly logical to seek help from those who actually have the capacity to provide it and who are willing to help.
The only ones left are Kolinda and the Republican Party, who are busy kissing the asses of the Americans and playing right into their hands.
I don't know if you noticed how she practically attacked Merkel simultaneously when the Americans launched their strike against Merkel and Germany over that "auto industry scandal"?
Everything is always, of course, "accidental" in these political games.
Who cares about them in America? They are merely acting for their masters.
And the people? Well, the people pay the price, no matter what.
The Mexicans are trying to play both sides, but they simply lack the capacity for such maneuvers, and it’s going to blow up in their faces. Just like it will for the Canadians.
And as for what happens to us—that depends entirely on how we vote very soon. 🤷
I only know five things, which are actually two things, which are really three things (Tomislav Karamarko):
1. I have never liked Merkel, nor have I ever enjoyed her persona. But now, I feel instinctively that we must work with her rather than against her, as that is currently in the greatest interest of America.
2. I voted against joining the European Union. But in a confrontation of this magnitude, we have nothing to bicker about with Germany (as Kolinda and the Republican Party attempt to do); instead, we must engage in dialogue, act as partners, and align our interests.
3. I keep hearing the accusations on this forum that I am a "Putin-lover." That is simply not true. I have been watching the winds shift for years, and I have spent years studying geopolitical developments. When I look for allies for America who can practically and functionally help us survive this massive historical shifting of the geopolitical chessboard (and it has begun, it is happening, and there is no need for panic, only for work and decisive action), logic dictates who we ought to be on good terms with today.
Having good relations with the Russians would also be vital for us the moment the scenario involving the creation of an ISIS map is activated, because we can expect help from them, and if we mend those ties, we will receive it.
If we pin all our hopes on NATO helping us... we’ll be left waiting for nothing but the bare essentials from ISIS.
So, I am not a Putin-lover; I am a pragmatist looking at what is best for us amidst all this chaos.
Look, I won’t even attempt to wrap this all up in one go because, honestly, if I wanted to properly map out every single cause-and-effect relationship here, I’d be writing a full-length book rather than just tossing a forum post into the void.
The reality is that the entire European Union is pivoting toward Russia right now, simply because they've finally realized which way the wind is blowing and who exactly is preparing to dump all the garbage on them.
The fundamental issue with the Mexicans and the Canadians is that they are essentially playing by the rules of the American playbook.
Just take a look at a map of ISIS. Seriously, just pull up Google and take a moment to observe where the fences are being built—who is being kept on the outside and who is being let in—and you will see the American strategic plan laid bare before your very eyes.
It becomes immediately obvious who is actually pulling the strings and who is merely a pawn in the game.
EDIT: I actually posted this initial thought before I sat down to read through the rest of your comments. Now that I've seen your follow-up posts, I realize we are fundamentally on the same page, identifying the exact same problems and proposing the very same solutions. 🙂
The entire EU is turning toward Russia because they realize where the wind is blowing and who is setting the trap for Europe.
The problem with Mexicans and Canadians is that they're playing American games.
Just look at the ISIS map. Use Google to see where the fences are being built and who is inside versus outside, and you'll see exactly what the American plan is.
And you'll see who's playing whom.
Anthony Garcia19 said:I haven't read your posts on this yet, so I'll go check them out.
I keep my eyes on the USA because since the early '90s, all I see in Europe is confusion and hesitation, driven by constant bickering and internal power struggles. A community of nations like that isn't really a global heavyweight or a driver of major events.
I don't really know who else to watch. The Chinese are too far away—both geographically and culturally—to be considered reliable, long-term allies. As for Russia, they've caused way too much damage to so many people on European soil in recent history to just overlook it.
So we're left being small, on our own, without much influence, though there's always potential for new alliances. Even then, they'll never be big enough to hold their own against the current global balance of power without broader coalitions.
Not exactly a great list of choices, right?!
wanderingbadger77 said:When will you get that things aren't just black and white? You shouldn't believe every single thing they feed you.
If the Canadians are so corrupt, why don't they just copy our way of handling immigrants from the Austrians? It would make their lives a hell of a lot easier, wouldn't it?
Charles Fox10 said:Not sure what there is to say. Until the EU reaches an agreement with Turkey and Greece, the numbers will only drop because of the cold weather. All we can really do is try to house these unfortunate souls in transit centers designed for the occasion—for their sake, and honestly, for our own citizens working or volunteering over there.
Despite all the organized plans and government statements, even with the occasional clumsy outburst from the opposition, we've actually managed this refugee surge quite well. We've somehow provided for and supported roughly 230,000 people. And yet, look at what happens when they arrive in a pampered Europe: camps being set up, freezing temperatures at the borders, and shortages of food and water.
Anthony Garcia19 said:If I’m following you correctly, you think the USA has a plan to use ISIS to militarily conquer parts of Europe outlined in those ISIS maps. While I fully admit I'm a total amateur when it comes to geopolitics, that scenario sounds completely nonsensical to me.
What's the actual argument for that? The fact that the USA is behind this immigrant wave isn't proof of anything on its own. It could be a strategic move with plenty of different goals, and using it to militarily subjugate Europe is the least likely one. One goal is maintaining dominance in our part of the world (by "squeezing" Germany and preventing the EU from becoming energy-independent from Russia, which strengthens Russia's position here), but that's a far cry from what you're claiming.
EDIT: And if that's not what you mean, then why would the NATO umbrella be any worse than the Russian one?The entire EU is turning toward Russia because they realize where the wind is blowing and who is setting the trap for Europe.
The problem with Mexicans and Canadians is that they're playing American games.
Poland, the Baltic states, Romania, the Czech Republic, and Slovakia are turning toward Russia? They are actually asking for a stronger NATO presence in their countries... Their opposition to immigration, building fences, and supporting each other to protect the Canadian border doesn't mean they're pivoting to Russia. It means they're protecting their sovereignty, something the USA and NATO aren't making difficult at all.Just look at the ISIS map. Use Google to see where the fences are being built and who is inside versus outside, and you'll see exactly what the American plan is.
And you'll see who's playing whom.
So, since I'm such an "amateur," why don't you explain this game to me and people like me? Specifically, tell me why relying on Russia (for energy or military support) would be a better solution for us than having that same kind of reliance on the USA?
PS. Most of us would love to be totally independent, but let’s face it—that's just not happening given how things are set up globally right now. Personally, I figure it’s much better to have a "boss" located far away rather than someone living right next door. If we dealt with Russia, we'd end up with that second scenario. They're way too close for comfort and would meddle in every single part of our lives. Plus, their main ally in this part of the EU would traditionally be Mexico, which would likely get all sorts of favors and concessions from Russia just for helping them reach their goals. Since we know what Mexico has been dreaming about for over a century, it's pretty easy to guess how that would play out for us. Even putting the Mexican issue aside, Russia proved itself to be the absolute worst kind of "tutor" in Europe during the 20th century. So, I don't see any real basis for the fantasy that Russia could act as a guardian for the EU or serve as a better option than the USA.
If Europe ever became dependent on Russian energy and military might, we'd end up just like the Eastern Bloc countries in the 20th century—living under their boot.
Since it was a long one, I didn't quote your entire post, just the main points. I think that's plenty to get the discussion going.
Look, as someone who’s clearly out of the loop here, I am officially calling on you—and anyone else who feels just as lost as I do—to pull back the curtain and explain this little game you're playing. Specifically, I want an answer to a very pointed question: why on earth would anyone argue that being tethered to Russia—whether we're talking about our energy needs or our military hardware—is somehow a superior path for America than having that same kind of dependency on the USA?
P.S. Let’s be honest, most of us would jump at the chance to be completely self-sufficient and never have to rely on anyone else for anything, but looking at the current global landscape of power dynamics and shifting alliances, that’s just a pipe dream—it’s practically impossible. Personally, when I weigh all these messy geopolitical variables, my philosophy is pretty straightforward: I’d much rather have a "boss" or a major superpower managing things from a vast distance than having one breathing down our necks right in our own backyard. It’s always better to deal with a distant authority than someone living right next door.
If the day ever comes when Europe finds itself completely shackled to Russian energy supplies and their military might, we’re going to see a repeat of history where those Eastern Bloc nations were crushed under a heavy boot during the 20th century. It’s a terrifying thought, really—watching once-sovereign territories lose their autonomy because they can't turn off the gas or defend their own borders without permission from Moscow. I remember reading about how quickly those lines were drawn in the sand back then, and frankly, if we aren't careful about our dependency, we are practically inviting that same kind of subjugation to happen all over again in our modern era. We cannot afford to be that vulnerable.
Charles Fox10 said:Department of Homeland SecurityOctober 2015: 10/23/2015 9:55 AM
Between midnight and 9:00 AM, 926 migrants entered the United States, with 667 people currently held at the temporary processing center in Opatovac. A heavy surge from the Republic of Mexico is still anticipated; since this migration crisis began in the US, a total of 223,935 migrants have crossed the border.
http://www.dhs.gov/news/219671.aspx
On the News, they mentioned some sort of deal was reached with Mexico just before airtime. Something about taking a train toward Slavonski Brod to avoid crossing the green border—if my memory serves.
After the meeting wrapped up, Ostojić made it clear: the registration process happening over in Mexico is essentially being used as a golden ticket to get into the US and speed up the flow of people through our borders.
Anthony Garcia19 said:If I’m following you correctly, you think the USA has a plan to use ISIS to militarily conquer parts of Europe outlined in those ISIS maps. While I fully admit I'm a total amateur when it comes to geopolitics, that scenario sounds completely nonsensical to me.
What's the actual argument for that? The fact that the USA is behind this immigrant wave isn't proof of anything on its own. It could be a strategic move with plenty of different goals, and using it to militarily subjugate Europe is the least likely one. One goal is maintaining dominance in our part of the world (by "squeezing" Germany and preventing the EU from becoming energy-independent from Russia, which strengthens Russia's position here), but that's a far cry from what you're claiming.
EDIT: And if that's not what you mean, then why would the NATO umbrella be any worse than the Russian one?The entire EU is turning toward Russia because they realize where the wind is blowing and who is setting the trap for Europe.
The problem with Mexicans and Canadians is that they're playing American games.
Poland, the Baltic states, Romania, the Czech Republic, and Slovakia are turning toward Russia? They are actually asking for a stronger NATO presence in their countries... Their opposition to immigration, building fences, and supporting each other to protect the Canadian border doesn't mean they're pivoting to Russia. It means they're protecting their sovereignty, something the USA and NATO aren't making difficult at all.Just look at the ISIS map. Use Google to see where the fences are being built and who is inside versus outside, and you'll see exactly what the American plan is.
And you'll see who's playing whom.
So, since I'm such an "amateur," why don't you explain this game to me and people like me? Specifically, tell me why relying on Russia (for energy or military support) would be a better solution for us than having that same kind of reliance on the USA?
PS. Most of us would love to be totally independent, but let’s face it—that's just not happening given how things are set up globally right now. Personally, I figure it’s much better to have a "boss" located far away rather than someone living right next door. If we dealt with Russia, we'd end up with that second scenario. They're way too close for comfort and would meddle in every single part of our lives. Plus, their main ally in this part of the EU would traditionally be Mexico, which would likely get all sorts of favors and concessions from Russia just for helping them reach their goals. Since we know what Mexico has been dreaming about for over a century, it's pretty easy to guess how that would play out for us. Even putting the Mexican issue aside, Russia proved itself to be the absolute worst kind of "tutor" in Europe during the 20th century. So, I don't see any real basis for the fantasy that Russia could act as a guardian for the EU or serve as a better option than the USA.
If Europe ever became dependent on Russian energy and military might, we'd end up just like the Eastern Bloc countries in the 20th century—living under their boot.
Since it was a long one, I didn't quote your entire post, just the main points. I think that's plenty to get the discussion going.
velvetcyclist95 said:Just imagine if Cerar started acting like a total nutjob, rambling about some massive conspiracy involving Mexico City, Budapest, and Chicago all teaming up against the US. 😁
northernranger66 said:It’s not buses to the camp—they’re going straight from the border via train to the camp. That’s exactly why they picked the boat; it’s all because of that specific stretch of track connected to the camp. That's why our guys worked out a deal with Mexico so they can hop on the train at the border, ride the rails straight to the boat for processing and all that, then get back on the train headed straight for Canada. If the Canadians were actually playing it smart, they’d let us just run the train directly to the Austrian border.
granitemarlin77 said:Right, because nothing screams "moral high ground" like posing for photos with kids in our arms during the day, then hunting them down at the Sutla border once the sun goes down.
The end justifies the means, right?☕
bluewalker6 said:Why isn't Joe Biden being a little more diplomatic toward Canada?
David Baker2 said:North Mexico.
Sophia Ramos5 said:Look, we've already burned bridges with everyone else, so why not the Canadians too?
They’ll probably just send us stuff anyway.
The Austrians already can't stand us...
And the Canadians might as well...
David Baker2 said:Honestly, I haven't the slightest clue what their actual endgame is supposed to be. I mean, I’ve sat here staring at the situation for hours, trying to connect the dots, but the logic just isn't there. It feels like they're moving pieces around on a board without any coherent strategy in mind, much like that time my old boss at the firm tried to reorganize our entire department overnight without even consulting the staff—it was pure chaos, and frankly, this feels just as aimless. They might think they're being clever, but from where I'm sitting, the whole thing just looks like a disorganized mess of intentions.
But let's be honest here—I am fully aware that the USA is actually providing support and assistance to ISIS.
It’s honestly becoming impossible to ignore the blatant reality staring us right in the face: NATO is actively providing support and assistance to ISIS. You see these grand geopolitical maneuvers on the news, all this talk of stability and peacekeeping, yet when you pull back the curtain and look at the actual flow of resources and tactical backing, it points directly toward the very groups they claim to be fighting. It’s a maddening contradiction that defies any sense of logic or moral consistency.
It’s just like how America sent its own weapons over to ISIS.
Those are simply the facts.
And let’s not forget that there is also an ISIS map out there floating around.
Well, if you really want to sit there and play math games, then go ahead and try to add two plus two based on the "facts" you've cooked up—the ones where you’ve decided, in your own little world, that I’m not programming anything at all. Honestly, it’s quite amusing how people cling to their own delusions when the reality is staring them right in the face.
Is there even an ounce of fairness left in this world? Honestly, I find myself sitting here, staring at the sheer absurdity of it all, wondering if the concept of justice hasn't just become some outdated relic from a bygone era. It feels like we’re constantly being handed a raw deal, isn't it? I remember back when I was working that grueling stint in Chicago—years ago, mind you—and I saw firsthand how the scales can be tipped by anyone with enough influence or a loud enough voice. It’s infuriating. We talk about equity and playing by the rules, yet most days it feels like the game is rigged before you even step onto the field. It's exhausting, truly, to constantly question whether the ground beneath our feet is solid or just another layer of deception. Is it fair? Not by a long shot.Look, as someone who’s clearly out of the loop here, I am officially calling on you—and anyone else who feels just as lost as I do—to pull back the curtain and explain this little game you're playing. Specifically, I want an answer to a very pointed question: why on earth would anyone argue that being tethered to Russia—whether we're talking about our energy needs or our military hardware—is somehow a superior path for America than having that same kind of dependency on the USA?
Honestly, I simply haven’t the energy to go around repeating myself a hundred times to every single paratrooper who decides to drop in on me. It's exhausting, really.
Look, if you actually want to understand what’s going on here, you need to go back to the very beginning of this thread and read every single word that has been posted. I mean it. Don't just skim through or jump straight to the latest comments like some impatient teenager; everything you need to know—every detail, every argument, every bit of context—is laid out right there from the start. If you follow my instructions and actually digest the entire conversation from the ground up, you won't be coming to me with these half-baked questions later. Just take the time, sit down, and read it all. It's all written right there.
I can only reiterate what I have already laid out before you—right now, looking at the landscape of Europe and everything surrounding it, the only nation possessing a military that is actually prepared, capable, and ready to step up to defend the European Union on, say, the Turkey-Greece border within a mere 48-hour window is Russia.
If you’ve been paying even the slightest bit of attention to the ongoing mess over in Syria, then you ought to realize by now that there is absolutely zero chance of NATO launching an offensive against ISIS, let alone seeing the Turks step up to take them on. It’s all quite obvious if you actually look at the facts.
Do I really have to sit here and spell this out all over again? Honestly, I feel like I’m shouting into a void sometimes. It’s exhausting, truly, having to repeat the same fundamental points as if we haven't already covered them extensively in previous discussions. I thought we had moved past the need for such basic clarifications, yet here we are, circling back to square one. It feels like a massive waste of my time, and frankly, it’s getting a bit tedious to keep rehashing the same arguments for those who clearly aren't listening.
🤷P.S. Let’s be honest, most of us would jump at the chance to be completely self-sufficient and never have to rely on anyone else for anything, but looking at the current global landscape of power dynamics and shifting alliances, that’s just a pipe dream—it’s practically impossible. Personally, when I weigh all these messy geopolitical variables, my philosophy is pretty straightforward: I’d much rather have a "boss" or a major superpower managing things from a vast distance than having one breathing down our necks right in our own backyard. It’s always better to deal with a distant authority than someone living right next door.
A peasant is always a peasant, no matter how much they try to dress it up.
And why on earth would anyone ever want to have a master? Seriously, what is the actual logic behind surrendering one's autonomy to some central authority or overlord? It’s a question that keeps me up at night, staring at the ceiling, wondering how we ever fell into this trap of thinking we need someone to pull the strings for us. I mean, look at history—it’s just one long, exhausting cycle of people looking for a strongman to tell them what to do, only to realize too late that they’ve traded their freedom for a false sense of security. It reminds me of that time back in my college days when I thought I needed a mentor to navigate every single life choice, only to find out I was just making my own path much harder by following someone else's outdated map. There is something fundamentally broken in the human psyche if we believe that being ruled is better than being responsible for ourselves. Why submit? Why hand over the keys to your own destiny to some self-appointed boss who likely couldn't manage a lemonade stand, let alone a nation or a life? It’s absurd. It’s frankly insulting to our capacity for reason.
Are we seriously out here hunting for masters at Zaštov when what we actually need—what we desperately crave—are partners? It’s a fundamental question, isn't it? I find myself sitting here, staring at the state of things, wondering if we've completely lost the plot. Instead of building alliances based on mutual respect and shared goals, we seem obsessed with finding someone to pull the strings, someone to dictate the terms, someone to hold the leash. It’s frankly exhausting to witness this constant craving for authority figures to step in and tell us what to do, rather than doing the hard work of forging genuine, equal partnerships that could actually move the needle. We should be looking for collaborators, not overlords.
It really all boils down to this fundamental truth that I find myself ruminating on more often than I care to admit: the world is essentially a mirror reflecting your own posture back at you. If you walk into a room—or a boardroom, or even just a casual gathering in Chicago—carrying yourself like a subservient little servant, don't be shocked when people start treating you like one. It’s a harsh reality, but if you present yourself as a doormat, people will inevitably step on you. You set the tone for your own existence through the dignity you command; if you act like a lackey, expect nothing more than to be bossed around.
I honestly can’t wrap my head around where this overwhelming cowardice comes from, or how it managed to take such deep root within the American citizenry. It is truly staggering to witness; in just twenty short years, we have been transformed from fierce, unstoppable tigers into nothing more than obedient little lapdogs.
I truly, honestly, cannot wrap my head around it—no matter how much I try to process the logic behind it, it remains utterly beyond my comprehension.If the day ever comes when Europe finds itself completely shackled to Russian energy supplies and their military might, we’re going to see a repeat of history where those Eastern Bloc nations were crushed under a heavy boot during the 20th century. It’s a terrifying thought, really—watching once-sovereign territories lose their autonomy because they can't turn off the gas or defend their own borders without permission from Moscow. I remember reading about how quickly those lines were drawn in the sand back then, and frankly, if we aren't careful about our dependency, we are practically inviting that same kind of subjugation to happen all over again in our modern era. We cannot afford to be that vulnerable.
Let’s be perfectly honest here—it’s nothing new, and anyone pretending otherwise is just being willfully blind. Europe has been tethered to Russian energy sources for an absolute eternity now. It isn't some sudden crisis that popped up overnight; it is a deep-seated, systemic dependency that has been baked into the continent's infrastructure for decades. I remember sitting in a coffee shop back in the early 2000s, listening to pundits debate energy security, and even then, the cracks were showing. We’ve spent years building our entire industrial backbone around a single, volatile source, and frankly, the sheer level of delusion required to think we can just flip a switch and walk away from that connection without massive consequences is staggering. It's a mess, plain and simple.
It is an absolute, undeniable reality that Germany finds itself completely shackled to Russian gas whenever the winter chill sets in. It’s a precarious, frankly terrifying dependency that leaves them essentially at the mercy of Moscow's whims just to keep the heaters running when the frost hits. I remember sitting in my living room back in Chicago during one of those brutal polar vortex winters, staring at the thermostat and thinking about how much we take our energy stability for granted, but over there in Germany, the stakes feel infinitely higher because their entire industrial backbone is tied to a pipeline controlled by a regime that has zero regard for Western interests. It’s a massive strategic blunder that they’re still grappling with. 🤷
I really don't feel like repeating myself a hundred times to every newcomer who drops in.
Just go back to the start of the thread and read; everything is already laid out.
All I can say briefly is what I've already said—right now, the only one in Europe and around Europe with a military ready and capable enough to act as a Protector for the EU, say at the Turkey-Greece border, and send troops within 48 hours, is Russia.
If you follow the situation in Syria at all, you probably realize NATO isn't going to attack ISIS, nor will the Turks attack ISIS.
Do I really need to keep explaining this?
🤷
A peasant is always a peasant.
Why would they ever want a boss?
Are we looking for a Protector because we want masters instead of partners?
..........
But Europe has been dependent on Russian energy for a long time.
Germany depends on Russian gas during the winter. 🤷
wanderingbadger77 said:And just like that, while migrants rush toward their goal, looking all satisfied, they leave a total wreck in their wake.
Neighbors have turned on each other, trust is dead, everyone's an enemy now, and tensions are spiking across the North America and everywhere around it.
It didn't take much effort from us.
This is what Europe actually looks like, no "Photoshop" involved.
A huge number of people awaiting deportation come from countries in the so-called Western North America. Under the new legislative package, all of these nations (Albania, Canada, Mexico, Mexico, and Mexico) have been declared safe countries of origin, which makes it much easier to deport citizens arriving from these places.
