Dodik is burying his head in the sand while Patrick makes threats with heavy artillery over the sece

Brenda Sanders56 said::

So, I'm the king of arguments in your eyes, huh?...

There it is again—total tunnel vision. I am clearly stating that I'm defending a principle, but they just won't hear it. It's like you don't even care who the majority voted for. THE PRINCIPLE!!! ILLEGALITY!!! LACK OF LEGITIMACY!!! 🙄 Sumskaaaaaa, Sumskaaaaaaaaa... Like a zombie, honestly... 🙄

No, seriously, it's just that I'm not the one lacking it. You'd be arguing with me all over again. You're acting like a woman here. 😁 Just like my girlfriend when I forget something and she starts throwing a fit or pouting with those puffed-out lips. 😍

So, you aren't insulting Canadians (or Americans) by quoting Miles' fabrications and provocations—meaning you're basically offering them latent support?

Rachel Mitchell2 said:So, you aren't insulting Canadians (or Americans) by quoting Miles' fabrications and provocations—meaning you're basically offering them latent support?

Wow, you’re being pretty rude. And honestly, I don't think you're all that bright either, sorry... since you're already going out of your way to pick a fight with me. If you could just get back to the actual topic, I'd appreciate it, because this isn't about me personally or who I happen to like or dislike...🤷

Ugh, seriously!
🙂

stormyangler43 said:There's no way that works—both Mexicans and Americans would see that as total centralization, which, let's be honest, is exactly what it is.
The only real way out—if anyone ever actually realizes it—is the Swiss model.
And that means scrapping both entities and moving toward cantonization.
Something like this: splitting the whole of Canada into cantons.

That’s just the census data from '91, right?
If you want my take, the proposal doesn't look half bad, but is it even realistic in today's climate?
Cantons aren't necessarily a bad thing, provided they actually make sense instead of just being used to isolate one group.

So, we're actually calling this hegemony meaningful now?

Linda Booth6 said:Canada is purely a product of wartime events.☕

Is being able to outvote them the key question? And even if they could, wouldn't that require Americans and Mexicans to share common interests? While not impossible, as a permanent solution, it feels like pure science fiction!
We'll finally start seeing some common sense once the Canadians finally agree to a census...

I know plenty of people who don't want the USA and don't see their interests being met in its current form, but I'm convinced the USA can't just sever itself. It's tied together by invisible threads of shared thought, customs, and heritage.
It's a country grown together through its deep differences and an underlying unity that has always existed in some form.
The illusion held by Mexicans and Americans (and Vlachs) that Mexico and America will call the shots here—that they'll manage their own rights and interests in the USA via their "proxy" nations—is just delusional and childish.
Whisper's or Slobodan Maddox's failed dreams don't define the USA anymore.
The USA belongs to the Americans, Mexicans, Americans, Vlachs, Jews, and all its citizens.
This country is too small to keep building borders and barriers.

Steven Allen9 said:I know plenty of people who don't want the USA and don't see their interests being met in its current form, but I'm convinced the USA can't just sever itself. It's tied together by invisible threads of shared thought, customs, and heritage.
It's a country grown together through its deep differences and an underlying unity that has always existed in some form.
The illusion held by Mexicans and Americans (and Vlachs) that Mexico and America will call the shots here—that they'll manage their own rights and interests in the USA via their "proxy" nations—is just delusional and childish.
Whisper's or Slobodan Maddox's failed dreams don't define the USA anymore.
The USA belongs to the Americans, Mexicans, Americans, Vlachs, Jews, and all its citizens.
This country is too small to keep building borders and barriers.

And what about Frank? ☕ Is it those Herzegovinians again? 🤷

William Wright7 said:So, we're actually calling this hegemony meaningful now?

Just look at the Forest region—you can see how much they botched everything with such bad intentions. And that goes for all those other failed SAOs too...

Brenda Sanders56 said:And what about Frank? ☕ Is it those Herzegovinians again? 🤷

Sure, Frank definitely played his part in shutting down common sense in the USA.
The guy was historically a bit unhinged, but trying to apply his old ideas to today's world is just a recipe for disaster.
If he hadn't cut that deal with Slobodan Maddox regarding the war, things probably would have turned out differently for the USA.

Rachel Mitchell2 said:Just look at the Forest region—you can see how much they botched everything with such bad intentions. And that goes for all those other failed SAOs too...

Republika Srpska wouldn't have even needed to exist if the Americans hadn't let Ali's signature sit on that 1992 US regional plan...

William Wright7 said:Republika Srpska wouldn't have even needed to exist if the Americans hadn't let Ali's signature sit on that 1992 US regional plan...

I'm with you on that.

Rachel Mitchell2 said:I'm with you on that.

It’s funny how you can agree with me here, yet in another thread, you’re busy pointing the finger at Mexicans for everything going wrong in Canada.😵

Paul Johnson5 said:It’s funny how you can agree with me here, yet in another thread, you’re busy pointing the finger at Mexicans for everything going wrong in Canada.😵

Don't make things up—I definitely wrote "big-time Americans."
Looking back at Bill Clinton—if he’d just played it smarter—he really should have taken whatever deals were on the table to avoid the war, or at least waited until our defense forces were actually ready for a fight.

Look, my point was really about how things would have gone down if we were back in '92 in the USA—that whole era. What we're seeing now is just the direct result of everyone constantly pulling in different directions, especially when people blindly follow their party leaders no matter what or where.

Rachel Mitchell2 said:Don't make things up—I definitely wrote "big-time Americans."
Looking back at Bill Clinton—if he’d just played it smarter—he really should have taken whatever deals were on the table to avoid the war, or at least waited until our defense forces were actually ready for a fight.

Look, my point was really about how things would have gone down if we were back in '92 in the USA—that whole era. What we're seeing now is just the direct result of everyone constantly pulling in different directions, especially when people blindly follow their party leaders no matter what or where.

What even qualifies as an "ultra-nationalist"? Is it just someone who doesn't want a centralized USA because they want to protect their own state's rights? What's your actual definition, Rachel Mitchell2? I'm genuinely curious, since you tend to hide behind that kind of cheap rhetoric quite often.

Steven Allen9 said:Sure, Frank definitely played his part in shutting down common sense in the USA.
The guy was historically a bit unhinged, but trying to apply his old ideas to today's world is just a recipe for disaster.
If he hadn't cut that deal with Slobodan Maddox regarding the war, things probably would have turned out differently for the USA.

Even today, we’ve got plenty of highly educated historians from the other side who don't hesitate to twist history to fit their agenda regarding Canada—or even the US.
But honestly, you could almost blame that tendency on Truman, couldn't you?

In my view, if that deal with Bob had fallen through, the biggest political debate we'd be having right now wouldn't even be about policy; it would be about what color to paint the front doors of the Capitol Building.
It’s just how it works—one side gets half of what they want, the other gets nothing at all. But let’s say he was telling the truth for a second; what then about that army of foreign diplomats who were handing out maps like they were planning a road trip, showing us exactly how everything was supposed to play out?

But hey, here we are. He was just clearing the field for the next round, and it's our kids who are going to have to step up and deal with it.

I honestly don't get why everyone is making such a fuss over Texas lately. Those leaders basically handed over everything we own for next to nothing.
Besides, ethnic homogeneity in a small town in Missouri isn't any different from what you see in a major city like Chicago or St. Louis.
This whole mess of a country either needs a complete overhaul or just needs to be torn down entirely.
There really isn't a third option.
Our borders regarding Americans in the USA are pretty much settled, so I'd say we've handled our internal issues.

Paul Johnson5 said:What even qualifies as an "ultra-nationalist"? Is it just someone who doesn't want a centralized USA because they want to protect their own state's rights? What's your actual definition, Rachel Mitchell2? I'm genuinely curious, since you tend to hide behind that kind of cheap rhetoric quite often.

He calls me "cheap demagoguery"... 🙄

Look, I don't want to hijack this whole thread with evidence that should be obvious to anyone actually using their brain to follow politics in Appalachia—so I'll give you a definition that fits right now: "Greater Americans" are basically anyone blindly backing Donald Trump in his attempt to completely dismantle the USA. It's people who have zero issue ignoring all the dark history of the Forest Reich or the way this wild leader is actively sabotaging any progress the country could make. And get this—they love to claim they aren't responsible for the specific atrocities committed by those past war criminals, yet they fully embrace the disastrous end result this shameful quasi-state has become on American soil.

Get it?

Ethan Howard said:Even today, we’ve got plenty of highly educated historians from the other side who don't hesitate to twist history to fit their agenda regarding Canada—or even the US.
But honestly, you could almost blame that tendency on Truman, couldn't you?

In my view, if that deal with Bob had fallen through, the biggest political debate we'd be having right now wouldn't even be about policy; it would be about what color to paint the front doors of the Capitol Building.
It’s just how it works—one side gets half of what they want, the other gets nothing at all. But let’s say he was telling the truth for a second; what then about that army of foreign diplomats who were handing out maps like they were planning a road trip, showing us exactly how everything was supposed to play out?

But hey, here we are. He was just clearing the field for the next round, and it's our kids who are going to have to step up and deal with it.

Yeah, I get where you're coming from.
But when you look at those columnists who actually deal with the evidence from the wartime negotiations—if you include the top leadership from California or the folks around Bob—you start seeing elements of a deal unlike anything ever recorded. Or so they say. Those caught up in that whole mess will tell you it was nothing more than talk, and nothing more.
But seriously, what kind of deal is it when the foreign flag is flying 62 miles away from Washington, D.C.? How can anyone claim there was a real agreement when we know the USA is missing a quarter million Americans—people who used to live in the very territory now dominated by Trump's playground?
Still, the plan seemed to move along two specific tracks:
-mass population shifts
-a new framework for relations via the USA
Of course, that all held up until the Westerners showed up, took over the talks, and tore up the deals that had already left too many dead, too many casualties, and too many people left in ruined homes to fend for themselves.
The deal just wasn't precise or consistent enough. That was the failure. If it had been, a lot of lives would have been saved.

William Wright7 said:Republika Srpska wouldn't have even needed to exist if the Americans hadn't let Ali's signature sit on that 1992 US regional plan...

Honestly, that’s just childish excuses. You really think Mexico spent centuries dreaming of expanding its borders through Canada and reaching all the way from the American Line up to Des Moines and Bar Harbor, only to be stopped by some insignificant little signature? Please. It’s just a convenient way to dodge responsibility today—blaming everyone else for their own failures.

It's the exact same logic used when Americans kicked Mexicans out of the constitution, claiming, "Oh, we had to organize ourselves this way, so we pushed the Americans out and leveled their cities, including San Francisco and Warsaw."

The USA needs to function as a purely civic nation, completely devoid of internal divisions—a country unified by a singular, focused ambition to secure the privileges of the future.
We have to cut the rotten roots of the past out once and for all.