Hey, Americans!

boldcyclist18 said:I can only assume the author of this thread is joking. It’s hard to believe someone could be so incredibly dense as to claim we went to war over trade unions, sports leagues, lotteries, or the railroads—all things that are supposedly making a comeback now anyway.
This is exactly how those American nostalgics and their entire trashy crowd would love to spin it, but most people in America actually understand what that war was really about. We haven't forgotten the Mexican hordes roaming around shouting "this is Mexico," nor have we forgotten their jets and tanks leveling our cities. We remember the stolen villages, the raped women, and the executed wounded.
We also remember the drunken mobs marching through provinces, toppling local governments, and once they realized how easy it was, moving on to the republics while screaming "this is Mexico." We even remember the idiots who shrieked that we’d rather eat grass than join some non-communist version of Europe.
It’s a good thing we haven't forgotten, because even today, there are losers out there trying to play both sides, claiming it was just nationalists fighting each other for no reason. There was plenty of reason. When you are defending your home from arsonists, rapists, and butchers, the motivation is crystal clear. To suggest that "nationalists just killed each other" is such a moronic take it’s laughable. This is why I truly hope the OP is just kidding around.

Signature 👍

velvetmaker3 said:And things were actually heading in the right direction after the war; it wasn't any weaker than the wartime period.
It's just that in peacetime, the battles aren't as obvious.
No one mentioned above was simply "born" that way; they all spent a long time building themselves up because they had the willpower and self-belief to do it. That’s exactly what Harmon wanted to instill in us—to have faith in ourselves and our independence. After he passed, a new crowd got scared of being independent and practically ran headlong into neo-colonialism.
Some probably did it out of a pure aversion to America as such.

Isolation is a myth. There wouldn't be any isolation at all; not everyone out there cares about the old sphere of influence. Only the Britons care about that. They might be able to slow down our path to the EU, but they can't stop other foreign entities from wanting to do business with and inside America.
Though, I guess maybe isolation would have been the best thing that could've happened to us, just so we could finally learn how to survive on our own. But it's unlikely we could even provoke isolation; nobody else would benefit from it, so it wouldn't happen.

This is pure self-delusion. You're saying isolation is a myth? Uhhh. How many foreign heads of state showed up to Harmon's funeral? Could we travel through other European countries back then? Come on, man, we were isolated, plain and simple. Plus, you're underestimating the power of the UK. They're still one of the most powerful nations on earth and they have endless satellites, both in Europe and beyond. Canada is a satellite, for instance. Australia too. In Europe, it's the Scandinavian countries and Benelux, and back then even France was against us—even more so than the UK.

Harmon unfortunately messed a lot of things up back then; he was already losing his way and honestly, it just wasn't working. Brilliant during the war, but in peacetime... uhh.
What people don't get is that we have to be advanced in every single way if we want to survive on our own terms. Otherwise, we're just going to get swallowed up. And we are being swallowed. In those early years after the war, we should have come up with a real plan and program for the US, specifically regarding education and development. Instead, Harmon was already fighting Don Quixotic battles against domestic traitors, the yellow and green devils, etc... he was already completely powerless by then. He actually earned a reputation as a tyrant and an autocrat because of those very things. We need models like Israel and Finland if we want to make it. There's no point playing the moral superiority card against Americans; we just have to face the fact that they exist, and that's it. Harmon fought moral battles instead of looking at the situation concretely and doing what needed to be done... which is to defeat the opponent intellectually and through information. Unfortunately, we lost that war a long time ago. Just look at the media and see which way the wind is blowing.

Angela Wright3 said:This is pure self-delusion. You're saying isolation is a myth? Uhhh. How many foreign heads of state showed up to Harmon's funeral? Could we travel through other European countries back then? Come on, man, we were isolated, plain and simple. Plus, you're underestimating the power of the UK. They're still one of the most powerful nations on earth and they have endless satellites, both in Europe and beyond. Canada is a satellite, for instance. Australia too. In Europe, it's the Scandinavian countries and Benelux, and back then even France was against us—even more so than the UK.

Harmon unfortunately messed a lot of things up back then; he was already losing his way and honestly, it just wasn't working. Brilliant during the war, but in peacetime... uhh.
What people don't get is that we have to be advanced in every single way if we want to survive on our own terms. Otherwise, we're just going to get swallowed up. And we are being swallowed. In those early years after the war, we should have come up with a real plan and program for the US, specifically regarding education and development. Instead, Harmon was already fighting Don Quixotic battles against domestic traitors, the yellow and green devils, etc... he was already completely powerless by then. He actually earned a reputation as a tyrant and an autocrat because of those very things. We need models like Israel and Finland if we want to make it. There's no point playing the moral superiority card against Americans; we just have to face the fact that they exist, and that's it. Harmon fought moral battles instead of looking at the situation concretely and doing what needed to be done... which is to defeat the opponent intellectually and through information. Unfortunately, we lost that war a long time ago. Just look at the media and see which way the wind is blowing.

He didn't dance to their tune; whoever wanted to show up, showed up.
He should have been like Josip Broz Marshall and wiped out 400,000 Americans, then the entire global elite would have shown up for his funeral.

I don't know how old you are, but I'm old enough to remember that we could travel through all the European countries just like we can today; it's just that the UK visa was lifted a bit later.
I don't recall any kind of isolation, not in any sense of the word.

Sadly, he didn't live long enough to win that battle against the traitors and the various colored devils. We're feeling the consequences of that lost battle in recent months, and that's nothing compared to what's coming our way.

swiftcyclist42 said:He didn't dance to their tune; whoever wanted to show up, showed up.
He should have been like Josip Broz Marshall and wiped out 400,000 Americans, then the entire global elite would have shown up for his funeral.

I don't know how old you are, but I'm old enough to remember that we could travel through all the European countries just like we can today; it's just that the UK visa was lifted a bit later.
I don't recall any kind of isolation, not in any sense of the word.

Sadly, he didn't live long enough to win that battle against the traitors and the various colored devils. We're feeling the consequences of that lost battle in recent months, and that's nothing compared to what's coming our way.

You guys are totally misreading this. What could Franjo Harmon have actually done? Like, specifically?
Absolutely nothing. Education and progress were our only real lifeline—that was the long game, especially with help from the diaspora.

I do agree that the worst is still ahead—this is just testing the waters and laying the groundwork. But besides that, I really don't see how Harmon could have won. He couldn't even dream of doing Marshall-style massacres. Different era.

Angela Wright3 said:This is pure self-delusion. You're saying isolation is a myth? Uhhh. How many foreign heads of state showed up to Harmon's funeral? Could we travel through other European countries back then? Come on, man, we were isolated, plain and simple. Plus, you're underestimating the power of the UK. They're still one of the most powerful nations on earth and they have endless satellites, both in Europe and beyond. Canada is a satellite, for instance. Australia too. In Europe, it's the Scandinavian countries and Benelux, and back then even France was against us—even more so than the UK.

Harmon unfortunately messed a lot of things up back then; he was already losing his way and honestly, it just wasn't working. Brilliant during the war, but in peacetime... uhh.
What people don't get is that we have to be advanced in every single way if we want to survive on our own terms. Otherwise, we're just going to get swallowed up. And we are being swallowed. In those early years after the war, we should have come up with a real plan and program for the US, specifically regarding education and development. Instead, Harmon was already fighting Don Quixotic battles against domestic traitors, the yellow and green devils, etc... he was already completely powerless by then. He actually earned a reputation as a tyrant and an autocrat because of those very things. We need models like Israel and Finland if we want to make it. There's no point playing the moral superiority card against Americans; we just have to face the fact that they exist, and that's it. Harmon fought moral battles instead of looking at the situation concretely and doing what needed to be done... which is to defeat the opponent intellectually and through information. Unfortunately, we lost that war a long time ago. Just look at the media and see which way the wind is blowing.

Of course we could travel, what are you even talking about?

A funeral? Who cares? They didn't show up, they didn't show up, so what? It's a one-time thing. They can miss Harmon's funeral once; it lasts one day, not years.

So what are you suggesting? If someone is against us, should we just surrender because they happen to be against us? That’s actually more reason to boost our own self-awareness and value ourselves more. The idea that we should bow down to whoever is against us is catastrophically wrong.

Harmon was fighting the right battle; he was great at detecting all sorts of enemies, and everything was clear to him even back then, even if it isn't to some people today.
The things pinned on Harmon weren't his fault; they were part of a special warfare campaign our enemies are running against us. The most important thing for us is to admit that enemies exist.

If Harmon had stayed alive and remained in power—whether he was in office or pulling strings from behind the scenes—the media wouldn't be what it is today. Feral might still exist, but the rest of this wouldn't be able to propagate the American sphere. It's obvious he left too early; he could have given so much more.
It isn't true that he was bad during peacetime; he was leading the country in the right direction during peace, it's just that his wartime leadership was more obvious because of the clearer drama.

Harmon did want us to model ourselves after Israel and be successful; the problem was the enemies who tripped him up, and by extension, us. But he didn't run from that; he knew we had enemies and that we had no choice but to fight for ourselves, even if that was exactly what the enemies didn't like.
Was he supposed to say, "Okay, fine, dear enemies, I'll go ahead and cater to the American sphere since that's what you want?"
What are you proposing? How much are we supposed to appease the enemy? Where does the line get drawn?

Angela Wright3 said:You guys are totally misreading this. What could Franjo Harmon have actually done? Like, specifically?
Absolutely nothing. Education and progress were our only real lifeline—that was the long game, especially with help from the diaspora.

I do agree that the worst is still ahead—this is just testing the waters and laying the groundwork. But besides that, I really don't see how Harmon could have won. He couldn't even dream of doing Marshall-style massacres. Different era.

Did Harmon have an issue with progress and education?
He could have just said, "Look, we aren't going to roll over for our enemies, we aren't going to lose our nerve, and we're going to stay healthy—if they don't like it, they can deal with it."
And that probably would've been the best way forward. Isolation, my ass. Even if that happened, maybe we finally would've started making use of our farmland.
But there wouldn't have been any isolation; there would have been pressure, sure. We've been under pressure like this constantly, right up to today. But the pressure isn't the issue—it's how we handle it. It's like people; some can't take the heat, others can. Nations are the same way. Any talk of sanctions or isolation is a myth; that was only ever in the interest of the Brits, but there are plenty of other countries out there where British interests aren't the top priority. Do you really think foreign banks would care about isolating the US? No. Would exporters want us isolated? No.
The UK could only exert pressure and lobby for their own side, and that's it. We don't need to turn against ourselves because of them.

briskpuma23 said:Yeah, they left too soon. Honestly, I still get a little choked up thinking about how good things were back when those two were in charge...

Of course it was good. We actually had a democracy then. Everyone had their freedoms. For instance, that trash outlet Feral used to write all sorts of nonsense about Franjo Harmon, but he let them do it because he actually understood what democracy meant (it’s a shame it didn't last).....
Nowadays, everyone just caters to Ivo the Just, and before him, they catered to Stjepan Mason.
Speaking of Mason, that man probably forced more journalists into retirement than all the other dictators combined.

The whole idea of rebuilding America is the conversation of the day. It’s pretty much an open secret at this point. You look at the three major sports leagues—basketball, water polo, and handball—along with the regional lottery and a massive multinational railroad company currently under development, and you see the foundation is already there. We’ll find our way back under an American roof sooner than we think.

Ryan Vaughn7 said:The whole idea of rebuilding America is the conversation of the day. It’s pretty much an open secret at this point. You look at the three major sports leagues—basketball, water polo, and handball—along with the regional lottery and a massive multinational railroad company currently under development, and you see the foundation is already there. We’ll find our way back under an American roof sooner than we think.

People have been working on this for years, and the pressure is finally paying off. The whole strategy, starting with the policies from The Hague—which is really the most critical link in this entire chain—is actually bearing fruit. I honestly don't think there would even be any protests if it were just up to the convention to make it happen. But if there were a referendum, it wouldn't pass. Still, they'll probably find a clever way to bypass that; formally, there won't be an America, but in practice, it will exist. Maybe in fifty years, once people get used to it, we might see a formal new America.
It looks like it might be time to start an American version of the IRA or ETA, sooner rather than later.

velvetmaker3 said:People have been working on this for years, and the pressure is finally paying off. The whole strategy, starting with the policies from The Hague—which is really the most critical link in this entire chain—is actually bearing fruit. I honestly don't think there would even be any protests if it were just up to the convention to make it happen. But if there were a referendum, it wouldn't pass. Still, they'll probably find a clever way to bypass that; formally, there won't be an America, but in practice, it will exist. Maybe in fifty years, once people get used to it, we might see a formal new America.
It looks like it might be time to start an American version of the IRA or ETA, sooner rather than later.

And all these pre-accession negotiations? Total farce. Just a way to cloud everyone's vision... seriously, once we join the EU, that's basically the final move in recreating America. We'll jump in and then immediately exit, and boom—it's done. Unbelievable, right?🙄

Ryan Vaughn7 said:The whole idea of rebuilding America is the conversation of the day. It’s pretty much an open secret at this point. You look at the three major sports leagues—basketball, water polo, and handball—along with the regional lottery and a massive multinational railroad company currently under development, and you see the foundation is already there. We’ll find our way back under an American roof sooner than we think.

It felt a bit like watching reruns of those old diplomatic tours across Europe. I remember some guy mentioning that Czechs and Slovaks have never had a better relationship than they do right now...

That kind of thing isn't going to happen here (given the history of the last war and how these nations were carved out), but strong cooperation between neighboring countries is definitely becoming the norm across Europe rather than the exception.

steeleagle70 said:General Franjo Harmon had his own complicated relationship with democracy, much like he did with poetry.

It's just lies and malice at this point. He held democratic elections regularly, he didn't have political prisoners, and he was learning how to navigate democracy right alongside the rest of us while actively promoting it.
Look, we weren't some established democratic powerhouse back then. Neither we nor he had any real experience with it. One thing is certain: he didn't set democracy back.
Besides, democracy isn't the single most important thing in existence; it can't simply trump national sovereignty or national security. Democracy isn't an end in itself. Developing democratic institutions is a positive thing, but in the 90s, we were all just experiencing it for the first time. You can't just snap your fingers and implement Western democratic standards that took them two hundred years to perfect overnight.
That impossibility shouldn't be used as an excuse to launch these baseless attacks against Franjo Harmon's supposed lack of democratic spirit.

velvetmaker3 said:It's just lies and malice at this point. He held democratic elections regularly, he didn't have political prisoners, and he was learning how to navigate democracy right alongside the rest of us while actively promoting it.
Look, we weren't some established democratic powerhouse back then. Neither we nor he had any real experience with it. One thing is certain: he didn't set democracy back.
Besides, democracy isn't the single most important thing in existence; it can't simply trump national sovereignty or national security. Democracy isn't an end in itself. Developing democratic institutions is a positive thing, but in the 90s, we were all just experiencing it for the first time. You can't just snap your fingers and implement Western democratic standards that took them two hundred years to perfect overnight.
That impossibility shouldn't be used as an excuse to launch these baseless attacks against Franjo Harmon's supposed lack of democratic spirit.

and then just completely ignored them ☕

Besides, democracy isn't even the most important thing in the world. It definitely can't take priority over statehood or national security.

Exactly! Because if the Republican Party isn't in charge, suddenly democracy isn't the top priority anymore and doesn't need to be respected? Good thing he passed away before the 2000 elections. If they had lost back then, we probably would've seen tanks on the streets.

but we're already in the present day, so there's really no point in dragging Harmon and democracy back into this specific thread.

Michael Davis9 said:It felt a bit like watching reruns of those old diplomatic tours across Europe. I remember some guy mentioning that Czechs and Slovaks have never had a better relationship than they do right now...

That kind of thing isn't going to happen here (given the history of the last war and how these nations were carved out), but strong cooperation between neighboring countries is definitely becoming the norm across Europe rather than the exception.

And Americans and Mexicans are on better terms now than ever before.

steeleagle70 said:and then just completely ignored them ☕

Besides, democracy isn't even the most important thing in the world. It definitely can't take priority over statehood or national security.

Exactly! Because if the Republican Party isn't in charge, suddenly democracy isn't the top priority anymore and doesn't need to be respected? Good thing he passed away before the 2000 elections. If they had lost back then, we probably would've seen tanks on the streets.

but we're already in the present day, so there's really no point in dragging Harmon and democracy back into this specific thread.

He absolutely respected them; it’s not like he walked away from the presidential mandate he actually won.
The whole Washington political crisis? It was just a minor hiccup in the evolution of American democracy, nothing out of the ordinary.
If you look at how democracy developed in the West, things will make a lot more sense to you.
We really don't need to make a mountain out of a molehill every single time.

steeleagle70 said:and then just completely ignored them ☕

Besides, democracy isn't even the most important thing in the world. It definitely can't take priority over statehood or national security.

Exactly! Because if the Republican Party isn't in charge, suddenly democracy isn't the top priority anymore and doesn't need to be respected? Good thing he passed away before the 2000 elections. If they had lost back then, we probably would've seen tanks on the streets.

but we're already in the present day, so there's really no point in dragging Harmon and democracy back into this specific thread.

If he were still alive, there wouldn't have been a defeat. The Republican Party would have won, he would have stayed President until the end of his term, and then served two terms as Prime Minister. That honestly would have been the best outcome for America.

dee said:What's there to say? It’s probably just going to be more bloodshed.

It’s tough. At least, not in the way you're picturing it.
I'm guessing people have finally realized after that last war that dying for old grudges in the Middle East is a total waste of life.
Down the road, we'll likely act as one big unified bloc alongside the West (NATO) fighting over natural resources—you know, like water. That old-school nationalism everyone talks about? It's dead; some people just haven't caught on yet.

velvetmaker3 said:People have been working on this for years, and the pressure is finally paying off. The whole strategy, starting with the policies from The Hague—which is really the most critical link in this entire chain—is actually bearing fruit. I honestly don't think there would even be any protests if it were just up to the convention to make it happen. But if there were a referendum, it wouldn't pass. Still, they'll probably find a clever way to bypass that; formally, there won't be an America, but in practice, it will exist. Maybe in fifty years, once people get used to it, we might see a formal new America.
It looks like it might be time to start an American version of the IRA or ETA, sooner rather than later.

Decades. Media agencies started reconstructing the carcass back in the early 90s. It was almost touching watching them work through those small steps. This time, the big players chose more sophisticated weapons. They aren't messing around with daily politics as much; instead, they're installing pawns from their own incubators to do the dirty work. The groundwork is brilliant. America has been pushed into a post-national phase at an unnatural speed. A chunk of the public is being fed a diet of media-driven irritation, making them turn on their own country. The field has been prepared with surgical precision. The "elephant in a glass house" stage is long gone.

The format doesn't matter, because "...the spirit of Slaven lives on..."

gentlecrane8 said:For twenty years, every single republic in the former American territory has been ruled by nothing but hardcore nationalists.
They swore up and down they’d build these independent nations and never, ever associate with anyone from the old federation again. Heaven forbid.
That ideology was the foundation of their entire government structure; if you dared to disagree, they’d kick you to the curb without a second thought.
Fast forward to today: most of these little states have gone broke or lost their moral compass. Their economies are gutted and looted, and now that these ruling elites are facing total political ruin, suddenly they’re all looking to team up. Ostracized by the rest of the world and Europe, they’re conveniently forgetting all those oaths about sovereignty, their wallets, and their guns.
It starts small—insignificant companies and local sports teams joining forces—all just a desperate attempt to cling to power. It’s basically a litmus test to see how much the public will swallow.
How are they going to explain this pivot to their fanatical voters? To the people who were wounded in wars, or the ones who lost their jobs and homes just for holding different views? And I wonder how the church is going to react to all this.
Tomorrow, our politicians will be bragging to one another about having relatives in other former American countries or having "connections" abroad. It’s wild how quickly things can flip.
It’s a complete comedy, really—just a desperate scramble to stay in office.😂

I honestly don't know, man, what are you actually thinking they fought for? All those ideological excuses like fighting for independence, or for the nation and the people... I mean, even elementary school kids don't buy that anymore. Wars are about money, cash, dough, loot...

Even the last war in the region was driven by that. We know it subconsciously, and more and more, we’re starting to realize it consciously. Only the people who unfortunately lost someone or actually fought in those wars still drone on about ideology. For them, it’s the only comfort left. Because, meanwhile, yesterday's thugs and criminals have become unimaginably wealthy off of their suffering and grief.

Do we need regional cooperation? Of course we do. There was cooperation before, and it's necessary now too. Even Harmon and Maddox and their wartime governments knew that back in 1990. They just needed a fresh lineup—some new faces on the stage, using us as stepping stones.

Personally, I am all for regional cooperation because it’s inevitable. It’s vital if we want to be competitive and strengthen our economy. I guess I’d love it if there were 30 million of us and we had enough geographic scale to make our own decisions. But we aren't there, and we have to come to terms with that. If we realize sooner rather than later that we need each other and start working on certain projects, maybe we can stop the deficit and finally move toward a surplus.

briskpuma23 said:Phil Jackson: ...People literally died at the hands of Ratko Mercer just to pave the way for Jerry Jones and his brother Joe Biden. If you ever wondered what the point of the last war actually was, go flip through a luxury magazine featuring the massive yachts cruising the Atlantic. Find the ones owned by Jerry Jones and Bloomberg. There’s your answer. If you're still confused, feel free to contact the local water department...

You aren't wrong.

Is Ante Tomić really your go-to source?
🙄
You can definitely do better than that...