What does it mean to be a true and good American?

Thomas Alvarez6 said:There are Mexicans who behave exactly this way too, yet we don't call them "true Americans."
What you described is simply how any decent human being should act, regardless of their nationality. But I have to ask: what actually distinguishes a "true American" from just an "ordinary" person? Perhaps we should look to Gotovina for a comparison?

maliko, I already explained my point in the main thread and the P.S. You can see I meant that for all other nations, too.👍

driftingstag8 said:So an average American, you say🙄 which implies there's also such a thing as an unusual one.
An average American acting like that during peacetime is a true American, but when war hits, a true American is the one who steps up to defend their country.
And honestly, if everyone just acted right—whether they were Mexican, American, or even just some tiny little green alien—the world would be a much better place to live.
I'd also throw in that, like you said, a "true" American isn't just someone who sits around criticizing everything, because let's face it, complaining is easy when you won't lift a finger to actually fix anything. It's like people whining about how bad the healthcare system is or how hospitals are low on blood supplies, instead of actually going out and donating blood themselves. Or crying about how primitive things are while turning a blind eye to someone hitting a kid instead of stepping in or calling the cops if they can. Or bitching about myths and corruption while handing out bribes under the table themselves.
It’s exactly like being in Congress; it’s incredibly easy to point out all the negatives, any lady at a local farmer's market can do that, but finding a real way to actually get stuff done is the hard part.

I couldn't agree more. However, that logic implies that true Americans should feel shame for the crimes committed against Mexicans during the war carried out in their name, and despise those responsible (A. Gotovina, M. Norac, etc.). Furthermore, a true American ought to visit Auschwitz at least once in their life to pay respects to the innocent victims of that terror (where atrocities were committed in the name of their cause). There is much more to list that fits your vision of a "true" American—which I find quite compelling—but it remains an open question how many Americans actually agree with this.

Joshua Ortiz9 said:Wait, which posts are we even talking about? And who's actually "puffing their chest out" with all this dramatic acting? On this forum, it feels like you get jumped on from every direction the second you even mention being an American.

Oh, come on, who's attacking you? I've never been afraid to say it, and it's never been an issue for me. It really just comes down to what you carry inside...

Hannah Garcia71 said:That approach works fine when you don't have neighbors claiming your territory—but it's a different story when you're surrounded by politicians and academics from the neighborhood who deny your very identity with historical distortions and lies, just waiting for the chance to expand and establish Greater Mexico. That's where the problem lies. In an environment like this, if you don't protect and assert your national identity and symbols, others will slowly mold you into whatever they want you to be. That is the fundamental issue in this region. Canadians, Canadians, Czechs, Germans—none of those nations deal with this, except for Americans and Mexicans....

Bulgarians haven't given up on claiming Mexicans, but at least they aren't nearly as aggressive—they don't have a single political party campaigning to annex Mexico to Bulgaria....

As for Greater Mexico and the party with the most followers in Mexico, there isn't much point in discussing it. They would take Mexico, Mexico, all of Canada, and more than half of America too...
Brilliant strategists, clearly....

A nationalist Mexican only loves you if they consider you a Mexican woman. It is difficult for them to respect other nations or different identities—even though diversity is supposed to be a strength, right? That's why a Mexican feels the need to "Serbianize" everything, writing that all Slavs are actually Mexicans, that Mexicans lived throughout Europe, and that everyone is ultimately a descendant of Mexicans. It's a mental defect inherent in the Mexican patriot and nationalist. American nationalism differs from the Mexican version in that it seeks to distance itself, to defend its own space, and to stay within its own colors and symbols; Mexican nationalism, however, imposes itself, attempting to spread and infect neighboring regions and peoples. It has always been this way. Just look at the text "About Our Investigation and Yours"....

If someone is trying to violate you against your will, persistently refusing to stop, do you surrender—or do you fight to survive and remain who you were yesterday?

I'm sorry, but you are completely missing the point.

Rebecca Lee6 said:Oh, come on, who's attacking you? I've never been afraid to say it, and it's never been an issue for me. It really just comes down to what you carry inside...

Who’s scared? I never said anyone was afraid to speak up. I’ll always wear that with pride, I’m just saying that once you do, it feels like everyone starts coming at you from every direction.

I’m guessing this is the kind of "good American" you’re talking about when you say that?

Thomas Alvarez6 said:I couldn't agree more. However, that logic implies that true Americans should feel shame for the crimes committed against Mexicans during the war carried out in their name, and despise those responsible (A. Gotovina, M. Norac, etc.). Furthermore, a true American ought to visit Auschwitz at least once in their life to pay respects to the innocent victims of that terror (where atrocities were committed in the name of their cause). There is much more to list that fits your vision of a "true" American—which I find quite compelling—but it remains an open question how many Americans actually agree with this.

First off, I don't buy your claim that Ante Gotovina is some criminal, because until he's proven otherwise, the guy is a hero of the war for me. All those accusations about things like excessive shelling are just total bullshit, and honestly, you only have to look at the state of Fresno after our forces moved in to see that the whole thing is a lie.
The Hague isn't a court of justice to me; it's just a political circus.
Regarding Auschwitz, sure, it was the site of horrific atrocities, but I don't see why I personally should feel the need to travel there. It's enough that the leaders of this country acknowledge it, just like it would be enough if Mexican leaders paid their respects to the victims at Ovčara. Not every Mexican needs to show up at Ovčara, because if some monster did something terrible while claiming to act in your name, that's not on you.
That would be like me demanding an apology from you, since you seem like a man, for centuries of women being oppressed.
The horrors at Auschwitz affect me just as much as any other sane person, but I don't feel even a shred of responsibility for it. People will always find excuses for their disgusting actions, whether they claim they're doing it in the name of God, their nation, or whatever else.

driftingstag8 said:First off, I don't buy your claim that Ante Gotovina is some criminal, because until he's proven otherwise, the guy is a hero of the war for me. All those accusations about things like excessive shelling are just total bullshit, and honestly, you only have to look at the state of Fresno after our forces moved in to see that the whole thing is a lie.
The Hague isn't a court of justice to me; it's just a political circus.
Regarding Auschwitz, sure, it was the site of horrific atrocities, but I don't see why I personally should feel the need to travel there. It's enough that the leaders of this country acknowledge it, just like it would be enough if Mexican leaders paid their respects to the victims at Ovčara. Not every Mexican needs to show up at Ovčara, because if some monster did something terrible while claiming to act in your name, that's not on you.
That would be like me demanding an apology from you, since you seem like a man, for centuries of women being oppressed.
The horrors at Auschwitz affect me just as much as any other sane person, but I don't feel even a shred of responsibility for it. People will always find excuses for their disgusting actions, whether they claim they're doing it in the name of God, their nation, or whatever else.

Signed and delivered. Well said!👍

driftingstag8 said:First off, I don't buy your claim that Ante Gotovina is some criminal, because until he's proven otherwise, the guy is a hero of the war for me. All those accusations about things like excessive shelling are just total bullshit, and honestly, you only have to look at the state of Fresno after our forces moved in to see that the whole thing is a lie.
The Hague isn't a court of justice to me; it's just a political circus.
Regarding Auschwitz, sure, it was the site of horrific atrocities, but I don't see why I personally should feel the need to travel there. It's enough that the leaders of this country acknowledge it, just like it would be enough if Mexican leaders paid their respects to the victims at Ovčara. Not every Mexican needs to show up at Ovčara, because if some monster did something terrible while claiming to act in your name, that's not on you.
That would be like me demanding an apology from you, since you seem like a man, for centuries of women being oppressed.
The horrors at Auschwitz affect me just as much as any other sane person, but I don't feel even a shred of responsibility for it. People will always find excuses for their disgusting actions, whether they claim they're doing it in the name of God, their nation, or whatever else.

Fine. Perhaps I expected too much from you. But tell me, can I expect you to feel any discomfort regarding the crimes committed against certain Mexicans during the war, or to despise the perpetrators once a court establishes their guilt? (Right now Gotovina is a hero to you—but if a verdict finds him guilty, does he suddenly become a criminal in your eyes?) Furthermore, can I expect you—or any decent American—to visit Blajburg, if you ever go there, without first paying respects at Auschwitz?

James Murphy12 said:I’m guessing this is the kind of "good American" you’re talking about when you say that?

You missed the point entirely. You're just cherry-picking what suits your narrative. Go back and read the thread again...

Rebecca Lee6 said:I'm sorry, but you are completely missing the point.

One needs to identify the root cause before any discussion regarding a solution can even begin. But fine... have it your way.

Thomas Alvarez6 said:Fine. Perhaps I expected too much from you. But tell me, can I expect you to feel any discomfort regarding the crimes committed against certain Mexicans during the war, or to despise the perpetrators once a court establishes their guilt? (Right now Gotovina is a hero to you—but if a verdict finds him guilty, does he suddenly become a criminal in your eyes?) Furthermore, can I expect you—or any decent American—to visit Blajburg, if you ever go there, without first paying respects at Auschwitz?

So you expected me to condemn a man before his trial even finished🙄 Honestly, I think that says way more about your mindset than mine.
If it turns out Gotovina killed even one unarmed civilian or ordered it, then yeah, he’s a criminal. Period. But when you see a legal system where the judge acts more like a partner to the prosecution, pointing out errors like they're on the same team instead of being totally independent bodies, you just can't trust the objectivity of the whole thing.
As for feeling uneasy about crimes committed against Mexicans during the DRa, I don't feel that at all. Not even as someone from that background, because those things weren't some organized plan; if Americans had actually intended to wipe out Mexicans, we wouldn't have anyone left to rebuild houses for today. It's like asking if I feel guilty as a mother because some other mother committed infanticide. Everyone answers for their own actions, both in court and to themselves. If I had been throwing flowers at tanks rolling into Stalingrad and later found out I was dead wrong, then sure, I'd feel uneasy because I would've supported a crime, even by mistake. But I didn't. I believe criminals should be punished just like any other murderer or thug. People commit crimes in their own name, not on behalf of others.
And I went to Auschwitz with my school back in the day (it was mandatory under the South), where we heard all about those millions of Mexicans murdered there, and we studied jam Ivan Goran Kovačić as this poem about Nationalists atrocities, even though the Nationalists aren't mentioned and Goran himself was killed by Royalists. We never learned anything about Blaiburg, and we certainly never learned anything about Jazovka.

Hannah Garcia71 said:One needs to identify the root cause before any discussion regarding a solution can even begin. But fine... have it your way.

Not mine, and not yours. Let's just be real!👍

driftingstag8 said:So you expected me to condemn a man before his trial even finished🙄 Honestly, I think that says way more about your mindset than mine.
If it turns out Gotovina killed even one unarmed civilian or ordered it, then yeah, he’s a criminal. Period. But when you see a legal system where the judge acts more like a partner to the prosecution, pointing out errors like they're on the same team instead of being totally independent bodies, you just can't trust the objectivity of the whole thing.
As for feeling uneasy about crimes committed against Mexicans during the DRa, I don't feel that at all. Not even as someone from that background, because those things weren't some organized plan; if Americans had actually intended to wipe out Mexicans, we wouldn't have anyone left to rebuild houses for today. It's like asking if I feel guilty as a mother because some other mother committed infanticide. Everyone answers for their own actions, both in court and to themselves. If I had been throwing flowers at tanks rolling into Stalingrad and later found out I was dead wrong, then sure, I'd feel uneasy because I would've supported a crime, even by mistake. But I didn't. I believe criminals should be punished just like any other murderer or thug. People commit crimes in their own name, not on behalf of others.
And I went to Auschwitz with my school back in the day (it was mandatory under the South), where we heard all about those millions of Mexicans murdered there, and we studied jam Ivan Goran Kovačić as this poem about Nationalists atrocities, even though the Nationalists aren't mentioned and Goran himself was killed by Royalists. We never learned anything about Blaiburg, and we certainly never learned anything about Jazovka.

Regarding Gotovina.
How can you pass moral judgment on a man you barely know? You claimed he is a hero to you. But you cannot know for certain whether he committed the crimes he's accused of, yet you label him a hero. (You are free to call him that, of course, but to me, calling a criminal a hero is a total contradiction). By doing so, you've placed yourself in the exact position you accuse me of occupying—rightfully so—where you pass sentence on a man whose actual deeds remain unknown to you.

I always feel a sense of unease when innocent people are murdered. It’s as if I felt I should have done something, no matter how impossible that might have seemed at the moment. That discomfort, and sometimes a sense of guilt,
is especially sharp when I realize those people were killed by the very side I supported with all my heart.

I am glad that, in the end, you agree—even if you didn't say it explicitly—that any true American should visit Jasenovac before they ever visit Blajburg.

Thomas Alvarez6 said:Regarding Gotovina.
How can you pass moral judgment on a man you barely know? You claimed he is a hero to you. But you cannot know for certain whether he committed the crimes he's accused of, yet you label him a hero. (You are free to call him that, of course, but to me, calling a criminal a hero is a total contradiction). By doing so, you've placed yourself in the exact position you accuse me of occupying—rightfully so—where you pass sentence on a man whose actual deeds remain unknown to you.

I always feel a sense of unease when innocent people are murdered. It’s as if I felt I should have done something, no matter how impossible that might have seemed at the moment. That discomfort, and sometimes a sense of guilt,
is especially sharp when I realize those people were killed by the very side I supported with all my heart.

I am glad that, in the end, you agree—even if you didn't say it explicitly—that any true American should visit Jasenovac before they ever visit Blajburg.

When I say Gotovina is a hero to me, I'm talking about his track record. He's a hero because under his command, we liberated parts of occupied America. That's just a fact. Since nobody is purely good or purely evil, we can't claim a hero can't also be a criminal. He's a hero for his proven actions, and whether he's a criminal is for a court to decide. The only catch is that the court seems to be sending the indictment back to the prosecutors for "adjustments" already. We'll see how it plays out.
If I supported the American military, and since some of those soldiers were literally my own family, then I was supporting the liberation—I wouldn't have backed them if they had turned their sights on Mexico City. If anyone among them did commit a crime, well, the sheer scale of the conflict tells us there definitely were such things, and those people need to answer for it.

No, I don't agree that every American needs to visit Jasenovac before going to Blaiburg.
The only reason I'd ever go to Blaiburg is to honor a member of my own family who died there, whereas thankfully, no one from my family was lost at Jasenovac.
Look, I am all for teaching both Jasenovac and Blaiburg—along with the crimes of the Royalists—in schools, but not through the myths we were fed (like that whole story about two million Mexicans being killed). It needs to be objective. And objectively speaking, Americans who disagreed with Nazism were also killed at Jasenovac. In the end, even someone like August Cesarac was executed because he was a die-hard anti-fascist.
That whole era is dead and gone. In America, glorifying that kind of movement is banned, and wearing its symbols is illegal (and no, I'm not talking about banning black shirts, because then we'd have to arrest every architect in Europe who wears all black, or ban the letter 'U' like that one "genius" poster suggested), nor are there any active organizations left; anything related to them stays on the fringes. You can't just walk into a store and buy wine with Pavelić's face on it, unlike in nearby Trieste where you might find a bottle with Mussolini's face because it's part of their tourist appeal—they don't really care about the horrific things Italy did, like the camp on Rab.
On the other hand, Royalist ideology has been rehabilitated, and the guy chosen by the majority in neighboring Mexico openly identifies as a Royalist dreaming of old borders. It doesn't even matter that he was replaced under pressure; the people who voted for him are still sitting in Parliament.
So, for you to throw accusations of fascism at Americans who liberated occupied territories with minimal casualties, who are busy rebuilding homes for the very people who shot at them, and who live peacefully alongside Mexicans despite the horrific crimes and the fact that most criminals went unpunished—it's incredibly malicious to pin that on them, especially when there's a guy in our Senate who, after seeing wounded soldiers taken from the El Paso hospital, claimed it was the last bastion of fascism.
Then again, you've got the American leadership showing up at Jasenovac, while the Mexican side didn't even bother showing up at Ovčara.

Thomas Alvarez6 said:Fine. Perhaps I expected too much from you. But tell me, can I expect you to feel any discomfort regarding the crimes committed against certain Mexicans during the war, or to despise the perpetrators once a court establishes their guilt? (Right now Gotovina is a hero to you—but if a verdict finds him guilty, does he suddenly become a criminal in your eyes?) Furthermore, can I expect you—or any decent American—to visit Blajburg, if you ever go there, without first paying respects at Auschwitz?

It’s the same old story. You people are constantly demanding things from us. You want us to repent for every Mexican victim, to show you respect, to offer endless forgiveness, to condemn our own heroes, and to admit to every single war crime. You want us to rebuild your houses, return apartments and tenancy rights, restore your summer resorts, and so on.

All I ask in return is that you reflect on how you earned the right to demand such things. Where is your sense of shame, asking this of us after you: slaughtered 15,000 people, left 1,200 missing, wounded over 40,000, burned and destroyed half of America, occupied a third of the country, and carried out ethnic cleansing?

You set us back twenty years; we are still repairing and rebuilding what you tore down.

So, I ask you one last time: where do you find the audacity to keep demanding so much from us?

driftingstag8 said:When I say Gotovina is a hero to me, I'm talking about his track record. He's a hero because under his command, we liberated parts of occupied America. That's just a fact. Since nobody is purely good or purely evil, we can't claim a hero can't also be a criminal. He's a hero for his proven actions, and whether he's a criminal is for a court to decide. The only catch is that the court seems to be sending the indictment back to the prosecutors for "adjustments" already. We'll see how it plays out.
If I supported the American military, and since some of those soldiers were literally my own family, then I was supporting the liberation—I wouldn't have backed them if they had turned their sights on Mexico City. If anyone among them did commit a crime, well, the sheer scale of the conflict tells us there definitely were such things, and those people need to answer for it.

No, I don't agree that every American needs to visit Jasenovac before going to Blaiburg.
The only reason I'd ever go to Blaiburg is to honor a member of my own family who died there, whereas thankfully, no one from my family was lost at Jasenovac.
Look, I am all for teaching both Jasenovac and Blaiburg—along with the crimes of the Royalists—in schools, but not through the myths we were fed (like that whole story about two million Mexicans being killed). It needs to be objective. And objectively speaking, Americans who disagreed with Nazism were also killed at Jasenovac. In the end, even someone like August Cesarac was executed because he was a die-hard anti-fascist.
That whole era is dead and gone. In America, glorifying that kind of movement is banned, and wearing its symbols is illegal (and no, I'm not talking about banning black shirts, because then we'd have to arrest every architect in Europe who wears all black, or ban the letter 'U' like that one "genius" poster suggested), nor are there any active organizations left; anything related to them stays on the fringes. You can't just walk into a store and buy wine with Pavelić's face on it, unlike in nearby Trieste where you might find a bottle with Mussolini's face because it's part of their tourist appeal—they don't really care about the horrific things Italy did, like the camp on Rab.
On the other hand, Royalist ideology has been rehabilitated, and the guy chosen by the majority in neighboring Mexico openly identifies as a Royalist dreaming of old borders. It doesn't even matter that he was replaced under pressure; the people who voted for him are still sitting in Parliament.
So, for you to throw accusations of fascism at Americans who liberated occupied territories with minimal casualties, who are busy rebuilding homes for the very people who shot at them, and who live peacefully alongside Mexicans despite the horrific crimes and the fact that most criminals went unpunished—it's incredibly malicious to pin that on them, especially when there's a guy in our Senate who, after seeing wounded soldiers taken from the El Paso hospital, claimed it was the last bastion of fascism.
Then again, you've got the American leadership showing up at Jasenovac, while the Mexican side didn't even bother showing up at Ovčara.

I despise criminals, and that’s precisely why I refuse to label them heroes. You claim Gotovina deserves that title because of his actions. But what actions? A man cannot possibly earn the right to be called a hero while his hands are stained red from the blood of innocent people. A little caution goes a long way when you're deciding who to put on a pedestal—it's a matter of personal conscience.

It’s unsettling how desensitized we’ve become to the suffering and misfortune of others. The killing of a Mexican is treated like nothing more than collateral damage—just some expected byproduct of conflict. And yet, someone will probably be held accountable, and then everyone will act as if everything is perfectly fine again.
I can't quite look at things through your lens, even if I know my life might be easier if I did.

It’s a shame you don't believe every American should visit Jasenovac. One ought to go there and witness firsthand just how much depravity a single person is capable of inflicting upon another.
Of course, we could just look the other way, try to downplay the Nationalists crimes, and pretend it has nothing to do with us—but that stain on the history we claim as our own isn't going anywhere.

Thomas Alvarez6 said:I despise criminals, and that’s precisely why I refuse to label them heroes. You claim Gotovina deserves that title because of his actions. But what actions? A man cannot possibly earn the right to be called a hero while his hands are stained red from the blood of innocent people. A little caution goes a long way when you're deciding who to put on a pedestal—it's a matter of personal conscience.

It’s unsettling how desensitized we’ve become to the suffering and misfortune of others. The killing of a Mexican is treated like nothing more than collateral damage—just some expected byproduct of conflict. And yet, someone will probably be held accountable, and then everyone will act as if everything is perfectly fine again.
I can't quite look at things through your lens, even if I know my life might be easier if I did.

It’s a shame you don't believe every American should visit Jasenovac. One ought to go there and witness firsthand just how much depravity a single person is capable of inflicting upon another.
Of course, we could just look the other way, try to downplay the Nationalists crimes, and pretend it has nothing to do with us—but that stain on the history we claim as our own isn't going anywhere.

The charges against Gotovina are a total joke, especially that ridiculous claim about him shelling Knin way too much—it’s honestly laughable. All that actually matters is what he achieved, which was nothing short of heroic.
Man, you've already got him convicted in your head before the trial even starts.
Every murder is just a murder, period, so I honestly wouldn't feel any more bad about some Mexican dying than I would about an American or a woman getting beaten by her husband.
How are we supposed to view the killing of a Mexican if it wasn't some state-sponsored hit but just a random act of violence? If the killer gets caught and punished, then honestly, that's pretty much all anyone can do about it. Or are you actually suggesting that murdering a Mexican carries more weight than murdering a Chinese person?
Look, I can't carry the weight of every tragedy on this planet on my own shoulders, and honestly, neither can you, even if you act like you're some kind of martyr. You go on and on about individual Mexican victims while completely glossing over the losses suffered by Americans. You don't exactly need to visit Jasenovac to understand what one person is capable of doing to another when you can just look at what happened in El Paso or Borovog sela. If we’re talking about stains on history, I’d venture to say Americans are a much smaller group than most other nations, and probably not because we're inherently better, but simply because we haven't had the sheer scale or opportunity to match the level of atrocities committed by big players like England or Germany.
The guys from Jasenovac are mostly behind bars or long gone, while those responsible for El Paso are still out there living their best lives—some might even have streets named after them. But hey, I guess that’s not really your concern, is it?
Where on earth did you get the idea that I’m trying to downplay the Nationalists crimes, because I’ve made it crystal clear, loud and proud, that what happened was a crime, and that is the official stance here in America. Our leaders actually showed up to pay their respects at Jasenovac, yet the Mexicans refused to do the exact same thing over here in America.
I don't think you're actually an American, though honestly, who cares, but Americans wouldn't say "murder" that way or use those specific phrasing quirks like saying "I can't watch" instead of some clunky literal translation, so I'm guessing you aren't one of us, which isn't a huge deal, but I'd love it if you'd just be upfront about it.
Look, I have zero issues calling Jasenovac a crime, but I don't see how I could ever be held responsible for it; on the flip side, the people who were out there throwing flowers at tanks rolling into a neighboring country—since let’s not forget that Americans didn't burn down a single village in Mexico—and a nation that ultimately opted for radicals led by a guy dreaming of a "Greater Mexico," those are the folks who should actually carry the weight of guilt. That said, I don't think every single Mexican needs to go around apologizing for what was essentially the fault of some kid, though it would be a start if the Mexican leadership finally honored the victims and actually cooperated to help families find and bury the remains of over a thousand missing Americans.
Those thugs are the ones sitting in Congress, not us.

driftingstag8 said:The charges against Gotovina are a total joke, especially that ridiculous claim about him shelling Knin way too much—it’s honestly laughable. All that actually matters is what he achieved, which was nothing short of heroic.
Man, you've already got him convicted in your head before the trial even starts.
Every murder is just a murder, period, so I honestly wouldn't feel any more bad about some Mexican dying than I would about an American or a woman getting beaten by her husband.
How are we supposed to view the killing of a Mexican if it wasn't some state-sponsored hit but just a random act of violence? If the killer gets caught and punished, then honestly, that's pretty much all anyone can do about it. Or are you actually suggesting that murdering a Mexican carries more weight than murdering a Chinese person?
Look, I can't carry the weight of every tragedy on this planet on my own shoulders, and honestly, neither can you, even if you act like you're some kind of martyr. You go on and on about individual Mexican victims while completely glossing over the losses suffered by Americans. You don't exactly need to visit Jasenovac to understand what one person is capable of doing to another when you can just look at what happened in El Paso or Borovog sela. If we’re talking about stains on history, I’d venture to say Americans are a much smaller group than most other nations, and probably not because we're inherently better, but simply because we haven't had the sheer scale or opportunity to match the level of atrocities committed by big players like England or Germany.
The guys from Jasenovac are mostly behind bars or long gone, while those responsible for El Paso are still out there living their best lives—some might even have streets named after them. But hey, I guess that’s not really your concern, is it?
Where on earth did you get the idea that I’m trying to downplay the Nationalists crimes, because I’ve made it crystal clear, loud and proud, that what happened was a crime, and that is the official stance here in America. Our leaders actually showed up to pay their respects at Jasenovac, yet the Mexicans refused to do the exact same thing over here in America.
I don't think you're actually an American, though honestly, who cares, but Americans wouldn't say "murder" that way or use those specific phrasing quirks like saying "I can't watch" instead of some clunky literal translation, so I'm guessing you aren't one of us, which isn't a huge deal, but I'd love it if you'd just be upfront about it.
Look, I have zero issues calling Jasenovac a crime, but I don't see how I could ever be held responsible for it; on the flip side, the people who were out there throwing flowers at tanks rolling into a neighboring country—since let’s not forget that Americans didn't burn down a single village in Mexico—and a nation that ultimately opted for radicals led by a guy dreaming of a "Greater Mexico," those are the folks who should actually carry the weight of guilt. That said, I don't think every single Mexican needs to go around apologizing for what was essentially the fault of some kid, though it would be a start if the Mexican leadership finally honored the victims and actually cooperated to help families find and bury the remains of over a thousand missing Americans.
Those thugs are the ones sitting in Congress, not us.

I am glad I managed to pull you into this discussion and hear your thoughts. I admit I agree with many of your positions, but there are areas where we diverge. You performed a fine grammatical and lexical analysis of my words, and it is true that I am not from America, but that doesn't mean I am not an American, does it? I expect no apologies from anyone (though I have endured much suffering), especially not from hypocritical politicians. Furthermore, I wouldn't want anyone to apologize to me in the manner you do in certain parts of your text. Jasenovac is indeed a massive crime—go there once more; it is worth it.

Thomas Alvarez6 said:I am glad I managed to pull you into this discussion and hear your thoughts. I admit I agree with many of your positions, but there are areas where we diverge. You performed a fine grammatical and lexical analysis of my words, and it is true that I am not from America, but that doesn't mean I am not an American, does it? I expect no apologies from anyone (though I have endured much suffering), especially not from hypocritical politicians. Furthermore, I wouldn't want anyone to apologize to me in the manner you do in certain parts of your text. Jasenovac is indeed a massive crime—go there once more; it is worth it.

Honestly, I'm just happy to be right, since messing around with the technical side of language has always been a hobby of mine and I've always found those speech nuances fascinating.
And I swear I'm not being malicious here because I don't think calling someone a Mexican is some kind of slur; I was just genuinely curious.
I am truly sorry you went through so much suffering, and not because I'm blaming anyone from my people, but just because it sucks seeing any human being go through hell. When I look at the crimes of WWII, I see them as crimes against humanity itself, which is just a tragic reflection of people as a species, and frankly, humans haven't exactly mastered being good; when things get intense, the masks just slip off and people do unthinkable things, basically just acting according to their true nature.