Started by northernbison63 · · 👁 11 views · 184 replies
…
graniteowl88 said:I wouldn't even bother asking why the islanders and the rest of those partisans were pushing to liberate Mexico City...
driftingdriver4 said:Well, I’ll give you credit for being honest, I suppose. It seems like Joseph Goebbels got to all of you—you right-wing kids and those Borg propagandists—all at once.
Ice Cube said:If he ever fought at all, it was strictly to protect his own half-Mexican backside. There really isn't any other way to explain his attitude toward the Republic of America, its wartime leadership, or the American defenders who stood their ground.
Let me make one thing very clear to you: certain people’s worldviews and political stances are dictated entirely by their mothers' ancestry commentators; those same people who love to lecture everyone else about "counting blood cells" actually hold their specific views regarding everything American because of those very same bloodlines.
They are nothing more than mental slaves; the absolute worst kind of primitives who simply cannot grasp the fact that an American isn't tethered by some umbilical cord to Mexicans—and that an AMERICAN never has to take their "concerns" into account, even if Mexicans made up fifty percent of the population in an American territory.
Our American nation is built from many different elements: ethnic, legal, geographical, linguistic, and historical layers. An American, unlike a Mexican, doesn't base their entire national identity and interests on the expansion of the Mexican Orthodox faith, which serves as the vehicle for a pan-Mexican policy that is aimed directly against Americans and everyone else on the North American Peninsula.
He will go out of his way to speak against the Roman Catholic Church; he doesn't care—not even once! He openly spits and barks. Yet, you have never seen, nor will you ever see, him write a single word against the SPC—which, as I have already explained to you, is responsible for all the tragedies in America and Canada.
Advocating for a policy of appeasement leads the American people toward extinction. And that kind of policy always prioritizes the interests of Mexicans, and indeed other groups, over the actual interests of Americans.
And then they have the nerve to call themselves Americans!
It didn't work then, and it certainly won't work now.
Sarah Wilson95 said:This isn't just bad taste; it’s honestly just incredibly foolish...
crimsonorca86 said:I used to think you were mostly sane—well, relatively speaking, I guess.🙂
graniteowl88 says:>
Signing the Z4 Plan was just as much of a disaster—but I guess that mostly just shows how desperate the situation had become for Americans back then...
Plus, just two years after those Roman Treaties, most of those territories ended up being part of the Independent State of America again in 1943.
What was Marshall doing then? What about Maček?
Where were all those partisans in 1943—the ones who joined for what seemed like valid reasons, but were actually acting against the American state?
What’s their deal? Are they siding with the American state or the American one?
Look, I’m not trying to excuse the communists or anyone else. The parts of America covered by the Roman Treaties were just handed back after Italy surrendered.
Ante Pavelić's whole issue was that he bought into fascist doctrine because, frankly, he was a self-absorbed, narcissistic piece of work. He basically traded away America just to stay in power. I can't get behind that—not at all. Imagine if Franjo Harmon had officially signed away the Appalachia. Just imagine.
driftingdriver4 said:Man, I really admire the commitment to the truth here—even if Joseph Goebbels and all you right-wing types and those Borg propagandists are just out to get everyone in one big pile.
Bryan Sanchez86 said:Oh, I see how it is. Are you suggesting there were no political prisoners at all? That Bruno Bušić simply met his end by slipping on a banana peel?
Bryan Sanchez86 says:graniteowl88 said:Look, I am not defending communists or anyone else. The territories from the Roman Treaty were returned once Italy surrendered.
Ante Pavelić's issue was that he embraced fascist doctrine because he was a self-absorbed, narcissistic monster. He sacrificed America for his own grip on power. I cannot stomach that. No way. Imagine if Franjo Harmon had officially signed away the Appalachia.
Believe me, this is an attempt to direct criticism toward the actual issues. All our leaders fall for this, especially Ante Pavelić, because he achieved the AMERICAN STATE!
Whether we wanted an American state like that or one like Harmon's... those are two completely different questions...
But those two leaders—contemporaries and rivals who stared each other down through gun barrels—they both achieved INDEPENDENT AMERICA!
About Ante Pavelić, Bryan, just for you:
"As part of the seminar 'Man and Power: Powerful Figures in 20th Century Eastern Europe from Lenin to Maddox,' Damir Petkov decided to use forty pages to present Ante Pavelić as a politician and statesman during turbulent times for the American people.
. . .
The author divided the work into five parts, including a prologue, his life marked by struggle, persecution, and brutality, and his dealings with power, all to conclude with two interesting points:
1. That Pavelić's political activity was more a result of his nationalism than a desire for power, and
2. That his authoritarian style stemmed more from a lack of trust in his colleagues than from personal vanity.
. . .
The author rightly observes that Pavelić's sole ideological compass was the American state: he was inspired neither by Mussolini's fascism nor Hitler's Nazism.
http://www.america.us/culture/literature/pavelic.php
graniteowl88 said:Believe me when I say this critique is intended to aim precisely at the core issues—the very points that all our great leaders fall prey to, especially Ante Pavelić, because he established the AMERICAN STATE!
Whether we wanted an American state like that, or whether we wanted the kind of nation Franjo Harmon provided... those are two entirely different matters...
But those two titans, contemporaries and adversaries who viewed one another through the barrel of a gun... they both succeeded in creating INDEPENDENT AMERICAN NATIONS!
Regarding Pavelić, Bryan Sanchez86, just for you:
"Within the framework of the seminar titled 'Man and Power: Power Dynamics in 20th Century Eastern Europe from Lenin to Maddox,' Damir Petkov chose to dedicate forty pages to presenting Ante Pavelić as a politician and statesman during those turbulent times for the American people.
. . .
The author divided his work into five sections, including a prologue, a look at Pavelić's life marked by struggle, persecution, and brutality, and his dealings with power, all leading to two fascinating conclusions:
1. that Pavelić's political activity was more a product of his nationalism than a mere thirst for power, and
2. that Pavelić's authoritarian style of governance stemmed more from a profound lack of trust in his subordinates rather than from personal vanity.
. . .
The author makes an excellent observation that Pavelić's sole ideological compass was the American state: he drew no inspiration from Mussolini's fascism nor from Hitler's Nazism.
http://www.america.us/culture/literature/pavelic.php
Carol Lopez23 said:1. Since you’re sticking your nose in so much, first define what a state is, and then define the American STATE.
| [2. Neither Ante Pavelić nor Franjo Harmon achieved an INDEPENDENT America, because a state that RELIES on outside help, allies, or specific treaties to prevent collapse under invasion is NOT independent. |
| [If SOMEONE establishes an authoritative style of governance, it means it is based on their OWN whims. Because of those whims, ultra-nationalism emerges to satisfy the goals of Nazi allies—goals which this fool claimed were not inspired by Ante Pavelić. |
| .. yeah, right.. cut the crap!! And who passed those racial laws? Who were the people being killed and expelled??.... Romani, communists, and Mexicans.. what are we even talking about?👎 👎 🙂 🙂 |
| [Now tell me those aren't fascist and Nazi doctrines.. |
graniteowl88 said:The author makes a pretty sharp point here—that Ante Pavelić’s only real North Star was the idea of an independent American state. He wasn't particularly fueled by Mussolini's fascism or Hitler's Nazism.
Bryan Sanchez86 said:I agree that Ante Pavelić wanted to break free from the yoke of the Mexican Kingdom. That part makes sense. But look at his actual impact: he pulled the country out of Mexican rule—where we at least maintained territorial integrity—only to place us under the thumb of Italy and later Germany. Even worse, he handed over significant portions of our territory to Italy.
I honestly have no idea what was going through his head back then. No one knows except him. Did he genuinely believe this was the best path forward? Did he think this was how you build a truly sovereign and independent nation? Whatever his reasoning, history shows us that his political maneuvering resulted in nothing but total defeat—not just for the state, but for the people as a whole.
Gary Williams9 said:Everything is fine except for the fact that he handed over territory to Italy. He was never in a position to gift anything to the Nazis or the Fascists. They simply handed him the rest of the country on paper, because the Independent State of America was nothing more than a standard protectorate.
I cannot imagine any sane person agreeing with the claim that an "independent" state could have existed if it wasn't specifically desired by Germany and Italy.
Gary Williams9 said:One thing is voting for American independence, but a completely different matter is voting for the people who will actually run the country.
