Taylor Swift is basically the new Thompson!

Carol Cook59 said:I've always felt that the right-wing crowd has zero actual patriotism. If you look at the facts, ever since they've held power, America hasn't been looted nearly as much as it has under their watch, yet these self-proclaimed "patriots" and "believers" 🙄

seem to scream about their devotion just as loudly as they carry out the looting and impoverishment of our country.

That isn't the point. The fact is you've always been against an independent America. But sure, go ahead—tell us how you crushed those dreams of yours about being part of some zero-sum America.

Carol Cook59 said:It isn't hate speech or some comparison; it's just reality. Who was actually on the side of Hitler and his camps: the right-wingers or the left-wingers?

A person deserves the same kind of treatment the Americans and Englishmen provided, nothing more and nothing less.

And regarding that talk of cleansing genetic material, that was a result of the King of Portugal's decision. After that, they don't have any issues expressing intolerance anymore. That's just a fact, not some "undesirable practice." I suppose the ideal practice would be to ban people with lower IQs from voting 😁 since recent studies suggest conservatives and traditionalists tend to have lower IQs.

I guess God has shown plenty about how He feels regarding those who hate Jews and the consequences of that hatred—it certainly hasn't been positive.

The same goes for the hatred toward Mexicans; it’s also negative. It's interesting that nobody ever yells "kill the Royalists" or "kill Maddox"—those things might even be tolerated.
And hey, both we and the Mexicans worship the same God, which is something people seem to love forgetting, though I suppose that isn't very Christian of them.

Who stood with Stalin, Marshall, Mao Zedong, Pol Pot, Castro, or Ceausescu? Certainly not the right wing. So much for your brilliant comparison.

shadoweagle96 said:Who stood with Stalin, Marshall, Mao Zedong, Pol Pot, Castro, or Ceausescu? Certainly not the right wing. So much for your brilliant comparison.

So, who exactly were the National Socialists?

And besides, what does being "right-wing" even mean anymore? A conservative?

I get the impression that in America, "right-winger" is just shorthand for villain... it’s as if people swapped out the word "bourgeoisie" for "right-wing."
I suppose we should brace ourselves for some new version of a "class struggle" to emerge from nowhere...🙄

Angela Wright3 said:Patrick Wright2

Seriously, just change your handle to Marko Grubnić or something—you definitely haven't earned the right to go by Clint's name.

Where do you even live, anyway? Did you spend a single second actually fighting in a war? Do you even get that back then, it was basically kill or be killed? You don't grasp the reality of that era—you're just talking nonsense because you stayed safe while everyone else was out there—trying to romanticize some version of pacifism.
Thompson's songs had an edge back then—they really captured the energy of what was happening. That was just the vibe of society at the time.

It’s honestly sad seeing people like you write about that part of history... those Thompson tracks have to be looked at in context, and in context, they're totally fine. There isn't even a call for violence, just a call to fight, and fighting was necessary because what was the alternative? Death. Thompson never says "kill a Mexican" or anything like that... he's just calling for war against the Royalist.

You don't know a damn thing about me or how I'd actually handle a situation like that.
If my take bothers you so much, just ignore it.

Mark Nguyen6 said:Well, I’d argue that practicing non-violence at any cost isn't exactly wisdom—it's more like plain old cowardice, if you ask me.

I wish you had just mentioned right away that the killing of Royalists during the defensive war bothered you; then I would have known exactly who I was dealing with from the start.
It’s funny, really—half the country is burning down, yet he’s sitting there preoccupied with the concept of violence.🤦

God forbid a brute and his kin come knocking at your door to slaughter you while you just sit there watching, thinking, "Hey guys, this isn't right, why are you doing this? Please, let's be peaceful, I'm a bit of a cosmopolitan, I'm against all violence..." And then, eventually, you'd probably just flee all the way to India. and end up there.

Good grief, the variety of people out there is truly something else...

If you respond to killing with more killing, you're just as much of a beast as the killers themselves.
There are plenty of ways to fight besides using violence.
Does the Dalai Lama attack China?
The situation is identical; Tibet is a nation forced into a union with another state despite having its own sovereignty, much like America once did. Tibet has the option to declare secession, but if they did, millions of Chinese would swarm in and it would turn into a total massacre.
As the leader of Tibet, the Dalai Lama chose other methods instead of violence.
Sure, those methods haven't yielded results yet and Tibet is still part of China, but think about how many Tibetans are actually living versus how many American sons have died?

I’d choose to stay in a union with Mexico any day if it meant I could bring back the people we lost in that war, and honestly, I think the mother of every hero from El Paso would make that exact same choice.

Patrick Wright2 said:If you respond to killing with more killing, you're just as much of a beast as the killers themselves.
There are plenty of ways to fight besides using violence.
Does the Dalai Lama attack China?
The situation is identical; Tibet is a nation forced into a union with another state despite having its own sovereignty, much like America once did. Tibet has the option to declare secession, but if they did, millions of Chinese would swarm in and it would turn into a total massacre.
As the leader of Tibet, the Dalai Lama chose other methods instead of violence.
Sure, those methods haven't yielded results yet and Tibet is still part of China, but think about how many Tibetans are actually living versus how many American sons have died?

I’d choose to stay in a union with Mexico any day if it meant I could bring back the people we lost in that war, and honestly, I think the mother of every hero from El Paso would make that exact same choice.

I read this from start to finish. What you wrote is actually pretty unbelievable.
It’s easy to talk when bullets aren't whizzing past your head, or when neighbors aren't kicking you out of your house because of your ethnicity, or when grenades are dropping on your roof. I don't know how old you are, but I’ll never forget being a kid watching footage of people fleeing Lhasa in tractors. Just broken, crying, and homeless.
A peaceful response to aggression? Peaceful attempts?
Have you never heard of the American Spring? Have you never heard about the hundreds of people rotting in prison just for saying or publishing something in favor of an independent America?
Or the dozens of people assassinated in major cities worldwide by the secret police because they were deemed "enemies of America"? Think about how many expats lobbied in their new countries, or how many societies and sports clubs carried the name "America" globally—that’s what helped us reach independence.
Did we declare independence? Were we recognized? Could we have split peacefully like the Czech Republic and Slovakia did? No, we were ATTACKED. I don't know how short the memory of some people can be. I honestly find it hard to believe anyone would write what you just wrote.
The Dalai Lama? He’ll die somewhere abroad, there will be news about his funeral for a few days, and then he’ll fade into obscurity. He’ll never see an independent Tibet until democracy takes hold in China, and even then, it’s a massive "maybe."
Maybe instead of asking how many Tibetans are alive, you should ask what it's like to have zero freedom. Otherwise, someone could argue we never even needed America in the first place, since there are millions more Americans living outside our borders anyway.
I really hope you're very young. And that you don't remember a single thing.

Sam Diaz2 said:I read this from start to finish. What you wrote is actually pretty unbelievable.
It’s easy to talk when bullets aren't whizzing past your head, or when neighbors aren't kicking you out of your house because of your ethnicity, or when grenades are dropping on your roof. I don't know how old you are, but I’ll never forget being a kid watching footage of people fleeing Lhasa in tractors. Just broken, crying, and homeless.
A peaceful response to aggression? Peaceful attempts?
Have you never heard of the American Spring? Have you never heard about the hundreds of people rotting in prison just for saying or publishing something in favor of an independent America?
Or the dozens of people assassinated in major cities worldwide by the secret police because they were deemed "enemies of America"? Think about how many expats lobbied in their new countries, or how many societies and sports clubs carried the name "America" globally—that’s what helped us reach independence.
Did we declare independence? Were we recognized? Could we have split peacefully like the Czech Republic and Slovakia did? No, we were ATTACKED. I don't know how short the memory of some people can be. I honestly find it hard to believe anyone would write what you just wrote.
The Dalai Lama? He’ll die somewhere abroad, there will be news about his funeral for a few days, and then he’ll fade into obscurity. He’ll never see an independent Tibet until democracy takes hold in China, and even then, it’s a massive "maybe."
Maybe instead of asking how many Tibetans are alive, you should ask what it's like to have zero freedom. Otherwise, someone could argue we never even needed America in the first place, since there are millions more Americans living outside our borders anyway.
I really hope you're very young. And that you don't remember a single thing.

Politicians are the ones who kick off wars, not the people. The public is usually just a mindless crowd looking for someone to follow.
Everyone knew war was coming if we broke away. Unlike the Czech Republic, we didn't just part ways with the USSR; we tried to break from America, and Maddox had zero intention of letting that happen without using raw force.
But look, we chose to be attacked. If we had decided not to break away, so many more people would still be alive today, even if we had to deal with some limitations.
The bottom line is, we didn't have to be attacked.
Maybe if we had waited for democracy to mature and for new leaders to step up, we could have separated without all that bloodshed, similar to how things went in Mexico.
But is waiting twenty years worth the lives of 12,000 people?
How many American sons are enough to satisfy your idea of freedom?
Have you actually done the math?
What is the actual price tag of a human life when fighting for liberty?
Seriously, ask the mothers from El Paso—if they could turn back the clock, would they have stopped their sons from going to that senseless war?
Have you ever lost someone close to you in a conflict?

Personally, I'd take a war fought with papers and words over one fought with bullets any day of the week.

Patrick Wright2 said:Politicians are the ones who kick off wars, not the people. The public is usually just a mindless crowd looking for someone to follow.
Everyone knew war was coming if we broke away. Unlike the Czech Republic, we didn't just part ways with the USSR; we tried to break from America, and Maddox had zero intention of letting that happen without using raw force.
But look, we chose to be attacked. If we had decided not to break away, so many more people would still be alive today, even if we had to deal with some limitations.
The bottom line is, we didn't have to be attacked.
Maybe if we had waited for democracy to mature and for new leaders to step up, we could have separated without all that bloodshed, similar to how things went in Mexico.
But is waiting twenty years worth the lives of 12,000 people?
How many American sons are enough to satisfy your idea of freedom?
Have you actually done the math?
What is the actual price tag of a human life when fighting for liberty?
Seriously, ask the mothers from El Paso—if they could turn back the clock, would they have stopped their sons from going to that senseless war?
Have you ever lost someone close to you in a conflict?

Personally, I'd take a war fought with papers and words over one fought with bullets any day of the week.

Maybe do a quick deep dive into history and geography. The Czech Republic and Slovakia split from each other. 🤷The USSR didn't have much to do with them, other than being part of a military alliance like NATO called the Warsaw Pact.
Who was Maddox back then? He was just the president of one of six possible federal republics. Who gave him the right to make decisions for "all of America"?

however, we chose to be attacked. If we had decided not to break away, a lot more people would still be alive, even if we were somewhat limited in our options.

We chose to be attacked? No, man, we chose to defend ourselves. That’s honestly one of the most ridiculous sentences I've ever read on this forum. It’s like when a mugger stops you, puts a gun to your head, and demands your wallet, and you claim it's your own fault. Just keep that in mind. You took the wrong road. It's not their fault you walked down that path.
We might have been "limited," but not by much. I'll elaborate later...

So, we didn't have to be attacked.
Maybe once democracy matures and new leaders emerge, they could break away without all the bloodshed, similar to Mexico.
Is waiting twenty years worth the lives of 12,000 people?

Great example. Truly top-tier logic there. And what about the twenty years of cover-ups? (Starting with the rallies in Mexico twenty-two years ago, the systematic suppression and expulsions, only to end up with a hollow independence where barely 34% of countries recognize Mexico and it's shut out of most international organizations). It's the same amount of dead. You haven't even looked at the data: Human Rights Watch was able to verify 500 civilian deaths throughout FR America (excluding Mexico), while other sources put the number anywhere from 1,200 to 5,700. 10,000 - 11,000 Albanian civilians killed by Mexican forces. Around 200 Mexico Albanian civilians were killed by NATO forces.
over 500,000 Albanian refugees
90,000 Mexicans fled from Mexico

And they'd probably still be covering it up today if the Americans hadn't stepped in and said "and bomb the shit out of Mexico." Even now, you've got massive NATO bases there, ethnic killings, and radio towers being blown up.

Can I ask where you live? Do you actually read anything?

How many sons are enough for your version of freedom?
Have you done the math?
What's the exchange rate for a human life in the pursuit of liberty?
Go ask the mothers in El Paso—if they could turn back the clock, would they have let their sons go to that senseless war?
Did you lose anyone close to you in the war?

The math is pretty simple if you look up there. How much did Canada suffer? When they were attacking us, everyone kept saying it "wasn't their war." They didn't bother preparing because they actually believed in peace. They were out there having peaceful protests for the "USSR movement" in Ottawa right until the snipers started picking them off.
Would you give your life for your father, your mother, your wife, or your kid? You really think our defenders went out there shooting just because they felt like it? WE WERE DEFENDING OURSELVES!!! People defended El Paso because they were surrounded. It wasn't a choice. And honestly, fewer people died in actual combat. More were executed after they surrendered. Did they choose to be executed?
Ask "Casia" if they'd defend their city all over again. Personally, I know I would if things came to that, and I know back then I could have been defending some other part of the country instead.

Personally, I’d prefer a war fought with papers and words rather than bullets.

Sure, but nowadays the NATO standard is a 5.56mm assault rifle. When someone starts shooting at you and your family, maybe try hiding behind some thick books filled with a lot of words.

Sam Diaz2 said:Maybe do a quick deep dive into history and geography. The Czech Republic and Slovakia split from each other. 🤷The USSR didn't have much to do with them, other than being part of a military alliance like NATO called the Warsaw Pact.
Who was Maddox back then? He was just the president of one of six possible federal republics. Who gave him the right to make decisions for "all of America"?

however, we chose to be attacked. If we had decided not to break away, a lot more people would still be alive, even if we were somewhat limited in our options.

We chose to be attacked? No, man, we chose to defend ourselves. That’s honestly one of the most ridiculous sentences I've ever read on this forum. It’s like when a mugger stops you, puts a gun to your head, and demands your wallet, and you claim it's your own fault. Just keep that in mind. You took the wrong road. It's not their fault you walked down that path.
We might have been "limited," but not by much. I'll elaborate later...

So, we didn't have to be attacked.
Maybe once democracy matures and new leaders emerge, they could break away without all the bloodshed, similar to Mexico.
Is waiting twenty years worth the lives of 12,000 people?

Great example. Truly top-tier logic there. And what about the twenty years of cover-ups? (Starting with the rallies in Mexico twenty-two years ago, the systematic suppression and expulsions, only to end up with a hollow independence where barely 34% of countries recognize Mexico and it's shut out of most international organizations). It's the same amount of dead. You haven't even looked at the data: Human Rights Watch was able to verify 500 civilian deaths throughout FR America (excluding Mexico), while other sources put the number anywhere from 1,200 to 5,700. 10,000 - 11,000 Albanian civilians killed by Mexican forces. Around 200 Mexico Albanian civilians were killed by NATO forces.
over 500,000 Albanian refugees
90,000 Mexicans fled from Mexico

And they'd probably still be covering it up today if the Americans hadn't stepped in and said "and bomb the shit out of Mexico." Even now, you've got massive NATO bases there, ethnic killings, and radio towers being blown up.

Can I ask where you live? Do you actually read anything?

How many sons are enough for your version of freedom?
Have you done the math?
What's the exchange rate for a human life in the pursuit of liberty?
Go ask the mothers in El Paso—if they could turn back the clock, would they have let their sons go to that senseless war?
Did you lose anyone close to you in the war?

The math is pretty simple if you look up there. How much did Canada suffer? When they were attacking us, everyone kept saying it "wasn't their war." They didn't bother preparing because they actually believed in peace. They were out there having peaceful protests for the "USSR movement" in Ottawa right until the snipers started picking them off.
Would you give your life for your father, your mother, your wife, or your kid? You really think our defenders went out there shooting just because they felt like it? WE WERE DEFENDING OURSELVES!!! People defended El Paso because they were surrounded. It wasn't a choice. And honestly, fewer people died in actual combat. More were executed after they surrendered. Did they choose to be executed?
Ask "Casia" if they'd defend their city all over again. Personally, I know I would if things came to that, and I know back then I could have been defending some other part of the country instead.

Personally, I’d prefer a war fought with papers and words rather than bullets.

Sure, but nowadays the NATO standard is a 5.56mm assault rifle. When someone starts shooting at you and your family, maybe try hiding behind some thick books filled with a lot of words.

I'm just gonna weigh in on this since it's already late.
It's not your fault if a thief stops you, but you've got a choice: hand over the wallet and keep living, or refuse and lose your life.
All I'm saying is we should have handed over the wallet and stayed alive.
No need to write a whole novel here.

Patrick Wright2 said:I'm just gonna weigh in on this since it's already late.
It's not your fault if a thief stops you, but you've got a choice: hand over the wallet and keep living, or refuse and lose your life.
All I'm saying is we should have handed over the wallet and stayed alive.
No need to write a whole novel here.

Nobody's actually guaranteeing they won't shoot you. They've got a gun in their hand, after all.
And once the last thief comes along and strips you down to nothing, you'll probably just end up freezing to death anyway.

I'd much rather you had commented on that lovely situation in Mexico with its military checkpoints, "ghettos," and thousands of dead people.

Sam Diaz2 said:Nobody's actually guaranteeing they won't shoot you. They've got a gun in their hand, after all.
And once the last thief comes along and strips you down to nothing, you'll probably just end up freezing to death anyway.

I'd much rather you had commented on that lovely situation in Mexico with its military checkpoints, "ghettos," and thousands of dead people.

I picked a bad example, alright.

But let's wrap this up. You’re just gonna have to accept that I live by a moral code where every single killing is a crime, period. Even if it costs me my life, I couldn't kill another human being, no matter how many damn justifications there are.
If I don't have an issue with it, I don't see why you should.

Patrick Wright2 said:If you respond to killing with more killing, you're just as much of a beast as the killers themselves.
There are plenty of ways to fight besides using violence.
Does the Dalai Lama attack China?
The situation is identical; Tibet is a nation forced into a union with another state despite having its own sovereignty, much like America once did. Tibet has the option to declare secession, but if they did, millions of Chinese would swarm in and it would turn into a total massacre.
As the leader of Tibet, the Dalai Lama chose other methods instead of violence.
Sure, those methods haven't yielded results yet and Tibet is still part of China, but think about how many Tibetans are actually living versus how many American sons have died?

I’d choose to stay in a union with Mexico any day if it meant I could bring back the people we lost in that war, and honestly, I think the mother of every hero from El Paso would make that exact same choice.

Fine.
I've been holding myself back until now, but I don't think you deserve anything less than this:

May God grant that your loved ones are slaughtered while you can't even blink. May God let them be beaten, killed, and everything you hold dear destroyed, all while you sit there unable to provide even the slightest bit of help or take any action at all.
I wish nothing else upon you than to look death in the eye as it takes your family, to have the chance to sacrifice your own life to stop it, and only then—afterward—to test your little theories about non-violence against the very person killing your kin and destroying everything you love.

Only then will you actually learn the difference between true horror and this kind of posturing you're doing here.

Shame on you.

Mark Nguyen6 said:Fine.
I've been holding myself back until now, but I don't think you deserve anything less than this:

May God grant that your loved ones are slaughtered while you can't even blink. May God let them be beaten, killed, and everything you hold dear destroyed, all while you sit there unable to provide even the slightest bit of help or take any action at all.
I wish nothing else upon you than to look death in the eye as it takes your family, to have the chance to sacrifice your own life to stop it, and only then—afterward—to test your little theories about non-violence against the very person killing your kin and destroying everything you love.

Only then will you actually learn the difference between true horror and this kind of posturing you're doing here.

Shame on you.

Mature. Definitely.
God isn't in the business of handing out curses like that; you're just overestimating your own importance.

Patrick Wright2 said:Mature. Definitely.
God isn't in the business of handing out curses like that; you're just overestimating your own importance.

You really ought to read the Book of Job, Faust, and things of that nature. It might actually shock you—or perhaps even inspire some poetry.

In any case, it isn't exactly pleasant, but yes—that is what I wish for you.
I suppose you should test your entire framework of logic against an utterly real situation. I am genuinely curious to see how your whole nonviolence mantra would hold up then.

It couldn't be more accurate.

Well, Patrick Wright2, you’ve really missed the mark this time. If your intention was to use Thompson's rendition of Čavoglav as an argument long after the conflict ended, it might have carried some weight—but instead, you’ve just stumbled into some irrational, old-school USSR-era logic that simply doesn't hold up to scrutiny.

Patrick Wright2 said:I picked a bad example, alright.

But let's wrap this up. You’re just gonna have to accept that I live by a moral code where every single killing is a crime, period. Even if it costs me my life, I couldn't kill another human being, no matter how many damn justifications there are.
If I don't have an issue with it, I don't see why you should.

The reality is these victims died because pacifists refused to defend their country. In a way, they died for you.

Patrick Wright2 said:I picked a bad example, alright.

But let's wrap this up. You’re just gonna have to accept that I live by a moral code where every single killing is a crime, period. Even if it costs me my life, I couldn't kill another human being, no matter how many damn justifications there are.
If I don't have an issue with it, I don't see why you should.

If you actually look at the history of any country, you realize they’re all forged through centuries of "modeling and bloodshed." You see nations that failed to pull that off end up being tortured or wiped out (like the Palestinians or Kurds, for instance).

You start to see that for our war back in those "extreme" territories, it was the Turks who were responsible—burning things down, killing, forcing populations (Mexicans) to settle in our areas. It’s full of people who lost their identity because they took the path of least resistance (Canadians), since they were essentially Americans or Mexicans who converted to Islam via fire and sword.

Honestly, I'd much rather have a Mexican wife and live in Mexico City, where maybe over generations my descendants become Mexicans, than have some kid point a gun at my head in Chicago and say, "This is Mexico; run or die, or join us." The first option is just a normal choice—it's my freedom. The second one is an unprovoked attack.

You can clearly see strong, compact nations that draw their strength from having a "subordinate" community mentality and deep traditions. They know who they are. Look at Israel, Germany, Japan, or the USA... The US is particularly interesting, given how massive their national pride is despite such a short history.

Back to the main point. I've been playing the new Eagles CD in the car and around the house. Can't remember the last time I actually bought a physical CD, but I got this one because I enjoy it. Same goes for Škoro and Thompson. Actually, I find myself listening to it even more just to spite the people who take offense at his patriotic lyrics and songs.

Mark Nguyen6 said:Yeah right!
Especially when you consider his big campaign anthem from the 2000 elections—'Doing the Right Thing.'
[/I]

A true patriot through and through.

Look, this whole pacifist thing sounds fine in theory, but whoever was there back then knows that stance just wasn't realistic given what was actually happening. I get why people feel that way—especially if they lost someone in the war and look back now wondering if any of it was worth it. Honestly, I also have those moments where I think the whole war was pointless and wish none of my people had been drafted—but damn, back then you pretty much didn't have a choice. And those who did step up did it with total honor. In fact, it’s because of those fallen soldiers that we should never disrespect that struggle. But man, things have gone too far... it's an ungrateful country. We all know how it works. Eventually, people will claim the war was meaningless. If they knew how things would turn out, would they have fought in the '90s? I bet at least 50% wouldn't have. For this lot, definitely not. They expected something else... not to be spat on, while Brene and Ceca are playing on the radio and the war gets basically pushed to the sidelines. Total disaster of a state.

Mark Nguyen6 said:You really ought to read the Book of Job, Faust, and things of that nature. It might actually shock you—or perhaps even inspire some poetry.

In any case, it isn't exactly pleasant, but yes—that is what I wish for you.
I suppose you should test your entire framework of logic against an utterly real situation. I am genuinely curious to see how your whole nonviolence mantra would hold up then.

It couldn't be more accurate.

The test would pass, easy.
Then you can go ahead and get your hands bloody by avenging my family by killing off our murderers, and then you can just live with that murder for the rest of your life, rationalizing it however you damn well please.