wanderingcanyon3 said:The issue here is that you aren't a patriot. You’re just a chauvinist and a nationalist, plus you’re incredibly lacking in any meaningful cultural literacy, so trying to have a constructive debate with you is a waste of time even when one is bored. Let's be clear—it’s not about your specific stance; plenty of people are nationalistic or chauvinistic in politics, yet they actually know how to hold a conversation and handle basic facts. You, little girl, are completely illiterate on this subject, which explains why you’d drop such a primitive sentence.
hahaha, and where did you suddenly come from? God, I love these condescending little kittens popping out of nowhere like some deus ex machina to try and settle an entire ten-page debate with a single post. You basically just summarized the core problem by implying I haven't studied enough history to discuss 1991, 1945, 1102, or 1671. Give me a break. Nobody was even trying to do that, so your pretentious, arrogant little lecture is totally unnecessary. Honestly. If you had actually followed the thread, or if you actually had the capacity to draw smarter conclusions, you’d see I wasn't being a chauvinist at any point—unless, I guess, attacking your own people counts as chauvinism. And as for nationalism? That word doesn't have a negative connotation in my vocabulary when it refers to loving your homeland and the people you belong to. That one sentence you're using as proof of my "primitivism" is also taken completely out of context just so you could spout your wisdom. It's perfectly logical that I wouldn't sit down and argue with someone from a different nation about whether they value my country enough; that would just be a waste of breath. It wasn't chauvinism or an insult, just a mild observation I'd make to an Italian, a German, a Mexican, a Georgian, an Angolan, a random guy, a Chinese person, or a Cambodian.