General statistics
List of Youtube channels
Youtube commenter search
Distinguished comments
About

Republitarian
ABC News
comments

Comments by "Republitarian" (@republitarian484) on "ABC News" channel.

One of the worst pieces of legislation ever passed.
46
@arc8216 . . . just because we know the Great Replacement is true does not mean we agree with violence.
41
Give us Clemency or WE WILL RIOT! That's the new standard.
41
@panterafanloco1600 . . . and what about "Hispanics" with Spanish ancestry. Are they going to be held accountable for their ancestors ties to colonialism and slavery?
26
@panterafanloco1600 . . . and also remember that white European lands were invaded by people of color long before the white man sailed the ocean looking to settle lands on other continents.
25
@againstviralmisinformation510 . . .I'm fine with English. . .a much better language. And why would you propose people learn a language of Colonizers?
22
@againstviralmisinformation510 . . . could care less if more people speak it. More people are poor than middle class. . .does that mean I should try to be poor? The US is over with anyway. It's going to be interesting how it manifests itself.
21
@decartes_3168 . . .Actually, I can answer both because the 1965 immigration act is one of the reasons why the US will be over with. Because a large multi-racial society will fail. Even Barrack Obama has made comments on if a large multiracial society will be successful. A little diversity is fine and probably a good thing, but too much diversity brings division and conflict. Hence the reason we're so divided right now. Many black people think they are getting even with the white man. But in the end they may end up replacing themselves with Asians, Arabs, Indians (India), Hispanics, etc. And those groups have no guilt from slavery or colonialism. They're a minority just like black people. Which is not right. At least the white man tried to atone for the sins of slavery and colonialism (even white people that have no ancestral ties to slavery or colonialism like Polish, Irish, Hungarian, Swedish, etc.). Black and native Indians were the only groups that deserved any type of special treatment for what happened to them. They were Americas minorities. Not an Arab Muslim from Pakistan. Anyway, that's all gone now. Now it's replace whitey and see what we get. You're not going to get Utopia once the white man is gone from North America. Hopefully Europe can manage to stay majority white.
20
@fwep679 . . . but is it the truth?
14
It's true. Even Left wingers have openly talked about it.
11
@sabin97 . . . what's odd is that you've never had an event like this. To be a majority where they basically hate themselves. What other country, race, ethnicity, nationality, etc. has bent over backwards to demonize itself but then also welcome its replacement? Name one other "country of color" that openly welcomes people of all stripes, colors, ethnicities, races, etc. Do you think Nigeria would welcome 300 million Chinese? What about Pakistan, Somalia, Israel, Mexico, India, etc. Also, it seems that white people are already becoming a hated majority. I'd hate to think how much more we'd be hated once we're just another minority? Or maybe it might end up being a good thing?
9
@sabin97 . . .I think you meant justified pride. White people build nice societies because we are more well rounded than other races. Who are these "thugs" and "troops" you mention? Seems like you have some animosity towards white people? Why would we then want to live among you? "its replacement" meaning white people/culture. Funny how you skipped over the replacement of Indigenous people of the Americas. So I guess whitey shouldn't feel any guilt or shame over replacing the "Native Tribes" of the Americas right? By the way, when are "Hispanics" (a made up term) with Spanish Ancestry going to be held accountable for their sins of slavery and colonialism. The British and French actually did do some things. Never heard of Spain doing anything. Sorry, but those countries you mention don't have open borders. Most "countries of color" have immigration and citizenship laws designed to keep their ethnic/racial majority the same. They'll let you white people live there for their money, but you can be quite certain that if enough white people started to move there permanently the laws would be enforced/changed. The United States is on its way to becoming just another 3rd world country LOL.
8
@hydrocarbon82 . . . or maybe you can call a spade a spade. The media needs to be held accountable for stoking division in order for their Democrat cohorts to grab more power. This was a Racist Black Supremacist BLM member that purposefully killed white people.
8
@decartes_3168 . . .How so in regards to what? The US being over with or the 1965 Immigration Act?
8
@Tazarah . . . you are correct. But don't act like white Europeans lands weren't invaded by people of color many times over long before the white man sailed the ocean looking to settle lands on other continents. And look at the result. Even though the United States has its share of atrocities, we still managed to build one of the greatest societies ever. But now that is on its way out.
8
But that still doesn't mean we can live peacefully together in large groups. The different races are actually that. . .different. And they will structure their societies differently from each other. Hence the reason why so many "countries of color' have immigration and citizenship laws designed to keep their ethnic/racial majority the same. It has only been white countries that have been duped into opening up all their borders to every creed and color from all around the world. Let's see Japan open up their borders. Nope. They want to keep Japan Japanese. A little diversity is fine and probably a good thing. Too much diversity brings division and conflict.
7
@tonyjones2524 . . .the Great Replacement.
7
@Tazarah . . . and I forgot. I sort of support Reparations. But it has to come with Land for Separation or repatriation back to another country. But at this point with all these "other" minorities it's probably a dead deal. Why should a brown Arab Pakistani, or Eastern Somalian, or Brown Indian (India) have the same minority status as a black American (that was a descendant of slavery) or a Native American Indian? They shouldn't. Those two groups were the original "minorities" that deserved some type of compensation, treatment, etc. that was different due to their history in the United States. But heII. . . now every "person of color" is an oppressed minority when that was never the case. A brown Arab Pakistanis ancestors never went thru slavery like black Americans. And the newer "people of color" have no guilt about the history of slavery or colonization. They just want the benefits that come from claiming they're a minority. Good luck when us white people are gone and finding our way back to Europe.
6
@Dorkeydaze . . . and look at the countries where Spanish is spoken vs English LOL!
6
@JeffMcDuffie72MeridianGate . . . culture and race are inseparable. Culture is downstream from race and politics is downstream from culture. The different races are just that. . . different. As the OP said up above is that wealth can sometimes mute those differences. The more wealthy people become the less they notice race within the group they associate with. And the lower you get on the socioeconomic ladder the more "racism" you'll encounter. I rarely look at it as racism and more of tribalism in varying degrees between individuals within that race. Some white people are more tribal than others while some black people are more tribal than others. Men tend to be more tribal than women. But those small differences become amplified when larger groups are involved. Go to any College lunch room even today and the students tend to self-segregate by race. People fool themselves into thinking just because they have a few friends of different races that it can then be applied to larger groups. Usually individual friends of different races have enough in common where any differences are overlooked by manners or just an individual having different tastes. But those little differences become exacerbated when larger groups of different races interact. The group dynamic will trump the individual trait. There are also some individuals that can bridge the natural racial divide. C. 0wen$ and La-ry EIder come to mind. There's a few derogatory names that their own tribe call them. That alone tells you something. This isn't a statement or question on one race being better than another. It's just an honest acknowledgement of the races being different. A little diversity is fine and probably a good thing. Too much diversity leads to division and conflict. In order for a nation to prosper you need a dominate super-majority of one ethnicity/race where any minority living within that country adheres, accepts, appreciates, admires, etc. the customs, norms, traditions, language, culture, laws, history, etc. of the majority. But that minority must stay a minority. And the majority welcomes that minority as they feel proud and flattered that a different ethnic/racial group would adopt their culture and country as their own. But as the minorities population #'s increase to a certain point (I have no idea at what % that would be but I'm assuming 10% to 20% minority) that feeling of welcoming and flattery turns to concern, displacement, and resentment. I'm sure the Native Indigenous Tribes of the Americas were curious and flattered at first when the white man set foot on North America. But at some point as the white man's #'s increased they became concerned. If multiracialism within countries were the norm then why do so many "countries of color" have strict immigration and citizenship laws designed to keep their ethnic/racial majorities the same. Such as "your grandparents had to be a citizen within such and such country for 10 years".
4
@kregadeth5562 @ Zachary Cruz Tom Seller is right. WWII is not the victory you've been led to believe. We fought on behalf of Imperialist Nations with Colonies around the Globe (Britain & France) and Communist Dictatorships (Soviet Union & China "soon to be Communist"). General Patton. . . "we defeated the wrong enemy". Try to view WWII from the other perspective besides the winners and what you've been taught. I also used to believe that WWII was a great victory but I've started to learn the other perspective of WWII and the long-term consequences that the West is currently dealing with because of that "victory".
4
@newton6936 . . . Moors, Turks, Mongols, etc. etc etc. Look them up.
3
A Racist Black Supremacist BLM Member purposefully ran over innocent white people with his car in order to kill them. . .that's what happened.
3
@JeffMcDuffie72MeridianGate . . . Cold hard fact I can't face? What? Look at how narrow minded your response is. Just because someone is from a different culture doesn't mean a person from another culture doesn't like them. They just prefer to associate with their own kind. It's when larger groups of different races interact is when tensions rise. A Cold Hard Fact that you ignore is that culture is downstream of race. Race and culture are inseparable. The different races are just that different. Biology, behaviors, IQ, personality, temperament, risk aversion/taking, planning & organization, athleticism, etc. is more than skin deep.
3
@tonyjones2524 . . . agreed. The Chinese could replace everyone.
3
@againstviralmisinformation510 . . . so are we talking poor and middle class in America or the world? Are we talking speaking Spanish in America or the world? My comment, and your comment, was in regards to Spanish being spoken world wide more than English. . . which is debatable. And my response that there are more poor people in the "world" than middle class. I thought you could have deduced that based on the context of our conversation or without me having to say "world". Or how about this. Is there a correlation of wealth and language? Seems to me English is more associated with higher standard of living than Spanish. I'm not English by the way.
3
@ttvBamBam1685 . . . Think about what you just said and now apply that to "the Great Replacement". Now you're on to something.
3
@ttvBamBam1685 . . . if we're so easily divided by race then maybe it was done on purpose. If "diversity" is a strength then why are we so easily divided? You kind of make the argument yourself but you don't see it.
3
Voter fraud.
3
@DG-nk7jo . . .are you really this ignorant? Are you referring to the Zimmerman Note? That was in relation to WWI. Please just stop with your ignorance.
3
@CadillacJak . . . America should not have joined either of the world wars. I used to also think that WWI & especially WWII were great victories. I've since changed my mind. WWII was not the great victory we've been led to believe. Yeah. . . it sounds sort of nuts, but the more you research it from all perspectives you'll eventually come to this realization. The decline of the West started with WWII. Look at Britain and France. . . in decline. . . shadows of their former greatness. (but if their Imperialism wasn't great why did we fight on their side?). The United States is also in decline. If you look hard enough and put all the pieces together you'll see it goes back, in part, to WWI & WWII.
3
@Churd84538 . . . I agree with a lot of what you say. But race and culture go hand in hand. It isn't just color. Race is more than skin deep. A Multiracial/multicultural society will fail. It brings division and conflict. It's failing right in front of your eyes and people refuse to see it and refuse to admit it. It doesn't mean any one race is better than the other. It just means we are different enough to where we will structure our societies differently from each other. But since the dominate/majority white culture is fading into just being another "minority" group there will be nothing to bring us all together leaving a vacuum for an authoritarian regime to take power.
2
And setting America back 50 years would be a bad thing? Rome didn't fall in a day, but do you think those Romans in the last few decades knew they would be the last?
2
@TheDeadlyVirus . . . I would prefer to live in a country where my race is the majority. There's nothing wrong with being a minority as it's based on the perception of the individual. But if you look at how the world is structured most people prefer to live among their own kind. The world already pretty much self-segregates. Black Americans did not have that choice. They were brought here as slaves. So as I've become more tribal myself it has helped me understand why many black Americans have resentment towards this country. I guess you could say the same with Native American Indians. But many of them welcomed the white man and also they were fighting amongst themselves too much. Anyway, I've got quite a few conversations going and need to tap out for a while.
2
@tinadraper9143 . . . Do you consider yourself European? And if so, then do you consider it at all times? Or do you get to play the minority card?
2
A certain individual from 1930s Germany thought so as well.
2
@justthatgirl-ct4jo . . . And one other thing to ponder is that the United States is/was the most prosperous nation in the world. If race relations were/are this bad then do you really think they will ever be good? I doubt it. If we couldn't get it to work nobody can. That is why the majority of the world, especially countries of color, self-segregates and they have immigration/citizenship laws designed to keep their ethnic/racial majority the same. Only white countries have been duped into opening up their borders to all colors and creeds from all around the world. And what do we get in return? Accusations of systemic racism, white privilege, diversity initiatives, DEI, quotas, equity, etc. all to discriminate against whites for the benefits of "people of color".
2
@ano_nym . . . I sort of consider myself a quasi white nationalist, but the same here. . .I have friends that are non-white and I probably see them more now that my life long friends. I find it funny when my White Liberal friends talk about "diversity" and yet all of their friends are other white liberals.
2
Hey whypepo. . .the United States is over with. You're being replaced and this country will soon be a country of color!!!!
2
@DG-nk7jo . .you obviously only know the version of WWII from the victors perspective. What is a Nazi by the way? They never referred to themselves as that. Hitler wanted Lebensraum. . .more land for the Germanic people of Europe. England and France did not like that. They were the big boys that were colonizing the globe. They didn't want any competition from another European power. England especially liked to have the mainland European powers always divided. Germany also had to deal with the threat of France from the West and Russia from the East; Franco-Russian Pact. Hitler never wanted global domination. If you can cite the source of where he stated that please let me know. But I guess taking sides with two very powerful Imperialist nations with colonies around the globe that subjugated the indigenous peoples of those areas was just fine and dandy. And also pairing up with a Communist dictatorship that had ambitions to spread Communism throughout Europe and the rest of the world was just fine and dandy too. And by the 1930's it was well know of all the murder, gulags, imprisonment, starvation, etc. that was happening in the Soviet Union. (Side note. . . the increasing influence of Communism was in part what gave rise to Hitler. Which is also why Germany became ultra nationalistic as Communism seems to be more anti-nationalism and more global). And what part did the Treaty of Versailles play in the rise of Hitler? After all, Germany was punished for a war you could argue they did not start and severely punished for a war one could argue they only lost on paper. Germany was forced to cede lands to other nations, pay war reparations, and had many other sanctions imposed on them. On top of that, they had to fend off a Communist coup shortly after WWI by Spartacists. Their economy eventually collapsed and their currency suffered from hyper-inflation. Also, many historians blame WWII on the Treaty of Versailles. So do the people/countries that drafted and signed the Treaty of Versailles also share some responsibilities for WWII? Anyway, you really need to learn the other perspective of WWI and WWII.
2
@IzayaTijisPrincess . . . Much of the World Speaks English!!! Do you not see the irony in your comment! That alone should make you want to learn the other perspective of WWI and WWII. Germany did not want to take over the entire world. Why do people still believe that? They wanted Lebensraum. England, France, and Russia did not like that. European countries were always in competition for power. . . especially England and France. Why are they not evil? England loved the mainland powers being divided. It made their lives easier.
2
@michaelroot6064 . . . Jews have Israel. . . an ethno-religious nation where one, for all intents and purposes, must be Jewish to become a citizen. I thought an ideology coupled with race was bad?
2
@michaelroot6064 . . . seems like white people are being passively replaced with mass immigration. When does that passive replacement turn into violent replacement? I guess we shouldn't worry because "everything's going to be all white".
2
@DG-nk7jo . . . they never referred to themselves as Nazi. Their political adversaries used Nazi as a derogatory term. The fact that you do not know this should also make you wonder what else you do not know.
2
@DG-nk7jo . . . your citation is not in relation to Hitler or members of the NSDAP referring to themselves as Nazis. Please cite where they referred to themselves as Nazis? Now take the argument you're making and turn it around. How about we create a derogatory word to refer to a group of people with a that have an ideology and race that are intertwined? Can you think of a group that fits that description? I'm not arguing for support one way or another. All I'm asking is that people need to learn the other perspective and history of WWI and WWII.
2
@DG-nk7jo . . . "Gonzalez". . . have you been made to atone for your ancestors sins of Slavery and Colonialism? The Spanish Conquistadors were some of the worst colonizers to walk the earth. They also participated in the Atlantic Slave trade.
2
@CadillacJak . . . OK. . .so explain to me then why the United States had to involve itself in WWI and WWII. It should be easy right. Maybe first read some of my prior comments and then make your case.
2
Open Borders for lsraeI then right? Think about it and then get back to us.
1
@spencerstarosta8912 . . are you disgusted that Palestinians were displaced to create an ethno-religious nation with the right of return? Open Borders for lsraeI.
1
HitIer showed more respect to Jesse Owens than FDR.
1
@PC Principal . . .actually, the Constitution is more powerful. And why weren't these mass shootings common back 40+ years ago? Liberalism.
1
Funny how I see 4 replies and yet I can only read 1 comment. The Great Replacement is true. It's happening right before our eyes. The fact that the Left is willing to lie right to your face shows what they have planned.
1
@panterafanloco1600 . . . I think white people care. If the Natives cared that they were being displaced and replaced don't you think white people care?
1
@panterafanloco1600 . . . I'm not talking about all Hispanics. I'm talking about "Hispanics" (a made up ethnicity) that have Spanish ancestry. Their ancestors are responsible for slavery and colonialism.
1
@panterafanloco1600 . . . and not ALL white people were involved in slavery or colonialism. What blame should a white Polish American bear? None!
1
@panterafanloco1600 . . . European lands were invaded countless times before white people decided to sail the oceans looking to settle lands on other continents. Are people jealous that white people were better at it?
1
@panterafanloco1600 . . .why were the Natives afraid of white settlers? They were just immigrants looking for a better life right? And many brown people living in Europe for over 1,000 years are not native to Europe. So why should they welcome their displacement? The different races are just that. . . different. And those different races will structure their societies differently. A large multiracial country will fail. Even Barrack Obama has made comments on if a large multiracial society will be able to succeed. People are tribal by nature. There is nothing wrong with a racial group of people to want to live among one another in a country they created. It doesn't mean they hate another group of people. They just prefer their own tribe. And that holds true for almost all ethnicities and race. A little diversity is fine and probably a good thing. Too much diversity bring division and conflict. Just take a look around.
1
@panterafanloco1600 . . . can you see my response or did youtube delete it?
1
@thebarbarian3108 . . . I don't know. I guess it's habit. Maybe because I'm typing next to a persons name during a reply and it seems odd to put in paragraph indent or start a sentence with a lower case letter.
1
@sabin97 . . . I am afraid that this country will change. That is part of the Great Replacement theory. Change the racial make-up and you will be able to change the politics of the nation and change it from a Free Market Capitalist society to a Socialist society. Do you think the Native tribes of North America were afraid of white settler expansion and displacing them? Why? I guess you could argue some welcomed the white man and some fought against the white man. Who do you cast blame on. . . the xenophobic Indians that did not welcome the white man or the open minded Indians that welcomed the white man? See how that works. I just believe the different races are just that. . . different. And those different races will structure their societies differently. It's not a question of one race being better than another. We are just different. And I'm not even arguing for a pure one race society as then that also will be failed Utopian pursuit. A little diversity is fine and probably a good thing. Too much diversity brings division and conflict.
1
@newton6936 . . .what do you mean you guys? What did a Polish, Hungarian, Irish, Swedish, German, etc. white American do? Most of those white people came to the United States as slavery was on its way out and colonialism was complete. It was mostly the English, French, & Spanish that partook in those events. And when are those "Hispanics" with Spanish Ancestry going to be held accountable for their ancestral ties to Slavery and Colonialism? Do Spanish "Hispanics" get a pass?
1
LOL. . . even Leftists have openly promoted the Great Replacement. It's not a conspiracy theory. It's reality.
1
@justtwobrotherspokemon . . . why is it radical by nature? Do you think those within the Native Tribes of the Americas that warned their fellow brothers and sisters of the dangers of white settlers and white expansion were conspiracy theorists? The United States was almost 90% white in 1960. It is now only about 58% white. That is a much quicker displacement than what happened to the Natives of the Americas. And it's going to accelerate in the coming decades as white people were "responsible" and kept their birth rates low for many reasons (another long conversation). And now mass immigration is happening in Europe. Look up Barbara Spectre and many others. It's not a conspiracy theory. It is a real theory that was planned long ago and is being implemented. You really need to red pill yourself on a lot of history that has not been taught. Why does almost every other "country of color" have immigration and citizenship laws designed to keep their ethnic/racial majority the same? Because they are tribal by nature and realize they want to live mostly among their own kind. It's human nature. A multiracial society will fail. Even Barrack Obama has made comments in regards to whether or not a large multiracial society will succeed.
1
@I.D.I.O.C.R.A.C.Y. . . . many studies have been done over the many decades and they have shown that on average the different races are different. I find it amazing that people that believe in evolution only think that evolution happened skin deep. Why are so many NBA players black? Does evolution only work from the neck down? Open Borders for Japan. Open Borders for Pakistan. Open Borders for India. Open Borders for Nigeria. Open Borders for all Non-white countries.
1
@waterbottleart2662 . . .it does create conflict. History has shown it does. Also, the world shows us that different races self-segregate and that they also create immigration/citizenship laws designed to keep "others" out of their territory. How old are you? Do you really value whatever krap "eduation" was spoon fed to you? I got my degree almost 30 years ago and even I knew then it was watered down and heavily influenced by "Leftists". The Scandinavian/Nordic countries were always brought up by the Left on how "Socialism" worked (even though they weren't Socialist but Capitalist with generous social benefits). And it was always mentioned how "Homogeneous" they are/were. You're not a scientist if you can't see that the different races are different. Read my comments above. I already said I can't really put a % on too much diversity but we all know it when it happens. Sort of like when Detroit started to get outside money invested in it and more huwhyte people started to move in. They started complaining about how it's changing the culture and gentrification of a majority black city. What's the difference between love making and porn? It's a fine line but we all know it. Does Japan even have any black people? LOL. How "diverse" is Japan? How many black people live in India? How many Arab Muslims peacefully live in India? Almost the entire non-white world has immigration/citizenship laws designed to keep their ethnic/racial majority the same. What's a "Hispanic"? If I learn Spanish and live in Central America for a year can I say that I'm "Hispanic"? Are they descendants of Spanish Colonizers? Are they from a Central American tribe? North American tribe? So if diversity is good then I guess the world will stop blaming the white man for taking North American "Indigenous" lands right? We were just innocent white settlers looking for a better life. It was those xenophobic indians that claimed it was their land.
1
@tonyjones2524 . . . the United States will most likely be a 3rd world country in 20 to 30 years.
1
@jackmonroe3284 . . . hey nitwit. . . lookup what "President" Biden said in regards to America becoming less white.
1
@vitalsigns2679 . . . and how's it working out? Not too well. Do you think China, Japan, Nigeria, Somalia, Pakistan, India, Mexico, Israel, etc. would let millions upon millions of different races/ethnicities into their countries? NO. That's why they have immigration and citizenship laws directly and indirectly structured to keep their racial majority the same.
1
@chrisabel6944 . . . agreed.
1
Maybe France, England, and Spain can take all the descendants of slaves into their countries since it was mainly them that brought them over.
1
Correction George. . . "A BLACK MAN drove his SUV into a Christmas Parade. . . "
1
@againstviralmisinformation510 . . . there's not going to be a United States in a few decades.
1
@Tazarah . . . yes. So those that are arguing for Reparations would be trying to justify confiscation of peoples property for what the English, French, Spanish did in "ancient" history? See how that game works. Or how about this. If people are going to bring up the sins of Europeans then the sins of the Moors, Turks, Ottoman Empire, Monguls, etc etc etc. and all those other "people of color" need to be reviewed. So why does a white Polish American have any guilt or blame for slavery or colonialism when they basically emigrated after those events were on their way out? And why does a "Hispanic" with Spanish Ancestry get a pass on slavery and colonialism when their ancestors were very involved in both of those atrocities and were probably the worst colonizers to walk the earth? I could really care less at this point as the United States is in decline and it's going down fast. In some respects I think that's a good thing and in other respects I think it's quite sad. I guess it depends on how it's all going to play out. I personally don't think a large multi-racial society will work. A little diversity is fine and probably a good thing. Too much brings division and conflict. Funny thing is, is that now that I've become more tribal in my attitude I understand the resentment and chip on their shoulder that many black people have with the United States. And I agree more and more with Malcomb X not trusting a white liberal.
1
@Dorkeydaze . . . They're not crying about being replaced? What? White people have been demonized for being colonizers and taking their lands. . .even white people whose ancestors were never involved in slavery or colonialism such as Polish, Hungarian, Swedish, Irish, etc. If they think they're countries are so nice then why are they crossing our border (a predominately white country. . . almost 90% white at one time) by the millions? Why not just stay in their nice countries? You can't even see your own contradiction with each argument you make. And I am complaining about being replaced. I like the beautiful white countries white people have built. I don't think different races can live together in large %s in the same country without division and conflict. A little diversity is fine and probably a good thing. Too much diversity brings division and conflict.
1
@Username_647 . . . I mention those that invaded white lands above. It doesn't matter how long they were there for. White people stopped their invasion. Don't be upset that innocent white people looking for a better life were better at settling other lands than those that tried to settle in Europe. Whites will eventually find their way back to Europe. The United States is over with. I think the West is on the verge of collapse. Maybe it is needed and was overdue.
1
@Username_647 . . . Sorry I missed this one. The Black/Brown MOORS conquered and ruled Spain for over 700 years. Many more invasions also. Look it up big boy.
1
@nedmode9412 . . . we might end up getting a river. . but it's not going to be from tears.
1
Nazi Germany? General Patton came to believe "we defeated the wrong enemy". Have you ever wondered why things seem to be going the wrong way in this country? Maybe you need to learn the other perspective of WWI and WWII.
1
@elbinx760 . . . what weapon couldn't be used to assault someone?
1
@i.s1134 . . . I get your point, but you need to educate yourself a little more on WWI and WWII. General Patton came to believe we defeated the wrong enemy.
1
It's starting to happen all over. America is in decline and possibly on the verge of collapse.
1
@CadillacJak . . .what economic fallout? So going to war and making it even bigger and more destructive would have been better for our economy and the global economy? How about the fact that the United States benefited economically because we were probably the only large country and homeland was not affected by WWI or WWII. But then you have to ask yourself how much more would we have benefited by not wasting money on military spending, deployment, and American deaths while also benefiting from the same scenario of the world being in shambles after WWII. And if we stayed out of WWII Germany and the Soviet Union may have fought each other longer and the Soviet Union may not have taken 1/2 of Europe under their Iron Curtain and we may have prevented a 50 year Cold War and Nuclear Arms race. Maybe Hitler could have been our pawn and hammer to stop the spread of Communism in Europe. (Please refer back to my comment about Communism being partly responsible for the rise of Hitler along with the Treaty of Versailles). Can you elaborate on your economic fallout bro? LOL. I'm seriously not trying to be a smart A##. But all I want is for people to view WWI and WWII from a different perspective.
1
@CadillacJak . . .the main reason Japan attacked the United States was that they thought we would avoid getting into a conflict with them. It was a gamble they took and it was the wrong one. And Germany declared war on the United States for the same reason. Japan and Germany wanted the United States to stay out of the war. And technically the United States broke some treaty (can't think of it off the top of my head) but the United States supplying and supporting England and China was an act of aggression. Look it up. I'm tired and having a brain lapse right now. Do you not find it IRONIC that two of our greatest allies since WWII have been Germany and Japan? Do you not find it ironic that two of our greatest enemies have been the Soviet Union/Russian and China?
1
@IzayaTijisPrincess . . . How many more millions of white Europeans were killed above 6 million? England and France killed people all over the world. The Soviet Union and China have killed many more people. Why are we even having the Olympics in China with their history of 50+ million killed and current genocide? So I suppose you support the dissolution of Israel? An ethno-religious-ideological nation. Many see International Capitalism and Communism as two sides of the same coin. You can take it from there.
1
@IzayaTijisPrincess . . . I'm not sure Hitler would have killed every Jew. I think his main cause, at first, was to rid Germany and eventually Europe of Jews and give them a homeland. I believe the Transfer Agreement was in relation to this. He did not like the nature of the Jew and believed they were inherently different from native Europeans. He saw them as subversive along with other characteristics that ran against white Europeans. Also, the Balfour Declaration did not sit well with Germans. Hitler despised Communism as he saw it as one with Judaism. . . Jewish Bolshevism. He also did not trust International Capitalism as he also saw it as a means to undermine a nation's interest. This is where International Capitalism and Communism are referred to as different sides of the same coin.
1
@gumblodobbins4465 . . . it's not in line with the one sided history that you've been fed. I used to be the same way, but then I started lookin at WWI and WWII from different perspectives. I suggest you do the same. Maybe reread just a little of what I've posted and think about some of the things I've stated. Just remember that the victors write the history books.
1
The Holodomor was just as bad if not worse. Millions of Ukrainians starved on purpose by Communists/Soviets. And yet we did nothing to stop that even though our intelligence knew it was happening. Imagine starving so bad you have to watch your children die in front of you only to find yourself eating their dead corpse soon after. Imagine your farming community starving so bad you have to protect your children from being kidnapped and eaten. When are their stories going to be heard? How many college kids even know about the Holodomor? Communists need to pay for their crimes.
1
@gumblodobbins4465 . . . LOL. . . who cares about a degree. College is pretty much useless. I "earned" my degree from a prestigious private college over 25 years ago and even then I knew the curriculum was watered down. It's a joke. I also have a minor in history along with 2 other majors. Who cares. I'm the furthest thing from Russia or China. I absolutely hate Communism and Communists. I used to be almost a pure far right Libertarian until I realized there are so many flaws in that ideology from a practical standpoint. Long conversation. So you think it's a good idea to discount the German's perspective from the 1920's and 1930's? That seems very ignorant as to ignore what caused certain major historical events to happen. Soviet Union, North Korea, Cuba, Vietnam, China, Cambodia, Venezuela, etc etc. etc. Sure seems like the Left has a very good track record of human rights violations. And here we are having the Olympics in China. Communism is still looked at as a viable political/economic system when it has and does create misery and death. If fails miserably wherever it is tried. And it definitely won't work in the West unless they manage to replace "us" as it's not a system for "us". Why don't we chase down Communists that have committed crimes against humanity as there's no shortage of those crimes from the Left. Seems like you're just angry that the other perspective of WWI and WWII is being talked about more and more. Also, you don't sound too educated regardless of your degree. . . not sure but maybe it's how you structured your sentence or the limited amount of information you replied with.
1
@AtlisDe . . . and why was it any of our business on what Japan was doing in Manchuria? or what Germany was doing in Europe? Did we go to war with China when they started murdering 10's of millions of people? Heck, we're in China right now for the Olympics when they are committing genocide against the Uyghurs. Did we go to war with the Soviet Union when they purposefully starved millions of Ukrainians or were murdering millions of political prisoners or throwing them in the gulags? Did we declare war the the Soviet Union when they invaded Poland? So I guess it's fine for you to pick and choose who we need to save and which wars we need to involve ourselves in? Again, you bring a limited perspective to the table. And now it's 11 million people? 10 million Ukrainians were purposefully starved to death and the United States did nothing. Are you a Holodomor denier?
1
@gumblodobbins4465 . . . Not a boomer doofus. Looks like you can't do math either. I'm guessing you're low IQ. Modern "academia". . .LOL. . . where they've lowered their standards to where anyone can get accepted such as yourself. You seem to have a problem with people discussing another perspective to WWI and WWII. Heck, you don't even bring up any historical references to refute my claims even though you state you have your degree in history. General Patton. . ."we defeated the wrong enemy". Being that you have a history degree you should know of this quote. What do you think it means? After all. . .he was one of the top commanders in WWII. You do know who he is right? Ayo. . .I'm not looking to change your mind anyway.
1
@gumblodobbins4465 . . . and yet here you are responding LOL. I'm only defending "Nazis" to the extent that you side with Communists or the Imperialist Colonizers. I'm just arguing for the other perspective to be told and not just demonized as evil. Communism has killed many more people than any other radical ideology and yet it's still widely accepted as a viable political/economic system. I'm not arguing everyone is dumb. But many are ignorant on this subject, like I used to be, of the other perspective. You're the one that brought up your degree in history and then did not cite or state any historical fact. I brought it up almost in a sense to refute any value most college degrees have. Why is a young person such as yourself wasting your time arguing with some old dude on youtube comments section? Says more about you than me.
1
@CadillacJak . . . war is great for economies? Are they still feeding people that line of garbage? Please tell me how destroying things is good for the economy. So WWII was good but the Vietnam war was bad? Was the Cold War good? Good or bad, all I'm arguing is for people to look at WWI and WWII from another perspective. Anyway, gotta go. I'm tapped out of this discussion. Spent way too much time on it already.
1
@gumblodobbins4465 . . . my bro. There is plenty of historical perspective that supports what I'm saying. And I cite much of it in this thread. It is well argued and agreed upon that the Treaty of Versailles is what caused WWII along with Communist agitation. So are they saying that the punishment from the ToV on Germany was too severe and that the reactionary backlash that arose was inevitable? Hitler did not want to take over the world. He wanted Lebensraum. England and France did not like that as they were the power players in Europe. Russia/Soviet Union also did not like that either hence the Franco-Russian Pact. So it was OK for England and France to have colonies around the world, but when Germany wanted to expand their influence just among other countries in Europe of similar people that is not OK? It's OK for the Soviet Union to take over European countries and spread Communism (which eventually did happen) is OK but not Germany?
1
@gumblodobbins4465 . . .exclusion? Everyone already knows that side of the story. . .the victors story. Did you know that ethnic Germans were being persecuted in lands that were formerly German territory and that Hitler pleaded with Britain and France to put a stop to it. The Broomberg Massacre, also known as Bloody Sunday, is one example. Without revisiting and questioning history we would never have known that it was actually the Soviets that were responsible for the Katyn Forest Massacre. The Germans were blamed for it all the way up until the 1990s. You state you have a degree in history and yet fail to mention anything in relation to any historical events. Again, all I'm asking is for people to view WWI and WWII with an open mind and look at all perspectives. Do you ever question why did Woodrow Wilson (WWI) and FDR (WWII) both pushed for entry into the World Wars? WWI was a complete disaster. There was no reason for us to enter that war. . . it was basically a stalemate and pretty much over. The Zimmerman Note is questionable at best. . .more like an excuse. FDR was breaking international treaties by supplying England and China (I can't think of them off the top of my head) during war time. FDRs acts were seen as an act of aggression. Truman drops the atomic bomb and then proceeds to get us involved in the Korean war. Kennedy, along with France, gets us involved in Vietnam. Then LBJ doubles down with the Gulf of Tonkin incident to formalize our involvement in the Vietnam War. ALL Democrats.
1
@gumblodobbins4465 . . . take a look at what Tom Seller says in regards to Japan and Pearl Harbor. It's true. FDR wanted war just like Woodrow Wilson. I'm dumbfounded by it and in my earlier days would have brushed it off as like "yeah. . .sure buddy. . . why would an American President want us to go to war". Japan screwed up by attacking us. But they attacked us in hopes that we would then stay out of the war not enter it. It was a very big strategical mistake. It's discussed even to this day. And Germany doubled down by declaring war on the United States in hopes that we would stay out of the European conflict.
1
@gumblodobbins4465 . . .sorry. There's another guy posting on this thread. Tom Seller. He talks about Pearl Harbor and Japan and how FDR wanted war with Japan.
1