52 minutes ago, save the frogs said:

Europeans on here bashing Trump.

Should we go down a list of everything wrong with these European countries?

Not many countries have all their sh*t together.

Maybe Norway is better than most, but the US is -- whether you like it or not -- a "world police" country. Not saying it should be or that's a good thing. But it's not like other countries in that respect.

Is it now I should ask who started the bashing?

I find it ironic you feel we bash Donald Trump and his crew after all the positivity and love the Europeans, Canadians, and rest of the world have gotten, Except Kim and Putin, who he admires

9 minutes ago, Hummin said:

Except Kim and Putin, who he admires

He admires Kim? LOL.

He doesn't even like Putin. He's playing him like a fiddle.

He's getting him to put his guard down, then he will call the shots.

America is probably the least likely country to be invaded on the planet, and the most paranoid on the topic.

3 hours ago, Yagoda said:

Source? Its repaired and its heading back.

https://www.24sata.hr/news/uss-gerald-ford-isplovio-iz-splita-otkazali-prosvjed-takvi-prizori-nam-ovdje-ne-trebaju-1119296

To admin: I know non-English sources are against the forum rules - and I already stated that the source is in Croatian, but Yagoda is still asking for it, so...

4 minutes ago, tomazbodner said:

https://www.24sata.hr/news/uss-gerald-ford-isplovio-iz-splita-otkazali-prosvjed-takvi-prizori-nam-ovdje-ne-trebaju-1119296

To admin: I know non-English sources are against the forum rules - and I already stated that the source is in Croatian, but Yagoda is still asking for it, so...

So that doesnt say what you allege, so you best ask the mods to delete your lie.

14 hours ago, save the frogs said:

Europeans on here bashing Trump.

Should we go down a list of everything wrong with these European countries?

Not many countries have all their sh*t together.

Maybe Norway is better than most, but the US is -- whether you like it or not -- a "world police" country. Not saying it should be or that's a good thing. But it's not like other countries in that respect.

Sorry you are totally right,what was wrong with me thinking i had the right to complain what lord trump

is doing to the world is bad.

We should all(all countries) get on our knees and praise trump for what the "world police" is doing to make us all better and more happy.

Are you trying to compare the problems of the individual countries to the shxt show trump is creating

for the rest of the world?

Trump has done so much damage to the world both economically and politically,can you deny that?

Tell me how is the winning going?

Release the trump files!

On 4/4/2026 at 9:01 AM, FolkGuitar said:

With the expenditure of missiles, rockets, ships, and men, all being funneled into the Middle East, and all of America's super-carriers on station there (Well, the USS Gerald Ford, the biggest and baddest, has already been put out of commission and is at drydock getting repaired, so out of action anywhere), it makes me wonder...

Is the timing right for Russia, China, and North Korea to come together to invade the USA?
(This is a question to be discussed, not a statement of fact.)

Why Donald’s wrecking the country all by himself why shed the blood and treasure?so nope doubt it.

7 minutes ago, jvs said:

Trump has done so much damage to the world both economically and politically,can you deny that?

A temporary economic blip is just that -- temporary.

You can't expect the price of gas to be the same your whole life.

17 minutes ago, Tug said:

Is the timing right for Russia, China, and North Korea to come together to invade the USA?

What a particularly weird suggestion! (or are you not a native speaker of English?)

In all the 40+ years of the Cold War I doubt that anyone anywhere ever conceived of the notion of actually invading Usofa, not even Alaska. Hurling nuclear-armed missiles at them is another matter ...

4 minutes ago, mfd101 said:

What a particularly weird suggestion! (or are you not a native speaker of English?)

In all the 40+ years of the Cold War I doubt that anyone anywhere ever conceived of the notion of actually invading Usofa, not even Alaska. Hurling nuclear-armed missiles at them is another matter ...

Ahh I was quoting the OP I say again why invade when trumps wrecking the country without them having to invade.

25 minutes ago, save the frogs said:

A temporary economic blip is just that -- temporary.

You can't expect the price of gas to be the same your whole life.

That is your only worry?

The gas price? lol

Again,did you forget what trump promised?

No new wars and all energy prices down by 50% !

The economic impact is just one thing,what he did to the worlds political scene is even worse!

Of course if you think the US is the center of the universe it all makes sense but i guess that is because

you have no idea about the rest of the world.

39 minutes ago, jvs said:

That is your only worry?

The gas price? lol

I'm worried about Stayin' Alive.

1 hour ago, save the frogs said:

A temporary economic blip is just that -- temporary.

You can't expect the price of gas to be the same your whole life.

Well, that is a very American way of seeing it. The biggest catastrophe to hit you in the last 25 years was two towers falling, and since then millions of people have had to pay. Tens of millions of innocent people paid the price for those two towers.

From an American perspective, 9/11 became the defining wound: a national trauma, a mythic rupture, proof of vulnerability. But from outside the U.S., the deeper moral question is this: how can one atrocity against you be treated as uniquely sacred, while the response destroys countless other lives that are treated as politically invisible?

That is where the accusation of hypocrisy comes in. Two towers fell, and that horror was made into a global moral license. The grief of one nation was elevated above the grief of others. American suffering was individualized, named, televised, ritualized.

The suffering of Afghans, Iraqis, and others became statistical, distant, and disposable. Philosophically, that reveals a hierarchy of human value: some deaths become history, others become collateral. The collective punishment is insane, so instead of justice against perpetrators, the response spread outward across entire countries, populations, and generations. Innocent people who had nothing to do with 9/11 still paid in blood, displacement, torture, instability, and ruin. So the moral scandal is not only revenge, but the scale of innocence consumed by it

And we have seen the same logic with Israel, where the war has been justified in the language of self-defense and revenge, while Gaza has been devastated and millions have been trapped in a humanitarian catastrophe.

The outrage here over some harsh criticism of the U.S and Israel. is, to put it mildly, absurd. People sit safely behind their desks, typing away, feeling personally attacked, while barely grasping the scale of the real tragedies out there.

They feel sorry for themselves and argue over things that should be basic, textbook-level understanding of how the world works — and how it does not.

Heaven and hell are often what you create for yourselves, and that is still a choice. Billions of others do not even have that luxury.

The point is that when a terror regime refuses to play along with the West, it is treated as a legitimate target. When it serves Western interests, its crimes are more easily overlooked. Years of propaganda and selective outrage have made people numb enough to accept that double standard.

15 hours ago, save the frogs said:

He admires Kim? LOL.

He doesn't even like Putin. He's playing him like a fiddle.

He's getting him to put his guard down, then he will call the shots.

I have two screen shots for you to look at.

You are wrong again about putin and trump.

Remember the Awac plane that was demolished?

It was thanks to putin who told Iran where the plane was.

So who is fooling whom?

3 minutes ago, Hummin said:

Well, that is a very American way of seeing it.

I'm not pro war.

But no one has figured out how to crack the code.

There's reasons these wars exist.

Good luck stopping it.

Go out with your Peace and Love placards.

2 minutes ago, jvs said:

Remember the plain that was demolished?

No I dont

23 hours ago, gearbox said:

It is not a good move to invade a country with nukes anywhere in the world.

Agree,

and there's no way you're going to sneak any sizable invasion force undetected, we'd nuke them while they're still in the water,

3 minutes ago, save the frogs said:

No I dont

I just reviewed and altered my post just for you.

Wrong spelling,sorry about that.

Do you remember now?

If not,i will not be surprised.

5 minutes ago, save the frogs said:

I'm not pro war.

But no one has figured out how to crack the code.

There's reasons these wars exist.

Good luck stopping it.

Go out with your Peace and Love placards.

War and conflict have been part of humanity from the very beginning, ever since people had something to protect or something to gain. It is part of human nature.

Even if war is as old as humanity, that does not absolve people of responsibility. To recognize conflict as part of human history is not to excuse ignorance, nor to defend the abuse of power. The real moral failure begins when people normalize oppression, justify excess, and treat innocent lives as acceptable collateral. Human nature may explain violence, but it does not justify the conscience that accepts it!

Iran’s history makes it easier to see why many people believe the country’s distrust did not appear out of nowhere. Iran had been defending its land and political independence for centuries, through wars with the Ottoman Empire and repeated foreign pressure, long before the British and the United States helped overthrow Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddegh in the 1953 coup. The point is not that Iran has always been right, but that outside powers played a major role in shaping the conflict from the beginning.

Iran’s history with the West is almost a blueprint for creating a long-lasting enemy. When a nation experiences repeated foreign interference, pressure, betrayal, and humiliation, resentment does not fade easily. It becomes memory, then identity, and eventually a permanent source of distrust passed from one generation to the next.

16 minutes ago, Hummin said:

Iran’s history with the West is almost a blueprint for creating a long-lasting enemy. When a nation experiences repeated foreign interference, pressure, betrayal, and humiliation, resentment does not fade easily. It becomes memory, then identity, and eventually a permanent source of distrust passed from one generation to the next.

IIRC the same history of colonialism and humiliation also has been played out with China.

IMO Richard McKenna's novel "The Sand Pebbles" should be compulsory reading in American schools.

4 minutes ago, Lacessit said:

IIRC the same history of colonialism and humiliation also has been played out with China.

IMO Richard McKenna's novel "The Sand Pebbles" should be compulsory reading in American schools.

Schools are failing to provide a shared foundation in history, philosophy, and critical thinking. Just as importantly, they often neglect practical education in personal finance.

This is not just an American phenomenon; it reflects a broader educational and cultural failure across many societies. The result is that people elect the wrong leaders for the wrong reasons, placing their faith in promises no single president could realistically fulfill. Just as troubling is the lack of understanding of social behavior, which leaves people more vulnerable to manipulation, political mythmaking, and emotional appeals disguised as leadership.

At the same time, people are being conditioned to believe that there are no real alternatives.

4 hours ago, save the frogs said:

I'm not pro war.

But no one has figured out how to crack the code.

There's reasons these wars exist.

Good luck stopping it.

Go out with your Peace and Love placards.

"There's reasons these wars exist."

Wow, that's so profound!! 🤣

@save the frogs, still waiting for your response,

On 4/4/2026 at 8:22 PM, connda said:

I tell you what. I Russia, China, and the DPRK invade the United States, I'll fly back and join a militia to fight them.

Don't be ridiculous they don't want some old codger with his walking stick !

22 hours ago, save the frogs said:

the US is -- whether you like it or not -- a "world police" country.

This is something often said, but its not true. A policeman derives authority from rules and regulations. The US, for the most part, acts unilaterally, and doesn't wait to be granted the authority, if it thinks its doing the right thing. Policemen are also expected to act independantly and without self-interest. When the US projects its power its always out of strategic self interest. As a world policeman why didn't it, for instance, stop Turkey invading Cyprus or numerous other little wars around the globe. Because none of those were in the interests of the United States.

As "World Policeman", you'd think the US must be the top contributor to UN Peacekeeping missions, after all, one of the missions of a police officer is to "keep the peace".

Currently 20 American military members participate in UN missions.

Interestingly the reason they are blue helmets is that US troops were the first UN Peacekeepers to keep apart the British/French/Israelis and the Egyptians in 1956. The Americans painted their helmet liners blue so they wouldn't get shot at by a Brit, Frenchman or Israeli. What the Brits, French and Israelis was trying to prevent nasser from illegally nationalising the Suez Canal.

In 2026, its uninformed Americans who bitcha nd complain about being a world policeman, because that;s what their leaders tell them, and they believe it.

The phrase originates after the Great War, from William Taft who said in 1918:

I do not think the boys will be coming home. They will stay there to steady the results of the war. Not a man among them is a Bolshevik. Theirs is the responsibility visited upon those who enjoy the boon of popular government. Our boys may have to garrison Germany. The French have an immense need for man power. American soldiers may properly undertake this burden of police and guard duty. And they will improve the environment in which they are put.

So, when you unpick that, what did he mean? In Europe, the Austro-Hungarian Empire was gone. The Ottoman Empire was gone. The Russian Empire was in disarray. The old controllers of power (and order) were gone, others were were probably showing signs of crumbling, eg France. Britain probably at that time still felt self in maintaining Pax Britannia. But America wanted a piece of that, where hitherto, Britain was the "World Policeman". By 1913, Britain controlled 25% of the globe; it got bigger after WW1, but not out of choice really (inheriting former German and Ottoman territories). In 1912, the British Army had "only" 250,000 full time soldiers, keeping more or less in line 1 in 4 of the global population.

Being "World Policeman" wasn't something an unwilling America had foisted on it. It was something they wanted. At the end of WW2, Britain was effectively bankrupted, but it still had a very large empire; governing 1 in 4 of the world's population. Truman saw what happened with the old Continental Empires in 1918. America wasn't really then to get a foothold in the Old Country, but it got a taste for Empire building in between the wars. Taft was right, the loss of Empires in Europe lead to chaos in Yugoslavia, and the rise of Adolf Hitler.

Postwar, the US forced the breakup of the British Empire too quickly; the major part was India, gone by 1947. There is evidence that Nehru would have been up for British Citizenship; transforming the British Empire into a federal structure, with a United Kingdom of Great Britain and India. Conceivably a British Federation would have been a significant global power, the £40bn war debt swift dealt with through growth. But the Americans wanted the British Empire gone quickly, not because it particularly cared for its former subjects, but it knew there would be a vacuum created that the US, a benevolant power, would step in and provide the law and order, to be the policeman, like Britain was 50 years earlier. And Britain ruled the earth with barely 30 divisions, and in return, became immensely rich.

So far from being a World Policeman as being some burden that has dragged down the US economy, its actually powered it. And the US wanted to be the Policeman, because they hate being called the alternative, Imperialists. Pax Americana was immensely beneficial to the United States.

If the US Empire now decides to self immolate, there will be those watching for an opportunity to offer safety and order.

10 hours ago, mfd101 said:

What a particularly weird suggestion! (or are you not a native speaker of English?)

he is an American that despises his country, he just isnt very articulate about it. Dont expect much more than wierdness out of any of them,

12 hours ago, Roadsternut said:

Because none of those were in the interests of the United States.

Yes, you are right.

But at the same time, some conflicts have been averted because a country is allied with US interests and fear of US getting involved.

On 4/4/2026 at 11:21 PM, Yagoda said:

So that doesnt say what you allege, so you best ask the mods to delete your lie.

This was the last article on the subject (at the time you asked), which has a bunch of linked ones at the end for the whole story.

23 hours ago, save the frogs said:

A temporary economic blip is just that -- temporary.

You can't expect the price of gas to be the same your whole life.

You forgot the shareholders in flight centre and Webjet in which I am one

All shares down 75%

11 minutes ago, georgegeorgia said:

You forgot the shareholders in flight centre and Webjet in which I am one

All shares down 75%