Anarcho Nihilist
Generalfeldmarschall
★★★
- Joined
- Jul 12, 2024
- Posts
- 2,711
Title
I wouldn't say I hate any particular country to great intensity until the 20th century. Russia, France, America, and Britain during the 20th century and forward can go to hell.
I would say historically the United Kingdom, but nowadays I wouldn't hesitate to say the country for which NATO constantly has to make sacrifices, namely Israel.Mainly the United Kingdom historically, because all of its power in the empire came from the exploitation of weak colonized people.]@Ubermenschvirtues[/USER]
France, because of their influence on modern liberalism and the French Revolution
Based, but this is logical, given that Britain contributed to the creation of Israel. And Oliver Cromwell was the patron saint of the Jews.I would say historically the United Kingdom, but nowadays I wouldn't hesitate to say the country for which NATO constantly has to make sacrifices, namely Israel.Mainly the United Kingdom historically, because all of its power in the empire came from the exploitation of weak colonized people.
Self explanatoryVictorious and Vulnerable: Why Democracy Won in the Twe…
In the blink of an eye, liberal democracy's moment of t…www.goodreads.com
I don’t hold any resentment or hatred towards any nation, but if I had to choose one, it would be the post-Civil War United States. It was the first major shift towards centralization around the federal government, allowed northern bankers and industrialists to form an oligarchy and basically take over the country, and set the precedent for militant anti-racism and forced integration. From there, it evolved into the golem of liberalism that it is today.
USA after it was ZOGGED
USA after it was ZOGGED
France and Russia.Title
The Turks as a people are the biggest mutts in existence. But generally speaking they descent from Greeks and Armenians that were converted to Islam. I watch Turks rage on Reddit about the fact they're not Central Asian Rapists all the time.Turkey. Constantinople should be European
BasedTurkey. Constantinople should be European
Good analogyUSA, UK, and Israel
(Do I have to say why?)
They are literally Mordor
But USA only from the 20th century (or whenever it has been dominated by the Jews and turned into a Zionist tool)
At a more local and not so international level I would say that Bolivia, Peru and Paraguay:
They send their surplus population of Amerindians and mestizos lumpentariat to wreak havoc and degrade society and culture in my country.
I've always thought thisMerica. Boring ass history compared to everywhere else.
Germany first started 'drang nach osten' against Slavs and Baltic pagans.England and Russia tied for 1st for the rape/destruction and rape of the German Race and basically blocking our only way out from a ZOG dictatorship
USA would be 2nd from the civil war on
3rd The phillipines for my brutal rejections coming out of filipina chicks
"JuSt Be WhItE BrO"
Cope. Russians made many inventions and scientific discoveries.France and Russia.
Historically speaking French people never really lost anything, yet act like they're this heroic superior nation that fought all odds every 10 years and always made it.
Plus in ww2 French people wanted to genocide all germans. So yeah fuck you guys.
Russians actively genocided the eastern Germans, hung POWs and committed mass rape in all German lands.
That's why I absolutely despise the modern German right that worships Russia like our God. Their women are whores, their country sucks ass. Only good thing Slavs can do is genocide people. No offense to the Slavcels here.
Do you not believe that Stalin would have been the first to invade sooner or later?Germany first started 'drang nach osten' against Slavs and Baltic pagans.
Only bullies defend the aggressor.
The USSR and Poland had a non-aggression pact from 1932, but Stalin invaded there anyway with Germany, I would not be surprised that Stalin was just bargaining with Churchill secretly about how much the British were willing to give Stalin territories and spheres of influence in exchange for stabbing Hitler in the back.Germany first started 'drang nach osten' against Slavs and Baltic pagans.
Only bullies defend the aggressor.
Stalin? 'Drang nach osten' started maybe even before XI century against Slavs.Do you not believe that Stalin would have been the first to invade sooner or later?
Yes, but Stalin gathered a large group of troops in front of Barbarossa at the border. Have you read Viktor Suvorov's Icebreaker?Stalin? 'Drang nach osten' started maybe even before XI century against Slavs.
Then Catholic Popes literally proclaimed crusades against heathen and tried to subjugate Orthodoxy.
German orders were a version of Catholic zogbots who killed people in the name of Catholic faith and ambitions of Rome/ Holy Roman empire...
KYS infiltratorGermany first started 'drang nach osten' against Slavs and Baltic pagans.
Only bullies defend the aggressor.
Poland also had non-aggression pact with Germany. These papers don't mean much...The USSR and Poland had a non-aggression pact from 1932, but Stalin invaded there anyway with Germany, I would not be surprised that Stalin was just bargaining with Churchill secretly about how much the British were willing to give Stalin territories and spheres of influence in exchange for stabbing Hitler in the back.
Have you even read my post?Yes, but Stalin gathered a large group of troops in front of Barbarossa at the border. Have you read Viktor Suvorov's Icebreaker?
Learn history.KYS infiltrator
Yes, but after the Riga Treaty of 1921, there was peace between Poland and the USSR. There was no war until 1939, when the USSR was the first to attack Poland. All you're doing is trying to justify the USSR. Poland was not to blame for Stalin's invasion.Poland also had non-aggression pact with Germany. These papers don't mean much...
Also Poland wasn't the victim. She occupied part of Lithuanian territory in 1920 and had territorial ambitions in Czechoslovakia.
Politics is dirty. Can you imagine that if, for example, France and Britain started war against USSR in 1927 or later, Poland just wait and wouldn't attack Soviet territory?Yes, but after the Riga Treaty of 1921, there was peace between Poland and the USSR. There was no war until 1939, when the USSR was the first to attack Poland. All you're doing is trying to justify the USSR. Poland was not to blame for Stalin's invasion.
Hitler had more reasons to invade Poland than Stalin. The Germans had an exclave in East Prussia, which they wanted to connect with the rest of Germany. Poles killed and terrorized Germans.Politics is dirty. Can you imagine that if, for example, France and Britain started war against USSR in 1927 or later, Poland just wait and wouldn't attack Soviet territory?
Also it's funny that you blame Stalin for invasion in Poland but don't blame Hitler...
Communism?Russia, China and Israel. Do I really have to explain why?
Communism?
So you're biased.Hitler had more reasons to invade Poland than Stalin. The Germans had an exclave in East Prussia, which they wanted to connect with the rest of Germany. Poles killed and terrorized Germans.
These countries aren't Communist. North Korea and Cuba are more communist than them.Communism?
The Poles just wanted to assimilate Western Ukrainians and Western Belarusians them, and nothing more. All nations do this against their minorities, whether it's the English with the Scots and the Welsh or the Turks with the Kurds. There is nothing terrible about assimilating one's minorities unless it involves violence or mass murder.So you're biased.
Soviets occupied Western Belarus and Western Ukraine, - territories which were a part of the ancient Kievan Rus and later majority of them were a part of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania where Eastern Slavs made 9/10 population.
These territories always were connected with the history of Eastern Slavs.
Poles also terrorized Belarusians and Ukrainians.