How is saying America owns Europe nationalistic? America uses the governments in Europe to spy on the people there, they keep Europe from forming their own army, had and still do have enormous influence over Europe. NATO which is American funded and made, is steadily going westward and expanding American influence. Me saying something partially truthful in a joking matter says nothing about my political beliefs.

Why? They did not live when the Native tribes were beaten and had their land's taken

I guess you are also part of the people against a recognition of the Armenian genocide? "they did not live when their ancestors were beaten and their land's taken" is a rather selfish statement and a total lack of respect of their ancestors.

If it's a matter of ethnicity, does that mean I get to vote in hypothetical Basque referendums, or that people can simply have their own countries because of their ethnicity?"

If a majority of these people want a self determination referendum you have no right to forbid them this right, it is not about ehtnicity but people's will for freedom.
The Republic of Lakota is an example among many other attempts of these people to have their own sovereign nation. The United States of America has continually violated the independent Native Peoples of this continent by Executive action, Legilsative fiat and Judicial decision. By its actions, the U.S. has denied all Native people their International Treaty rights, Treaty lands and basic human rights of freedom and sovereignty. This same U.S. Government, which fought to throw off the yoke of oppression and gain its own independence, has now reversed its role and become the oppressor of sovereign Native people.

That's dumb, we're all talking hairless apes that are made of the same stuff, get used to it. Existing does not mean you get to be your own country.

Existing does not mean you get to be your own sovereign nation but what about the current independent existing nations then?

Edited 3/28/2016 19:45:31

I guess you are also part of the people against a recognition of the Armenian genocide? "they did not live when their ancestors were beaten and their land's taken" is a rather selfish statement and a total lack of respect of their ancestors.

I never said I wouldn't recognize atrocities, I said I wouldn't give them independence. They're human, they owe it to their ancestors to help unite humanity , not to divide it.

If a majority of these people want a self determination referendum you have no right to forbid them this right, it is not about ehtnicity but people's will for freedom.

This is not about freedom, this is about race. Racial and ethnic divisions are awful and are responsible for awful conditions in many places.

The Republic of Lakota is an example among many other attempts of these people to have their own sovereign nation. The United States of America has continually violated the independent Native Peoples of this continent by Executive action, Legislative fiat and Judicial decision. By its actions, the U.S. has denied all Native people their International Treaty rights, Treaty lands and basic human rights of freedom and sovereignty. This same U.S. Government, which fought to throw off the yoke of oppression and gain its own independence, has now reversed its role and become the oppressor of sovereign Native people.

They've been non-independent for more than a hundred years. It's not like Romania should give away Transylvania because they're not all Romanians, same with Transnistria, same with Tibet, same with Tuva, same with South-Eastern Nigeria, and same with Euskadi.

À Ellipse and JaiBharat:

Calm down you patriots. I'm not so against clerks and nonkilling files, but that's noone. Now, I'm not for killing any soldiers either despite that's what they would have coming (whether in peace or in war), but they should be spit upon, and damned to hell. But all I am suggesting is not to give money to these scum. Would you give money to serial killers and honour the twisted aims of them? An army is the most evil organisation in the world.

An Army that helped saved the world from the rampant nationalism of Hitler? That ended two world wars? They deserve to be spit on?

but they should be spit upon, and damned to hell. But all I am suggesting is not to give money to these scum. Would you give money to serial killers and honour the twisted aims of them? An army is the most evil organisation in the world.

Wow...I'm blacklisting you. This is inappropriate and heinous. People who would die to protect their family and friends deserve to be condemned to hell? Where do you think you deserve to go O Holy One? With a propensity to see people suffer, certainly not in heaven. And for that I will pray for you.

Soldiers are not serial killers, and only the most radical and extremist of people with no comprehension of history nor the organization of social civilizations would argue on this line.

I doubt any soldiers who are active today fought in WW2. Besides, back then people would be drafted against their will, and were doing something that was arguably good though.

Most soldiers who even kill are mono-killers, only a few are serial killers.

The tooth-to-tail ratio for the US military for 2008 was one to three, which means that for every combat troop there were 3 non-combat related service personnel. Only 25% of the military would see combat and in that I doubt every single one has even shot a bullet at another human being.

à GeneralPE and JaiBharat:

First, American army played a small role in the Second World War in Europe and even way smaller in the First. It played a bigger role in the Pacific war, it would make more sense to brag about. Second, they very much did war crimes and killed innocent lives knowingly, just as almost every army did in the Second World War. Third, that's not at all what's happening today, and like Smedley said, I very much doubt that soldiers serving in 1945 are still serving today.

You know why serial killers? It's for a noble cause. Maybe to protect their lifestyle, maybe to right society, maybe for love. But it doesn't matter: what their delusions may be doesn't justify ending lives. I spit upon anyone who kills for their own purposes, especially just for money and their country (totally different setting in a draft, though). Filthy rat soldiers have every wound and death coming to them.

Frankly, you ought to damn them, too, if you hold human life above patriotism. But I'm kind and won't put every soldier on criminal try, despite that being better than what they've earned.

However, to reward psychopathic killers with regular money, and think they're the best folk ever, these killers, that's just extreme patriotic militarism.

The US was most definitely the second allied country in terms of importance in Europe.

New update:

FOREIGN POLICY

1. Withdraw from NATO.
2. Keep being closely tied to Britain.
3. Keep being tied closely to Japan.
4. Stop bombings against ISIS
5. Become closely tied to countries in the Caribbean , Mexico, Central America and South America that is essentially Caribbean.
6. Withdraw from the situations in the Middle East, and the Balkans.
7. Start revealing things that European countries have done against each other , to help along the destruction of the EU.
8. Give some aid to a splinter faction in the North Korean army, help with a assassination against whatever Kim is in power.
9. Take in as many refugees as possible, send them back to their respective countries after the conflicts end there.
10. Help Haiti's economic situation.
11. Give aid to the AU, that is again, purely humanitarian.
12. Recognize Somililand.
13. Apologize for the bombings against Vietnam.
13a. Apologize for supporting a dictator in South Korea.
13b. Apologize for supporting a dictator in Taiwan.
13c. Apologize for the conquest of Native lands in America.
13d. Apologize for the Banana Wars.
13e. Apologize for not giving independence to the Philippines after 1898.
13f. Apologize for the mass bombings in WW2 against Germany, Italy, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria , Croatia and additional countries that were occupied.
13g. Apologize for bombing Japan and nuking Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
13i. Apologize for the war on terror.

That's a lot of apologies...

Yeah, I had to cut it down from it's original amount because of just how many apologies we'd have to deliver.

1. We leave NATO, it collapses, that means wars are bound to begin.
2. Ok
3. Ok
4. No, ISIS is a menace. We are at fault for it's creation, so we must end it. Period. Obama is busy pussy footing with the idea.
5. We already are, NAFTA keeps us close with Canada and Mexico with trade, Central America isn't ready for foreign contacts until their civil wars are over, and the Caribbean is where many US tourists go.
6. Ok, but we are hardly even in the Balkans. Bosnia was over 20 years ago.
7. No, the EU is keeping Europe at peace. Without it and NATO, WWIII will come and that takes 2 alliances out of the picture that would be intertwined and could end the war faster.
8. How about we just laugh at them and stop taking them serious? If they take one of our people, we take him back, by diplomatic matters or by force. NK hardly even has China and Russia at their side.
9. No. No. No. No. No. What the fuck is wrong with you? Just blindly take in some refugees from some random ass country not worth a fuck and then were supposed to wait 1-20 years for their conflicts to end so we can just deport them back? You know how much that would cost, right?
10. Haiti is none of our business.
11. WHY. If you want to aid Africa, actually aid them not give them money so they can blow it on more wars with its self.
12. No point to recognize a little sliver of land if it gives us no advantage.
13. No, wth is wrong with you dude? That was 60 years ago, those Veterans took more shit than Vietnam ever could have. Apologize to the Veterans for ruining their minds.
13a. No point, that was 70+ years ago.
13b. I swear to God this is starting to piss me off.
13c. CONQUEST. Should every other country apologize for invading the rest 100s of years ago? So Italy should apologize for the Roman Empire then? Turkey for the Ottomans? Russia for the Soviet Union?
13d. That was a mistake, yes, but nothing we need to apologize for.
13e. No. Fucking. Point. You. Idiot.
13f. DUDE. GERMANY WAS MURDERING MASS AMOUNTS OF PEOPLE. All of those countries were targets. They were allied/occupied. If we hadn't, Hitler would own Europe.
13g. Shut. The. Fuck. Up. I swear to God to need to never speak on politics again. We did what we needed to to save AMERICAN LIVES. Japan didn't give 2 fucks about any Americans, they were trying to gas the West Coast, they were committing arguably worse atrocities in China than Germany was in Europe (search unit 731). Plus, they could have only had one hit them but they didn't surrender.
13i. So then Al Qaeda should apologize for 911? Then those brothers from Tartaristan in Russia should apologize for the Boston bombing? How about Belgium last week? Maybe France? Hmmm your shit is not adding up.

I'm face palming so hard. I hope this was a joke, and not serious.

Edited 3/29/2016 16:40:07

There is nothing wrong with a few small rebellions, to keep the tyrants and politicians on their toes. It helps a nation

I'm not suggesting that states get their own militias, I am actually opposed to that since states might try to secede (California would try to, probably try and join the EU too.) and they can be as negligible towards human rights' as the federal government.

You do realize how the EU is the European Union right? Cali couldnt join it.

Also I changed most of it anyways.

With the exception of the Native Americans (which is useless anyway), the apologies do seem really mental. Even the Indians should be for genocide, not conquest

Edited 3/29/2016 16:44:54

1. We leave NATO, it collapses, that means wars are bound to begin.

Wars already happen, usually NATO causes a few.

4. No, ISIS is a menace. We are at fault for it's creation, so we must end it. Period. Obama is busy pussy footing with the idea.

If we bomb again, we'll be responsible for terrorists again.

Central America isn't ready for foreign contacts until their civil wars are over, and the Caribbean is where many US tourists go.

We must defend US influence in the American Lake.

7. No, the EU is keeping Europe at peace. Without it and NATO, WWIII will come and that takes 2 alliances out of the picture that would be intertwined and could end the war faster.

The EU will militarize after NATO falls and will replace NATO as the warmongering alliance. Destabilizing it puts off militarization for a while, and will keep them from moving against Russia with even more intensity.

8. How about we just laugh at them and stop taking them serious? If they take one of our people, we take him back, by diplomatic matters or by force. NK hardly even has China and Russia at their side.

Killing Kim makes a much more moderate regime in charge, and will reduce the chance of a nuclear war.

9. No. No. No. No. No. What the fuck is wrong with you? Just blindly take in some refugees from some random ass country not worth a fuck and then were supposed to wait 1-20 years for their conflicts to end so we can just deport them back? You know how much that would cost, right?

What the fuck is wrong with you? They are humans, we are obligated to help them.

10. Haiti is none of our business.
The Caribbean is our business, and aiding humans that are starving is our business.

To all of your anti-apologia responses: Yes, many governments were doing wrong. But were the civilians doing wrong? By living in Japan, Vietnam etc, were they doing wrong? No , apologize for that. It costs nothing and makes people like us.

The California joining the EU thing was a joke.