Best league in the world

>best league in the world
>exposed by every Italian managers tactics in serie A

Did you ever see this happening?

>best army in the world
>exposed by female vietnamese rice farmers in the jungle

Who could have foreseen this possibility?

>best army in the world + japs + italy
>exposed by the whole rest of the world

shoud've seen it coming 2bh

was worth the try
look what's happening now, to all Western countries
if we wouldn't have tried it we would have regretted it forever

Au contraire, the excesses of the Nazis has tarnished the nationalist cause for three quarters of a century and is still tainted to this day.

hardly their fault what how others look at it
they would have just taken something else

To think that Britain would have probably joined Germany if they never invaded Poland.

>defending nationalism

So when did you first become a racist?

We left because of hippies bitching at home not because we were losing.

No, it is your fault how others look at it. Nationalism was a celebrated cause until WWII. By invading numerous neutral countries and butchering ethnic minorities and civilians, the Nazis has made any gains for a nationalist cause nearly impossible because normies will forever associate national pride with National Socialism.

Would people have just taken something else? Very possibly, but Hitler gave people the easiest form of argument against national pride possible, unfortunately.

I don't see what nationalism has to do with racism.

>you need to despise other houses if you love your house

Actually the US was losing badly, the protests just helped the case for evacuation. The US was also losing in the "secret war" over in Laos.

Nah man, the US lost that one.

You still have veterans that are mortified by Vietnam to this day. Meanwhile Vietnamese people don't give a shit about Americans. If anything, the older ones are more pissed off about the French than the Americans.

Patriotism (nationalism sucks anyway) was alive and well up until the 1970s, when the hippie movement started to emerge in the West.

This is also why former Communist countries in Eastern Europe are still patriotic as fuck, because they weren't exposed to that Leftist bullshit (they just had to endure radical economic Leftist rule, but socially the commies were quite conservative)

Some burgers actually believe this
we were ruining the entire continent for no reason, that's why we left

Because America is a nation-less state where skin colour determines one's ethno-cultural affiliation.

...

Doesn't change the fact that you failed completely in your political and military objectives, caused much of SE Asia to hate and fear you, and at the end of it all it was the North Vietnamese,arching through Saigon, not the South marching through Ho Chi Minh.

You lost the Vietnam War, Clap. Politically or militarily it makes no difference.

Protip: If you want your infopics to be taken seriously in the future, try to avoid putting screenshots of Sup Forums threads in it

Very nice digits.

Can you elaborate on the difference between Patriotism and Nationalism please? Surely both go hand in hand. A patriot would want to further the causes of his nation, yes?

...

Kek, glorious FBI brainwashing lefties to fight each other over who is the biggest victim of them all.

But a nationalist would only become a nationalist if there was something in his culture that he admired and wished to preserve. "Patriot" just seems like a soft word for "nationalism" but without the connotations to Fascism.

A Patriot loves his country and cares for its well-being, but respects other nations as well

A Nationalist believes in the superiority of his country and regards it morally right to destroy other countries if he thinks his country could profit from it.

A world of nationalists leads to a world at constant war, a world of patriots to a world of philanthropists.

I like America
but if they fuck up (invade the wrong countries after 9/11, spy on allies, mass survey the public, whatever) I'm not defending their actions

I disagree with this strongly. Being a nationalist doesn't inherently make you an expansionist. A nationalists first instinct would be to preserve certain national traits and values, not tamper with others.

>a fkn journalist

Nationalism is not about agreeing with your leaders all the time, it's about wanting the best for your nation all the time. Still, wanting the best for your nation doesn't imply you are imoral nor even an utilitarianist like implies.

Ues because at one point Serie A was the best keague in the world for a reason.

I miss the Serie A of yesteryear.

columnist

wanting what's best from your country is subject to interpretation, that's a meaningless statement

Wew Sergio, could you be any wronger?

It doesn't have to lead to expansionism, but the nationalist would have no problem if it did.

A nationalist from a country like say Luxembourg will never be expansionst probably, because he knows his country isn't capable of invading another one.
But from a moral standpoint he wouldn't have a problem seeing thousands or millions of people of other countries die, just so his country can profit from it.

A nationalist, basically, believes in social darwinism, just on the basis of his nation, not race, religion or whatever (although in practice nationalists are usually also at least in part racially motivated in that they don't regard a certain ethnic minority group as a real part of his or her nation)

We'd kill every last one of you if we felt like it.

It's not a meaningless statement just because it has different interpretations. You could have a left-wing nationalist and a right-wing nationalist advocating for different ways to improve their countries. Neither disqualify the other from being nationalists. Not everything is a hard and fast rule with only one answer or explanation to be valid.

He does have a point, New World nationalism such as ours is rather diffrent than Old World nationalism, as the New World is mostly made up of different ethnicities and cultures while the Old World is mostly made up of one.

I'm sure you could, but I think your hippie leftists would stop you :^)

nothing but empty threats, pathetic

>A nationalist, basically, believes in social darwinism

No. Being a nationalist does not imply the survival of the fittest. It implies protectionism of a either a nations culture, language, ideas, ethnicity, religion etc or all of the above.

Take for instance a Celtic nationalist. He could be a nationalist for wanting to preserve his nations language and culture. It does not necessarily indicate that said nationalist would want the expulsion of the English from the British Isles. Nationalism is fundamentally protectionsit first, it doesn't mean that a country that acts in its own interests will stop others from taking an interest in the actions of theirs.

This is what I was talking about earlier in regards to Hitler. The Nazis have warped our view of what a nationalist is, so much so that we have to create words like patriot to make us seem softer and more palatable to the mainstream nihilist and borderless masses.

>But from a moral standpoint he wouldn't have a problem seeing thousands or millions of people of other countries die, just so his country can profit from it.

Wtf are you on about dumb kraut. Just because you seem to have unexplainable desire of causing chaos with World Wars and economical expansion, doesnt mean other nations are alike.

Impressive thread derailment.

I don't see why people gloat about the US failure in Vietnam. The US had some unreasonably ambitious goals that were undermined by a justifiably unsupportive public. It's not like the US couldn't have won a simple takeover, instead they tried to mix hearts&minds w scorched earth while half-assing the whole thing. Silly for sure, but not indicative of incapability in general.

The man in the black pajamas, dude. A worthy fucking adversary.

kek

I guess some cultures are defined by the urge to subjugate, kek

When talking about nationalism and patriotism, one cannot avoid the famous quotation by George Orwell, who said that nationalism is ‘the worst enemy of peace’. According to him, nationalism is a feeling that one’s country is superior to another in all respects, while patriotism is merely a feeling of admiration for a way of life. These concepts show that patriotism is passive by nature and nationalism can be a little aggressive.

Patriotism is based on affection and nationalism is rooted in rivalry and resentment. One can say that nationalism is militant by nature and patriotism is based on peace.

Most nationalists assume that their country is better than any other, whereas patriots believe that their country is one of the best and can be improved in many ways. Patriots tend to believe in friendly relations with other countries while some nationalists don’t.

In patriotism, people all over the world are considered equal but nationalism implies that only the people belonging to one’s own country should be considered one’s equal.

A patriotic person tends to tolerate criticism and tries to learn something new from it, but a nationalist cannot tolerate any criticism and considers it an insult.

Nationalism makes one to think only of one’s country’s virtues and not its deficiencies. Nationalism can also make one contemptuous of the virtues of other nations. Patriotism, on the other hand, pertains to value responsibilities rather than just valuing loyalty towards one’s own country.

Summary:

Patriot: Expresses the emotion of love towards his country in a passive way

Nationalist: Strives for independence and the interests and domination of a nation and expresses his love or concern for the country in an active political way.

this is copypaste btw

A """"""""""""""""""""""sports"""""""""""""""" related thread right here

it's the most civil political discussion I've ever seen on Sup Forums
don't ruin a decent thing

SEETHING

This. The van basten threads are really impressive too. I just want to enjoy this before we go back to flaming each other and cuckposting

Thanks, I knew that OP's post was a blatant shitpost so I thought I'd hijack it with a post that would guarantee me instant replies.

I'm not gloating about the Vietnam War, it's a tragic event in history which I'm sure you know my nations soldiers suffered in too.

The thing is, "guys in black pajamas" did kick your arse, and it amazes me how people still fail to see why. It's right under your nose.

Wars are not won by material alone, otherwise we'd see an American puppet state in the South still there with all their planes tanks bombs etc.

Wars are won by spirit and the belief in victory, not material. It was for this reason the Vietcong and NVA let you bomb the place to shit while they hid underneath you and engaged you once every 60 days. They defeated you through fear and terror, not superior force of arms, to the point where Vietnam is still talked about in horror by American troops despite their foes being merely "a man in black pajamas".

If your commanders understood this Saigon would be a free and prosperous Western state. No guesses for who controls it now.

I enjoy political posts on other boards because Sup Forums is just a troll board, not dedicated to actual political discussion anymore.

Sory for being off topic everyone, but we're refugees until the place is free of shills.

are there political discussions on /his/
I sorta assume there's a "no politics" rule but that seems like a pretty comfy board

To an extent, but it is a slow board and anything remotely modern and political gets you shouts of "/pol!" which they are withing their rights to do I suppose.

And it is a comfy board. The best tits on Sup Forums are in /his/ art threads, take my word for it mate.

lol I might check it out then
I'm from a shitty board and Sup Forums traffic+speed only goes through whenever there's a big get

Yeah, same thing happens on /n/. Great discussion, no doubt, but as soon as you go to post a reply to something you realise that you're going to be chatting to a user that posted 53 days ago or something and you just think to yourself what's the point?

The quality may suffer overall on the bigger boards but I would take that over the loneliness of the small ones, I spend enough time on my own IRL as it is, haha

Going to try and get things back to normailty and with some sense of sport involved by saying that every team that has had as many points as Chelsea do now have gone on to win the PL title.

well, at least you're not from /p/ or Sup Forums
they're fucking annoying =(

I've never been on /p/ before, what dark secrets are contained there?

And I'll only go on Sup Forums if there is a good show on that has just aired. I fear that with the rise of Netflix and the like that board culture on Sup Forums will suffer because an enitre season can be watched at once, not once a week with our boardmates, giving us a whole week to discuss and anticipate the next episode, if that makes any sense.

it does
I just don't like that people from /p/ and Sup Forums go on the fashion board to talk about photography equipment and television shows, like if they're so bored by their own boards that they need to bother other people about it

Nice trips.

I see what you mean. I don't want to point fingers at those who derail threads with off-topic shit because that's exactly what I've done here (kek) but it's massively frustrating on the smaller boards when the most replies are to things that have nothing to do with the board itself.

Yeah I'm with you on that desu

Sorry, I know I put that across quite agressively but I just dont want the mistakes of Vietnam remade in future wars, considering our nations are bro-tier and we'll be fighting in everything together in future.

We got Forrest Gump and Predator out of 'Nam so I'd say we were the true winners

kek I can't argue with this

Tropic Thunder too.

USA committed massacres in Iraq, so there haven't been much in the way of improvements

Iraq and Afghanistan were far more successful militarily, but the painful fact still remains that our nations haven't grasped the value of spirit in warfare. To truly destroy a foe, you must either break his will to fight completely or win his heart over to fight with you.

Neither was possible, and so the insurgency sprang up. What worries me with ISIS is that they and their ilk are far more dangerous than the UN Iraqi army despite the imbalance in material between the two simply because the Iraqi's dont give a shit while the Jihadis will give everything for their cause, including their lives.

It's a doomed cycle I'm afraid until our whole outlook on the world changes in the West. We may be rich materially, but we are bankrupt spiritually, and it is this that could cause our downfall on battlefields or in our own political sectors.

The same thing can be said for sports of course. If someone with incredible talent has no belief in himself, then he can be beaten by an amateur who does.

There's a lot more to ISIS than you probably think. Read a bit more, man
Most of the founders of ISIS are former military (Iraqi military behead their enemies and commit war crimes just like any terrorist group), and most current members bounce from group to group with no regard to religious/political affiliation. There are no fucking jobs in war-torn countries, and the only way to support yourself when you're a teenager from a broken home is to sign up for an insurgency group.
They change allegiances whenever a group stops cutting paychecks. Obama and Kerry have been totally correct in saying that ISIS is a "JV team"
I'm not terribly happy that we've armed rebels, who behead captured terrorists and bomb civilians by mistake all the time

based ausworm destroyed the thread

Obrigado my banana eating friend

2 Scottish managers
1 French manager
4 Italian managers
1 Portuguese .manager
1 Chilean manager
Zero Spanish managers
Zero English managers
Zero northern Irish managers
Zero German managers.

that's what you call utter domination

>he best tits on Sup Forums are in /his/ art threads
Can't find shit

In the EPL?

Not really fair if you only count since 1992 though

>4 Italian managers
Ancelotti, Ranieri, and Mancini. that's 3 or is there another i'm missing? also by that you'd have to compare by wins per, Scottish 14 wins vs Italian, 3 wins

Nah son you right

>best league in the world
Not even senegalese-indonesian customers believe that shit anymore.