Conflicts which may cause World War 3?

[Empire*Of*Media]

despite The Islamic Regime's Corruption and ill-governship in Iran......but what surprised me was this time losing value of Iranian Toman (Rials) Currency against Dollar & Europ & Pound was not because of sanctions or misgovernship of the government. but it was because of UKRAINE"S CRISIS !!!!i was just so much surprised how another country in somewhere in other part of the world can have influence in some other country's People's Life with far far from them. just was because Obama Threated Putin & Russia!! oh my......

ok, so i have one question guys......

since we had Arab so Called Spring (Winter?!!) and many other things, can for example this Ukraine's Crisis be the one of Important Flicks of the next coming World war along with North Korea & South & Japan's Hostility, Armenian & Azerbayjan's Cold War & Hostility, Iran's Threat To the world and his Syria Problem with Russia & China against the West, The Russian & US the Hostility of From Abkhazia of Georgia - to Syria & Ukraine, The Hostility of Japan & China, The Tension and Hate of Pakistan & India very ready to nuke each other, Iraq's Ready somehow to attack Kurdistan of Iraq, Turkey's desire to Invade Kurdistan of Iraq and Syria - in lame excuse To Destroy the People's Freedom Fighters of PKK - YPG - PJAK, the ascending hate of Muslims & Arabs against Israel specially Iran & Hezbullah & Hamas in the other side of Turkey's hate and also Egyptian Extremists and also the willing & wanting of Independent Free Catalan & N.Ireland & Kurdistan & .....................so other problems and Cold Wars. ( i bypassed The African and Latin American Nations!!)

I can say the world is again ready to explode again and start of the world war !! Thats irrefragable but when ........thats the question.

i'd very like to know your Ideas!....

[HoreTore]

I'm sorry to say, but the Turkish response to Kurds will not trigger a world war. It's an irrelevant conflict to the rest of the world.

[Fragony]

Turkey is a nato partner, is way too important for the west. Syria is a nice excuses to place some anti-missile system at the Syrian border, but of course they are really there because of Iran.

[Kagemusha]

Turkey is a nato partner, is way too important for the west. Syria is a nice excuses to place some anti-missile system at the Syrian border, but of course they are really there because of Iran.

And it is absolutely stupid to demonize Iran when they should be the best partner of West in the area like they once were. More we provoke them, more extreme elements take over there, as in many other places as well. We are digging our own graves.

[Empire*Of*Media]

I'm sorry to say, but the Turkish response to Kurds will not trigger a world war. It's an irrelevant conflict to the rest of the world.

no i didnt mean the reason or the matter of starting world war.
i told that is among them to and i said "Flicks" not the ........

[HoreTore]

no i didnt mean the reason or the matter of starting world war.
i told that is among them to and i said "Flicks" not the ........

One of the main drawbacks of using wrong words and bad sentence structure, is that other people do not understand what you mean.

Flicks...?

[The Lurker Below]

oops

[Fragony]

One of the main drawbacks of using wrong words and bad sentence structure, is that other people do not understand what you mean.

Flicks...?

I think he meant 'conflicts'.

[HoreTore]

I think he meant 'conflicts'.

Yes, well.... The number of, and violence of, conflicts in the world is decreasing (http://www.regjeringen.no/en/dep/ud/kampanjer/refleks/innspill/engasjement/prio.html?id=492941).

The world actually did get more peaceful at the end of the cold war. The fall of a massive dictatorship armed to the brim with nuclear arms, sponsoring armed groups all over the world led to more peace, whuddathunkit?

[rvg]

The world actually did get more peaceful at the end of the cold war. The fall of a massive dictatorship armed to the brim with nuclear arms, sponsoring armed groups all over the world led to more peace, whuddathunkit?

Well that's about to change.

[HoreTore]

Well that's about to change.

Nah, Obama isn't ready to reveal himself as the Anti-Christ just yet.

[rvg]

Nah, Obama isn't ready to reveal himself as the Anti-Christ just yet.

Sure he is. And he did:
12389

[Empire*Of*Media]

One of the main drawbacks of using wrong words and bad sentence structure, is that other people do not understand what you mean.

Flicks...?
oh please dont tell me that word is wrong!! sorry guys im using a bullshit dictionary and english has extremley meanings and exceptation!!

i think my i meant "fillips "......thats OK ?!
and that decrease was temprary after cold war until US government decided to create world on terror!!


Sure he is. And he did:
12389

lollllllllllllll!!!!! :laugh4:

but i think he not he is himself!! he is to make way for AntiChrist!!

[HoreTore]

oh please dont tell me that word is wrong!! sorry guys im using a bullshit dictionary and english has extremley meanings and exceptation!!

i think my i meant "fillips "......thats OK ?!

Never heard that word before.


and that decrease was temprary after cold war until US government decided to create world on terror!!

Wrong. The number of conflicts have not risen since the end of the cold war. It's been a steady decline since the fall of the USSR. The war on terror didn't stop the decline.


but i think he not he is himself!! he is to make way for AntiChrist!!

See, this is the problem... Debating world affairs with someone who believes in the coming of the Antichrist is....problematic....

[Sarmatian]

Yes, well.... The number of, and violence of, conflicts in the world is decreasing (http://www.regjeringen.no/en/dep/ud/kampanjer/refleks/innspill/engasjement/prio.html?id=492941).

The world actually did get more peaceful at the end of the cold war. The fall of a massive dictatorship armed to the brim with nuclear arms, sponsoring armed groups all over the world led to more peace, whuddathunkit?

I do believe it was more of a case of one superbully losing any competition.

[HoreTore]

I do believe it was more of a case of one superbully losing any competition.

....and thus resulting in way fewer conflicts and violence in the world.

[Sarmatian]

....and thus resulting in way fewer conflicts and violence in the world.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post_hoc_ergo_propter_hoc

[HoreTore]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post_hoc_ergo_propter_hoc

You believe the disappearance of hostilities between two superpowers is not the cause of the decline in number of conflicts over the last two decades...?

Pray tell then, what you believe the cause to be.

[rvg]

You believe the disappearance of hostilities between two superpowers is not the cause of the decline in number of conflicts over the last two decades...?

Pray tell then, what you believe the cause to be.

Underpants gnomes.

[HoreTore]

The steady and growing proliferation of nuclear arms.

....And we have had a "steady and growing" number of nuclear arms and nuclear states from roughly the 80's?


Underpants gnomes.

Dang, forgot about those little buggers...

[Empire*Of*Media]

Never heard that word before.

Really !! :wall: i meant little or maybe big things to provoke something whats that in Damn English!? (ah yes really damn English!! Loll)


Wrong. The number of conflicts have not risen since the end of the cold war. It's been a steady decline since the fall of the USSR. The war on terror didn't stop the decline.

if you mean between USA & Russia and europe?! yes indeed. but not the rest of the world......


See, this is the problem... Debating world affairs with someone who believes in the coming of the Antichrist is....problematic....

i was JOKING friend!! :d i knew he was joking and then i joked too!! why you see me so negative ?!

[HoreTore]

Ya sure. Pakistan, North Korea, Iran soon. Saudi Arabia and Egypt, nominally. Once the middle east is openly nuked up the wars will stop, watch.

I'd hardly say those states are enough to cause a major decline in world conflict.

[HoreTore]

if you mean between USA & Russia and europe?! yes indeed. but not the rest of the world......

No, I was referring to the entire world.

[Empire*Of*Media]

Ya sure. Pakistan, North Korea, Iran soon. Saudi Arabia and Egypt, nominally. Once the middle east is openly nuked up the wars will stop, watch.

lolllllll indeed!! well north korea & Pakistan is not middle east!!
but please dont Nuke Kurdistan and Armenia! they have nothing to do with the world crisis and terrorism!! indeed they are Victims themselves!


I'd hardly say those states are enough to cause a major decline in world conflict.

the matter is ISRAEL !!

have i forgot USA (Government) even giving his life for them?!.....

[HoreTore]

the matter is ISRAEL !!

Ah yes of course, it's always dem jooooooooooooooooooze who are responsible for all our pain and suffering.

The 1920's called, they want their dead horse back.

[Rhyfelwyr]

One of the main drawbacks of using wrong words and bad sentence structure, is that other people do not understand what you mean.

Flicks...?

I thought for a minute there we had another Bartix thread on our hands...

[Pannonian]

One of the main drawbacks of using wrong words and bad sentence structure, is that other people do not understand what you mean.

Flicks...?

That's where you've got it wrong, when you talk about regions and generalised risks. Easternkurdikus is talking about individual peoples, like those flicking Kurds. If the west get their policies wrong concerning them, we might end up in WWIII. So IMHO it's better to just say, flick them.

[Hax]

But I thought...
12391

[Shaka_Khan]

I was thinking of good movie flicks to match the WWIII mood.

[Sarmatian]

You believe the disappearance of hostilities between two superpowers is not the cause of the decline in number of conflicts over the last two decades...?

Pray tell then, what you believe the cause to be.

I agree with that, but based on your original post,


The fall of a massive dictatorship armed to the brim with nuclear arms, sponsoring armed groups all over the world led to more peace, whuddathunkit?

I understood that your position is that USSR was the only one responsible for higher rate of conflicts.

[Kadagar_AV]

I agree with that, but based on your original post,



I understood that your position is that USSR was the only one responsible for higher rate of conflicts.

Because commies like HT generally blame USSR?

I think he meant that it was the tension coming from having TWO super powers without much good will for each other, that was the problem.

Now we just have one super power without much good will towards the world.

[Fragony]

Tie in : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kenneth_Waltz

Kenneth waltz abandons the theory of political realism that is power, and goes for security instead. What brought peace is probably the mutual agreement of destruction. Worth reading.

[Hax]

Mutually assured destruction.

Come on.

[Fragony]

Mutually assured destruction.

Come on.

There is a theory behind it.

The old political realism, power is everything https://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/morg6.htm

The new political realism assumes not power is being the most important, but security, making the nuclair adantage the ultimate reason to prevent conflict. Total destruction is prevented in such a way.

[HoreTore]

I agree with that, but based on your original post,

I understood that your position is that USSR was the only one responsible for higher rate of conflicts.

While I consider the US to be morally superior to the USSR, I was referring to basically what Kadagar said.

The tension between the US and USSR and their struggles to get the world on their side created a whole bunch of conflicts. Neither of the two are to be considered innocent in this regard, and the disappearance of one of them meant a disappearance of a lot of the conflicts which fed of the cold war. Like FARC, for example, which is a lot less violent now than it was before, because the US doesn't see it as important to support the government and the USSR isn't around to arm FARC.

MAD can't explain the decline of conflicts either, because the presence of MAD is what caused an increase in the number of conflicts. Since the USSR and the US could not risk a direct war with each other, they started sponsoring a ton of conflicts all over the world. This led to an increase, not a decrease.

[Empire*Of*Media]

Ah yes of course, it's always dem jooooooooooooooooooze who are responsible for all our pain and suffering.

The 1920's called, they want their dead horse back.
first i said if Turkey attack PKK in kurdistan of Iraq the Kurdistan regional government will not remain silent and therefore while iran have hostility against Turkey they will support KRG too!
second
i told you are so much negativism on me! dont know why! because i dont agree with your believes ?!
i typed the word "Israel" not because i said they are responsible, indeed i support Jewish Israel i dont hate anyone without reason. i named Israel because if a major war goes in middle east Israel is in it too, and since American Government is ready to sacrifice USA for Israel (Thats Undeniable) and Islamic Regime of Iran (Dont call them Iran!) will not be silent so as they have allies too like Russia & China, then many other countries will interfere as we've seen China and Mostly Russia in matter of Syria.
so?

ok stick on nuclear war too. but i dont think the WW III is because of nuclear but maybe be a part of it.

and dont forget Pakistan & North Korea have Nuclear Missiles too! they are more dangerous to humanity.

[Empire*Of*Media]

lol...... who edited the Title!! :D

you could edit the "Flick" too!! lol

[TiagoJRToledo]

Ah yes of course, it's always dem jooooooooooooooooooze who are responsible for all our pain and suffering.

The 1920's called, they want their dead horse back.

It's hard to call it a dead horse, when they've built the State on milking the Holocaust cow for 70 years now...

[Montmorency]

You should be more precise in your wording, as what you're saying now is that it's hard to put conspiracies of the threat of international Jewry at rest because the Jewish state won't let the world forget the Jewish genocide just two generations after it happened.

And that couldn't be what you want to get across, right?

Right?

[TiagoJRToledo]

You should be more precise in your wording, as what you're saying now is that it's hard to put conspiracies of the threat of international Jewry at rest because the Jewish state won't let the world forget the Jewish genocide just two generations after it happened.

And that couldn't be what you want to get across, right?

Right?

I'm saying that the State of Israel was built on the premise that, due to the Holocaust, Jews were not safe in Europe anymore and demanded to return to a land that had not been theirs for about 2500 years. I believe it is wrong to cite an event that occurred 70 years ago whenever someone puts the existence of Israel in question.

I guess Mr. Bones' Wild Guilt Ride never ends.

[Montmorency]

Why are you changing the subject?

[TiagoJRToledo]

Why are you changing the subject?

Where did I?

[Montmorency]

What does the contemporary Jewish state have to do with century-old conspiracies? Or is any mention of "Jews" an opportunity to harp on this or that aspect of Israel?

[TiagoJRToledo]

What does the contemporary Jewish state have to do with century-old conspiracies? Or is any mention of "Jews" an opportunity to harp on this or that aspect of Israel?

I don't really understand what your are trying to say. I merely disputed that the Israeli question is not a dead horse, when a milking is still under way...

[Montmorency]

Horetore mentioned conspiracies.

Then you mentioned Holocaust-milking.

Now it's the "Israeli question"?

What exactly are you trying to say?

[TiagoJRToledo]

Ah yes of course, it's always dem jooooooooooooooooooze who are responsible for all our pain and suffering.

The 1920's called, they want their dead horse back.

I'm saying that Israel (or dem joooooooooze, as he put it) causing pain and suffering is not a conspiracy or a dead horse from the 1920', it is fact, and is founded on Holocaust-milking and guilt-tripping.

I guess the Golden Rule doesn't apply to them, hum?

[Montmorency]

I'm saying that Israel (or dem joooooooooze, as he put it) causing pain and suffering

That's an interesting interpretation, as the original quote was replying to "the matter is Israel" (i.e. 'Israel is the problem').


and is founded on Holocaust-milking and guilt-tripping.


So Israel causes pain and suffering through Holocaust-milking? I don't think that's what you're trying to say either.

[TiagoJRToledo]

That's an interesting interpretation, as the original quote was replying to "the matter is Israel" (i.e. 'Israel is the problem').



So Israel causes pain and suffering through Holocaust-milking? I don't think that's what you're trying to say either.

Israel causes suffering by building illegal settlements and by oppressing the Palestinian people.

The protection that is given to them by the international community, now that is gained by Holocaust-milking.

[Montmorency]

The protection that is given to them by the international community, now that is gained by Holocaust-milking.

:laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4:

You honestly think Israel is "protected" because the international community is made to feel bad by being reminded of the Holocaust?

[TiagoJRToledo]

:laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4:

You honestly think Israel is "protected" because the international community is made to feel bad by being reminded of the Holocaust?

I do not think that, I see that. That, and nukes provided by the US.

[rvg]

I do not think that, I see that. That, and nukes provided by the US.

Um... Israelis have their own nukes, they don't need ours.

[TiagoJRToledo]

Um... Israelis have their own nukes, they don't need ours.

Because Israel sprang up with in-built nuclear reactors...

[rvg]

Because Israel sprang up with in-built nuclear reactors...

Just like everyone else.

[Fragony]

:laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4:

You honestly think Israel is "protected" because the international community is made to feel bad by being reminded of the Holocaust?

They sure like their Godwins. That's comming from someone who supports Israel. I find them kinda offensive really, if you don't agree with anything Israel does there is this magic stfu-card they love using. No free pass for jews for being jewish from my part.

[Montmorency]

I do not think that, I see that.

I see that you don't have a good understanding of the situation.


Because Israel sprang up with in-built nuclear reactors...

As it turns out, the French are the ones who supplied Israel with reactors and scientific aid.

Not surprising, as Israel developed a nuclear capacity before it acquired the US as its patron - and when France was.

[TiagoJRToledo]

I see that you don't have a good understanding of the situation.

I see that you are the only authority on the matter.

[Montmorency]

I see that you are the only authority on the matter.

Yet another weak red herring.

[TiagoJRToledo]

Yet another weak red herring.

You're the one that started flinging fish.

The US have been the patrons of Israel ever since they put them in Palestine. Lucky for the Cypriots that the Jews we're too finicky to be placed on their island.

[Montmorency]

The US have been the patrons of Israel ever since they put them in Palestine.

Since 1967.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

I see that you don't have a good understanding of the situation.



As it turns out, the French are the ones who supplied Israel with reactors and scientific aid.

Not surprising, as Israel developed a nuclear capacity before it acquired the US as its patron - and when France was.

Indeed, while Truman (against the advice of his Secretary of State and almost causing the protest resignation of the entire US delegation to the UN) recognized Israel immediately in 1948, US support for Israel was limited to loan guarantees for the purchase of foodstuffs. Arms and technology were supplied by the French. The USA did not become Israel's primary foreign supplier and ally until the Johnson administration nearly 20 years after Israel was founded. There was a lot of sentiment in favor of the Israelis as the "plucky underdog" and certainly some sense of guilt over the holocaust, but we were not the linchpin of Israeli support in the early days.

As monty noted, the watershed year was 1967. France was unhappy with Israeli aggression and put a stop to things. The USA, under Johnson's leadership, stepped into the breach -- despite more Americans than French having been killed by Israel during the six days war. Wes old them Phantoms in 1968 and then the support built from there.

[Empire*Of*Media]

The fact that they (Zionists Government) are misusing the "Holocust" to do whatever they wish is undeniable!

the matter is they are still misusing!! i dont know why for the Holocust in 70 years ago (that the event is half doubtful about what happened in Auchwitz & ....) still Germany is paying MILLIONS of EUROs as fine and that is gained by People's Taxes and other, that its people's, while Israel is full wealthy itself and can blow the whole middle east with some buttons! this is ridiculous! and very humiliation against German People! if they claim Nazism was the cause so why they forced migrated 11 million German from their Ancestor's Homeland?! why they insult Germans in general in those times and even now in documentaries and movies? why they Splited and Seized the thousands years German Borders to other nations how they wished if its Nazism falut and not people's as they claim?! what was German Children and Women' Fault?!

im very sorry for the world as they believe how the Supplied media is cheating them, and they only see the things ONE SIDED.

I dislike Israel and some Jews (its not Hate!) because of their Secret and Cunning Politics & Actions & Justifications & Dark Magics! but that doesnt mean i FULLY deny Holocust, indeed we too (Kurds) are the victims of genocide too, as the Germans were too but no one cares for both of us nor support for it!! they dont want you to see other things. i just say there are just some questions is unanswered and of course NO ONE DARES!! you know what they do to them.....(in those so called DEMOCRACY Countries?!)

btw, this topic its not ONLY about Israel you could discuss about something else if the topic is going to a bad way.
thanks

[HoreTore]

Full-blown antisemitism.

What a shocker.

What's happened to the Kurds is but a tiny fraction of the evil the Jews have been subjected to in Europe.

[TiagoJRToledo]

Full-blown antisemitism.

What a shocker.

What's happened to the Kurds is but a tiny fraction of the evil the Jews have been subjected to in Europe.

Guilt-tripping at its best.

So tell me, what makes the Jewish suffering more important then every other suffering? The Kurds have been ethnically cleansed for centuries now, and no one has bat an eye. But just mention the Holocaust, and everyone should automatically feel bad and let them do as they please.

I'm sorry, this isn't anti-Semitism. I recognize and condemn the horrors that were perpetrated during the Holocaust. But suffering is suffering, and no one's is bigger or better then the next. That's why I ask to stop milking the cow.

[HoreTore]

everyone should automatically feel bad and let them do as they please.

This is plain nonsense, best demonstrated by the fact that Israel can barely act at all without being condemned by all of Europe.

And Kurdishspartakus went much further than this when he called the Holocaust "half-doubtful". Calling the Holocaust into question is hateful antisemitism at its best, plain and simple.

[Rhyfelwyr]

Calling the Holocaust into question is hateful antisemitism at its best, plain and simple.

Not necessarily. You can deny that an atrocity happened without doing it from a hatred of the victims of the supposed atrocity.

Not that I personally in any way doubt that the Holocaust happened on the generally accepted scale, I hasten to add.

[HoreTore]

Not necessarily. You can deny that an atrocity happened without doing it from a hatred of the victims of the supposed atrocity.

Perhaps in theory, but definitely not in practice.

Except, I guess, by ignorance and stupidity.

[Empire*Of*Media]

And Kurdishspartakus went much further than this when he called the Holocaust "half-doubtful". Calling the Holocaust into question is hateful antisemitism at its best, plain and simple.

i have never denied holcust completely. the matter is all the matters and facts not in general. >>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holocaust_denial so if its completely true why no one dares to say anything even softly and the one says that only CRITICIZE not insult or anything, should be jailed and fined?! so there maybe many things that its reveal has great Danger for them?!



Guilt-tripping at its best.

So tell me, what makes the Jewish suffering more important then every other suffering? The Kurds have been ethnically cleansed for centuries now, and no one has bat an eye. But just mention the Holocaust, and everyone should automatically feel bad and let them do as they please.

I'm sorry, this isn't anti-Semitism. I recognize and condemn the horrors that were perpetrated during the Holocaust. But suffering is suffering, and no one's is bigger or better then the next. That's why I ask to stop milking the cow.

not only KURDS but ARMENIANS & Germans Vietnamese (By USA) and .........! but the only big title for genocide in the world is HOLOCUST!! because they had the unlimited money to make Propagandas & Documentes & Documentaries for it!! and a holocust that most of their facts were by Jews themselves!! even the Nuremberg trial's judges were jew themselves!! one of the genocide as they claim it was that a jew claimed that they made Soap from their Blood (!!) but those that should defend themselves had no right to say anything but only to CONFESS!! so they were simply trialed by that simple words of him!! thats the Democracy & Justice!!

at all dear TIAGO whoever says anything to jews even if he/she says hey why your acting strange? are you mad?.........he/she will be condemned as ANTI SEMITISM !! thats a very good word to SUPPRESS anything against them!!

and leave HoreTore......he thinks he is god and know the world's full history and secrets. he cant accept Criticism he believes you must Obey him at believe him AT ALL COSTS !!

[HoreTore]

i have never denied holcust completely. the matter is all the matters and facts not in general. >>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holocaust_denial so if its completely true why no one dares to say anything even softly and the one says that only CRITICIZE not insult or anything, should be jailed and fined?! so there maybe many things that its reveal has great Danger for them?!


Because the Holocaust is as well-documented as the Sun, and so those who deny it do so in an effort to to revive Nazism, which is illegal in some countries.

There is no "great danger" the "powers that be" fear will be "exposed".

Serious historians rewrite history all the time, and they do so with the Holocaust as well. And those serious historians are never prosecuted. Ignorant hacks like David Irving, on the other hand....

....And when you say nonsense like "the judges at Nürnberg were Jews" you show your ignorance. The judges at the Nürnberg trials were:

- Iona Nikitchenko and Alexander Volchkov for the Soviet Union
- Geoffrey Lawrence and Norman Birkett for the UK
- Francis Biddle and John Parker for the US
- Henri de Vabres and Robert Falco for France

Of those 8, a grand total of 1 Jew is found. Robert Falco was dismissed from the French courts by the Vichy regime because of his Jewish origin.

It's not that I am "a god". It's that you are ignorant.

[Empire*Of*Media]

- Francis Biddle and John Parker for the US was jew !! indeed they dont SHOUT we are jew! jews never expose themselves! they be good or not that in origin of their history as they should cover themselves always to not be seen by muslim or catholics or communists !! we have many jews in SEMNAN that call themselves Muslim and they are high ranks of Mullah!! but their origin & names of their past families show that!! and guess what! they supported Ahmadinejad !!

---------------------------------

jews were very few very. specially in 100 years ago. so how 8 million jews in Israel and 15 million jews in USA (!!) are living ?! (my problem is with the number dont misunderstand i dont mean nothing happened) they were copied then?!

ah anyway...........

ok so anyone that criticize someone that has the world power & authority & economy in their hands are ignorant and should be silenced and put in jails suffer them then fine them.......this is democracy you like it or not..........

---------------------------------

there is no genocide in the world and nothing happened to Armenians Kurds Vietnamese Chinese & ........ only and Only Jews!!! and if its happened dont care and STICK to the Jewish one!! why because they have everything and they deserve it you are no match to say anything! say and you will be punished hard!! ok?! thats good?! now you like me ?!?! :D

[HoreTore]

- Francis Biddle and John Parker for the US was jew !!

lol, no.

John Parker was a member of the Episcopal church (http://ncpedia.org/biography/parker-john-johnston), and so was Francis Biddle (http://www.lib.udel.edu/ud/spec/findaids/biddle.htm). So was their entire families.

The belief in the crypto-Jew is another calling card of anti-semitism.

As for revisionism in general, the problem isn't that "the rich and powerful" support the "official story". The problem is that the points made by revisionists are pure bollox.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

inot only KURDS but ARMENIANS & Germans Vietnamese (By USA)

In what distorted reality do you make this claim? The pogrom against the Armenians following WW1 is well known. Germany's sins are well known, with the Holocaust including efforts to extirpate the Jews, the Romany, and many of the Slavic peoples.

Vietnamese by the USA? We fought a nasty war there as part of our effort to stop the various dominos of the Communist powers. We fought the war, all too often, with the wrong tools and with the cultural sensitivity of Kodiak bear. But a programmatic effort to eradicate the Vietnamese? Stuff and piffle. I have more persons of Vietnamese birth in my church congregation than it is likely you have met.

If you are going to lambast the USA for its sins, at least bust our chops over something we actually did.

[rvg]

The pogrom against the Armenians following WW1 is well known...

Not only that, but Kurds were the primary perpetrators of the 1915 genocide. They did most of the killings in what is now Eastern Turkey.

[Hax]

Then of course, the Kurds were repaid a bit sourly for their "services" to the Ottoman Empire.

Do bear in mind that not all Ottoman officials approved of what happened to the Armenians and later the Kurds, much like how several European officials tried to save Jews from persecution during the Second World War.

[rvg]

Do bear in mind that not all Ottoman officials approved of what happened to the Armenians and later the Kurds, much like how several European officials tried to save Jews from persecution during the Second World War.

True. Anyway, what's done is done, my job is simply to never forget. I empathize with the Jews quite a bit because of that and totally understand their desire to keep the Holocaust fresh in the memory: my people and their people were almost wiped off the face of the Earth. It wasn't oppression or persecution, we were quite literally being exterminated. It's not something that I can ever forget. Anyway, I don't want to expand my thoughts on this issue any further in this looney tunes thread. This issue is too important to me.

[Papewaio]

One of my Great Uncles was a Judge an Nuremburg. He was Welsh, and definitely not Jewish... because you can be both.

So the statement that they were all Jews is false.

[Hax]

True. Anyway, what's done is done, my job is simply to never forget. I empathize with the Jews quite a bit because of that and totally understand their desire to keep the Holocaust fresh in the memory: my people and their people were almost wiped off the face of the Earth. It wasn't oppression or persecution, we were quite literally being exterminated. It's not something that I can ever forget. Anyway, I don't want to expand my thoughts on this issue any further in this looney tunes thread. This issue is too important to me.

Noted, and understood. :bow:

[Hax]

jews were very few very. specially in 100 years ago.

What even. Did you ever even read about the history of Poland, to name one country?

[Slyspy]

Perhaps the alledged explosion in population was due to their "Dark Magics"?

[Ironside]

In what distorted reality do you make this claim? The pogrom against the Armenians following WW1 is well known. Germany's sins are well known, with the Holocaust including efforts to extirpate the Jews, the Romany, and many of the Slavic peoples.

Vietnamese by the USA? We fought a nasty war there as part of our effort to stop the various dominos of the Communist powers. We fought the war, all too often, with the wrong tools and with the cultural sensitivity of Kodiak bear. But a programmatic effort to eradicate the Vietnamese? Stuff and piffle. I have more persons of Vietnamese birth in my church congregation than it is likely you have met.

If you are going to lambast the USA for its sins, at least bust our chops over something we actually did.

Actually, the Vietnamese was genocided around that time..., by Pol Pot in Cambodia. Then again, he wasn't that picky with who he ordered killed. The most underreputated evil leader of the last century.

[rajpoot]

Isn't holocaust denial or discussing the subject against the forum rules?

While I am in no way trying to curb free speech, but I am afraid some of KurdishSpartakus' comments are getting a little ridiculous.

Edit:
NVM, it appears there are no banned topics at all. :dizzy2:
I could've sworn I had seen it in the Backroom FAQ and rules thread one time....

[HoreTore]

Isn't holocaust denial or discussing the subject against the forum rules?

Holocaust denial is hate speech, which is against the backroom rules.

The last time someone posted blatant Holocaust denial, Tiaxz brought out the axe and chopped the thread. Kurdishspartakus' comments are not of the same level as that thread, however.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Actually, the Vietnamese was genocided around that time..., by Pol Pot in Cambodia. Then again, he wasn't that picky with who he ordered killed. The most underreputated evil leader of the last century.

The Killing Fields....let's execute those wearing corrective lens-wear because the are, obviously, effete intellectuals who support the bourgeoisie in opposing the noble communist peasantry...

I am thoroughly well aware of Pol Pot's villainy. A commo-dictatorship so rabid that Vietnam itself felt obliged to put it down. Whatever sins the Vietnamese communist regime has committed, wiping out that rectal sphincter must be put to their credit.

Stalin killed more, Hitler killed more, and the Japanese probably killed more in China. Pol Pot probably holds the record for murders per year average though. Vile.

[HoreTore]

Stalin killed more, Hitler killed more, and the Japanese probably killed more in China. Pol Pot probably holds the record for murders per year average though. Vile.

Nah. As far as I'm aware, that dubious honour goes to the Hutus of Rwanda.

Pol Pot average around 700.000 a year. The Hutus killed that number in just 100 days.

[Montmorency]

There are the exaggerated Mongol massacres at Urgench and Merv.

[Ironside]

The Killing Fields....let's execute those wearing corrective lens-wear because the are, obviously, effete intellectuals who support the bourgeoisie in opposing the noble communist peasantry...

I am thoroughly well aware of Pol Pot's villainy. A commo-dictatorship so rabid that Vietnam itself felt obliged to put it down. Whatever sins the Vietnamese communist regime has committed, wiping out that rectal sphincter must be put to their credit.

Stalin killed more, Hitler killed more, and the Japanese probably killed more in China. Pol Pot probably holds the record for murders per year average though. Vile.

He combined the insane cultural revolution of Mao (and that after the Chinese admitted that is was a horrible idea), the murderous paranoia of Stalin (but worse. The basic logic for traitor hunting would've ended up branding 100% of the population as traitors) and the genocidal tendencies of Hitler (he never got industrial there though).

Cambodia is simply too small to get the really horribly large numbers, but he's probably the top candidate for leaders you least want to have for your country.

He's known to be bad, but not that bad.

[lars573]

jews were very few very. specially in 100 years ago. so how 8 million jews in Israel and 15 million jews in USA (!!) are living ?! (my problem is with the number dont misunderstand i dont mean nothing happened) they were copied then?!

ah anyway...........
I usually stay away from your ethnocentric lunacy but this one time I make an exception. The total population of Jews globally in 1933 was about 15.3 million. Of that 60%, about 9.5 million, lived in Europe. Making them 1.7% of the total population of Europe at the time (with the numerically largest populations in Poland and the Soviet Union). In North America there were 4.4 million Jews. South America 293000, Asia 583000, Africa 531000, Oceania 30000.

Now your modern figures have come right off crazy street. 8 million is Israel's total population. The Jewish population accounts for 74.3% of that population (5.9 million), Arab (aka Muslim) Israelis comprise 20.7% of Israel's population (1.7 million). And the USA has almost as many Jews as Israel (5.425 million) out of the total global Jewish population of 13.8 million.

Now in 1933 the global population of humans was 2.1 billion. In 2014 the world population is 7.2 billion. So while the global population has increased 3.4 times in 81 years the Jewish population shrank by 1.5 million.

[Kadagar_AV]

I usually stay away from your ethnocentric lunacy but this one time I make an exception. The total population of Jews globally in 1933 was about 15.3 million. Of that 60%, about 9.5 million, lived in Europe. Making them 1.7% of the total population of Europe at the time (with the numerically largest populations in Poland and the Soviet Union). In North America there were 4.4 million Jews. South America 293000, Asia 583000, Africa 531000, Oceania 30000.

Now your modern figures have come right off crazy street. 8 million is Israel's total population. The Jewish population accounts for 74.3% of that population (5.9 million), Arab (aka Muslim) Israelis comprise 20.7% of Israel's population (1.7 million). And the USA has almost as many Jews as Israel (5.425 million) out of the total global Jewish population of 13.8 million.

Now in 1933 the global population of humans was 2.1 billion. In 2014 the world population is 7.2 billion. So while the global population has increased 3.4 times in 81 years the Jewish population shrank by 1.5 million.

Source?

87% of your facts have been wrong so far. See, I can make up numbers too :)

A lot about the holocaust is exaggerated imho, and one has to be VERY careful of sources. Let's remember that the winner writes the history books.

I've had family in the concentration camps, my father among them. So it would be very far from me to deny the holocaust. As a somewhat serious historian at university level though, I seriously question much of the "officially known stuff".

[rvg]

I've had family in the concentration camps, my father among them. So it would be very far from me to deny the holocaust. As a somewhat serious historian at university level though, I seriously question much of the "officially known stuff".

For example?

[Kadagar_AV]

For example?

I believe the numbers to be exaggerated. I don't wish to dwell on it though.

My point is that no one can nilly willy come with "facts" and "statistics" about the holocaust without sourcing it damn well.

Heck, my grandmother was in a forced prostitution camp set up for homecoming SS-soldiers. Some very seriously bad stuff did happen. That, however, is no reason or excuse for letting go of ones analytical side.

[rvg]

I believe the numbers to be exaggerated. I don't wish to dwell on it though.

This is rather vague. How badly do you believe them to be exaggerated? 5 mil vs 6 mil? 2 mil vs 6 mil? 60000 vs 6 Mil?

Keep in mind that I'm an American. I do not share the European belief that opinions should be penalized.

[Hax]

I believe the numbers to be exaggerated. I don't wish to dwell on it though.

My point is that no one can nilly willy come with "facts" and "statistics" about the holocaust without sourcing it damn well.

Heck, my grandmother was in a forced prostitution camp set up for homecoming SS-soldiers. Some very seriously bad stuff did happen. That, however, is no reason or excuse for letting go of ones analytical side.

Come on. You can't just go "I believe the numbers are exaggerated", and then when someone calls you on it go "oh but I don't want to dwell upon it". How about you give us some damn statistics or evidence to the contrary before going all "well we should question everything". Unless you feel of course, that the Jews are a threat to Sweden or something.

In any case, I think you're playing the Holocaust card just as much as anyone now by the repetition of how your family members suffered too. My mother's grandfather was a member of the military police, whose job it was to shoot deserters. His uncle was a judge in the Hague. Probably some family members on my father's side fought for the French during World War II. If you're born in Europe, of course that means that some part of your family suffered during the Holocaust.

[Montmorency]

Yet those aren't even Holocaust statistics - they were demographic statistics on the population sizes of the Jews in the contemporary period against those of the Jews in the pre-war period.

It is difficult to take your protests seriously when they are not even directly relevant. Further, it smacks of unwholesome bias.

[Kadagar_AV]

... All I asked for was a source...

Also, I don't have an "opinion" on numbers. I spent some time on this issue some 10 years ago, and it left me with a whole lot of questionmarks.

And contrary to popular opinion, HELL YEAH, I can be vague. This is the internet, I can even be anonymous. This is one of those topics where my analytical mind battles my emotional mind.

So let me be precise, I'd love to flame the nazi's for their wrongdoings. But I just want to make it perfectly clear that we do it for the right reasons, and know exactly what went wrong and where.

Unsupported numbers do not help, because when people see through those numbers, they might start to question other issues as well.

Real issues.

And that would be terrible.

[rvg]

And contrary to popular opinion, HELL YEAH, I can be vague. This is the internet, I can even be anonymous.

The problem with that level of vagueness is that you basically aren't saying anything. It's the equivalent of saying "Something's wrong." Okay, and? There's no good response to that statement, because something somewhere can most assuredly be wrong, but unless you state what and where, there can be no further discussion.

[Montmorency]

Hitler killed six-million (or so - possibly fewer, possibly more) people with at least one Jewish grandparent.

Now, some people make a lot of the fact that on the strictest interpretation, only someone with a Jewish mother can be a Jew.

Using that qualification, then yes, Hitler did indeed kill fewer than 6 million Jews.

Ultimately though, the point is that yes, Hitler did kill all those people (among others), and he did so specifically because he considered them to be Jews. Whether or not there is a consensus on the Jewishness or lack thereof of every single one of the victims of Hitler's regime is totally irrelevant, and may in fact be one of the greatest red herrings of the past century.

Happy?

[Kadagar_AV]

Answering would just be repeating myself, again.

[Strike For The South]

Your stupidity, like your morality, has no ground level

I thought the fascists would've figured out a better way at hiding themselves by now.

[lars573]

Source?
Google and Wikipedia. Which led to scans of the 1933 world almanac. And other census data from 1933. Any of the modern stats are easily found of wikipedia.

[Strike For The South]

Google and Wikipedia. Which led to scans of the 1933 world almanac. And other census data from 1933. Any of the modern stats are easily found of wikipedia.

BOTH RUN BY THE ROSTHCHILDS NO DOUBT

[HoreTore]

Google and Wikipedia. Which led to scans of the 1933 world almanac. And other census data from 1933. Any of the modern stats are easily found of wikipedia.

They are also very well-known numbers and sources, used in basically all literature concerning the holocuast. You would think that a "university-level historian" would be familiar with them...

[Brenus]

“I believe the numbers to be exaggerated.” You believe? That is not a way to approach History.
In fact, studies could lead to the reverse, numbers were underestimated. I don’t want to enter in the why, but were excluded from the counting almost all the victims dying before coming in the camps, victims unregistered in the Camps and killing fields (i.e. Einsatzgruppen , Nazi Germany Allies as the Independent State of Croatia (NDH) and others).

“I do not share the European belief that opinions should be penalized.” That is not an opinion when it is a political statement to support an ideology against the Constitution and Democracy. Nazism, contrary to Communist, advocates openly for Slavery, Mass Killing and Racism. All these are against the law in Europe.

[Fragony]

Hitler killed six-million (or so - possibly fewer, possibly more) people with at least one Jewish grandparent.

Now, some people make a lot of the fact that on the strictest interpretation, only someone with a Jewish mother can be a Jew.

Using that qualification, then yes, Hitler did indeed kill fewer than 6 million Jews.

Ultimately though, the point is that yes, Hitler did kill all those people (among others), and he did so specifically because he considered them to be Jews. Whether or not there is a consensus on the Jewishness or lack thereof of every single one of the victims of Hitler's regime is totally irrelevant, and may in fact be one of the greatest red herrings of the past century.

Happy?

I really don't want to be of this side of the argument but the numbers are kinda off, there weren't six millions jews in Europe. What the hell Poland and Russia did I don't know, but I do know that they weren't all that reserved when it comes to killing jews, or anything really.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Hitler killed six-million (or so - possibly fewer, possibly more) people with at least one Jewish grandparent.

Now, some people make a lot of the fact that on the strictest interpretation, only someone with a Jewish mother can be a Jew.

Using that qualification, then yes, Hitler did indeed kill fewer than 6 million Jews.

Ultimately though, the point is that yes, Hitler did kill all those people (among others), and he did so specifically because he considered them to be Jews. Whether or not there is a consensus on the Jewishness or lack thereof of every single one of the victims of Hitler's regime is totally irrelevant, and may in fact be one of the greatest red herrings of the past century.

Happy?

The Nazis used their own definition of "Jew," a definition that was specifically aimed at an ethnicity and not at a religion per se. They did NOT bother to ask if you had attended synagogue recently, if you adhered to the Levitican proscriptions, whether the only "Jew" in your family was a paternal grandfather who had converted to Lutheranism, or even if you were a fan of the Jews for Jesus (http://www.jewsforjesus.org/)movement [and yes, the anachronism is noted, I just couldn't resist the sardonic edge of humor provided -- one of my failings].

[drone]

Really, what difference does it make if it was 2, 4, or 6 million? :inquisitive:

20-30 million Soviet citizens were designated for death by starvation through the OKW Hunger Plan (Ukrainian wheat ftw!). Government bureaucracies are the worst tyrants.

[HoreTore]

there weren't six millions jews in Europe.

Pure (http://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article.php?ModuleId=10005161) rubbish. (http://www.jewishgen.org/databases/givennames/dbdespop.htm)

Have fun. (http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Holocaust_denial#Death_toll_and_census_data)

[Empire*Of*Media]

In what distorted reality do you make this claim? The pogrom against the Armenians following WW1 is well known. Germany's sins are well known, with the Holocaust including efforts to extirpate the Jews, the Romany, and many of the Slavic peoples.

Vietnamese by the USA? We fought a nasty war there as part of our effort to stop the various dominos of the Communist powers. We fought the war, all too often, with the wrong tools and with the cultural sensitivity of Kodiak bear. But a programmatic effort to eradicate the Vietnamese? Stuff and piffle. I have more persons of Vietnamese birth in my church congregation than it is likely you have met.

If you are going to lambast the USA for its sins, at least bust our chops over something we actually did.

first i meant USA Imperialist GOVERNMENT not its people that you say "WE" & "US"! SECOND, .... Really?! you mean that because of Nazi's Sins 11 million Germans must be force splited and force migrated from their HomeLand? the people that had no sins?!!

and because of Communists of Vietnam the Villages should be set to fire rape their women butcher their men and burn their children with their shacks?!!! because of Communists ?!!

because of some Japneese Colonels & Generals many thousands of Peoples must be Nuked?!

this is how you wash your government's guilty and unquestioned & untrialed sins and Crimes ?!!

at least im so happy Great HO CHI MINH the Peacful trashed your governments dream of annexing and making slave and Puppet of Vietnam too!!......


Source?

87% of your facts have been wrong so far. See, I can make up numbers too :)

A lot about the holocaust is exaggerated imho, and one has to be VERY careful of sources. Let's remember that the winner writes the history books.

I've had family in the concentration camps, my father among them. So it would be very far from me to deny the holocaust. As a somewhat serious historian at university level though, I seriously question much of the "officially known stuff".

do not question anything! you must obey & believe what they tell you, or your anti semitic and you should be punished HARD!

so close your eyes ban your thoughts close your ears and obey what they tell you as others do.....



BOTH RUN BY THE ROSTHCHILDS NO DOUBT

Yes Exactly........and Also Creating The Numbers of Holocust Death Toll.

[HoreTore]

first i meant USA Imperialist GOVERNMENT not its people that you say "WE" & "US"! SECOND, .... Really?! you mean that because of Nazi's Sins 11 million Germans must be force splited and force migrated from their HomeLand? the people that had no sins?!!

Rubbish.

The Germans didn't lose land because of the Holocaust. They lost land because they lost a war. That's usually what happens when you lose a war, ya know.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

1first i meant USA Imperialist GOVERNMENT not its people that you say "WE" & "US"! 2SECOND, .... Really?! you mean that because of Nazi's Sins 11 million Germans must be force splited and force migrated from their HomeLand? the people that had no sins?!!

3and because of Communists of Vietnam the Villages should be set to fire rape their women butcher their men and burn their children with their shacks?!!! because of Communists ?!!

4because of some Japneese Colonels & Generals many thousands of Peoples must be Nuked?!

5this is how you wash your government's guilty and unquestioned & untrialed sins and Crimes ?!!

6at least im so happy Great HO CHI MINH the Peacful trashed your governments dream of annexing and making slave and Puppet of Vietnam too!!.....

First, I have added the bold numbers above for clarity of response for the reader. They were not in the original.

1 I have commented numerous times on the "imperialism" of the US government. Our history includes several periods of time when we took an aggressive/imperialist role in world affairs....and numerous times we did not. Our allies are often vexed by our inconsistency, but it should be noted that we are inconsistently imperialist as well. Silly as it may seem, a surprising amount of our "imperialism" was actually "do-gooder" behavior by our rationale (admittedly, sometimes that was self-justification, at other times it was well-intentioned but ill-thought). I also note that you are careful to separate our "leadership" from our "people." We sir, are not a dictatorship and, despite all the tinfoil-hat theories to the contrary, we are not run by some oligarchic cabal pulling strings behind the scenes. The distinction does not exist in the manner you imply. Our leaders are elected by ourselves -- thus all Americans claim a share in our successes and our shames.

2 I assure you that the USA was not particularly enamored of fragmenting Germany -- especially handing a huge slice to the USSR. It was viewed as a necessity of war to maintain the alliance and to limit Stalin from seeking to acquire more (remember, at the time we were unaware of just how deeply they had been bled by winning the Great Patriotic War).

3 War begets atrocities. The USA committed its share in Vietnam, but rarely with official sanction and without any programmatic character. Stacked against the atrocities committed by the VC to cow the people of South Vietnam, we didn't ever hold our own. Of course, as the anti-colonialists, their sins are automatically excused by too many. It is, sadly, the curse that hangs over any US warrior -- you will be condemned for any action that harms a non-combatant (whether rightly because you were committing crimes or wrongly because it was just a horrid accident) -- the other fellow, not so much. Until we manage to convert all wars into duels between champions on an open field somewhere, atrocities will continue to occur. All-in-all, I am happy that our current warriors commit fewer than the warriors of our past -- a reducing trend that I hope continues.

4 That's what you do in wars. With rare exceptions, you do not get a clear shot at the leaders themselves. The etiquette of the time accepted that massive civilian casualties were understandable collateral damage resulting from the aerial bombardment of military/industrial targets situated in proximity to civilian areas. Our modern definition does not agree, but that was the standard utilized at the time. Were the atomic weapons used any more harmful to the citizenry of the target areas than were the firestorms generated in Hamburg or Tokyo?

The reason we employed to nukes was rather simple -- to save lives. We knew that an invasion of Japan would likely double the total casualties suffered by US forces throughout the entirety of the war. In addition, though this was quite secondary to their decision at the time, millions of Japanese would have been killed as well. We figured if we demonstrated that we could smash targets with only one sortie -- as opposed to mass attacks -- that the Japanese (tenacious to a fault) would finally realize that any form of victory was impossible and sue for peace. The decision was proven correct.

5 Were all of those who have, in the past, committed acts viewed as criminal by modern "war crime" standards, then a minority of humanity might be forced to guard the majority in prison. Yes, I exaggerate, but the point is that war IS an atrocity. I am glad that we try to hold ourselves to a higher standard -- howevermuch it is honored in the breach -- but that does not alter that basic fact. Until we all collectively cease to war -- I do not expect this in this millennium either -- we will have to cope with such things as best we can.

You are, moreover, pointing to the wrong "sins" in your lambasting of the USA. Our semi-programmatic ethnic cleansing of Native Americans and our mistreatment of Mexico are far more in line with your negative assessment than are the examples you invoke.

6 Ho didn't beat us. Walter Cronkite did. Ho authorized Tet, finally giving Westmoreland the large-scale fight in the open he'd been dreaming of (and was actually skilled in fighting) as opposed to the strategy that had been sapping our efforts so successfully. We broke the VC more or less entirely and Giap was on the verge of urging negotiations. THEN, "Uncle Walt" pops off in despair about how it cannot be won -- encouraging the North to stay the course and allow us to beat ourselves. Sadly, Giap was quite enough of a skilled leader to perceive -- and effectively utilize -- this path to victory. We opted out, signing the Paris accords. The North waited for our draw-down of forces to begin, then ignored the agreement and completed their objective of conquering the whole country -- Ho had been dead for some years at the time of the signing. He was far more important as a symbol than as a war leader.

[Montmorency]

THEN, "Uncle Walt" pops off in despair about how it cannot be won -- encouraging the North to stay the course and allow us to beat ourselves.

This isn't really what happened. The American public did not feel that the war could not be won - it felt that it was not worth fighting, as the government had demonstrably deceived the public as to the nature and scope of the conflict. It was this alienation that sapped America's will to fight.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

This isn't really what happened. The American public did not feel that the war could not be won - it felt that it was not worth fighting, as the government had demonstrably deceived the public as to the nature and scope of the conflict. It was this alienation that sapped America's will to fight.

A good deal of truth there. However, Nixon has held the support of the "Silent Majority" up until that time. When THEY became alienated, then the internal opposition to the war moved forward largely unchecked.

[Montmorency]

My impression of Nixon is that he wanted a slam-dunk deal and kept putting off peace overtures from the North in order to get a better position on the ground from which to bargain.

Read this (http://www.amazon.com/Americas-Longest-War-Vietnam-1950-1975/dp/0072536187/ref=la_B001IQXI7M_1_2/183-0765881-7029624?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1394564126&sr=1-2) and count all the missed opportunities.

[Brenus]

“We broke the VC more or less entirely and Giap was on the verge of urging negotiations.” More or less agree with the rest but that was an illusion. Giap had no say in negotiation as the Vietminh/Vietcong always put politic ahead military. A military defeat that won a political fight is a win for the Vietnamese Communist (as the Tet Offensive did). If a battle couldn’t be won, the Vietminh would break and withdraw. Giap lost major battles against the French (Battle of the Delta, Na San) but always learned of them. Same thing in Khe san against the US: Overestimation of his own forces and abilities, underestimation of the enemies. In each case, he made a campaign of auto-critic, adjusted and went back to fight.
As for the Tet, Giap took a gamble and lost (some think it was as well a good way to get rid of the Southern Communist, too nationalist (I have no opinion on this matter). But Ho Chi Minh and the Communist Party wouldn’t have sought after peace for military defeats.

Hmm. sorry for the digression...

[Hax]

Why do I get the impression that some people feel that they can't criticise Israel without also sorta implicitly doubting the Holocaust. Why do people do that? Can't we just acknowledge that the Holocaust was horrible, and that Israeli politics is also horrible. They don't cancel eachother out.

[HoreTore]

Why do I get the impression that some people feel that they can't criticise Israel without also sorta implicitly doubting the Holocaust. Why do people do that? Can't we just acknowledge that the Holocaust was horrible, and that Israeli politics is also horrible. They don't cancel eachother out.

Because, apparently, the world is controlled in secret by a conspiracy of evil and powerful bankiers who invented the Holocaust to conceal their fiat money production.....or something.

[Hax]

Do they also pay my college?

[Fragony]

Pure (http://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article.php?ModuleId=10005161) rubbish. (http://www.jewishgen.org/databases/givennames/dbdespop.htm)

Have fun. (http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Holocaust_denial#Death_toll_and_census_data)

It's highly debatable I know, I am not making a stance in anything but the numbers are debatable. Does it really matter, truth remains that jews were to be exterminated at some point. (Possible) exaggaration of numbers is only a very welcome gift to those who would rather have it that it wasn't all that bad. I might be breaking forum rules by saying that the numbers are kinda off and I'll leave it to the moderaters to judge. I will leave it at this untill I continue, there wasn't all that much encourigment needed, everybody suddenly hammered down on the jews, it weren't just the nazi's. Freaky as hell how this could all happen, mass psychose.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

The specific numbers will never be known. Ultimately, they are immaterial when placed next to the fact of a modern state engaged in industrialized genocide. One murder is a crime. Millions of murders are millions of crimes. Is 5.5M any less horrific than 6M? Or, for that matter, is 1 less horrific?

The thought of murdering someone simply and solely because of ethnicity is abhorrent. Full fucking stop.

[rvg]

The thought of murdering someone simply and solely because of ethnicity is abhorrent. Full fucking stop.
For an American this would be hair-raising. Much less so for the Old World folks. Ethnic hatreds run deep in the Old World.

[Fragony]

For an American this would be hair-raising. Much less so for the Old World folks. Ethnic hatreds run deep in the Old World.

A sad truth. It's always there. There is this new rage especially in France, the 'guenelle'. Often made jokingly but I don't find it all that funny. Blatant antisemitism by extreme right/extreme left/extreme islam is rampant. They hate eachother but hate someone else a whole lot more. If I start seeing the quenelle here I an going to break the arms that make it, no jew ever harmed me.

[HoreTore]

It's highly debatable I know, I am not making a stance in anything but the numbers are debatable.

They're really not.

[Brenus]

“For an American this would be hair-raising. Much less so for the Old World folks. Ethnic hatreds run deep in the Old World.” True. Only the Black Americans were ban from schools and others services until, hmmm, 1960’s. Nothing about hatred of course, or prejudices…
By the way, to be Jewish is to be part of a religion, not an ethnicity. Small detail for an American, I know.
And how the West was won exactly if not on genocide and ethnocide?…
You can put me in "ignore", I am not a moderator.:laugh4:

[Montmorency]

By the way, to be Jewish is to be part of a religion, not an ethnicity.

I'm sure you're aware that this is rather tendentious.

[Brenus]

"I'm sure you're aware that this is rather tendentious." If you find a common "ethnic" root uniting the Jewish Communities, just tell me which one...

[Montmorency]

If the Jewish communities do, well, isn't that enough?

I think it's one thing to say that to be Jewish is heavily rooted in Judaism the religion, and another to say that a Jew may stop being a Jew merely by foregoing the practice of that religion.

But you take the currently more conservative, and so more popular, view on the subject. Just know that quite a few self-proclaimed Jews, Reform Jews in particular, would take umbrage with your statement.

[Montmorency]

http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/opinion/netanyahu-has-forgotten-what-it-means-to-be-israeli-1.375846



In order to understand this, we must go back 14 years to the moment when the prime minister at that time, the same as today's, whispered in the ear of the aged kabbalist, Rabbi Yitzhak Kaduri: "The people of the left have forgotten what it is to be Jewish."

[Fragony]

They're really not.

Goes both ways, some think it was much worse, some think it were less who were murdered. I don't know I wasn't there. I make zero claim, just pointing out that it isn't all that settled. We will never know how many have died.

[HoreTore]

"I'm sure you're aware that this is rather tendentious." If you find a common "ethnic" root uniting the Jewish Communities, just tell me which one...

Are you of the opinion that Hitler targeted Synagogue-goers...?


Goes both ways, some think it was much worse, some think it were less who were murdered. I don't know I wasn't there. I make zero claim, just pointing out that it isn't all that settled. We will never know how many have died.

No, not really. The 5.5 to 6 million estimate is universally accepted and uncontroversial among historians.

Claims that this number is inaccurate is only found among non-historians.

[Fragony]

No, not really. The 5.5 to 6 million estimate is universally accepted and uncontroversial among historians.

Claims that this number is inaccurate is only found among non-historians.

That's not true, it's a very rough estimate. It could actually be much worse than 6 million, nobody knows how much were killed in Russia and Poland, by Germans Polish and Russians alike. Most killings we never heard about, just killed and thrown in mass-graves.

[Fisherking]

That's not true, it's a very rough estimate. It could actually be much worse than 6 million, nobody knows how much were killed in Russia and Poland, by Germans Polish and Russians alike. Most killings we never heard about, just killed and thrown in mass-graves.

I think those are part of the estimate.

I think the death camps only took care of about half that number. Not all of those Jews. Death camps killed about 3 million.

It’s been some time since I looked at it all though. Jews were a little less than half of all they systematically murdered but the largest single group.

[HoreTore]

That's not true, it's a very rough estimate. It could actually be much worse than 6 million, nobody knows how much were killed in Russia and Poland, by Germans Polish and Russians alike. Most killings we never heard about, just killed and thrown in mass-graves.

I am not surprised at all that this statement does not refer to any historical works.

And yes, Fisherking is more or less correct.

[Fragony]

I am not surprised at all that this statement does not refer to any historical works.

And yes, Fisherking is more or less correct.

The stove is hot, nobody wants to have their hands burned. The actual number is really hard to determine, especially in Russia, I mean Russians and administration, bad combination. A lot of killing was done on the go, and it are nameless victims. In the Netherlands and Germany everything has been registered, so they knew exactly who was jewish, they (well who is they, the nazi's didn't need all that much encouragment here as well) but in vaster area's ranging from Germany to Russia it's impossible to make estimations. Anyhow, the rediculous vileness that is the intention to whipe out an entire race is more important than the actual numbers.

[Fisherking]

The stove is hot, nobody wants to have their hands burned. The actual number is really hard to determine, especially in Russia, I mean Russians and administration, bad combination. A lot of killing was done on the go, and it are nameless victims. In the Netherlands and Germany everything has been registered, so they knew exactly who was jewish, they (well who is they, the nazi's didn't need all that much encouragment here as well) but in vaster area's ranging from Germany to Russia it's impossible to make estimations. Anyhow, the rediculous vileness that is the intention to whipe out an entire race is more important than the actual numbers.

Just go to wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Holocaust

Check the source materials. You don’t have to take the figures but with the bibliography you can research it your self.

[HoreTore]

Do you know the meaning of the term "estimate", frags?

I suggest you actually pick up a history book concerning the Holocaust, and see how the number is calculated.

[Fragony]

Do you know the meaning of the term "estimate", frags?

I suggest you actually pick up a history book concerning the Holocaust, and see how the number is calculated.

I actually am a historian Horrie, I can say I am at least, I am not unaware of the difficulties. I know preciously little of WW2 and all the horrors that was put upon those that had to die, but at least I know that I don't. Feel free to call me absolutily ignorant when it comes to that. But I am not all that uneducated, not all that dumb either.

[Empire*Of*Media]

FIRST of all. Sorry for my Long Texts it will be my last LONG TEXT here so if you hate me or dont like my ideas read this for last time and you will know your misunderstanding of me....... I must Clear that I am not Anti Semitic or Jewish Hater or even Holocust Denier. I am but to question some things, not the whole event & Story. and that’s any human’s right. Denying Holocust is a silly thing. I am pro Jewish (I don’t mean Zionism too!) and hate anything that tramples & suppresses anyone’s Right that has no Harm for the others….. so please I need you to FORGET YOUR HATRED AND NEGATIVE VIEW ON ME. I beg you all, please, As its going to be New Year for us in 20-21 March (NEWROZ) and I can not and should not carry negative energy and negative thoughts on me. I wish you all be Happy and be good in all your life. This is not my Slogan, I really say that from my heart……even if you insist on the negative thinking on me. Cheers & Bless to you all…..


First, I have added the bold numbers above for clarity of response for the reader. They were not in the original.

1 I have commented numerous times on the "imperialism" of the US government. Our history includes several periods of time when we took an aggressive/imperialist role in world affairs....and numerous times we did not. Our allies are often vexed by our inconsistency, but it should be noted that we are inconsistently imperialist as well. Silly as it may seem, a surprising amount of our "imperialism" was actually "do-gooder" behavior by our rationale (admittedly, sometimes that was self-justification, at other times it was well-intentioned but ill-thought). I also note that you are careful to separate our "leadership" from our "people." We sir, are not a dictatorship and, despite all the tinfoil-hat theories to the contrary, we are not run by some oligarchic cabal pulling strings behind the scenes. The distinction does not exist in the manner you imply. Our leaders are elected by ourselves -- thus all Americans claim a share in our successes and our shames.

............................

Dear Sir Seamus Fermangah, Thanks for The most Respected and Moderate Reply, you could teach some in here to be like yours they really lack of it..........like…………oh I don’t bring names they now better themselves who I mean.
so

Dear Seamus, sir, dont make me laugh please. What’s election if there's between close friends in two same Party with different name?! HAVE YOU NOT EVER THOUGHT WHY IT SHOULD ALWAYS BE REPUBLICANS AND DEMOKRATS? really why?! why not an Ordinary man or woman without in any parties ? well, this is SELECTION not election, you must Vote for someone that has no difference in reality with the other one, and he/she is who they have selected to be, and someone that has been selected before, they only need your vote not much, to come and participate nothing more. so there is complete difference between US Government and its people as I say, as their people dont support in Imperialistic acts or they would not Demonstrate against war in Vietnam & Iraq. at all, your SIGNATURE too tells many things....

....Dear Seamus Fermangah, many acts of Imperialism should not be only Open and direct as The Great Britains did in 3 centuries. By time they realize they must change their course & style of controlling the world. USA did not want to Repeat the hatred of People of Asia & Africa & Middle East toward Colonialism & Imperialism of UK/GB! So USA will control the nations but will give some little bit of a share too, unlike UK depleted and stole all the nations resources & manpower as Slaves. Of course i mentioned some of the Open ones, but there are too much Hidden Acts & Events too.

such as DIRECT hand in putting out Democracy in Iran. US Government Created & Supplied The Coupe to Remove the people's Elected MOSADDEQ and bring their puppet, Shah again to fulfill The US & UK Oils & other great benefits in Strategic Country like Iran. then they realized The Shah is going to be “Saucy” and want to be Independent from US as he was Threatening US & UK to raise oil and also annoying interferes for example.so they provoked people trained someone like KHOMEIN I and Showed the Shah that they have left their puppet and now should leave! As he left after the revolution it was USA the FIRST Country to Recognize Iranian Islamic Government!!(So what this means while USSR still was waiting?) one year later Khomein i betrayed (I don’t know it was real or not) USA and called the people to be against US & Israel(and not UK?! Strange!) and because he had Shia people’s special place, USA did not want to REPEAT VIETNAM!! This and :

The Treaty of Severe in 1921 that even UK & France despite their suppressing of Kurds in the Defeated Ottomon Regions, but after were considering giving a country, or at least Autonomous Government to The Kurds, because there countries have been made that they had not such before and Arabs did not care to create Jordan Iraq Syria or any of them! The Brits and West in general created The Middle East Maps & Borders & Governments. so as long they did that for Arabs and Turks why not Kurds? but after sometime we see that USA after death of their president in 1921 the congress of so called People's elected of USA with the new president did realize there MAYBE less Profits and benefits for US if they create or make autonomous Kurdistans. so despite the PROMISE the west gave to Kurds, they Backstabbed and Betrayed the Kurds, not even they did not do their promise, they also SUPPORTED the Dictators and Racists of Arabs and Turks like ATATURK to suppress the Kurdish Movements and they even BOMBARDED the Kurdish Villages that in there Revolts happened (by UK & USA). so you dont know and even dont care because they doesnt let you to see the truth, if i am a bad guy in here at ORG by your view, that DOES NOT MEAN ALL KURDS ARE LIKE ME!!

and again in 1946 when Republic of Mahabad was created by the result of USSR army’s presence in there, US again helped alot the Shah of Iran to Suppress fully of Kurdistan's little Republic in Iran that was supported by USSR after world war II. so?!.....so you think i should Thank the US Gov? because at least they helped the Kurds to establish Autonomous Region in 2003-4? but no i will NOT because that was not for the sake of humanitarian, it was but BENEFITS. because many years earlier at 1975 & 1984 USA promised the same in those years but exactly after some time they realized other profits and benefits too in elsewhere with Saddam Hussain The BloodThirsty and forgot their promise so they instead, HELPED SADDAM to suppress the Kurds. yes 2 times betrayal by US Gov, and of course Kurds are not known by their Islam, Kurds are too much moderate and in third time they yet believed there may USA help them in 1991 but again USA did not, because Golf War had been ended and US Troops were leaving, they got their money from Kuwait why helping people that gives no money?! Sothe poor misfortune people were left alone and once again Iraqi jets Bombarded Villages and Cities some chemical again, it was near the kurds be wiped out from region. In this time it was it was Francois Mitterrand http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fran%C3%A7ois_Mitterrand that saw Painful Crimes against Kurds and banned the Flight of Military jets of Iraq in the Kurdistan's Air, and he was Socialists President not Imperialist, THAT’S WHY!. so no thanks to US again…. Then after, in George Bush time, US Gov wanted to invade fully to iraq now, so They needed the Kurds they knew almost most things and situations there, so Bush promised Kurds to be full Autonomous, however not the Kirkuk that has significant Oil Potential. despite all of those betrayals by the USA Kurds again Opened their Peacful hands to shake with the Traitor USA! so it was for BENEFITS again that USA did that at last, so after all of these betrayals & crimes ..... so thank you for your Benefits that saved one part of us. And:

The USA always condemn PKK for being terrorists group but the only reason is to make their Ally Turkey happy! because Turkey fulfills many of their Strategically Benefits in the region.so this means USA IS SUPPORTING RACISM AND FASCISM AND SUPPRESSION AND OPPRESSION AGAINST A DEFENCELESS & GENOCIDED PEOPLE!! the blood of Kurds in Turkey is in the US Governments hands as they supply the Fascist Racists to Kill and force migrate and Rape People called Kurds & Armenians.( This was just very short title…)

and also when the Islamists/Jihadists Terrorists of Syria invaded & abused Kurdish villages & lives, as they justified killing Kurds and raping their girls & women and butchering their children will cause them go to heaven to Allah, then YPG another PKK linked in Syria took action to defend at any cost and called People to Raise against these Evil Acts. so do you know what was USA Governments did/said?! "oh we only Support Unified Syria and do not support Seperatists”!!!! what kind of Justify is this while the YPG themselves raised flag of Free Syria along Kurdistan’s Flag and said we wish our rights be considered and confirmed in Syria so we dont need Seperation now.

and what kind of justify is this when Children & Women are being killed and Raped?!! why US GOV no say about that huh? these were only SUMMARY of TITLES of what USA Government did & Betrayed the Poor & Misfortuned people and supporting their Hatred racist fascist enemies!!


this was only about Kurds and very bit about Iran. now if i say fully about them, or even if i name the Titles of their Crimes in Vietnam, Rwanda, Germany After WWII, Kongo, Venezuela, Bolivia, Cuba, Argentina, Japan, & .......too much more, not only this post but this or any Thread can not take its huge long texts and references. And that’s why I did answered one by one of your replies friend….
SO NO THANKS FOR the US Government.............instead i think most of their leaders should have been trialed ........the thing that is impossible for a SuperPower to be done due to they have unlimited power & Authority, but after all of these i wonder how people still believe their Speech in News and HollyWood Propagandas that USA is savior of mankind?! what is it instead?!...........!! so this is The Hidden Imperialism & Colonialism...

Only to say do not self-justify yourself with those word from them that “We were had to”. I understand your Defence Stance for USA GOV blames as you are in that Country. But first, Governments do not Represent their people even the most democratic ones, Second Killing and Burning wretched poor Women & Children civilians in Vietnam and Japan, and splitting Germany in excuse of fear of Stalin, handing over Minorities to Cruel Fascists, Interfering in Countries Fates & Destiny to the worst ones & …..much other, that you say it was sacrifice for a good purposes. if that was/is good, so something like The Holocust was a need for the oppressors too! They too said that & Jews & Gypsies & Slavs were a threat for the world and should be stopped……but is it?! If not so don’t continue on WASHING or COVERING Gulities and Crimes and Sins of Western Imperialist Governments that are actually one and working with each other.

Im sorry that I should spend good days with peace of life like you in Europe and US & West in general completely without Worries and Emotions, than I or like me to feel affliction by all these events and misfortunes! Why someone born in for example Norway from the birth should be at super Comfort with having everything in life and nothing less, but instead the others in other parts of the world should only worry about Poverty war racism hatred and those kinds without their wanting……?!
What a rubbish world we have indeed……………

btw, i have Respect for you all, so i will not repeat my starting sentences, ........ wish the best for you all:bow:
cheers, and hope for that your Negative View be washed on me........~:)
.

[Fragony]

If you copy/paste link the scource, you didn't write that

[Seamus Fermanagh]

“For an American this would be hair-raising. Much less so for the Old World folks. Ethnic hatreds run deep in the Old World.” True. Only the Black Americans were ban from schools and others services until, hmmm, 1960’s. Nothing about hatred of course, or prejudices…
By the way, to be Jewish is to be part of a religion, not an ethnicity. Small detail for an American, I know.
And how the West was won exactly if not on genocide and ethnocide?…
You can put me in "ignore", I am not a moderator.:laugh4:

Earlier posts of mine, prior to the one you indirectly reference, noted that the Nazis themselves used an ethnic and not religious definition of Jewishness as the basis for their pogrom and that the USA had -- however haphazardly -- engaged in a process of ethnic cleansing towards the Native Americans. It was a subsequent poster, and not I, who suggested that the USA had few problems with ethnicity. Sadly our history includes the African enslavement and a whole series of nativist "X group of immigrants are criminals and scum" episodes. Our ethnic conflict have only rarely degenerated into murder, but we are not without them.

[Kadagar_AV]

KurdishSpartacus, I will go out on a limb and guess that your addition to that text mainly consist of colouring. Don't get me wrong, colouring stuff is great and all, had a blast with it at kindergarten myself. It's just that it might come off as rather juvenile in this context, no?

I have said it before, and I will probably have to say it again...

NO ONE will care about long and unsupported rants, specially when the grammar is so bad.

Try to spend more time understanding others, and then use YOUR OWN WORDS to question or agree with them. If you don't use your own words, clearly source the material used.

That way, people wont just write your texts off as idiotic after just a quick glance, like I just did.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

KurdishSpartakus:

You did not quite get my point regarding our elected leadership. Many would argue that we have fallen into a rut wherein both of our principal parties are strongly similar and constitute only a modest degree of difference in leadership value from one another. I was asserting, however, that we really do have a Representative government -- that regardless of who wins and whether or not we personally voted for that person, we accept the verdict of the election and move forward. In short, we provide "the consent of the governed." Remember, politics is a lagging indicator. If, over time, the parties have become only variations on the same theme it is because that works for the electorate -- politicians rarely stand against public opinion when the people voice their opinion, they just tend to try to appear to be at the leading edge of the crowd.

Moreover, who we elect does matter. In your example of the USA's attempts to leverage events/leadership in Iran, M. Mossadegh was encouraged and counseled by the US Ambassador who had been appointed by Truman. In 1952 we voted in Eisenhower, who appointed a new ambassador and who signed off on CIA efforts in support of the British plan to overthrow Mossadegh. Pahlavi then took the reigns of power, enjoying the benefits of US aid and protection as well as the revenue explosion from the Petroleum industry. Pahlavi continued to enjoy US support under every US administration up until we elected Carter -- a genuine liberal peacenik in 1976. Though never officially denouncing the Shar, Carter's administration (with its focus on Human Rights as a central foreign policy component), frequently criticized the Shah for the activities of SAVAK etc. This changed tone of support encouraged Iranian opposition efforts, culminating in the Shah's vacation and his overthrow by a returned Khomenei [sic?] -- a return from exile of which Carter approved.


As to the Kurds, we definitely left them in the lurch during the First Gulf War. You suggest that we promised full autonomy as reward for Gulf II -- I think you don't understand political jargon very well. To the diplomat, there is a huge difference between autonomy and independence. We had also, for that same war, secured the support of Turkey by agreeing not to have a fully independent Kurdish state. International politics is not a genteel activity.

[Kadagar_AV]

In the Army we always liked the Kurds because they were the only Iraqis who took their newfound liberty seriously. They deserve an independent state, where they will then hopefully raise educational standards so Kurdish Spartacuses (Spartaci?) can make real political conversation.

If you get the above standing to like a post... I guess you just won the backroom or something...

[Empire*Of*Media]

KurdishSpartakus:

You did not quite get my point regarding our elected leadership. Many would argue that we have fallen into a rut wherein both of our principal parties are strongly similar and constitute only a modest degree of difference in leadership value from one another. I was asserting, however, that we really do have a Representative government -- that regardless of who wins and whether or not we personally voted for that person, we accept the verdict of the election and move forward. In short, we provide "the consent of the governed." Remember, politics is a lagging indicator. If, over time, the parties have become only variations on the same theme it is because that works for the electorate -- politicians rarely stand against public opinion when the people voice their opinion, they just tend to try to appear to be at the leading edge of the crowd.

Moreover, who we elect does matter. In your example of the USA's attempts to leverage events/leadership in Iran, M. Mossadegh was encouraged and counseled by the US Ambassador who had been appointed by Truman. In 1952 we voted in Eisenhower, who appointed a new ambassador and who signed off on CIA efforts in support of the British plan to overthrow Mossadegh. Pahlavi then took the reigns of power, enjoying the benefits of US aid and protection as well as the revenue explosion from the Petroleum industry. Pahlavi continued to enjoy US support under every US administration up until we elected Carter -- a genuine liberal peacenik in 1976. Though never officially denouncing the Shar, Carter's administration (with its focus on Human Rights as a central foreign policy component), frequently criticized the Shah for the activities of SAVAK etc. This changed tone of support encouraged Iranian opposition efforts, culminating in the Shah's vacation and his overthrow by a returned Khomenei [sic?] -- a return from exile of which Carter approved.


As to the Kurds, we definitely left them in the lurch during the First Gulf War. You suggest that we promised full autonomy as reward for Gulf II -- I think you don't understand political jargon very well. To the diplomat, there is a huge difference between autonomy and independence. We had also, for that same war, secured the support of Turkey by agreeing not to have a fully independent Kurdish state. International politics is not a genteel activity.

thanks again for your good reply. please tech some in here how you must POLITELY answer even so called Idiotic posts!
well friend, i cant believe they are your representatives or elected by you, but you could believe how you wish. i dont know why you even deny your own Signature!
but i did not mean they are suppressing you. indeed they show themselves as perfect Democrats & liberals that are the perfect angels too!! i can only LOL on this. but indeed they respect and do not suppress.
and i only did not said about Iran or Kurdistan, others too but they were detailed more.
you know, the matter and fact is WHAT IS POLITICS?! dear Seamus if Politics it was as you mentioned (specially about Iran before the revolution), so we could say this world was a great place! but is it?!! NO
nothing can Deny CIA & MI6 hand in overthrow of people's elected Mosaddeq. and indeed they dont deny it now too!
but as i Said WHAT IS POLITICS?! if politics was like what we see and hear from the politicians, then it would not be Politics! politics is to be Cunning is to be deceitful is to be double-faced in many cases is to be cruel and evil but some of them are obvious like saddam & pinochet & ......some are hidden like Ira***(Censored) and some cover themselves in a chic good faced shape and that is Imperialism and specially SuperPowers.(but i dont think Russia is a superpower now equal to USA?!)
so POLITICS is a dirty thing it had never been clear and good. dont believe what you see or hear !!........
the USA-Kurdish matter, i dont think you can deny they treachery and evilness!! there is nothing excuse USA to make it a good thing to throw kurds into Racists & Fascists Hell!


In the Army we always liked the Kurds because they were the only Iraqis who took their newfound liberty seriously. They deserve an independent state, where they will then hopefully raise educational standards so Kurdish Spartacuses (Spartaci?) can make real political conversation.

lol! as i said if im bad or fool does not mean to all Kurds! but i said before my problem is lack of Damn English words thats why you get my meanings hard or bad. you have much expectations of a Non English persons!
but 45 million Kurds are not Iraqis and are not only in Iraq! but as you see Kurdistan of Iraq is the only safe & peaceful place in the middle east (indeed, soon the whole Kurdistan i hope) and even in that iraq moneys will be spent for Military and Jails! as you see somewhere like Erbil (or Arbil or Hawler) is advancing & progressing very good, and it was far much better if Saddam wouldnt destroy there, so the culture would not be more Islamic. as its not in other parts.


KurdishSpartacus, I will go out on a limb and guess that your addition to that text mainly consist of colouring. Don't get me wrong, colouring stuff is great and all, had a blast with it at kindergarten myself. It's just that it might come off as rather juvenile in this context, no?

I have said it before, and I will probably have to say it again...

NO ONE will care about long and unsupported rants, specially when the grammar is so bad.

Try to spend more time understanding others, and then use YOUR OWN WORDS to question or agree with them. If you don't use your own words, clearly source the material used.

That way, people wont just write your texts off as idiotic after just a quick glance, like I just did.

its my OWN WORDS i dont know why you say its Copy Pasted! and i knew i was talking with Seamus and he is a wise & polite man unlike some in this org like ...........!
i dont know what do to how you wish!! if i post little you say its sourceless and nothing much to say! if its alot you say its alot and no one cares!! so if you cant read long texts you should not participate too as its discussion not chatting.



again accept my Respects to all.........:bow:

[HoreTore]

lol! as i said if im bad or fool does not mean to all Kurds! but i said before my problem is lack of Damn English words thats why you get my meanings hard or bad. you have much expectations of a Non English persons!

You can blame grammar, spelling and low vocabulary on a lack of english knowledge.

You can't blame poor structure on a lack of english knowledge, which is the main problem with your text.

[Fragony]

The guy is from Iran ffs, give him some time to improve. Can't expect that everybody speaks perfect English on an international forum. My English is pretty ok and I am still very good at making no sense.

[Empire*Of*Media]

You can blame grammar, spelling and low vocabulary on a lack of english knowledge.

You can't blame poor structure on a lack of english knowledge, which is the main problem with your text.
indeed i have bad english which does not mean to offense me, bu indeed English has poor structures! it has huge amount of exceptions and words and accents from all over Europe and even Aramic & Iranic a little too! english is simple but hard for memorize words with same meanings in different sentences.
but i dont see that in French Espanyol Deutsch or any other languages.

at all. this matter is taking the Thread to off-topics. i just said my view


The guy is from Iran ffs, give him some time to improve. Can't expect that everybody speaks perfect English on an international forum. My English is pretty ok and I am still very good at making no sense.

indeed, many in Europe think English MUST be our first or second lang! well, i've learned english myself i've not gone to class or using any kind of perfect English learnings. i think my english is very good too without learning from anything.......
but im improving in here. but guys here see me negative and thats why they cant accept is because of my english or giving my understand its reality to people.
thanks that you realized and understood that........

[Hax]

Kurdistan in Iraq is already pretty much de facto independent anyway.

[HoreTore]

I actually am a historian Horrie, I can say I am at least, I am not unaware of the difficulties. I know preciously little of WW2 and all the horrors that was put upon those that had to die, but at least I know that I don't. Feel free to call me absolutily ignorant when it comes to that. But I am not all that uneducated, not all that dumb either.

Which historians do you base this claimed uncertainty on?

[HoreTore]

indeed i have bad english which does not mean to offense me, bu indeed English has poor structures! it has huge amount of exceptions and words and accents from all over Europe and even Aramic & Iranic a little too! english is simple but hard for memorize words with same meanings in different sentences.
but i dont see that in French Espanyol Deutsch or any other languages.

at all. this matter is taking the Thread to off-topics. i just said my view

What I mean is that your text is badly written because of issues like excessive use of "!" and "?", missing punctuation, a lack of paragraph structure, overly long sentenes and excessive use of paranthesis.

These problems are not due to you having english as a second language. These problems are due to your lack of written communication skills. I'm willing to bet a rather large sum of money that the text you produce in your first language suffer from the very same problems.


The guy is from Iran ffs, give him some time to improve. Can't expect that everybody speaks perfect English on an international forum. My English is pretty ok and I am still very good at making no sense.

As I said, the problems are not caused by a lack of skill with the English language, but rather a lack of skill with language in general.

[Fragony]

Which historians do you base this claimed uncertainty on?

A lack of actual numbers, six million is not determined. I could ask you to google but you will most likely find yourself in bad company. The number of deaths in WW1 are unclear, the number of deaths in WW2 are unclear, nothing is ever clear. Some say it were probably less, some it were prbably more. I just say 'I don't know'. Because I don't.

[HoreTore]

A lack of actual numbers, six million is not determined. I could ask you to google but you will most likely find yourself in bad company. The number of deaths in WW1 are unclear, the number of deaths in WW2 are unclear, nothing is ever clear. Some say it were probably less, some it were prbably more. I just say 'I don't know'. Because I don't.

I sense that you have not read much about this issue.

[Empire*Of*Media]

What I mean is that your text is badly written because of issues like excessive use of "!" and "?", missing punctuation, a lack of paragraph structure, overly long sentenes and excessive use of paranthesis.

These problems are not due to you having english as a second language. These problems are due to your lack of written communication skills. I'm willing to bet a rather large sum of money that the text you produce in your first language suffer from the very same problems.

i always observe punctuations. and "!" and "?" and paranthesis are need of the sentences. i dont see anything bad of it! <(like this!! lol!>) you see that is need because you always deny and i should use those points.
and no i dont have problem with my first lang. but yes, i acknowledge my lack of Words in English and thats why make the texts bad. my problem is only WORDS not anymore. and English have massive and huge amounts of words related and unrelated and thats make English very Hard and Nasty in that matters. other languages heve Superhard gramers and its accent, but at least does not have exceptions. that is the good matter about them compare to English that its Source is UnKnown....


I sense that you have not read much about this issue.
he acknowledged that too. but the fact is you say everything is 100% Sure and Clear!

well nothing in this world is "PERFECT" and 100 Sure & Clear.......NOTHING!
but it seems you always know yourself as The Unlimited Truth and Perfect Knowledge! that is great problem for discussion. it would be like Muslims that can not accept anything because they have relied on their old say that EVERYTHING about us is True and undeniable right one. why? because they say "ALLAH has said and Allah is the 1000% sure and clear that knows ANYTHING & unlimitly"!! this is affirmation about what you say "because Zionist jews and Jewish 7 jewish Allies said it, so its the PERFECT Truth and 100% sure!" You were there ? NO? you COUNT THEM? NO? so please dont say that with 100% Sure. or you only want to suppress the questioning (and not Denying! dont misunderstand me).

[Empire*Of*Media]

btw, this is not Holocust Thread and nor ONLY Israel & Jews. it was just part of the discussion. this Subject is going too much off topic, please get back to the topic.


i have Two question from those that know the Europe's Situation better. i dont say to "those that have acquaintance with "Politics" " because no one can be that about Politics as Politics it is a knowledge and Science, but has nothing Positive in it and it has so much Dirtiness, Secrets, Conspiracies, Benefits Seeks & Attitude ONLY and Double-Tripple Faces. as RHYFELWYR says : At The End Of The Day Politics is Just Trash.

at least most of us agree with that.

ok now:

1.why the USA & EU are so much SUPER sensitive about UKRAINE ? why they were Silence about Georgia and in a case Syria with Russia?!
is it because Ukraine has much more profit for them and not Georgia & Syria? this one is question. but i say yes, they only give improtance to what "BENEFITS" and profits them and its not about Rules or Humanitarian.

2.if Ukraine's Matter take longer more, will bigger tensions rise ? Locally or Internationally?


but i would like to know your Views too.

[HoreTore]

but it seems you always know yourself as The Unlimited Truth and Perfect Knowledge!

Rubbish.

The problem is that you are making outlandish claims with absolutely no substance. That you seem to have very limited actual knowledge of the subjects you wish to discuss does not make things any better, exemplified in the following:


this is affirmation about what you say "because Zionist jews and Jewish 7 jewish Allies said it, so its the PERFECT Truth and 100% sure!" You were there ? NO? you COUNT THEM? NO? so please dont say that with 100% Sure. or you only want to suppress the questioning (and not Denying! dont misunderstand me).

....where you show yourself to be absolutely clueless as to what the term "estimate" means.

Yes, it is an unquestionable fact that somewhere in the region of 5.5 to 6 million jews were killed in the Holocaust. There is no credible historian anywhere who claims otherwise, and the volume of evidence for that figure is simply overwhelming.

Expressing doubts over it is in the same category as expressing doubts that the earth orbits the sun. You're free to make any such claims, but doing so will only show off your complete lack of knowledge.

And when you assert US and EU silence over Georgia and Syria, it only highlights how little attention you pay to what goes on in the world. Syria has been a headliner since the start, and the Georgian peace treaty was negotiated by the EU and the US. There was none of your claimed silence.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

btw, this is not Holocust Thread and nor ONLY Israel & Jews. it was just part of the discussion. this Subject is going too much off topic, please get back to the topic.


i have Two question from those that know the Europe's Situation better. i dont say to "those that have acquaintance with "Politics" " because no one can be that about Politics as Politics it is a knowledge and Science, but has nothing Positive in it and it has so much Dirtiness, Secrets, Conspiracies, Benefits Seeks & Attitude ONLY and Double-Tripple Faces. as RHYFELWYR says : At The End Of The Day Politics is Just Trash.

at least most of us agree with that.

ok now:

1.why the USA & EU are so much SUPER sensitive about UKRAINE ? why they were Silence about Georgia and in a case Syria with Russia?!
is it because Ukraine has much more profit for them and not Georgia & Syria? this one is question. but i say yes, they only give improtance to what "BENEFITS" and profits them and its not about Rules or Humanitarian.

2.if Ukraine's Matter take longer more, will bigger tensions rise ? Locally or Internationally?


but i would like to know your Views too.

Horetore may be taking a harsh tone, but his point is valid.

Your post that I quote here is one of your better ones. You are using a skipped line or two between points -- which makes it easier for a reader to process both visually and intellectually. You tend to write longer paragraphs with lots of emphasis -- sometimes in color -- and the very density of the material makes it tougher to read.

Also, and this is really the heart of Horetore's criticism (HT will correct me if not), the problem is the logical progression from point to point.

Classically, your argument should be framed as follows:

Thesis: The basic theme or idea that you are arguing (can be phrased positively [this is what we should...] or negatively [this is wrong/evil]).

Preview: A short listing of the points you will cover to prove your thesis.

Point 1-?: Cover each point, citing evidence or example or concept as appropriate

Summary: A quick review of how you have just "proved" your thesis.


It is true that we ourselves often skip some of these formal steps, but if you are going to post long posts on a topic, following that format will make it far easier for your readers to keep up with your ideas and reasoning.....or at least it will have them criticizing you on the substantive content and not the formatting.

As readers, we will slog through difficulties with the English language (there are many on this forum for whom it is NOT their first language), but the proper flow and development of an argument is important to making your point regardless of the language in which you express yourself.

[Kadagar_AV]

1.why the USA & EU are so much SUPER sensitive about UKRAINE ? why they were Silence about Georgia and in a case Syria with Russia?!


Regarding Syria, the West was not quiet at all. It's just that we got superbly out played by Putin.

Regarding Georgia, there was a uproar about it in the US. But somewhere they understood that it wasn't Georgia-USA, and it punctured the whole movement and it never took off again.

[Fisherking]

KurdishSpartakus

As to your points:

1. The west is sensitive about Ukraine because of its location next to Russia, still seen as aggressive and because it has some of the worlds richest Uranium deposits. Silent about Georgia because they are in a place where they are totally beyond hope of timely intervention, unless people want a nuclear war anyway. Syria was a no win situation for all but arms manufacturers. No one but them and Obama wanted to go there.

2. Heaven help us, it will go on until the end of May at the very least. Likely longer. Depending on what happens it could be very ugly.

[Kadagar_AV]

Rubbish.

The problem is that you are making outlandish claims with absolutely no substance. That you seem to have very limited actual knowledge of the subjects you wish to discuss does not make things any better, exemplified in the following:



....where you show yourself to be absolutely clueless as to what the term "estimate" means.

Yes, it is an unquestionable fact that somewhere in the region of 5.5 to 6 million jews were killed in the Holocaust. There is no credible historian anywhere who claims otherwise, and the volume of evidence for that figure is simply overwhelming.

Expressing doubts over it is in the same category as expressing doubts that the earth orbits the sun. You're free to make any such claims, but doing so will only show off your complete lack of knowledge.


While on that topic. The pope banned such thoughts, just like historians over here are banned from investigating the truth about the holocaust.

Are you now saying it is a good idea to ban science?

I find it rather laughable to recite official sources, when the winner wrote the sources and contrary research is forbidden. There ARE other perspectives, unfortunately one has to fish in rather muddy waters to get a hold of them.

[Fragony]

I find it rather laughable to recite official sources, when the winner wrote the sources and contrary research is forbidden. There ARE other perspectives, unfortunately one has to fish in rather muddy waters to get a hold of them.

And often from people with dubious motives. You have to be an absolute idiot to deny the holocaust, but the scale, and who did what isn't always very clear.

[HoreTore]

While on that topic. The pope banned such thoughts, just like historians over here are banned from investigating the truth about the holocaust.

Are you now saying it is a good idea to ban science?

I find it rather laughable to recite official sources, when the winner wrote the sources and contrary research is forbidden. There ARE other perspectives, unfortunately one has to fish in rather muddy waters to get a hold of them.

There's a simple reason why those other perspectives are only found in muddy waters: they're nonsense.

[Fisherking]

All I can say is that I was nearly dismissed from a uni course on the Holocaust because I asked about the numbers of the other groups that were murdered.

The Professor wrongly assumed that I was questioning whether the Jews were the main target of the Nazi’s actions.

[Kadagar_AV]

There's a simple reason why those other perspectives are only found in muddy waters: they're nonsense.

Yeah, I am sure the priests said the same about the sun.

Why don't we apply our scientific tools and find out? Right, because it's forbidden... Because it's nonsense...

Maybe it makes sense to you, doesn't make sense to me. Truth should NEVER EVER have anything to hide.

[HoreTore]

Yeah, I am sure the priests said the same about the sun.

Why don't we apply our scientific tools and find out? Right, because it's forbidden... Because it's nonsense...

Maybe it makes sense to you, doesn't make sense to me. Truth should NEVER EVER have anything to hide.

Rubbish.

Actual historians rewrite the Holocaust all the time. The laws you are talking about(which only exist in a few countries) are never applied to them.

Idiots who think stuff like downgrading the number of people killed at Auschwitz should result in downgrading the overall number of deaths, however, are targeted by such laws at times. That's because what they're doing isn't historical research, it's simple revisionism aimed at exonerating the nazis.

[rvg]

Why don't we apply our scientific tools and find out? Right, because it's forbidden... Because it's nonsense...
Maybe it makes sense to you, doesn't make sense to me. Truth should NEVER EVER have anything to hide.

Scientific tools? They have been applied and they actually point to the 6 million figure. I remember that back in the old days the big counterargument against the 6 million figure was the amount of fuel it took to ignite and burn one body in the oven. However, the explanation was quite obvious: the preheated oven didn't require any additional fuel. Having an oven run 24/7 for a week took as much fuel as having it to dispose of just one body.

[Kadagar_AV]

Rubbish.

Actual historians rewrite the Holocaust all the time. The laws you are talking about(which only exist in a few countries) are never applied to them.

Idiots who think stuff like downgrading the number of people killed at Auschwitz should result in downgrading the overall number of deaths, however, are targeted by such laws at times. That's because what they're doing isn't historical research, it's simple revisionism aimed at exonerating the nazis.

The laws apply to the countries where such research is actually possible.

Sure, you can go to Eskimo lands and research it, but what's the point if you cant get any first hand sources?

The laws apply to any historian who doesn't follow the official line. You are right though, that historical research is allowed as long as they don't actually question anything.

[Kadagar_AV]

Scientific tools? They have been applied and they actually point to the 6 million figure. I remember that back in the old days the big counterargument against the 6 million figure was the amount of fuel it took to ignite and burn one body in the oven. However, the explanation was quite obvious: the preheated oven didn't require any additional fuel. Having an oven run 24/7 for a week took as much fuel as having it to dispose of just one body.

As mentioned, the winner writes the history books.

It's easy to make claims when opposing claims is forbidden.

[rvg]

The laws apply to any historian who doesn't follow the official line. You are right though, that historical research is allowed as long as they don't actually question anything.

I agree with you in the sense that Holocaust denial laws have no place in a society that is supposed to be ruled by reason. Penalizing Holocaust deniers makes no more sense than penalizing Flat Earthers.
However, the reasoning provided by the Holocaust deniers is on par with that of the Flat Earthers, i.e. utterly ridiculous.

[HoreTore]

The laws apply to the countries where such research is actually possible.

Sure, you can go to Eskimo lands and research it, but what's the point if you cant get any first hand sources?

The laws apply to any historian who doesn't follow the official line. You are right though, that historical research is allowed as long as they don't actually question anything.

I am not all surprised that you do not specify the perspectives you claim exists.

[Kadagar_AV]

I agree with you in the sense that Holocaust denial laws have no place in a society that is supposed to be ruled by reason. Penalizing Holocaust deniers makes no more sense than penalizing Flat Earthers.
However, the reasoning provided by the Holocaust deniers is on par with that of the Flat Earthers, i.e. utterly ridiculous.

Well, I for one fully support flat earthers right to investigate.

But I do automatically smell something rotten when science on a topic gets forbidden.

Flat earthers are KNOWN as a joke just because we LET them research. In a sense, forbidding scientifical research on this topic is like a huge christmas gift to the Neo-Nazis.

If there's nothing to hide, why hide it?

[HoreTore]

But I do automatically smell something rotten when science on a topic gets forbidden.

Again, you are stating the false claim that holocaust research is forbidden.

Holocaust "research" by nazis is forbidden. Holocaust research is not.

[rvg]

Well, I for one fully support flat earthers right to investigate.

But I do automatically smell something rotten when science on a topic gets forbidden.

Flat earthers are KNOWN as a joke just because we LET them research. In a sense, forbidding scientifical research on this topic is like a huge christmas gift to the Neo-Nazis.
I totally agree with you: Neo-Nazis would have done a superb job of discrediting themselves had they been given the freedom to do their "research".

[Brenus]

“Truth should NEVER EVER have anything to hide.” Absolute non-sense: If I would have said to my brother what I thought of his son, we won’t have spoken to each other never again. If you make the mistake to tell your wife/partner what you really think of her new pair of shoes (or dress) (for the price), it will be a mistake you will never do again…
So CIA / NSA whistle-blower are right: Nice to hear.

“The laws apply to the countries where such research is actually possible.” Err, what the countries where researches are not possible?

“As mentioned, the winner writes the history books.” Over-simplification : History is written by survivors following the political interest of the moment. And that why History changes and is interesting. It was in the interest of the winners in the West to clean the German Soldiers so the German Army was not questioned and only the SS blamed. We know now it was much more complex than that. It was in the interest of the East that Poland and the slaughter of the Polish Elite passed under the carpet.
It is still like this: the insurrection of Warsaw crushed by the German due to a stand-by the Red Army (lack of logistic said the Red Army) is very well known but when Stalin, in reward, left the Greek Communists to be crushed by the English, we close our eyes.

[Fragony]

Scientific tools? They have been applied and they actually point to the 6 million figure. I remember that back in the old days the big counterargument against the 6 million figure was the amount of fuel it took to ignite and burn one body in the oven. However, the explanation was quite obvious: the preheated oven didn't require any additional fuel. Having an oven run 24/7 for a week took as much fuel as having it to dispose of just one body.

To my shame I must admit that I kinda fell for that one at a time. Not because of any hostile intend but because I just couldn't imagine that people would actually do such a thing, pretty naive of me.

[HoreTore]

To my shame I must admit that I kinda fell for that one at a time. Not because of any hostile intend but because I just couldn't imagine that people would actually do such a thing, pretty naive of me.

You should read Michael Barkun then, he explains the concept of stigmatized knowledge.

I confess I haven't actually read his book yet myself, but he is referenced in a ton of books I have read.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

I do not agree with laws that restrict free speech in this fashion. The state should not have the power to curtail speech or free expression, even where denial of a crime against humanity is being attempted.

Denying the Holocaust is rather idiotic, but allowing persons to do so lets us clearly identify the real idiots who should be ignored.

When, and only when, that free speech (denial) moves from annoying to being a "clear and present danger" should any restrictions come into play.

[Brenus]

"The state should not have the power to curtail speech or free expression" That is where we defer. More than 6.000.000 humans beings died because it was OK to say they must be killed. Laws are here to give a frame, as total freedom is illusion in a society. You can't have the free speech to say it is perfect to perform to human sacrifices (even if they are volunteer ) , to rape (even if they deserve or ask for it) and to enslave (even if there are happy slaves).
The denial of the Holocaust is just the first step that goes with Nazism=Communism, in order to make Nazism a "normal" party, as Hitler being just a mistake. That is why you have always to remind people the Nazi Ideology based on war, racism and extermination. Stalin had to pervert Communism to feed his killing machine. Hitler just to be a good Nazi.

[Sarmatian]

Scientific tools? They have been applied and they actually point to the 6 million figure. I remember that back in the old days the big counterargument against the 6 million figure was the amount of fuel it took to ignite and burn one body in the oven. However, the explanation was quite obvious: the preheated oven didn't require any additional fuel. Having an oven run 24/7 for a week took as much fuel as having it to dispose of just one body.

What I don't understand is what revisionists are hoping to gain. Let's say that 6 million figure isn't correct, let's say it's 5 - what does that prove? Does it make the nazis less evil? Or if it's 7 millions. More evil?

It's incomprehensible to a sane man. I don't believe we can deal with such numbers any way. Kill one person, you're a criminal and you go to prison. Kill 10, you're big criminal and you get executed or go to prison for life. Kill 20 or 30, you're insane, you spend the rest of your life in a rubber room dressed in a straightjacket.

But figures of 10 or 20 thousands are pretty much the same as 5, 10 or 20 millions. How can one even argue that someone was less evil if that someone killed 500,000 instead of a million people...

That being said, I don't oppose anyone questioning the Holocaust figures. That's more of a freedom of speech thing. Even from a scientific point of view, it's perfectly fine. No scientific work should ever be considered infallible or untouchable.

[Fragony]

You should read Michael Barkun then, he explains the concept of stigmatized knowledge.

I confess I haven't actually read his book yet myself, but he is referenced in a ton of books I have read.

I will check it out. Reading about the Milgram experiment and the diffusion of responsibilty was quite the eye-opener. Yep Frags you idiot, people are capable of doing horrible things if they don't have to answer for it.

[Montmorency]

The Milgram experiment is basically a hoax.

[HoreTore]

I will check it out. Reading about the Milgram experiment and the diffusion of responsibilty was quite the eye-opener. Yep Frags you idiot, people are capable of doing horrible things if they don't have to answer for it.

Here ya go. (http://www.amazon.com/Culture-Conspiracy-Apocalyptic-Contemporary-Comparative/dp/0520248120)

[Fragony]

Here ya go. (http://www.amazon.com/Culture-Conspiracy-Apocalyptic-Contemporary-Comparative/dp/0520248120)

Merci. Not sure how it ties in, looks very USA-minded at first glance. But I'll give it a shot.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

"The state should not have the power to curtail speech or free expression" That is where we defer. More than 6.000.000 humans beings died because it was OK to say they must be killed. Laws are here to give a frame, as total freedom is illusion in a society. You can't have the free speech to say it is perfect to perform to human sacrifices (even if they are volunteer ) , to rape (even if they deserve or ask for it) and to enslave (even if there are happy slaves).
The denial of the Holocaust is just the first step that goes with Nazism=Communism, in order to make Nazism a "normal" party, as Hitler being just a mistake. That is why you have always to remind people the Nazi Ideology based on war, racism and extermination. Stalin had to pervert Communism to feed his killing machine. Hitler just to be a good Nazi.

I understand your point, but for me the trigger is: call for/incite violence. THAT justifies restriction of free speech (and jail, fines, etc.)

[Fragony]

I understand your point, but for me the trigger is: call for/incite violence. THAT justifies restriction of free speech (and jail, fines, etc.)

Exactly there.

[rvg]

I don't think any speech should be restricted. If someone is trying to incite revolution it'll either work because it's justified, or it won't because it's not. Any restrictions on free speech or peaceful (however irritating) assembly are cowardly and hurt the credibility of the state.

B-but what if it hurts someone's precious feelings? We can't have that.... Can we?

[Kadagar_AV]

Are you referring to a specific issue or just disparaging political correctness?

Can't it be a bit of both?

[Empire*Of*Media]

While on that topic. The pope banned such thoughts, just like historians over here are banned from investigating the truth about the holocaust.

Are you now saying it is a good idea to ban science?

I find it rather laughable to recite official sources, when the winner wrote the sources and contrary research is forbidden. There ARE other perspectives, unfortunately one has to fish in rather muddy waters to get a hold of them.

Exactly !!


Yeah, I am sure the priests said the same about the sun.

Why don't we apply our scientific tools and find out? Right, because it's forbidden... Because it's nonsense...

Maybe it makes sense to you, doesn't make sense to me. Truth should NEVER EVER have anything to hide.

so i think they are hiding somethings....


As mentioned, the winner writes the history books.

It's easy to make claims when opposing claims is forbidden.

again Exactly! History Is Written by The Victor like what Napolen said! like what Religious Fanaticists said that anyone Talking about things against our Holy Book & Believes, has made pacts with the devil! and they only want to corrupt humanity with their science!!!
but as Brenus said it is written by the survivors!! so we must believe what the Extremists say like Muslims that call every non muslim are infidels and must be beheaded or convert. and no one dares or can have the will to question that!! so by Brenus, we must believe them because they survived coallitioned pagan tribals tortures and war on them. and because they succeeded and survived they can say anything that desires and that will be "History". and many muslims now believe that. (Islam was just one Example) or like NORTH KOREA that have survived from full annilhilation by US & SK, and now they teach kids in their classes and history books that USA should be blamed that they must eat seaweeds and die from starve while they create Nuclear Missiles and buy expensive warfare!!
as like Iran & other parts of the world!! so they are THE RIGHT !! because they survived and could Write or rewrite history!! and their Sources are fully trusted!!
your believes are Amazing Brenus! i cant be in defence stance at this time! only im feeling very FUNNY with it!!


Well, I for one fully support flat earthers right to investigate.

But I do automatically smell something rotten when science on a topic gets forbidden.

Flat earthers are KNOWN as a joke just because we LET them research. In a sense, forbidding scientifical research on this topic is like a huge christmas gift to the Neo-Nazis.

If there's nothing to hide, why hide it?

hiding is for somethings not to be blown! like Crimes, Lies, Distortions, Falsifications, & so many! and Trying to Suppress or Insult the investigation or questioning is fear of people going near it........

[Kadagar_AV]

I suddenly feel the urge to take back everything I said.

KS, please don't colorize my texts, they are perfectly fine as is.

[Brenus]

“History Is Written by The Victor like what Napoleon said!” The problem is that Napoleon lost the war but he wrote the History. The good old story of “I always lie” thing.

“so by Brenus, we must believe them”
I don’t speak of survivors only for the Holocaust.
And I don’t believe.

A bit of explanation: The German Generals after WW2 blamed Hitler, Himmler, and others dead Nazi. Defeat in front of Moscow, Hitler, defeat in Stalingrad, Hitler, Extermination Camps, Himmler and the list is long. For political reasons, the West chose to close eyes on their crimes and responsibilities and/or build legend i.e. Rommel the Anti-Nazi. That is what I mean by survivors.
And we choose to ignore the Soviet account of events, so we swallow the “USSR saved by winter” story when it is now less obvious: In his Memoires, Konstantin Rokossovsky (A Soldier’s Duty) explained that the GERMANS were save by the winter in 1941/42, as fog nailed the IL2 Sturmovik on the ground and the too deep snow forbade the deployment of the T34, allowing the German and their better trained anti-tank weapons and tanks crews to keep the Soviet at bay.

In term of the extermination campaign, we have physical evidence (camps) and documents proving the reality of it. The deniers you support just come-up with questions that can be easily answer (figures) and never come with positive proofs of their claims, i.e. invoices, plans, funding of the elaborate scam the holocaust is. No witnesses from Hollywood that filmed the camps or builders that made the Camps. We have the ones from Nazi Germany. We have the testimonies of former SS Guards, railways drivers and engineers and we have the Camps books. We have the CAMPS.

[Fragony]

The Milgram experiment is basically a hoax.

Explain please?

[HoreTore]

Explain please?

There's some criticism that Milgram was overly eager to get his results, and was dismissive when his lab rats saw what was actually happening.

Still, that's completely irrelevant, since his results have been replicated in later experiments.

[Fragony]

Sure you aren't confused with Asch? People tend to confuse these two for some reason, there was such critisism on his work. Never heard about the Milgram experiment being repeated.

[Empire*Of*Media]

The problem is that Napoleon lost the war but he wrote the History. The good old story of “I always lie” thing.

that is not History! its memories!! but that period's history has been written by thee GreatBritain!!


In term of the extermination campaign, we have physical evidence (camps) and documents proving the reality of it. The deniers you support just come-up with questions that can be easily answer (figures) and never come with positive proofs of their claims, i.e. invoices, plans, funding of the elaborate scam the holocaust is.

well i dont consider deniers as valid proof. i listen to REconsiderators that they say it has been highly exaggerated in the tales and stories and facts.

no they too dont claim that Camps was myth. except some Death camps for killers and thieves and Zionists and FreeMasons, that numbers held there was few, they claim that those other big Camps were not Death camps but work farm of Prisoners and quarentined. because there were many rooms like kitchen and other, that some survivors said they themselves have made food there!! but never their tolds was/will be published!

and they say too that those were not human burning stoves! this is too much exaggerated and laughable myths to be believed, they were but burning Putrefied Corpses that died from pestilence and typhus. specially they confirmed that the pictures exactly shows dying from typhus as there are much photos not related to WWII that those that die from typhus by evidence of their looks and skins. that is more Rational than to believe what jews said. because jews have a long history in exaggerating anything against them like hellenics! you go read Torah and you'll understand that!

[HoreTore]

Sure you aren't confused with Asch? People tend to confuse these two for some reason, there was such critisism on his work. Never heard about the Milgram experiment being repeated.

I am not. The Milgram experiment has been repeated of course - otherwise it wouldn't be considered proven. Here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Le_Jeu_de_la_Mort) is a recent repetition.

[HoreTore]

but never their tolds was/will be published!

What nonsense. The Auschwitz death camp, for example, was placed just beside the Auschwitz work camp. Of course you will find kitchens at Auschwitz, and of curse that's not a hidden fact.

The guided tour of Auschwitz actually includes visiting such recreational areas. I assume you have never been to Auschwitz.

[rajpoot]

and they say too that those were not human burning stoves! this is too much exaggerated and laughable myths to be believed, they were but burning Putrefied Corpses that died from pestilence and typhus. specially they confirmed that the pictures exactly shows dying from typhus as there are much photos not related to WWII that those that die from typhus by evidence of their looks and skins.

Using the remains of someone who died due to a disease as fuel is no more morally correct than using the remains of someone who died a natural death.
The remains of the dead need to be treated with a certain amount of respect. Burning to prevent disease from spreading might be fine, using as fuel is not.

[Brenus]

“but that period's history has been written by thee GreatBritain!!”: Yeap. Peace and War (Tolstoi) is definitively English literature. Do you even know how many books were writing in France about Napoleon and the Napoleonic Wars? And Movi

http://youtu.be/dIfqBXiZrTw

Perhaps I am missing something, but starving people to death, making them forced working to death, is as criminal as to suffocate them by gaz in Chambers specially designed for, or machine-gunning them, hanging them etc. So yes, the Crematoriums were not a way to kill people but a way to dispose of their corps.

[Fragony]

Gassing is more sinister though, it's putting someone down like an animal, it's completetily dehumanising someone. End result is the same but it's really unsettling.

[HoreTore]

So yes, the Crematoriums were not a way to kill people but a way to dispose of their corps.

Wait, what?

Does KurdishSpartakus believe people are saying that the Nazi's killed jews in the crematorium...?

[rajpoot]

Wait, what?

Does KurdishSpartakus believe people are saying that the Nazi's killed jews in the crematorium...?

I think he believes that that is what is claimed by the jews.
It is a widespread misconception.

[Fragony]

Wait, what?

Does KurdishSpartakus believe people are saying that the Nazi's killed jews in the crematorium...?

They actually did burn people alive if they were too weak to walk. Why bother killing them first if they can't move anyway.

[Pannonian]

“but that period's history has been written by thee GreatBritain!!”: Yeap. Peace and War (Tolstoi) is definitively English literature. Do you even know how many books were writing in France about Napoleon and the Napoleonic Wars?

Most of the lower ranking first hand accounts were written by Frenchmen, were they not?

[HoreTore]

I think he believes that that is what is claimed by the jews.
It is a widespread misconception.

I browse neo-nazi/"alternative" websites every single day.

This is the first time I've heard that. I'm stunned.

[Empire*Of*Media]

I think he believes that that is what is claimed by the jews.
It is a widespread misconception.

no not the jews! but i said The RECONSIDERATORS about the Holocust!
who says its widespread?! the widespread things are the one that jews or controlled media make people to believe!


Using the remains of someone who died due to a disease as fuel is no more morally correct than using the remains of someone who died a natural death.
While logic would perhaps advocate not wasting anything since there was a war on and fuel was scarce, still, the remains of the dead need to be treated with a certain amount of respect. Burning to prevent disease from spreading might be fine, using as fuel is not.

indeed yes. but you forgot something, it was war not making love!! in war anything worse you even cant imagine will happen. the ALLIES DID WORSE to Germans, Japaneese & Iranian CIVILIANS !


“but that period's history has been written by thee GreatBritain!!”: Yeap. Peace and War (Tolstoi) is definitively English literature. Do you even know how many books were writing in France about Napoleon and the Napoleonic Wars? And Movi

Perhaps I am missing something, but starving people to death, making them forced working to death, is as criminal as to suffocate them by gaz in Chambers specially designed for, or machine-gunning them, hanging them etc. So yes, the Crematoriums were not a way to kill people but a way to dispose of their corps.

Unfortnately i couldnt see the link because youtube is blocked here!! lol!
but no i dont know how much.......

indeed i agree with you. i never denied Nazis Crimes! i said in some cases ware too much exaggerations and that is an insult to human Rational Logic!! but people here misunderstand me as a Holocust Denier! indeed i hate anyone commit mass killing! even if that person is my father!

but killing people with gas is to give them peacful death! thats the best way i think, to kill people without violence. do you know how Armenians were raped then slaughtered by Turks & Azeris?! do you know how Kurds were butchered by Turks & Arabs and Persians?! Cambodians by Red Khemers? &...... if those facts be worldwide i bet holocust will be nothing in comparison with other genocides and mass killings.


im against lies and falsifications. bu indeed with any kind of crimes specially Genocide!

Death & Dawn with anyone or Regime that Commit Genocide of non harmful people and nations.......

but the real fact is that those superpowers and their servant allies that claim to be Democrats and angels of mankind will be silence because it will not fulfill their benefits and world domination purposes! that the matter that make me nervous and Angry!!

hope for a peaceful world...........................hehe what a joke i said!!.......

[Brenus]

“the ALLIES DID WORSE to Germans, Japaneese & Iranian CIVILIANS !” So, the allies came in a German village (or thousand in Russia), separated men for women ans child, then killed the men in the barns, throw incendiary grenades in the Church where they had put the children and women, posted a machine-gun in the entrance and killing all the ones trying to get out, all this when a gramophone was playing some music. The Allies issued a statement saying than for one allies soldier killed, 1000 Germans will be shot? So, the Allies did starved to death the German populations in forced labour and organised brothels for their soldiers? Dis the Allies used prisoners to experiment new gaz, or “experiments” in whatever they thought about. Did the Allies fill Germany with Extermination Camps and Death Camps?
Why are you coming with this non-sense? There is no equivalent of the Rape of Nan-kin and Auschwitz.

[Empire*Of*Media]

Brenus

i mentioned Allies Genocide's before. yes as you say they may not be equal to jewish holocust. but crime is crime! in whatever level or style, its still CRIME! some obvious some need to be blown some hidden and unquestioned always....

[Brenus]

No. You said, 2 boxes above, the Allies did worse. WORSE.

[Kadagar_AV]

No. You said, 2 boxes above, the Allies did worse. WORSE.

I'm with KurdishSpartacus here, if you look to what he replied to when he made that statement.

The thing he referred to was burning already dead people in an oven.

If you compare that to the, say, Dresden bombings - where the allies purposefully fire bombed a civilian population, women children elderly and all... It doesn't come off quite as bad, does it?

If you then account for the Atomic Bombs on civilian population, that is industrialized murder on a scale very well comparable to the concentration camps.

so :shrug:

[Empire*Of*Media]

again blindly washing Allies Crimes!! if it was Total War then it was for Nazis too! they did the same as allies did too!

in fact Hitler did not used Chemical Bombs but he could! but what about allies?! USA supported Saddam's Chemicals Attack against Civilians of Halabja in Kurdsitan of Iraq in 1988.3.16 !! but Imperialists know quite good how to cover their crime !!



No. You said, 2 boxes above, the Allies did worse. WORSE.

and i said a Crime is a Crime ! although that if you figure it worse or less !



I'm with KurdishSpartacus here, if you look to what he replied to when he made that statement.

The thing he referred to was burning already dead people in an oven.

If you compare that to the, say, Dresden bombings - where the allies purposefully fire bombed a civilian population, women children elderly and all... It doesn't come off quite as bad, does it?

If you then account for the Atomic Bombs on civilian population, that is industrialized murder on a scale very well comparable to the concentration camps.

so :shrug:

you must Bold that "PURPOSEFULLY" to innocent Dresden Civilians.

[HoreTore]

and i said a Crime is a Crime ! although that if you figure it worse or less !

I was speeding some time ago. That's a crime.

Obviously, I am now as evil as Hitler was.

[Empire*Of*Media]

I was speeding some time ago. That's a crime.

Obviously, I am now as evil as Hitler was.

you indeed have a high profession in luring subjects and discussions into your own wish!!

never mind, what i said was truth! and if not, Kadgar Replied you....

[Strike For The South]

Strip clubs removing breakfeast

[Brenus]

“If you compare that to the, say, Dresden bombings - where the allies purposefully fire bombed a civilian population, women children elderly and all... It doesn't come off quite as bad, does it?” Yeap. That is war. Dresden was a German Town. Hitler gave order to defend all square cm to the death. A lot of German Soldiers did exactly that. Or perhaps you would prefer that the Allies waited the Germans to lay all the minefields and prepare all the barricades before to attack the town?
Dresden was a target in the Eastern Front, a Centre of Communication, railways and Roads, vital for the logistic. The Allies bombed Lyon as well, and they reduce Lorient to an amount of rubble. That is because these two French towns were logistic centres of the Germans Armies. The US and GB bombing killed more French Civilians than the Germans and the Italians one. Totally innocent civilians, but the French don’t resent it. That was the price to pay for freedom.
Germany and Japan started a war of aggression. They paid the price

[Pannonian]

“If you compare that to the, say, Dresden bombings - where the allies purposefully fire bombed a civilian population, women children elderly and all... It doesn't come off quite as bad, does it?” Yeap. That is war. Dresden was a German Town. Hitler gave order to defend all square cm to the death. A lot of German Soldiers did exactly that. Or perhaps you would prefer that the Allies waited the Germans to lay all the minefields and prepare all the barricades before to attack the town?
Dresden was a target in the Eastern Front, a Centre of Communication, railways and Roads, vital for the logistic. The Allies bombed Lyon as well, and they reduce Lorient to an amount of rubble. That is because these two French towns were logistic centres of the Germans Armies. The US and GB bombing killed more French Civilians than the Germans and the Italians one. Totally innocent civilians, but the French don’t resent it. That was the price to pay for freedom.
Germany and Japan started a war of aggression. They paid the price

Caen as well. I'm not too familiar with the southern campaign though, so Lyon's a new one to me.

[Ironside]

I'm with KurdishSpartacus here, if you look to what he replied to when he made that statement.

The thing he referred to was burning already dead people in an oven.

If you compare that to the, say, Dresden bombings - where the allies purposefully fire bombed a civilian population, women children elderly and all... It doesn't come off quite as bad, does it?

If you then account for the Atomic Bombs on civilian population, that is industrialized murder on a scale very well comparable to the concentration camps.

so :shrug:

The fact that burning human bodies usually requires energy (unless you dry them) and that the crematoriums wasn't used as an energy facillity makes the statement that the bodies were burnt for fuel utterly stupid though. Seriously, it's in superdenying territorium since the actual reason is quite valid. If you need to despose of a giant amount of bodies quickly, burning them is the only good way to do it. Burying them gives moving hills due to corpse gases. Practical German experience from the east front on that one.
It even falls back to evil through its own logic. It expects significant continous death among the working force. If your answer of deaths because of pestilence and typhus are to use their bodies as fuel, you're kind of not caring about your workers.

I recall you liked Ghengis. Why did he butcher cities? There's a cruel but practical reason he did it. The darkest interpretations of Dresden, Tokyo, Hiroshima and Nagasaki follows that pattern more or less.
How did the Nazis treat the Holocaust? Was that one done to destroy the morale of the opposition? Nah, they just wanted to kill every unwanted induvidual. Some more slowly than others, but it seems to've been extremely hard to get released from a concentration camp, even the nicer ones that didn't have the work (literally) to death mentality.

[Kadagar_AV]

The fact that burning human bodies usually requires energy (unless you dry them) and that the crematoriums wasn't used as an energy facillity makes the statement that the bodies were burnt for fuel utterly stupid though. Seriously, it's in superdenying territorium since the actual reason is quite valid. If you need to despose of a giant amount of bodies quickly, burning them is the only good way to do it. Burying them gives moving hills due to corpse gases. Practical German experience from the east front on that one.
It even falls back to evil through its own logic. It expects significant continous death among the working force. If your answer of deaths because of pestilence and typhus are to use their bodies as fuel, you're kind of not caring about your workers.

I recall you liked Ghengis. Why did he butcher cities? There's a cruel but practical reason he did it. The darkest interpretations of Dresden, Tokyo, Hiroshima and Nagasaki follows that pattern more or less.
How did the Nazis treat the Holocaust? Was that one done to destroy the morale of the opposition? Nah, they just wanted to kill every unwanted induvidual. Some more slowly than others, but it seems to've been extremely hard to get released from a concentration camp, even the nicer ones that didn't have the work (literally) to death mentality.

Euhm... Are you sure you quoted right there?

My post had extremely little - to none - to do with what you posted.

[Ironside]

Euhm... Are you sure you quoted right there?

My post had extremely little - to none - to do with what you posted.

Yes. Your post is basically saying that the Allies' bombing of say Dresden is worse than the concentration camps having crematoriums (as a fuel source that didn't work as a fuel source).

While technically correct, you more or less intentionally ignored half the orignial argument and ignored the more important question on why the concentration camps needed crematoriums in the first place. The Gulags didn't have crematoriums, despite the number of deaths there. That's intentional nit-picking in a way that the nice reading is to troll up Kurdishspartakus.

You also placed moral equalence between the Nazi concentration camps and the use of atomic bombs.

[Fragony]

Caen as well. I'm not too familiar with the southern campaign though, so Lyon's a new one to me.

Both the German and the Allies also made a bit of a mess here in the Neds.

#cares

[Hamburger]

Switzerland Also!

not quite mes like Netherland. but Allies really loved to Bombard Switzerland because they never bowed to anyone! i like them.

[Hamburger]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombings_of_Switzerland_in_World_War_II
here a few says about that. i know more in german unfortunately.

this was, while Switzerland was Natural Country bowed to no one not Allies nor Axis, but Allies expected them to Assist them in any cost, or Forcibly assist!

[Seamus Fermanagh]

War, for those directly involved and particularly for non-combatants in the wrong place at the wrong time, sucketh.

Is there a moral difference between the Luftwaffe's destruction of the old city centre of Rotterdam in 1940 which killed 900 and the American Rotterdamn "oopsie" in 1943 that killed nearly as many? YES! On the other hand, the morality of a mistake versus a purposeful attack is a distinction that matters rather less to the families of those killed and none at all to the victims themselves.

Gelcube summed it up nicely. The standards of the day were fairly harsh. Purposefully attacking a purely civilian target was considered wrong, but any civilian target that had been occupied by the military for defense purposes and any concentration of civilians that happened to be to near an industrial or military target were considered an unfortunate byproduct of the war effort. All of the powers slipped, at least occasionally, and allowed terrorizing civilians to become at least part of the targeting decision -- the goal was never to specifically target the civilians, but to our shame there were numerous occasions when little care at all was exercised in preventing those deaths (Hamburg, Dresden, Tokyo) and in the instance of the Atomic weapons, it was known for a certainty that they would destroy everything nearby, so the target spots were picked with city-killing in mind, knowing the military targets would get the chuff at the same time.

Sadly, we now know that the aerial bombardment of Germany in WW2 was nowhere near effective enough to justify the amount of treasure and lives spent upon the task. The tools available were of such limited precision that a ridiculous amount of munitions were expended for each useful hit on a military or industrial target. There were those who, even at the time, said that the most effective way to have crippled German industry would have been to ignore the factories and bombed all the neighborhoods with a heavy mix of incendiary -- since it was the oxygen deprivation of the huge firestorms that was the best way to kill everyone in the hardened shelters-- and it is, of course, far easier to hit a mile-wide city neighborhood than a couple thousand square foot factory.

Such eminently logical, albeit completely amoral, tactics were not adopted.

[Hamburger]

i totally Agree with you Seamus Fermangah,

i see no Difference between Nazis wanted to take the world with Allies (Mostly UsA & GB) that HAVE taken the world at any cost!

i just see two Evils. one of them their face is evil in face and the world always hate them, and the other is hidden evil that covers his face with good chic and humanitarian democratic mask! and they also hypnotize the world by their media to believe in the way what have the purpose for it.

bad world heh?!

[Pannonian]

i totally Agree with you Seamus Fermangah,

i see no Difference between Nazis wanted to take the world with Allies (Mostly UsA & GB) that HAVE taken the world at any cost!

i just see two Evils. one of them their face is evil in face and the world always hate them, and the other is hidden evil that covers his face with good chic and humanitarian democratic mask! and they also hypnotize the world by their media to believe in the way what have the purpose for it.

bad world heh?!

Ask the Berliners who lived through the blockade what they think of the occupying Allies. Ask any of the countries Germany occupied the same question, and see if you get the same answer. The Allies, especially the US, are very, very far from the moral standards set by the Germany of that period. The US is by some distance the most altruistic occupying power history has seen.

[Kadagar_AV]

Yes. Your post is basically saying that the Allies' bombing of say Dresden is worse than the concentration camps having crematoriums (as a fuel source that didn't work as a fuel source).

While technically correct, you more or less intentionally ignored half the orignial argument and ignored the more important question on why the concentration camps needed crematoriums in the first place. The Gulags didn't have crematoriums, despite the number of deaths there. That's intentional nit-picking in a way that the nice reading is to troll up Kurdishspartakus.

You also placed moral equalence between the Nazi concentration camps and the use of atomic bombs.

Yeah, well, I just felt KurdishSpartacus was being treated a bit unfairly, and wanted to defend that specific point of his.

I do however see a moral equivalence between industrial slaughter and industrial slaughter.

The idea that you can press a button and eradicate a city is for me as repulsive as sending cultural/political enemies to death camps. Heck, one could even state that the Nazi's at least specifically targeted their victims.

But NO, I have absolutely no real interest in defending the Nazis, they commited horrible, horrible crimes to humanity. I just get a bit upset when people forget that - so did the allies.

It's just that we are schooled to whitewash the allies and flame the axis.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

i totally Agree with you Seamus Fermangah,

i see no Difference between Nazis wanted to take the world with Allies (Mostly UsA & GB) that HAVE taken the world at any cost!

i just see two Evils. one of them their face is evil in face and the world always hate them, and the other is hidden evil that covers his face with good chic and humanitarian democratic mask! and they also hypnotize the world by their media to believe in the way what have the purpose for it.

bad world heh?!

I do not agree with this assessment.

I view the Nazi system as abhorrent. I view the Soviet system almost as poorly (very, very closely so). I find the efforts of the West to have been far less objectionable and the aims of the Allies and NATO thereafter to have been far less loathsomely amoral.

I will not and do not characterize every effort of the Allies as noble or morally appropriate -- truth must be served -- but I simply cannot draw a true moral equivalency between the Nazis and the Western Allies. One is a manifestation of genuine evil, the other is a hodge podge of mixplaced altruism and haphazard self service.

My serious posts are fairly nuanced -- please try to minimize your selective attention (I know, none of us can avoid this entirely) when reading them.

[Hamburger]

I do not agree with this assessment.

I view the Nazi system as abhorrent. I view the Soviet system almost as poorly (very, very closely so). I find the efforts of the West to have been far less objectionable and the aims of the Allies and NATO thereafter to have been far less loathsomely amoral.

I will not and do not characterize every effort of the Allies as noble or morally appropriate -- truth must be served -- but I simply cannot draw a true moral equivalency between the Nazis and the Western Allies. One is a manifestation of genuine evil, the other is a hodge podge of mixplaced altruism and haphazard self service.

My serious posts are fairly nuanced -- please try to minimize your selective attention (I know, none of us can avoid this entirely) when reading them.


History Is Written By The Victor and i say even its present and future. thats why you people think they were altruism!

[Strike For The South]

]History Is Written By The Victor [/B]and i say even its present and future. thats why you people think they were altruism!

Patently false

[Empire*Of*Media]

Patently false

patently Truth

[Kadagar_AV]

patently Truth

Hey SFTS, how does it feel being argumentatively-intellectually owned by a new member who just got into your mother-language?

[Strike For The South]

patently Truth

The # of works that have been done for the "defeated" perspective is enough to refute your claim.

Every single American secondary student knows about the "defeated". Simply because you are contraian does not make you right. Your bullshit neo-fascism is easily refuted with simple census statistics, you're not even a good troll.

This is all besides the point, the study of History is by no means the study of what is right.

[Kadagar_AV]

The # of works that have been done for the "defeated" perspective is enough to refute your claim.

Every single American secondary student knows about the "defeated". Simply because you are contraian does not make you right. Your bullshit neo-fascism is easily refuted with simple census statistics, you're not even a good troll.

This is all besides the point, the study of History is by no means the study of what is right.

Nice wiggling.

Can we get back to the part where you said that History wasn't written by the winners? :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4:

[Strike For The South]

Nice wiggling.

Can we get back to the part where you said that History wasn't written by the winners? :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4:

I am still saying that min kärlek

[Pannonian]

History Is Written By The Victor and i say even its present and future. thats why you people think they were altruism!

So why don't you talk to the Berliners who were alive during that period, then talk to the inhabitants of those countries that Germany occupied, and compare the answers? Did Nazi Germany ever do something like carry out an airlift to supply and feed the population of a subjugated enemy? Oh hang on, they did the reverse, planning instead to systematically starve the defeated population as a way to reduce their numbers.

[Hax]

SFTS let's drop this thread and get a beer or something.

Seriously, how is this thread still alive?

[Kadagar_AV]

So why don't you talk to the Berliners who were alive during that period, then talk to the inhabitants of those countries that Germany occupied, and compare the answers? Did Nazi Germany ever do something like carry out an airlift to supply and feed the population of a subjugated enemy? Oh hang on, they did the reverse, planning instead to systematically starve the defeated population as a way to reduce their numbers.

Your history books mention Allied rapes and slaughters much? Probably not, right? Now go ask the Berliners about that.

Trying to equalize actions AFTER the war to actions DURING the war is about as stupid as... Well... Trying to equalize actions after the war to actions during the war.

Let's face it, it's stupid.

Also, I am sure that post-war Germany would also have airlifted food to keep the red tide at bay, if they would have won.

[rvg]

Also, I am sure that post-war Germany would also have airlifted food to keep the red tide at bay, if they would have won.

What? Hitler helping the Untermenschen? :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4:

[Kadagar_AV]

What? Hitler helping the Untermenschen? :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4:

The historical example I (and everyone else) was referring to was Berlin... I don't think Hitler saw those peeps as Untermenschen.

As Hitler himself approved of other people as more pure blooded than even Germans (Scandinavia comes to mind), it is not a far off bet that he would have supported other nations as well.


EDIT: There is a reason why occupied Norway had a breeding program. And here's a hint: It's not because they were considered Untermenschen.

[rvg]

The historical example I (and everyone else) was referring to was Berlin... I don't think Hitler saw those peeps as Untermenschen.

As Hitler himself approved of other people as more pure blooded than even Germans (Scandinavia comes to mind), it is not a far off bet that he would have supported other nations as well.

I'm trying to think of a scenario where Hitler has to airlift food to Berlin while Germany has won the war...

[Kadagar_AV]

I'm trying to think of a scenario where Hitler has to airlift food to Berlin while Germany has won the war...

Yeah, me too. That's why your point made absolutely no sense.

[rvg]

Yeah, me too. That's why your point made absolutely no sense.

My point? No, it's your point, no need to pawn that off onto me. As in:
"Also, I am sure that post-war Germany would also have airlifted food to keep the red tide at bay, if they would have won."

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Your history books mention Allied rapes and slaughters much? Probably not, right?

Actually, old bean, I learned about My Lai in a high school history class; I learned of the wrongs of slavery in 4th grade and the refusal of the founders to deal with that issue definitively in that same high school class I mentioned; the Trail of Tears is in every 6th grade history book; The tragedy at Wounded Knee receives as much class time in most school systems as the post ACW reconstruction. It may be that America before 1970 taught nothing but a litany of self-arrogating stories and episodes, but we haven't had that kind of a history program in decades. American apologists such as myself are, if anything, annoyed at the degree of self loathing inculcated in our younglings.

[Kadagar_AV]

My point? No, it's your point, no need to pawn that off onto me. As in:
"Also, I am sure that post-war Germany would also have airlifted food to keep the red tide at bay, if they would have won."

Yes?

What about it?

You argue that Germany would never have helped an occupied/allied area with supplies during the "cold war" that still would have followed had they won the war?

[rvg]

Yes?

What about it?

You argue that Germany would never have helped an occupied/allied area with supplies during the "cold war" that still would have followed had they won the war?

Help allied area? Perhaps. Helped occupied area? Hell no. That would go against everything that Hitler stood for.

[Kadagar_AV]

Actually, old bean, I learned about My Lai in a high school history class; I learned of the wrongs of slavery in 4th grade and the refusal of the founders to deal with that issue definitively in that same high school class I mentioned; the Trail of Tears is in every 6th grade history book; The tragedy at Wounded Knee receives as much class time in most school systems as the post ACW reconstruction. It may be that America before 1970 taught nothing but a litany of self-arrogating stories and episodes, but we haven't had that kind of a history program in decades. American apologists such as myself are, if anything, annoyed at the degree of self loathing inculcated in our younglings.

Yeah... Well done you, and your school.

Wait, strike that. Did any of your examples bring up the allied war "crimes" that is currently being discussed here? If not, you are kind of leaning towards my point, you know.

[Kadagar_AV]

Help allied area? Perhaps. Helped occupied area? Hell no. That would go against everything that Hitler stood for.

You really ought to open up a history book.

I think the occupied territory of Austria would have been more than supplied given a post-war cold war. :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4:

Don't play with the :laugh4: emote until you know you are right, silly.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Yeah... Well done you, and your school.

Wait, strike that. Did any of your examples bring up the allied war "crimes" that is currently being discussed here? If not, you are kind of leaning towards my point, you know.

Actually, a fair amount of attention is paid to Dresden and the two atomic strikes. The former because of real questions as to the necessity of the raid at that point in the war -- some critics have said that its real purpose was to awe the Russians (remember that very very few people new of the possibility of atomic weapons at that time and they had not been successfully tested). The two atom bomb strikes are discussed in very mixed fashion. While it was war and the targets had significant military value as things were defined then, it is pretty hard to think of those strikes as targeted "legitimately" by our current thinking. The issue is re-debated in many a history class. Most of the land warfare incidents are available in libraries or on the internet, but I note that other than My Lai they are not as thoroughly addressed. Recent film and book efforts make it clear that "heat of the moment" war crimes are well known to have occurred. Germans being shot by Rangers after the Point du Hoc assault are said to have asked "what the fuck does nicht sheissen mean?" after gunning down Germans at the end of the assault. History books I read at the time suggested -- I suspect it didn't make the official regimental diaries -- that the 82nd AB wasn't too interested in taking prisoners for a while after Ste. Mere Eglise. Those last couple of examples were not from general classes though. The invasion of Iraq and its aftermath, in particular, still draws debate from our pundits and in lots of college classrooms.

I have heard a WW2 marine comment to a Fallujah era marine that he admired their restraint. He said that the marines of his era would have warned the civilians to leave, given them 30 minutes, and they would have used artillery and air to remove it from the map. He spoke light-heartedly, but the smile never reached his eyes. I suspect that quite a few things happened that have never made it to a history text.

[rvg]

You really ought to open up a history book.

I think the occupied territory of Austria would have been more than supplied given a post-war cold war. :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4:

Don't play with the :laugh4: emote until you know you are right, silly.

No, I was thinking more along the lines of, oh, Russia perhaps? Or Greece or even Italy.

[Pannonian]

Help allied area? Perhaps. Helped occupied area? Hell no. That would go against everything that Hitler stood for.

I suppose Kadagar thinks all those Russian women ended up in Germany through invitation and open immigration laws.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

I suppose Kadagar thinks all those Russian women ended up in Germany through invitation and open immigration laws.

No, I doubt he is a denier of Germany's crimes in that era. I suspect he's just your classic modern moral purist on such things -- any deviation from the moral high ground is to be called out and chastised and there can be no good guys.

[Papewaio]

You really ought to open up a history book.

I think the occupied territory of Austria would have been more than supplied given a post-war cold war. :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4:

Don't play with the :laugh4: emote until you know you are right, silly.

Are we taking about individual or state orchestrated war crimes?

[Sarmatian]

"what the fuck does nicht sheissen mean?"

Well, if you have to ask...

[Brenus]

“History Is Written By The Victor” You never study history, really study I mean, did you? Who is actually writing the Vietnam war(s) History? The Vietnamese?
If History is written by the Victors, why the West still believe that the landing in Normandy was the start of the Liberation of Europe?
To repeat a nice catching sentence doesn’t make it true…

“your history books mention Allied rapes and slaughters much?” Yes they do, as it was done by the Red Barbarians Hordes…

History is Politic, and change from the need of self-representation.

“I suspect he's just your classic modern moral purist on such things” Agree.
It is fashion now, to equal things: Communism=Nazism, Auschwitz=Dresden, Marines=SS. Not too much to think, easy for the brain, makes all things even.

[Ironside]

I do however see a moral equivalence between industrial slaughter and industrial slaughter.

The idea that you can press a button and eradicate a city is for me as repulsive as sending cultural/political enemies to death camps. Heck, one could even state that the Nazi's at least specifically targeted their victims.


Your stance on the firebombing on Tokyo then? It killed more people than the Hiroshima nuke. Intention doesn't matter, only method?

Had the nukes been used after surrendering, then it would've been an equivalence. Now it's a clear case of (possibly dark) gray (using the nukes were certainly not a good action) vs black.
In military actions I personally have a scale of something like this.

Puppy-kicking evil. Is completely pointless for the war effort, possibly even a drain.
Petty evil. Most revenge actions.
Pragmatic evil. Uses fear and excessive violence as an intentional tool of the war effort.
Pragmatic evil. Evil actions that if not done would severly hinder or cripple the war effort.

The nukes falls under the last two categories, while the holocaust is up at the top.

Oh and history is written by those who wrote it (victors, losers or observers). And the commonly learned interpretation depends on who is in charge of that. Prone to shift between white washing and self-flagellation when becomming an ideological battlefield. More balanced outside that.