|
On March 18 2012 19:46 Holy_AT wrote:
The Nazis cant be "evilized" enough because of what they have done, and yes if my government was to gas and mass murder people by the hundred-thousands and millions I would strap a bomb to my chest and blow myself to kingdom come with as many Nazis around me as I could get.
This filth has to be eradicated at all cost even the smallest foothold of them nowadays needs to be purged.
Everyone saying Nazis weren't that bad and spoils of the victors shit is either a Nazi sympathizer or incredibly dumb, either way he is a threat to all that is good right and just and needs to vanquished.
It is my firm believe that any kind of sympathizing or excusing the excesses of this Nazi regime is a crime and needs to be punished even with the death penalty in some cases.
Maybe you could start your crusade by NOT having right extremist in your government. That would be a reasonable start, still I'm not sure you have what it takes to exercise your voting right.
The man is dead, so let's just leave him in peace. He tried to escape the justice for a long time and he succeed but he didn't escape his conscience and being caught at the dusk of his life was probably a good remainder of his acts. People are their own prison.
|
On March 18 2012 19:46 Holy_AT wrote:
The Nazis cant be "evilized" enough because of what they have done, and yes if my government was to gas and mass murder people by the hundred-thousands and millions I would strap a bomb to my chest and blow myself to kingdom come with as many Nazis around me as I could get.
This filth has to be eradicated at all cost even the smallest foothold of them nowadays needs to be purged.
Everyone saying Nazis weren't that bad and spoils of the victors shit is either a Nazi sympathizer or incredibly dumb, either way he is a threat to all that is good right and just and needs to vanquished.
It is my firm believe that any kind of sympathizing or excusing the excesses of this Nazi regime is a crime and needs to be punished even with the death penalty in some cases.
And this is your reasoning for calling for a genocide on everyone involved in your earlier post? We're speaking AT LEAST about the entire population of Germany, Austria, Italy and Japan here.
It is kind of ironic that you follow similar guidelines as the Nazi regime in their ideology. Just.. more extreme.
Considering the usage of your vocabulary ("filth has to be eradicated", "purged", "blown to kingdom come", "needs to be vanquished") you sound no better than any religious or nationalist extremist.
Why you're trying to use TL for hate-speeches against entire populations, ESPECIALLY considering that you wouldn't be alive today if your ancestors would have followed your own advice, is beyond my understanding.
|
On March 18 2012 19:46 Holy_AT wrote:
The Nazis cant be "evilized" enough because of what they have done, and yes if my government was to gas and mass murder people by the hundred-thousands and millions I would strap a bomb to my chest and blow myself to kingdom come with as many Nazis around me as I could get.
This filth has to be eradicated at all cost even the smallest foothold of them nowadays needs to be purged.
Everyone saying Nazis weren't that bad and spoils of the victors shit is either a Nazi sympathizer or incredibly dumb, either way he is a threat to all that is good right and just and needs to vanquished.
It is my firm believe that any kind of sympathizing or excusing the excesses of this Nazi regime is a crime and needs to be punished even with the death penalty in some cases.
So you're a fanatic who wants to kill people for having a different opinion? Or in your words "eradicate that filth" ? That reminds me of someone hmm...
I think/hope you're trolling. But sadly enough people like that do exist.
|
On March 18 2012 20:14 teddyoojo wrote:Show nested quote +On March 18 2012 19:59 Doublemint wrote:On March 18 2012 19:54 teddyoojo wrote:
theres nothing important after i stopped quoting. its like saying tooth for tooth eye for eye So? That´s war - isn´t it? There is no bad or good in the long run when so many lives are wasted to a stupid cause people go to war for in most cases. It was not just nazis who died there, just like in London where not only military personal died, it was civilians. What I said was that, because people in Dresden were "nazis" we can not grieve for them. That´s the double standard and where the unjust and stupid social pressure is happening. Churchill definitely was a great man, but we seldomly hear about the bombing of Dresden and him being called out on the senseless bombing, do we? no. war isnt supposed to be that. because your opponent does cruel things you are in no way entitled to do the same. i dont understand what you are trying to say - dresden had no military importance at all. it was purely burned for the sake of burning it. and there was a long discussion after the war whether this bombing was justified or not.
...That is exactly my point... And you said it yourself and repeated what I wrote - that´s how war is NOT supposed to be - yet IT IS because war fucking sucks and brings the worst out of human beings. They bombed civilian targets in order to break morale and terrorize - no military importance at all fo those targets.
But maybe there should have been some discussion in the aftermath to question these actions.
Am I stupid or don´t you understand my posts?
//edit: I misread - can you link to the "discussion" where , on a broad scale, people discussed the bombing of civilized targets - especially from the side of the allies. Iam quite wondering, since in Austria we do have quite some deficit to come "clean" with our history, and if I did not use it as my special field when I made my Matura(Abi) I would never have learned about it to this extent. Which on the other hand can be said for most of the countries in the world where they had a rather dark time.
|
I read the 2009 thread on this and stumbled upon this gem of a post by a guy named Pika Chu who in my opinion hits the nail on the head:
"... And now when he's almost gone, they help his end come faster. Of course he was guilty, at least indirectly of supporting that horrible regime but as guilty were every germans living back then who were working in factories and making bombs and aircrafts and everyone else for the sole reason that they were indirectly supporting the regime. Should every american be guilty of the murders some have done in iraq?"
I'm sure some people will misinterpret this as him saying "people in factories producing bombs are just as evil as guards keeping people locked up in hell". However, the idea behind this is if you refused to cooperate you could meet with certain death sooner or later down the line, regardless of the line of duty you're conscripted or forced to. Most people don't stand up and be all heroic; if they did we would've seen that happen with the citizens of Germany (a substantial uprising or revolt of sorts) but to my knowledge they didn't. Of course that doesn't mean they're cowards either; it simply means their hands were forced.
|
On March 18 2012 20:44 Doublemint wrote:Show nested quote +On March 18 2012 20:14 teddyoojo wrote:On March 18 2012 19:59 Doublemint wrote:On March 18 2012 19:54 teddyoojo wrote:
theres nothing important after i stopped quoting. its like saying tooth for tooth eye for eye So? That´s war - isn´t it? There is no bad or good in the long run when so many lives are wasted to a stupid cause people go to war for in most cases. It was not just nazis who died there, just like in London where not only military personal died, it was civilians. What I said was that, because people in Dresden were "nazis" we can not grieve for them. That´s the double standard and where the unjust and stupid social pressure is happening. Churchill definitely was a great man, but we seldomly hear about the bombing of Dresden and him being called out on the senseless bombing, do we? no. war isnt supposed to be that. because your opponent does cruel things you are in no way entitled to do the same. i dont understand what you are trying to say - dresden had no military importance at all. it was purely burned for the sake of burning it. and there was a long discussion after the war whether this bombing was justified or not. ...That is exactly my point... And you said it yourself and repeated what I wrote - that´s how war is NOT supposed to be - yet IT IS because war fucking sucks and brings the worst out of human beings. They bombed civilian targets in order to break morale and terrorize - no military importance at all fo those targets. But maybe there should have been some discussion in the aftermath to question these actions. Am I stupid or don´t you understand my posts? //edit: I misread - can you link to the "discussion" where , on a broad scale, people discussed the bombing of civilized targets - especially from the side of the allies. Iam quite wondering, since in Austria we do have quite some deficit to come "clean" with our history, and if I did not use it as my special field when I made my Matura(Abi) I would never have learned about it to this extent. Which on the other hand can be said for most of the countries in the world where they had a rather dark time.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dresden_bombing
Post-war discussion of whether or not the attacks were justified has led to the bombing becoming one of the moral causes célèbres of the Second World War.[1][2]
A 1953 United States Air Force report defended the operation as the justified bombing of a military and industrial target, which was a major rail transportation and communication centre, housing 110 factories and 50,000 workers in support of the Nazi war effort.[3] However, several researchers have claimed that not all of the communications infrastructure, such as the bridges, were targeted, nor were the extensive industrial areas outside the city centre.[4] Critics of the bombing argue that Dresden—sometimes referred to as "Florence on the Elbe" (Elbflorenz)—was a cultural landmark of little or no military significance, and that the attacks were indiscriminate area bombing and not proportionate to the commensurate military gains.[5][6]
http://www.amazon.com/Firestorm-Bombing-Dresden-Paul-Addison/dp/1566637139 (didnt read it tho but its all about it)
|
On March 18 2012 21:39 teddyoojo wrote:Show nested quote +On March 18 2012 20:44 Doublemint wrote:On March 18 2012 20:14 teddyoojo wrote:On March 18 2012 19:59 Doublemint wrote:On March 18 2012 19:54 teddyoojo wrote:
theres nothing important after i stopped quoting. its like saying tooth for tooth eye for eye So? That´s war - isn´t it? There is no bad or good in the long run when so many lives are wasted to a stupid cause people go to war for in most cases. It was not just nazis who died there, just like in London where not only military personal died, it was civilians. What I said was that, because people in Dresden were "nazis" we can not grieve for them. That´s the double standard and where the unjust and stupid social pressure is happening. Churchill definitely was a great man, but we seldomly hear about the bombing of Dresden and him being called out on the senseless bombing, do we? no. war isnt supposed to be that. because your opponent does cruel things you are in no way entitled to do the same. i dont understand what you are trying to say - dresden had no military importance at all. it was purely burned for the sake of burning it. and there was a long discussion after the war whether this bombing was justified or not. ...That is exactly my point... And you said it yourself and repeated what I wrote - that´s how war is NOT supposed to be - yet IT IS because war fucking sucks and brings the worst out of human beings. They bombed civilian targets in order to break morale and terrorize - no military importance at all fo those targets. But maybe there should have been some discussion in the aftermath to question these actions. Am I stupid or don´t you understand my posts? //edit: I misread - can you link to the "discussion" where , on a broad scale, people discussed the bombing of civilized targets - especially from the side of the allies. Iam quite wondering, since in Austria we do have quite some deficit to come "clean" with our history, and if I did not use it as my special field when I made my Matura(Abi) I would never have learned about it to this extent. Which on the other hand can be said for most of the countries in the world where they had a rather dark time. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dresden_bombingShow nested quote + Post-war discussion of whether or not the attacks were justified has led to the bombing becoming one of the moral causes célèbres of the Second World War.[1][2]
A 1953 United States Air Force report defended the operation as the justified bombing of a military and industrial target, which was a major rail transportation and communication centre, housing 110 factories and 50,000 workers in support of the Nazi war effort.[3] However, several researchers have claimed that not all of the communications infrastructure, such as the bridges, were targeted, nor were the extensive industrial areas outside the city centre.[4] Critics of the bombing argue that Dresden—sometimes referred to as "Florence on the Elbe" (Elbflorenz)—was a cultural landmark of little or no military significance, and that the attacks were indiscriminate area bombing and not proportionate to the commensurate military gains.[5][6] http://www.amazon.com/Firestorm-Bombing-Dresden-Paul-Addison/dp/1566637139 (didnt read it tho but its all about it)
Thanks a bunch!
|
Armchair heros... Teamliquid is filled with them. We might as well of killed the entire population for being taken in by propoganda, most jews had no idea of the deathcamps untill after the war, do you think most citizens knew? So you now have a guard, probably a guard before the war, asked to guard a facility (deathcamp)... He has two choices, say no and be executed for insubordination or stand and watch.... I wonder what you armchair hero's would do, get off your high horses, especially that idiot who said he'd strap a bomb to his chest, more like piss and shit himself to sleep everynight in fear...
Oh and a good comparision to how propoganda works, whats the first thing that comes to your mind when you think muslim? Terrorist, polls show it, you'd be a liar if you said no even if you think its a misconception... Sure the jew's were never accused of bombing shit, but the point remains that it's our media that gave us that outlook, for instance when those idiotic republican candidates debated airport security and they (except ron paul who said its racist) all implied and outright said "we should profile muslims over everyone else"...
Anywho the point is, in 40 years, are we going to start axing americans for there part in global racism? no
|
In the struggle between the three great ideas (Nationalism, Socialism, Liberalism) in the 20th century, the outcome decided who would have to pay for everything. The loser would have to be ritually "defeated" again and again, to secure the winner's stability. All sin and guilt of mankind was loaded onto the defeated Fascism(and its supposed foundation: nationalism), so therefore the so-called Anti-Fascism resulted as the biggest civil indulgence business. From now on, everyone could and should "purify" himself from the idea of "nationalism" or "fascism" by spitting on it, defaming and hating it passionately.
In societies where animal sacrifices are of no use anymore, there is always a search for substitute sacrifices, for the same old effect. These victims are minorities or schools of thought; by fighting them, one's own ignobility can be concealed. Those who daily point their fingers at "Nazis", need this abstract evil, to hide their own darkness and totalitarianism. It's the reaction of a hypocrite, who wants to outwards ban something that he inwardly desires. - It's hard to find an other explanation for the incredible irrational hatred, that always surges again, especially in nervous ages. Man rejects to think whenever he seeks refuge behind dogmas and declarations of war. He needs a tangible object which he can demonize, and by fighting this object, he certifies for himself and others to belong to the true faith. And fear is the most effective instrument for that. So the fearful create fear, in order to be "brave" together. "Showing colors" or "moral courage" then means: to act against a declared victim, which is always powerless in its role: The "witch" must burn, the "jew" has to be evicted, the "right wing/nationalist/racist/fascist/nazi" stigmatized and ostracized (even when his guilt is unproven and he is 89 years old) so that the inwardly weakened group can feel "strong" and attains togetherness, by defining itself as winner over a long-vanquished, imaginary foe.
Since the beginning of history, people are ready to violently act against their particular object of hate in the name of the zeitgeist, even today. Why should the inquisitorial plebeians of history have suddenly disappeared?
Our trust in civilization is big. That also was the case in the 1870s, 1880s, when not only insignificant writers and journalists started to use terms like "dirt", "rats", "plague", "scourge" for Judaism (terms, which are gladly used nowadays in the public to describe representatives of "nationalism"(->fascism->racism->and so on), without hardly anybody being disturbed by it. - The more nervous an age is, the more drastic the voices and words become, that demand "decisive actions" against the particular object of hate. Although the accusations against most Jews were as outlandish and irrational as most accusations against "nationalist"(and everything it remotely implies) today. Against both groups, the hatred is first and foremost a functional one. The aura of "danger" that is supposed to emanate from them, is created intentionally and purposefully, and could not withstand a clear, neutral scrutiny, which is why none ever happens. - What's important is that the loathed ones fulfill their psychological purpose: as object of projection of self-hatred, they cause mental relief, at the same time stabilizing the own world view and also offering a safe scope to live out one's thrive for power.
The object of hate allows the hating one to act towards it in a way that the object of hate is accused of behaving: ignoble and despiteful. That is the fundamental social function of every publically justified object of hate. It channels the aggression of a society in controllable ways and creates inner stability. Just like the fight against Judaism was a fight against the "corrosion of our people", today the fight against "nationalism" (read: right-wing) goes in kind of the opposite direction, but is carried out with the same zeal and for the same purpose. The political class of Germany today needs National Socialism like God needs Satan. - Where would the moral syndicates be without their warrantor Hitler? The cultural scene? How much money was made by now with National Socialism and the fight against it? Whole industries, countless associations and networks depend on it. The so-called "Antifascism" is perhaps the safest, because most reliable crutch that the politcal class can rest upon.
|
Damn. That was one of the most eloquent and accurate posts I've read on TL since the holy Moltke has left us. Kinda reminds me of Elias Canetti.
I kinda hoped that it's not written by you, but uncle google didn't come up with any different claim. Well done, sir.
|
Leave the man alone people act like every country does not violate laws in time of war. I am pretty sure the hundreds of Americans that raped killed and robbed innocent people in Vietnam were not charged nor are they being looked for by anyone.
|
On March 18 2012 23:47 r.Evo wrote:
Damn. That was one of the most eloquent and accurate posts I've read on TL since the holy Moltke has left us. Kinda reminds me of Elias Canetti.
I kinda hoped that it's not written by you, but uncle google didn't come up with any different claim. Well done, sir.
While it definitely is a high quality post, and eloquent to say the least - some things are debatable.
How is having artists work on what history has given us, and giving it an artistic value on which people can reflect what happened a bad thing for example - and I am also not quite sure that many people got really rich off of this. I agree with the sentiment however, that seems to be inspired by Silone, that the "new fascism will not say I am fascism - it will say I am the anti-fascism." (Just paraphrasing)
Good job nonetheless.
|
On March 19 2012 00:02 GhostfaceKillah wrote:
Leave the man alone people act like every country does not violate laws in time of war. I am pretty sure the hundreds of Americans that raped killed and robbed innocent people in Vietnam were not charged nor are they being looked for by anyone.
Don't worry, he is alone now.
|
Following orders is completely justifiable. Especially if you're required to, he'd be probably put to death if he DIDN'T follow orders. Why don't we execute/punish WW2 vets that guarded Japanese soldiers? Leave the man alone obviously.
|
On March 19 2012 01:42 XenocideFTW wrote:
Following orders is completely justifiable. Especially if you're required to, he'd be probably put to death if he DIDN'T follow orders. Why don't we execute/punish WW2 vets that guarded Japanese soldiers? Leave the man alone obviously.
USA was winning side. So obviously war crimes are not punished that hard. WW2 veterans are what 88 years avg so I think we should just leave them alone anyways.
|
|
|
So..... does it prevent him from opening another death camp? What's the point?
I thought the law is suppose to protect the people in our society, I cannot see any logic in this case.
(I never get the punishment reasoning, I do not know why the law should punish people, how can that be justified if all right or wrong is just subjective?)
|
Alright, everyone who can say they understand what he went through, stand up. I guess everyone's still comfortably on their ass.
So the guy was basically a more or less conscripted guard at a place where they executed people. He knew what was going on. Did he have a choice? Well, that's where the facts get/ got blurry, and you have to try and define choice. In the military system and psychology, the answer is pretty much no, and that's the answer I'd go with.
Did he do anything bad after he got out of that place? He moved to America. He got a job. He had a family. You can interpret that as either running away from what he may have done, or repenting for it. By all counts, he lived a pretty decent, productive life. Prosecuting a, what, infirm 80 year old seems more like a petty act than justice.
That said, let him rest in peace.
|
It depends on what a person's opinion of the point of justice.
Is it to prevent the person from committing future crimes?
or
Is it to let the person pay for the crimes he has committed?
|
Those nazi guys probably didn't even know what they were doing (the lower ranked ones ofc. ..)
Can't see a good point for them to be punished almost dying of eldery ...
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
