Invading other forums. Is there ever a good reason?

Metal Vendetta · Post by **Metal Vendetta** » Fri Apr 15, 2005 4:56 pm

In terms of sheer numbers, yes, Stalin was the worst. In fact, here's the top 9 of all time:

(1) Joseph Stalin, 43 million dead, 1929-'53
(2) Mao Tse-tung, 38 million, 1923-'76
(3) Adolf Hitler, 21 million, 1933-'45
(4) Chiang Kai-shek, 10 million, 1921-'48
(5) Vladimir Lenin, 4 million, 1917-'24
(6) Tojo Hideki (Japan), 4 million, 1941-'45
(7) Pol Pot, 2.4 million, 1968-'87
(8) Yahya Khan (Pakistan), 1.5 million, 1971
(9) Josip Broz, better known as Marshal Tito (Yugoslavia), 1.2 million, 1941-'80.

I think we can all safely agree that all of these people were pretty deeply unpleasant individuals, no matter their motivations.

Ultimate Weapon · Post by **Ultimate Weapon** » Fri Apr 15, 2005 5:12 pm

Tired Tracks wrote: Don't you think it was probably his actions that got him that title? Not a bunch of men/women trying to frame him or anything along those lines. They looked at the facts, and thats the conclusion. He may not be the most evil man ever, as there are still men on the planet so theres a chance we will/have someone worse.

Again that is debatable and left up to interpretation. usually people define their opinions based upon what is written in the histroy books, Nazi bad ugh.

The Japanese were sent to camps that in ways paralleled the Jewish camps. The Japanese were wrongfully enclosed for the protection of a paranoid nation that happened to be at war with Japan. There was no intention of killing the Japanese, although their social image was damaged by the US actions. Racial tensions were still high then, and unfortunatly the nation wasn't ready to trust people that looked exactly like the people whom attacked them not long ago. Not saying it was the right action, but at least those camps weren't aimed at killing, mostly protection.

Had the roles been reversed Jews would have gotten the same treatment in America and Japanese would have starved. basically it boils down to rations. Why feed a prisoner when the front lines need supplies? During times of war.

Just because it didn't happen immediatly, doesn't mean it didn't happen any less.
I must say, I find it very sad how you refer to genocide as war spoil. I beleive thats the first time I've ever come across such a dehumanizing comparison.

Any more dehumanizing than the semitic plot to kill the German race after the war? Please due research before making comments on my statements. Especially of interest should be Patton's diary quotes, and Eisnehower's death camps were germans starved to death.

"When they caught me throwing C- Rations over the fence, they threatened me with imprisonment. One Captain told me that he would shoot me if he saw me again tossing food to the Germans ... Some of the men were really only boys 13 years of age...Some of the prisoners were old men drafted by Hitler in his last ditch stand ... I understand that average weight of the prisoners at Andernach was 90 pounds...I have received threats ... Nevertheless, this...has liberated me, for I may now be heard when I relate the horrible atrocity I witnessed as a prison guard for one of 'Ike's death camps' along the Rhine." (Betty Lou Smith Hanson)

http://www.unitedstatesgovernment.net/e ... ocaust.htm

Darth Aux · Post by **Darth Aux** » Fri Apr 15, 2005 5:22 pm

Stormwolf wrote:Wow, the posters on those forums are retards.

The G1 cartoon over comic fans somehow don't seem to be that bad anymore.

See I told you we weren't that bad

Post by **Kaylee** » Fri Apr 15, 2005 5:30 pm

I don't understand the concept that because there are other things in the world which are bad and sometimes worse that means we should consider the work of Nazi Germany to be a triviality.

Ultimate Weapon · Post by **Ultimate Weapon** » Fri Apr 15, 2005 5:33 pm

Karl Lynch wrote:I don't understand the concept that because there are other things in the world which are bad and sometimes worse that means we should consider the work of Nazi Germany to be a triviality.

The problem I have is that it the spotlight on Nazi atrocities allows for other ones to go unnotoced. Then comes the guilt, which is heaped upon the German nation. When the others are no better. Slanted history is still distorted.

Post by **Kaylee** » Fri Apr 15, 2005 5:35 pm

Ultimate Weapon wrote:
The problem I have is that it the spotlight on Nazi atrocities allows for other ones to go unnotoced. Then comes the guilt, which is heaped upon the German nation. When the others are no better. Slanted history is still distorted.

Ultimate Weapon wrote:
Anyway what everybody's beef with Hitler anyway? What did he ever do to you? Anyway I found the site informative as regards to national socialism. Every tribe should have it's own land and be able to govern that land himself. Bascially it mainly restricts tribes from joining other groups which is a system that has been in place since the begginning of time. Only recently in the modern era has this system been done away with, called multiculturalism, or no culture.

I'm afraid I fail to see the correlation.

Ultimate Weapon · Post by **Ultimate Weapon** » Fri Apr 15, 2005 5:37 pm

I just don't see right and wrong as clearly defined as historians would like.

Post by **Kaylee** » Fri Apr 15, 2005 5:39 pm

Ultimate Weapon wrote:I just don't see right and wrong as clearly defined as historians would like.

Unfortunately it reads more like "So this Hitler bloke, do we let him off or what?"

Ultimate Weapon · Post by **Ultimate Weapon** » Fri Apr 15, 2005 5:42 pm

Karl Lynch wrote:
Ultimate Weapon wrote:I just don't see right and wrong as clearly defined as historians would like.
Unfortunately it reads more like "So this Hitler bloke, do we let him off or what?"

Holding Hitler accountable for his actions is why the allies won. Had the roles been reversed, allied atrocities would be the ones we question today.

Post by **Kaylee** » Fri Apr 15, 2005 5:46 pm

Ultimate Weapon wrote:
Karl Lynch wrote:
Ultimate Weapon wrote:I just don't see right and wrong as clearly defined as historians would like.
Unfortunately it reads more like "So this Hitler bloke, do we let him off or what?"
Holding Hitler accountable for his actions is why the allies won. Had the roles been reversed, allied atrocities would be the ones we question today.

I already appreciated that history was written by the winners, not the losers, for good or ill. I also still do not understand this underlying thread that what Nazi Germany did wasn't in fact that bad because other bad things have been done by other people, which seems to be the main thrust of whats been proposed unless I misunderstand it.

Post by **Best First** » Fri Apr 15, 2005 6:08 pm

i think its mainly because he is talking ****.

If you are bothered by other atrocities draw attention to them, don't try and talk down the ones that currently have the spotlight. Christ.

And...what semitic plot to wipe out the German People? Been reading Protocols of the Elders of Zion again?

Oh and you seem to be glossing over the fact that during the war no one else planned and initiated the extermination of an entire group of people.

Ultimate Weapon · Post by **Ultimate Weapon** » Fri Apr 15, 2005 6:08 pm

Karl Lynch wrote:
Ultimate Weapon wrote:
Karl Lynch wrote: Unfortunately it reads more like "So this Hitler bloke, do we let him off or what?"
Holding Hitler accountable for his actions is why the allies won. Had the roles been reversed, allied atrocities would be the ones we question today.
I already appreciated that history was written by the winners, not the losers, for good or ill. I also still do not understand this underlying thread that what Nazi Germany did wasn't in fact that bad because other bad things have been done by other people, which seems to be the main thrust of whats been proposed unless I misunderstand it.

Ok I see where you are coming from. Others may share that opinion or not I don't know. What I'm trying to say is that equal coverage should be given light. Of course that is almost impossible given that history is written by the vicotrs. I don't consider the holocaust anymore atrocitous as the next murder. This whole elevation of the evil Nazi regime as the worst in history is what I'am debating. I don't consider what the Nazi's did any different nor place any specail significance to it.

Ultimate Weapon · Post by **Ultimate Weapon** » Fri Apr 15, 2005 6:12 pm

Best First wrote:i think its mainly because he is talking ****.

If you are bothered by other atrocities draw attention to them, don't try and talk down the ones that currently have the spotlight. Christ.

I'm only asking for equal coverage. What the allies did was horrible, and allowing the Russians to do exactly what the Nazi's had done previously in the eastern zone.

And...what semitic plot to wipe out the German People? Been reading Protocols of the Elders of Zion again?

http://www.churchoftrueisrael.com/identity/patton.html

Post by **Kaylee** » Fri Apr 15, 2005 6:12 pm

I see, it came over very much as trying to trivialise what occurred.

Post by **Best First** » Fri Apr 15, 2005 6:26 pm

Ultimate Weapon wrote:
Best First wrote:i think its mainly because he is talking ****.

If you are bothered by other atrocities draw attention to them, don't try and talk down the ones that currently have the spotlight. Christ.
I'm only asking for equal coverage. What the allies did was horrible, and allowing the Russians to do exactly what the Nazi's had done previously in the eastern zone.

no you are not, you are attempting to trivalise nazi actions. That in no way equates to 'equal coverage', it equates to idiocy.

And...what semitic plot to wipe out the German People? Been reading Protocols of the Elders of Zion again?
http://www.churchoftrueisrael.com/identity/patton.html

So thats a yes to reading Protocols is it? I prefer my history with, you know, actual sources and evidence and not so much...

In the second place, Harrison and his ilk believe that the Displaced Person is a human being, which he is not, and this applies particularly to the Jews, who are lower than animals

blatent racism and bull**** consipiracy theories. I'd like to see you explain exactly how an article on a website that includes the following quote:

Just as Yahshua and the Apostles had faced the wickedness of the children of Satan (Jews),

is somehow considered by yourself to be a viable alternative to the more mainstream historians you have utterly failed to discredit with your illogical retorts.

Post a link like that again and i will ban the crap out of you.

Ultimate Weapon · Post by **Ultimate Weapon** » Fri Apr 15, 2005 6:39 pm

Best First wrote:no you are not, you are attempting to trivalise nazi actions. That in no way equates to 'equal coverage', it equates to idiocy.

Why does Karl Lynch state differently?

And...what semitic plot to wipe out the German People? Been reading Protocols of the Elders of Zion again?
http://www.churchoftrueisrael.com/identity/patton.html

So thats a yes to reading Protocols is it? I prefer my history with, you know, actual sources and evidence and not so much...

In the second place, Harrison and his ilk believe that the Displaced Person is a human being, which he is not, and this applies particularly to the Jews, who are lower than animals

blatent racism and bull**** consipiracy theories. I'd like to see you explain exactly how an article on a website that includes the following quote:

Just as Yahshua and the Apostles had faced the wickedness of the children of Satan (Jews),

is somehow considered by yourself to be a viable alternative to the more mainstream historians you have utterly failed to discredit with your illogical retorts.

Post a link like that again and i will ban the crap out of you.

Look i just grabbed that site from a google search for Patton. Just because it comes from a certain website does not discredit the the content of the quotes. Even main stream historians agree that Patton had a different idea about the war. Anyway I didn't really pay attention to the website link, so take whatever action you feel is neccessary, it still won't change the facts.

Post by **snarl** » Fri Apr 15, 2005 6:46 pm

Ultimate Weapon wrote:Everything this bloke says

Wanker!
Wanker!
Wanker!
Wanker!
Wanker!
Wanker!
Wanker!
Wanker!
Wanker!
Wanker!
Wanker!
Wanker!
Wanker!
Wanker!
Wanker!
Wanker!
Wanker!
Wanker!
Wanker!
Wanker!
Wanker!
Wanker!
Wanker!
Wanker!
Wanker!
Wanker!
Wanker!
Wanker!
Wanker!
Wanker!
Wanker!
Wanker!
Wanker!
Wanker!
Wanker!
Wanker!
Wanker!
Wanker!
Wanker!
Wanker!
Wanker!
Wanker!
Wanker! v

Ultimate Weapon · Post by **Ultimate Weapon** » Fri Apr 15, 2005 6:54 pm

snarl wrote:
Ultimate Weapon wrote:Everything this bloke says
Wanker!

And your an asshole.

Post by **Best First** » Fri Apr 15, 2005 7:00 pm

Ultimate Weapon wrote:
Best First wrote:no you are not, you are attempting to trivalise nazi actions. That in no way equates to 'equal coverage', it equates to idiocy.
Why does Karl Lynch state differently?

Because he is more polite than i?

Look i just grabbed that site from a google search for Patton.[/qupte]

uh huh.

Just because it comes from a certain website does not discredit the the content of the quotes.
no, not at all. I can't belive you can type that with a straight face. The fact that this article on Jewish behaviour was on a white supremacy site has no bearing on the article at all.

Additionally, prey tell, what lends credence to the quotes?

Even main stream historians agree that Patton had a different idea about the war.
So?

Anyway I didn't really pay attention to the website link,
sure buddy

so take whatever action you feel is neccessary,
er, i will, obviously. Any more redundant phrases you want to throw in there

it still won't change the facts.

And what facts are these? You seem to be somewhat avoiding them. So far you have posted to a link to an article on a racial hate site that has no quoted sources.

F- for history.

U for debating skills.

Ultimate Weapon · Post by **Ultimate Weapon** » Fri Apr 15, 2005 7:05 pm

I'm not really going to post quotes now because I don't want to offend anybody here. Since it comes from a source that pthers may see as hateful, etc..

Jetfire · Post by **Jetfire** » Fri Apr 15, 2005 7:24 pm

here are another few classics brought to you from "Racist's are A.O.K guy when he posted in the archive about this:

Originally posted by Ultimate Weapon

I agree, not sure what you are getting at Jets, even in the closed topic. Why would you want to press an issue? What makes you think a racist is gonna change? Does a rattlesnake change it's stripes? Are you the kind of person that throws rocks at a hornets nest?

Besides Hitler was beaten as a child to a bloody pulp by his overbearing father, same with Stalin. I'm not justifing their actions, just trying to understand them. People hate the world and their situations and often find solace in venting that anger towards racial minority groups. It has little if anything to do with superior genetics, but rather eugenics.

Sooo, your saying that as I got beaten as a child I can go and almost wipe out an entire race becaue I've got issues.

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

Originally posted by Ultimate Weapon
I actually signed up at the forum that Jets posted earlier. I have found it quite informative despite the racial slurs.

Ultimate Weapon wrote:
Best First wrote:i think its mainly because he is talking ****.

If you are bothered by other atrocities draw attention to them, don't try and talk down the ones that currently have the spotlight. Christ.
I'm only asking for equal coverage. What the allies did was horrible, and allowing the Russians to do exactly what the Nazi's had done previously in the eastern zone.

And...what semitic plot to wipe out the German People? Been reading Protocols of the Elders of Zion again?
http://www.churchoftrueisrael.com/identity/patton.html

Wow. While I posted this as a provative thread which I thought could provoke some intresting discussion. i didn't realise it would be this intresting. And no that's not a good thing. Finding out someone clearly has anit-semetic or just general racist tendencies really doesn't make me feel good.

Hitler and the Nazi's were f##king evil. No if's no but's, just plain f##king evil. Who cares if there is the whole of 2 other people actually, technically killed more in history?

They are still viewed equally as evil, don't make issue that just because Hitler got better publicity about it, it doesn't mean you need to trump his cause. His killing was intentionally and selectively performed, camps were actually make to perform this and even planned out for maximum effeciency. Even before that he had degraded them as humans and had them rounded up like cattle, ripped from their homes and slaughtered. Men, women and children. How many wives or little children or even babies deserved that? Pure evil that.

Hitler is with out doubt one of the most evil people in history. He killed 21 million people. He tried to wipe a race off the face of the planet and given the resource would have killed and enslaved (in some form) every other race too. He also tried to take over other countries for no other reason than he and his friends wanted too and killed all who opposed this and pulling quotes of racist propaganda website won't change that just because you don't like Jews.

Jetfire · Post by **Jetfire** » Fri Apr 15, 2005 7:25 pm

Ultimate Weapon wrote:I'm not really going to post quotes now because I don't want to offend anybody here. Since it comes from a source that pthers may see as hateful, etc..

No not "May be seen as hateful". It's a clearly hateful source.

Post by **snarl** » Fri Apr 15, 2005 7:32 pm

Guys and Gals, Ultimate weapon has a comb over haircut.

IGNARE

Stormwolf · Post by **Stormwolf** » Fri Apr 15, 2005 7:41 pm

Ultimate Weapon, you don't know what your talking about.

Have you ever been to a death camp?

Have you ever spoken with former SS'ers?

Do you know anybody who lived during that regime?

Well I have, or even better yet, I'm half German and a descendant of people from that generation.

Quite ironic when you consider that my grandfather from my Dutch side was in the resistance at the same time.

Hey, I even have blue eyes and blond hair, but I think that the sites you posted are nothing but leftover garbage from the Nazi regime.

Ultimate Weapon · Post by **Ultimate Weapon** » Fri Apr 15, 2005 8:51 pm

Jetfire wrote:here are another few classics brought to you from "Racist's are A.O.K guy when he posted in the archive about this
Sooo, your saying that as I got beaten as a child I can go and almost wipe out an entire race becaue I've got issues.

Wow entirely out of context that is. Eugenics is the study of selective breeding to improve the human race. I wass not justifying their actions. Just because I don;t fit into your scenario does not make me anti-semitic!

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

Wow. While I posted this as a provative thread which I thought could provoke some intresting discussion. i didn't realise it would be this intresting. And no that's not a good thing. Finding out someone clearly has anit-semetic or just general racist tendencies really doesn't make me feel good.

Well I'm sure you feel bad about your feelings, but they are your own. But if you want to call me a jew hater or what not, I'm gonna have to tell you to step off! Thats a bold statement and one that I would not like to be known around here! I'am not anti semitic, nor am I sympathetic either. The Jews are just as capable of the same destruction as the Germans.

Hitler and the Nazi's were f##king evil. No if's no but's, just plain f##king evil. Who cares if there is the whole of 2 other people actually, technically killed more in history?

Tribal warfare has gone on for centuries. Just because it became modernized does not set it above the rest. Yes they are evil, just like everybody else.

They are still viewed equally as evil, don't make issue that just because Hitler got better publicity about it, it doesn't mean you need to trump his cause. His killing was intentionally and selectively performed, camps were actually make to perform this and even planned out for maximum effeciency. Even before that he had degraded them as humans and had them rounded up like cattle, ripped from their homes and slaughtered. Men, women and children. How many wives or little children or even babies deserved that? Pure evil that.

Yes I know the camps and the ghettos were set up to rid Germany of the Jews. What to do with them only became an isssue when the war began. In 1942 the orders were laid out, yet there is no significant proof that incriminates Hitler. See the movie, Conspiracy with Kenneth Branaugh. Whic is a film about the meeting that took place to decide the Jew fate.

Hitler is with out doubt one of the most evil people in history. He killed 21 million people. He tried to wipe a race off the face of the planet and given the resource would have killed and enslaved (in some form) every other race too. He also tried to take over other countries for no other reason than he and his friends wanted too and killed all who opposed this and pulling quotes of racist propaganda website won't change that just because you don't like Jews.

No that is not the case. Lebensraum was the 1st reason why Germany invaded the other countries, and annexed Austria. This is the type of expand or die foreign policy. It has been used by hundreds of civilizations throughout history. The term was not even coined by Hitler, but previously in the 19th century by Friedrich Ratzel.

Bouncelot · Post by **Bouncelot** » Fri Apr 15, 2005 9:45 pm

Ultimate Weapon wrote:
Hitler and the Nazi's were f##king evil. No if's no but's, just plain f##king evil. Who cares if there is the whole of 2 other people actually, technically killed more in history?
Tribal warfare has gone on for centuries. Just because it became modernized does not set it above the rest. Yes they are evil, just like everybody else.

So stop trying to play down their evil. It does you no credit. If you'd been trying to argue that not everything the Nazi s did was evil (e.g. they're arguably responsible for the VW Beetle), then you might have had a point. But what you actually said was along the lines that you couldn't understand their bad reputation.

They are still viewed equally as evil, don't make issue that just because Hitler got better publicity about it, it doesn't mean you need to trump his cause. His killing was intentionally and selectively performed, camps were actually make to perform this and even planned out for maximum effeciency. Even before that he had degraded them as humans and had them rounded up like cattle, ripped from their homes and slaughtered. Men, women and children. How many wives or little children or even babies deserved that? Pure evil that.
Yes I know the camps and the ghettos were set up to rid Germany of the Jews. What to do with them only became an isssue when the war began. In 1942 the orders were laid out, yet there is no significant proof that incriminates Hitler. See the movie, Conspiracy with Kenneth Branaugh. Whic is a film about the meeting that took place to decide the Jew fate.

So you're saying that he personally had nothing to do with it, but that it was his regime, acting on his ideology. That still makes Hitler culpable, and doesn't excuse the bad rap he and his regime got.

Hitler is with out doubt one of the most evil people in history. He killed 21 million people. He tried to wipe a race off the face of the planet and given the resource would have killed and enslaved (in some form) every other race too. He also tried to take over other countries for no other reason than he and his friends wanted too and killed all who opposed this and pulling quotes of racist propaganda website won't change that just because you don't like Jews.
No that is not the case. Lebensraum was the 1st reason why Germany invaded the other countries, and annexed Austria. This is the type of expand or die foreign policy. It has been used by hundreds of civilizations throughout history. The term was not even coined by Hitler, but previously in the 19th century by Friedrich Ratzel.

Lebensraum had nothing to do with why Hitler invaded France, Belgium, Luxemburg, and Denmark, amongst others. It's arguable in the case of Czechoslovakia and Poland as well, as that was partly to unify the German people, returning to the 1914 borders.

Oh, and technically they didn't invade Austria - they took that over by rigging a referrendum.

And very few (if any) other regimes ever justified trying to expand by conquest in terms of racial superiority.

Ultimate Weapon · Post by **Ultimate Weapon** » Fri Apr 15, 2005 10:03 pm

Bouncelot wrote:So stop trying to play down their evil. It does you no credit. If you'd been trying to argue that not everything the Nazi s did was evil (e.g. they're arguably responsible for the VW Beetle), then you might have had a point. But what you actually said was along the lines that you couldn't understand their bad reputation.

I understand it. And the Nazi's had some of the best scientists of the time. Many who were recruited to teach here at american universities. I'm just trying to understand it from their point of view.

Lebensraum had nothing to do with why Hitler invaded France, Belgium, Luxemburg, and Denmark, amongst others. It's arguable in the case of Czechoslovakia and Poland as well, as that was partly to unify the German people, returning to the 1914 borders.

Oh, and technically they didn't invade Austria - they took that over by rigging a referrendum.

"The elements of the program outlined in Mein Kampf included 3 general ideas:

* idea of military expansion and force expulsion of the nations of Poland, Ukraine, Russia and other countries in order to prepare settlements for German people (both Reichsdeutsche and Volksdeutsche). The German historians underlined German claims to those countries.
* idea of supporting a high birth rate among the German women, to increase the country's population.
* idea of selection of young German women and German soldiers, in order to produce optimal from the racial point of view Germanic material to replace soldiers killed in action. Implemented in institutions recalling brothels."

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

Oh, and technically they didn't invade Austria - they took that over by rigging a referrendum.

Austria was annexed, I already stated that.

And very few (if any) other regimes ever justified trying to expand by conquest in terms of racial superiority.

Just because they don't admit it does not mean it is not true. Of course conquering nations are going to consider themselves superior. What better a morale booster?

Bouncelot · Post by **Bouncelot** » Fri Apr 15, 2005 11:18 pm

Ultimate Weapon wrote:I understand it. And the Nazi's had some of the best scientists of the time. Many who were recruited to teach here at american universities. I'm just trying to understand it from their point of view.

That understanding didn't come across in your earlier posts. And what does the fact that they didn't get rid of all the top notch scientists have to do with anything?

Lebensraum had nothing to do with why Hitler invaded France, Belgium, Luxemburg, and Denmark, amongst others. It's arguable in the case of Czechoslovakia and Poland as well, as that was partly to unify the German people, returning to the 1914 borders.

"The elements of the program outlined in Mein Kampf included 3 general ideas:

* idea of military expansion and force expulsion of the nations of Poland, Ukraine, Russia and other countries in order to prepare settlements for German people (both Reichsdeutsche and Volksdeutsche). The German historians underlined German claims to those countries.
* idea of supporting a high birth rate among the German women, to increase the country's population.
* idea of selection of young German women and German soldiers, in order to produce optimal from the racial point of view Germanic material to replace soldiers killed in action. Implemented in institutions recalling brothels."[/quote]

I'm aware of the concept of Lebensraum, Nazi Germany took up half of my History A-Level. But Poland, Austria, and Czechoslovakia weren't about lebensraum, they were about reuniting the Germans. The countries earmarked for Lebensraum were in Eastern Europe and don't account for all the places the Nazis invaded.

And very few (if any) other regimes ever justified trying to expand by conquest in terms of racial superiority.
Just because they don't admit it does not mean it is not true. Of course conquering nations are going to consider themselves superior. What better a morale booster?

Nazi ideology was different from previous nationalistic ideologies, the idea of racial supremacy was rather more extreme and heavily worked out. The Nazis proclaimed the idea that the nature of the world was an evolutionary struggle between different races. They had a worked out hierachy, with them at the top. This is a world away from the kinds of nationalism other regimes have employed, which is more about promoting your culture, and pointing out that any enemies you have are "foreign".

Master_Fwiffo · Post by **Master_Fwiffo** » Sat Apr 16, 2005 1:12 am

There are posts in this thread that disgust me.

Shanti418 · Post by **Shanti418** » Sat Apr 16, 2005 1:42 am

I agree.

But honestly, I'm glad we're having it. I'm glad we're having a discussion about it, and I'm glad UW is still around defending his side with actual arguements instead of just shutting up and putting his opinions back inside his head or reverting to name calling.

I think that, regardless of the origins of WWII, the precision and thought that went into the Holocaust makes Hitler very, very evil, to put it plainly.

But I won't pretend to know more about European history then you guys, so I'll just keep on listening.