Hi Paul,
.......unless he was ignorant, naive or stupid...................
By the way, in case anyone is confused, Michael Moore is a satyrist, not a historian. Factual accuracy is not a necessary attribute of a satyrist.
Cheers,
Sid.
Will the "Bad" Germans ever forgive the Allies
Moderator: Commissar D, the Evil
However rediculous the good guys bad guys scenario is, the original poster do express an to common world view.
People where not nazis because they hated jews. The attributes that attracted people to the party was more of patroism and a wish to see their german country whole again. Fear and to some extend hatred against communism. A new social order that gave them the best health insurance in world, lowered unemployment and brought a sence of pride and achivement.
They did not join the party because they wanted war, no one wants war. Neither did they vote for the nazis because they wanted to murder gipsys and jews. Most germans did not even concider them. Certainly the state propaganda made its contribution. I would say that the german prewar view on jews was as false as the american view on WWII nazis (or arabs) is today.
But nazi state propaganda only worked for 12 years, they have had 60 years to learn better.
People where not nazis because they hated jews. The attributes that attracted people to the party was more of patroism and a wish to see their german country whole again. Fear and to some extend hatred against communism. A new social order that gave them the best health insurance in world, lowered unemployment and brought a sence of pride and achivement.
They did not join the party because they wanted war, no one wants war. Neither did they vote for the nazis because they wanted to murder gipsys and jews. Most germans did not even concider them. Certainly the state propaganda made its contribution. I would say that the german prewar view on jews was as false as the american view on WWII nazis (or arabs) is today.
But nazi state propaganda only worked for 12 years, they have had 60 years to learn better.
-
sid guttridge
- on "time out"
- Posts: 8055
- Joined: Thu Oct 10, 2002 4:54 am
Hi Anton,
I think you are essentially correct in your analysis as to why people became Nazis. I doubt even Himmler became a Nazi primarily out of anti-Semitism.
However, whatever the primary motivations of NSDAP members, the fact remains that anti-semitism was an integral part of Nazi philosophy and all party members knowingly acquiesced in it. Some knowingly benefitted from it and a few even committed horrendous crimes in its name.
I think the official pre-war German/Jewish situation was very different from the current official US/Arab situation. For a start, throughout the 1930s the Nazis were intent on forcing Jewish emigration from Germany, whereas the USA has a guaranteed quota for Arab (and all other) immigration.
However, if you are saying that the bulk of the German population in the 1930s and of the US population today are essentially ignorant regarding Jews or Arabs, then you are probably right.
Fortunately George Bush will undergo a second election and cannot compete in a third. If only Germans had had the same hold over Hitler. Imagine what the historical results might have been if Hitler's term in office also had to finish after eight years - in January 1941.
Cheers,
Sid.
I think you are essentially correct in your analysis as to why people became Nazis. I doubt even Himmler became a Nazi primarily out of anti-Semitism.
However, whatever the primary motivations of NSDAP members, the fact remains that anti-semitism was an integral part of Nazi philosophy and all party members knowingly acquiesced in it. Some knowingly benefitted from it and a few even committed horrendous crimes in its name.
I think the official pre-war German/Jewish situation was very different from the current official US/Arab situation. For a start, throughout the 1930s the Nazis were intent on forcing Jewish emigration from Germany, whereas the USA has a guaranteed quota for Arab (and all other) immigration.
However, if you are saying that the bulk of the German population in the 1930s and of the US population today are essentially ignorant regarding Jews or Arabs, then you are probably right.
Fortunately George Bush will undergo a second election and cannot compete in a third. If only Germans had had the same hold over Hitler. Imagine what the historical results might have been if Hitler's term in office also had to finish after eight years - in January 1941.
Cheers,
Sid.
You are absolute right that they could not have ignored the antisemite message of NSDAP and no one is thus without guilt.
I just mean that being a nazi in prewar Germany was not primeairely driven by a hate against non-kaukasians, as is the case with modern day nazis.
It is hard to understand that intelligent people reasoned like they did. I have no problem understand that simple uneducated rural people that do not travel and do not meet different cultures can be ignorant and racial. But even scholars and people like Henry Ford or Aldus Huxley subscribed to it.
My grandfather sent several jewish families to camps. On one occation it was the familly Lipke. They where tenants in one of my great grandfathers houses. He objected to the folly of prosecuting jews that obviously did no one any harm. My grandfather did however not listen to his father in law, neiter did it help the Liepkes to denounce their origin nor that they had a big portait of Adolf Hitler in their window.
It is the only case I know of and it feels terrible that my grandfather did what he did. They where guilty, no doubt.
Neither did I mean to bash the USA. What I spite is the Hollywood dehumanification of nazis and arabs as cruel stereotypes. If you like many ignorant people learn history by watching movies, there is a great risk that you will see the world as being a struggle between the white hats against the black hats. Where the black hats are all evil. That ignorance is of course well represented everywhere.
The question shows the author of this thread to be a representative of that ignorance.
The greatest difference between George Bush and Adolf Hitler is that Hitler got to power by winning a democratic election....
I just mean that being a nazi in prewar Germany was not primeairely driven by a hate against non-kaukasians, as is the case with modern day nazis.
It is hard to understand that intelligent people reasoned like they did. I have no problem understand that simple uneducated rural people that do not travel and do not meet different cultures can be ignorant and racial. But even scholars and people like Henry Ford or Aldus Huxley subscribed to it.
My grandfather sent several jewish families to camps. On one occation it was the familly Lipke. They where tenants in one of my great grandfathers houses. He objected to the folly of prosecuting jews that obviously did no one any harm. My grandfather did however not listen to his father in law, neiter did it help the Liepkes to denounce their origin nor that they had a big portait of Adolf Hitler in their window.
It is the only case I know of and it feels terrible that my grandfather did what he did. They where guilty, no doubt.
Neither did I mean to bash the USA. What I spite is the Hollywood dehumanification of nazis and arabs as cruel stereotypes. If you like many ignorant people learn history by watching movies, there is a great risk that you will see the world as being a struggle between the white hats against the black hats. Where the black hats are all evil. That ignorance is of course well represented everywhere.
The question shows the author of this thread to be a representative of that ignorance.
The greatest difference between George Bush and Adolf Hitler is that Hitler got to power by winning a democratic election....
Anton
While I'm no Bush supporter I think you jumped a bit over the top stating the biggest difference between him and Hitler was that Hitler was elected democratically.
1) In the US we use something called the electoral college - ours is not a democracy (Thank God!) but a Republic. The States elect a president not the inidividual voters. The voters determine who their state will go for.
2) I don't seem to recall Bush have rounded up and exterminated any particular group of people? Maybe I missed that.
His actions in Iraq do not thrill me but you must look closely at American politics to catch what is really happening. The far left party, democrats, have been anti-semitic while still prattling about the joys of socialist brotherhead. All of their leaders are rich.
The not so far left party, the Republicans, are overly pro Israel due to the take over of that party by so called neo-conservatives - former leftists who deserted the democrats (and trotyskites) to start a new 'conservative' movement that embraces all the usual socialist baloney while basing foriegn policy on support for Israel. All of their leaders are rich.
Neither party has America's best interests at heart, nor yours either. Many of us in America have become Constitutionalists, Libertarians, of Nader socialists. Few of their leaders are rich - these are a middle class phenomenon.
All three minority parties have more integrity than the ruling Party which is the Demo/Repubs who are actually one party if you examine their policies. (excluding support for Israel) The three noted above are characterized by at least a modicum of integrity and a desire to not intervene in the business of other countries - something missing from the primary two. None of the minority parties to my knowledge are anti-semitic though at least two of them do not believe in military alliances with any one, including Israel. Not sure where Nader stands on that.
All American political parties are willing to fight terrorism - the minority parties however, are not into so called 'nation building' which is actually occupation of other countries.
I have no idea why the democrats are becoming anti-semitic since there are so many Jews in the party so I won't attempt to explain it.
The Republicans are pro Israel largely because of a high proportion of pro Israeli Jewish theorists at the top, and a lot of support from the so called 'Christian Right' who are a fragmented group of Christians who are primarily 'dispensationalists' which is new variant of Christianity thats only been around a couple hundred years. But their support for Israel is unequivocal and based on an extemely literal interpretation of scripture - particularly Revelation.
I hate blathering about politics but lately many have posted comments about Bush and Americans and such and I thought it was time to describe what the political reality is in America. No where near as cut and dried as you might think. the major parties hate the minority parties because we can upset elections so they have to pay a bit of attention to us which I'm sure is confusing for folks who live elsewhere and only read the mainstream US press - which is owned by the money intestests of the main parties. Confused yet? I am.
But I must tell you bluntly - none of these political entities are interested in mass murder of anyone, nor KZ, nor racism. It may appear so because the primary parties throw words like racism around all the time but that is simply about pandering to minorities for votes. Both primary parties do it constantly - its about who gets what share of the spoils stolen from tax payers.
It is a self correcting system that has gone out of wack, forsaking rule of law as described in our constition but still essentially able to fix itself. May God grant that it does.
Bush is not a good president in my opinion. Kerry is pathetic - who can tell what he stands for. But please, tell me of a leader anywhere now in any country who has his head sown on straight. It is up to us, the people of the various nations, to keep these guys from getting too out of hand.
When the German people failed to do that, they got Hitler. It could happen to any of us so I'm not throwing stones at other countries - I'm trying to get my own back on track.
I hope my attempt at an explanation here does not offend and my effort is simply an attempt at clearing the air a bit.
cordially
Reb
While I'm no Bush supporter I think you jumped a bit over the top stating the biggest difference between him and Hitler was that Hitler was elected democratically.
1) In the US we use something called the electoral college - ours is not a democracy (Thank God!) but a Republic. The States elect a president not the inidividual voters. The voters determine who their state will go for.
2) I don't seem to recall Bush have rounded up and exterminated any particular group of people? Maybe I missed that.
His actions in Iraq do not thrill me but you must look closely at American politics to catch what is really happening. The far left party, democrats, have been anti-semitic while still prattling about the joys of socialist brotherhead. All of their leaders are rich.
The not so far left party, the Republicans, are overly pro Israel due to the take over of that party by so called neo-conservatives - former leftists who deserted the democrats (and trotyskites) to start a new 'conservative' movement that embraces all the usual socialist baloney while basing foriegn policy on support for Israel. All of their leaders are rich.
Neither party has America's best interests at heart, nor yours either. Many of us in America have become Constitutionalists, Libertarians, of Nader socialists. Few of their leaders are rich - these are a middle class phenomenon.
All three minority parties have more integrity than the ruling Party which is the Demo/Repubs who are actually one party if you examine their policies. (excluding support for Israel) The three noted above are characterized by at least a modicum of integrity and a desire to not intervene in the business of other countries - something missing from the primary two. None of the minority parties to my knowledge are anti-semitic though at least two of them do not believe in military alliances with any one, including Israel. Not sure where Nader stands on that.
All American political parties are willing to fight terrorism - the minority parties however, are not into so called 'nation building' which is actually occupation of other countries.
I have no idea why the democrats are becoming anti-semitic since there are so many Jews in the party so I won't attempt to explain it.
The Republicans are pro Israel largely because of a high proportion of pro Israeli Jewish theorists at the top, and a lot of support from the so called 'Christian Right' who are a fragmented group of Christians who are primarily 'dispensationalists' which is new variant of Christianity thats only been around a couple hundred years. But their support for Israel is unequivocal and based on an extemely literal interpretation of scripture - particularly Revelation.
I hate blathering about politics but lately many have posted comments about Bush and Americans and such and I thought it was time to describe what the political reality is in America. No where near as cut and dried as you might think. the major parties hate the minority parties because we can upset elections so they have to pay a bit of attention to us which I'm sure is confusing for folks who live elsewhere and only read the mainstream US press - which is owned by the money intestests of the main parties. Confused yet? I am.
But I must tell you bluntly - none of these political entities are interested in mass murder of anyone, nor KZ, nor racism. It may appear so because the primary parties throw words like racism around all the time but that is simply about pandering to minorities for votes. Both primary parties do it constantly - its about who gets what share of the spoils stolen from tax payers.
It is a self correcting system that has gone out of wack, forsaking rule of law as described in our constition but still essentially able to fix itself. May God grant that it does.
Bush is not a good president in my opinion. Kerry is pathetic - who can tell what he stands for. But please, tell me of a leader anywhere now in any country who has his head sown on straight. It is up to us, the people of the various nations, to keep these guys from getting too out of hand.
When the German people failed to do that, they got Hitler. It could happen to any of us so I'm not throwing stones at other countries - I'm trying to get my own back on track.
I hope my attempt at an explanation here does not offend and my effort is simply an attempt at clearing the air a bit.
cordially
Reb
Totally agree with your analysis. You even got the joke right.
I am by no means anti-american and even if I am critical to the Israeli occupation of Palestine, I am by no mean antisemetic. An opinion shared by most europeans. We do not hate jews or believe they are specially bad. But we are fed with disturbing images that are not shown in US media like CNN or FOX.
I read the other day that Bush is more hated by the scandinavian public than Hitler was 1939. Among the ignorant that spills over to include everything american.
I am by no means anti-american and even if I am critical to the Israeli occupation of Palestine, I am by no mean antisemetic. An opinion shared by most europeans. We do not hate jews or believe they are specially bad. But we are fed with disturbing images that are not shown in US media like CNN or FOX.
I read the other day that Bush is more hated by the scandinavian public than Hitler was 1939. Among the ignorant that spills over to include everything american.
Anton
We have folks like that too. There is a small minority we call the 'war party' who wish to nuke various Arab countries and another minority called 'always blame America' who figure we are always wrong.
The most vehemant folks belong to those two.
There is a strong anti-French sentiment among the former which I, as an amateur military historian, find quite offensive.
I suspect the key to getting along is to actually meet foriegners. I was fortunate to live overseas for a while and have engaged in a lot of business with Europeans (technical field) so yeah, the Germans prefer beer and the French wine but other than that all seem to be individuals - just like Americans.
The strangest guy I ever had over to my house was actually Danish -but he was certainly entertaining!
Feldgrau is interesting because of the mix - I'm always happy to hear other opinions - particularly from non English speakers who have access to books I sadly can't read!
cheers
Reb
We have folks like that too. There is a small minority we call the 'war party' who wish to nuke various Arab countries and another minority called 'always blame America' who figure we are always wrong.
The most vehemant folks belong to those two.
There is a strong anti-French sentiment among the former which I, as an amateur military historian, find quite offensive.
I suspect the key to getting along is to actually meet foriegners. I was fortunate to live overseas for a while and have engaged in a lot of business with Europeans (technical field) so yeah, the Germans prefer beer and the French wine but other than that all seem to be individuals - just like Americans.
The strangest guy I ever had over to my house was actually Danish -but he was certainly entertaining!
Feldgrau is interesting because of the mix - I'm always happy to hear other opinions - particularly from non English speakers who have access to books I sadly can't read!
cheers
Reb
good point about generalization there. I think that in a lot of ways the opposition against americans in general over here in Scandinavia has gone a bit too far. It is always the politicians and industrial leaders/backmen et.al who are responsible. But only slightly so, because in a democracy there are no civilians, in the sense that we, the public, in our different countries are also responsible for who gets elected. The duty of every citizen in a free country is to always be vigilant towards the upper echelons of power. Now, what i fear is the common grudge held against U.S citizens is the notion that they really do not care about (or enough about) what consequences the actions of their leaders can have on the lives of overseas people. Or maybe that they`re just throwing up their hands and saying "what can I do? They are the leaders"
Time has to a degree shown that some changes come slow over there, even though it has massive public support. No offense though
And a main point, maybe the most important, is the U.S hand being held over Israel. I myself really dont agree with a nation subduing another people just because their ancestors used to live there over 2000 years ago.
I am a sound believer in that Religion should be as far removed from the affairs of the state as possible. So are most young scandinavians i think.
We should, however, agree on the fact that not everyone thinks this way in my country and far from every american fits the description above. We who know history have all to often encountered what foul repercussions national pride and mistrust among nations can have. And when my fellow countrymen just slags off the average american it kinda pisses me off. It reminds me of the naive and degenerate view europeans had of eachother in the years prior to WW1. And look what that brought
Lets just oust the bad politicians, religious leaders, share a beer and dance a little
Time has to a degree shown that some changes come slow over there, even though it has massive public support. No offense though
And a main point, maybe the most important, is the U.S hand being held over Israel. I myself really dont agree with a nation subduing another people just because their ancestors used to live there over 2000 years ago.
I am a sound believer in that Religion should be as far removed from the affairs of the state as possible. So are most young scandinavians i think.
We should, however, agree on the fact that not everyone thinks this way in my country and far from every american fits the description above. We who know history have all to often encountered what foul repercussions national pride and mistrust among nations can have. And when my fellow countrymen just slags off the average american it kinda pisses me off. It reminds me of the naive and degenerate view europeans had of eachother in the years prior to WW1. And look what that brought
Lets just oust the bad politicians, religious leaders, share a beer and dance a little
Pax Aeterna ACDC
Marius
Heinekin for me please! And I don't dance very well but I play
bass like I mean it - you all can do the dancing!
cheers
Reb
ps I'm a confessional Lutheran of the old school - our role has been to shat upon by governments everywhere for the last 500 years! we're starting to like it - or at least get used to it! And we tend to agree with you on about every point.
Heinekin for me please! And I don't dance very well but I play
bass like I mean it - you all can do the dancing!
cheers
Reb
ps I'm a confessional Lutheran of the old school - our role has been to shat upon by governments everywhere for the last 500 years! we're starting to like it - or at least get used to it! And we tend to agree with you on about every point.
Hi Anton,
Your coment........
"It is hard to understand that intelligent people reasoned like they did. I have no problem understand that simple uneducated rural people that do not travel and do not meet different cultures can be ignorant and racial. But even scholars and people like Henry Ford or Aldus Huxley subscribed to it."
Its not hard at all to understand once you access the infomation needed, thus when you have the relavent info, then far more analysis can take place to understand those people.
The problem is getting that infomation, as most infomation avaliable is Politcaly correct ("winner writes the history")
And the very little Politcaly incorrect infomation that one does find which is translated into english, is not really anywhere enough to understand those people or even to judge them.
A good starting point I have found is the analysis of hitlers speeches, there avaliable in english on the net, This is the stuff that was being preached to the intelligent germans which went to his speeches, he really needed to convince them, before they would follow him, Its hard to get much further in depth as like i said everything else is written in German, thus one really is limited to getting a proper understanding of why they did what they did.
Your coment........
"It is hard to understand that intelligent people reasoned like they did. I have no problem understand that simple uneducated rural people that do not travel and do not meet different cultures can be ignorant and racial. But even scholars and people like Henry Ford or Aldus Huxley subscribed to it."
Its not hard at all to understand once you access the infomation needed, thus when you have the relavent info, then far more analysis can take place to understand those people.
The problem is getting that infomation, as most infomation avaliable is Politcaly correct ("winner writes the history")
And the very little Politcaly incorrect infomation that one does find which is translated into english, is not really anywhere enough to understand those people or even to judge them.
A good starting point I have found is the analysis of hitlers speeches, there avaliable in english on the net, This is the stuff that was being preached to the intelligent germans which went to his speeches, he really needed to convince them, before they would follow him, Its hard to get much further in depth as like i said everything else is written in German, thus one really is limited to getting a proper understanding of why they did what they did.
Hi again Reb,
Your coment.........
"While I'm no Bush supporter I think you jumped a bit over the top stating the biggest difference between him and Hitler was that Hitler was elected democratically.
1) In the US we use something called the electoral college - ours is not a democracy (Thank God!) but a Republic. The States elect a president not the inidividual voters. The voters determine who their state will go for.
2) I don't seem to recall Bush have rounded up and exterminated any particular group of people? Maybe I missed that."
(a) I would have to agree that hitler was elected more fairly than bush, bush was not elected on his own merits but rather "big oil &defense corp money" where as hitler had to sell himself far more to convince the majority...................if we were to compare the early speeches to the people of hitler versus bush, bush would not have a chance.............besides hitler convinced the minority intelligent germans also.....................I think the intelligent American minority (not the masses) would all think bush to be pathetic, and certainly if it were just up to them would never given him a chance to get in.
(b) your second point..........
" I don't seem to recall Bush have rounded up and exterminated any particular group of people? Maybe I missed that."
what about all the innocent civillians which have been killed just in Iraq..........just Iraq, because they had weapons of mass destruction, where are they, and even if they had them,they would not of been a threat to America.
besides I dont seem to Remember any good reason for America to mass Exterminate Japanese civilians, by fire bombing every city except Kyoto , and then later dumping atomic bombs , not to mention the bombing ,fire bombing every city in germany...........hardly military targets, nor did any of these people ever kill Americans civilians or fire bomb them.
Just remember , America remains a Super Power because it keeps its defence industries well fed, and for them to remain fed there needs to be conflict...........so the game goes on, And we are part of the game, God help us all when America runs out of baddies to take on, for without America as a Super power leaves the field wide opened to get somebody worse.
Your coment.........
"While I'm no Bush supporter I think you jumped a bit over the top stating the biggest difference between him and Hitler was that Hitler was elected democratically.
1) In the US we use something called the electoral college - ours is not a democracy (Thank God!) but a Republic. The States elect a president not the inidividual voters. The voters determine who their state will go for.
2) I don't seem to recall Bush have rounded up and exterminated any particular group of people? Maybe I missed that."
(a) I would have to agree that hitler was elected more fairly than bush, bush was not elected on his own merits but rather "big oil &defense corp money" where as hitler had to sell himself far more to convince the majority...................if we were to compare the early speeches to the people of hitler versus bush, bush would not have a chance.............besides hitler convinced the minority intelligent germans also.....................I think the intelligent American minority (not the masses) would all think bush to be pathetic, and certainly if it were just up to them would never given him a chance to get in.
(b) your second point..........
" I don't seem to recall Bush have rounded up and exterminated any particular group of people? Maybe I missed that."
what about all the innocent civillians which have been killed just in Iraq..........just Iraq, because they had weapons of mass destruction, where are they, and even if they had them,they would not of been a threat to America.
besides I dont seem to Remember any good reason for America to mass Exterminate Japanese civilians, by fire bombing every city except Kyoto , and then later dumping atomic bombs , not to mention the bombing ,fire bombing every city in germany...........hardly military targets, nor did any of these people ever kill Americans civilians or fire bomb them.
Just remember , America remains a Super Power because it keeps its defence industries well fed, and for them to remain fed there needs to be conflict...........so the game goes on, And we are part of the game, God help us all when America runs out of baddies to take on, for without America as a Super power leaves the field wide opened to get somebody worse.
Yeah - Bush was a real jerk for bombing the Japanese...How does that relate to this discussion?
I won't waste time defending Bush since I don't like him much.
But to compare Iraq to say, Poland? Poland was one of the few countries
in the world to ever gain from being 'liberated' by the Russians. The Nazis killed and were still killing a higher proportion of Poles than any other group or nationality. We're talking millions here - not the 10,000 or so killed in Iraq. While the latter was wrong in my opinion - at least a case could be made for it by reasonable men. The former? You tell me.
If you really think no intelligent people voted for Bush I can't imagine what you are using to form your opinions. But it sounds as if you are deciding that only people that agree with you can be smart.
Remember - Bush was running against a moron. And both candiates were floating in money. The big corporations you condemn so flippantly supported both of them - there is really only one major party - if you doubt that the info is available on the web. bill Gates paid in grief for not doing that very thing - found himself with no friends in DC - a costly mistake.
You might also consider that under Bill Clinton's aegis (and Clinton was an intellectual giant compared to Gore) America bombed the snot out of Iraq, blasted Yugoslavia to bits and hit an aspirin factory in Somalia. How is that different than Bush?
I realize you may be a socialist - in which case the left (or more left) party is always right in your eyes. There is certainly a lot of that going around. I know a lot of Europeans favor the democratic party in America - God only knows why. Because there is not a dime's worth of difference between them and Bush's buddies. I almost hope Kerry wins - maybe that will open your eyes because brother - nothing will change except taxes will go up. (and hopefully we'll have gridlock in DC)
If you think the Germans were wise to elect Hitler I can't imagine what you could be basing that on. I can understand their reasons for doing so but the results were so appalling for Germany and the world - I can't call that wisdom.
If you review my posts on various threads you will find that I have consistantly condemned terror bombing as a war crime. How that is pertinet to this discussion eludes me.
While I don't approve of attacking Iraq I don't think you can show me an army in history that made more of an effort to avoid killing civilians than the American army does - even at the risk of taking losses by avoiding 'maybe' targets. Civilians still get killed - you'll note I said I'm voting for the Constitution pary? We're against that. Should we actually win we'll pull the troops out of Europe too. It's called minding our own business. And you will find smart people among us...
I think your sense of proportion is skewed. Many Americans believe that Iraq was involved in 911. Hitler started WW2 over a manufactured provocation. 911 was not manufactured - you no doubt saw it on TV.
I personally do not believe Iraq was involved for various reasons - but unlike you I would not presume to think that only a dummy could disagree with me. That will cost you ultimately - think military for a moment - the worst sin in tactics (and strategy) is to underestimate your enemy. Never assume something as silly as that - you'll end up reading every situation wrong - or turn into a fanatic.
If you think about it real carefully you have fallen into the same trap as the people you despise - like bush. Every bad guy is a Hitler. That is exactly what Clinton/Bush have said about Slobo and Sadaam. T'aint so my friend. We're very fortunate in this world that we produce few real Hitlers.
cordially
Reb
I won't waste time defending Bush since I don't like him much.
But to compare Iraq to say, Poland? Poland was one of the few countries
in the world to ever gain from being 'liberated' by the Russians. The Nazis killed and were still killing a higher proportion of Poles than any other group or nationality. We're talking millions here - not the 10,000 or so killed in Iraq. While the latter was wrong in my opinion - at least a case could be made for it by reasonable men. The former? You tell me.
If you really think no intelligent people voted for Bush I can't imagine what you are using to form your opinions. But it sounds as if you are deciding that only people that agree with you can be smart.
Remember - Bush was running against a moron. And both candiates were floating in money. The big corporations you condemn so flippantly supported both of them - there is really only one major party - if you doubt that the info is available on the web. bill Gates paid in grief for not doing that very thing - found himself with no friends in DC - a costly mistake.
You might also consider that under Bill Clinton's aegis (and Clinton was an intellectual giant compared to Gore) America bombed the snot out of Iraq, blasted Yugoslavia to bits and hit an aspirin factory in Somalia. How is that different than Bush?
I realize you may be a socialist - in which case the left (or more left) party is always right in your eyes. There is certainly a lot of that going around. I know a lot of Europeans favor the democratic party in America - God only knows why. Because there is not a dime's worth of difference between them and Bush's buddies. I almost hope Kerry wins - maybe that will open your eyes because brother - nothing will change except taxes will go up. (and hopefully we'll have gridlock in DC)
If you think the Germans were wise to elect Hitler I can't imagine what you could be basing that on. I can understand their reasons for doing so but the results were so appalling for Germany and the world - I can't call that wisdom.
If you review my posts on various threads you will find that I have consistantly condemned terror bombing as a war crime. How that is pertinet to this discussion eludes me.
While I don't approve of attacking Iraq I don't think you can show me an army in history that made more of an effort to avoid killing civilians than the American army does - even at the risk of taking losses by avoiding 'maybe' targets. Civilians still get killed - you'll note I said I'm voting for the Constitution pary? We're against that. Should we actually win we'll pull the troops out of Europe too. It's called minding our own business. And you will find smart people among us...
I think your sense of proportion is skewed. Many Americans believe that Iraq was involved in 911. Hitler started WW2 over a manufactured provocation. 911 was not manufactured - you no doubt saw it on TV.
I personally do not believe Iraq was involved for various reasons - but unlike you I would not presume to think that only a dummy could disagree with me. That will cost you ultimately - think military for a moment - the worst sin in tactics (and strategy) is to underestimate your enemy. Never assume something as silly as that - you'll end up reading every situation wrong - or turn into a fanatic.
If you think about it real carefully you have fallen into the same trap as the people you despise - like bush. Every bad guy is a Hitler. That is exactly what Clinton/Bush have said about Slobo and Sadaam. T'aint so my friend. We're very fortunate in this world that we produce few real Hitlers.
cordially
Reb
I think that one of the big differences between Europe and USA is that of faith. You find that 6% of the english population believe in god, 9% of the swedish and so on. I read that over 60% of the people voting for Bush are believing christians.
I do not believe, but I respect other poeples rights to do so. But like most non-believing europeans I get scared when I hear politicans basing their actions on religious grounds.
Guess we would like to see Martin Sheen as president. LOL. It is your call, not ours. In Europe we now have the most important election ever to the european parliament. During this term we will move closer to a federation than ever. Still it is predicted to be a record low in voting participation. We obviously do not care who will run the EU, whos the president or what power that office will have. We are all guilty to let bad politicians get to office.
But the basic problem is that our choices are as bad as the american ones.
As for Hitler, I do read and understand german. It does not help to understand how intelligent people took the racist bullshit to them. But as I have come to understand at least in my family, it was not about that.
I´m writing a book about my family history. If not published at least for my kids and future generations to read. This is a great place to find facts and leads. I´m putting up my camp here.
I´m in for the beers.
I do not believe, but I respect other poeples rights to do so. But like most non-believing europeans I get scared when I hear politicans basing their actions on religious grounds.
Guess we would like to see Martin Sheen as president. LOL. It is your call, not ours. In Europe we now have the most important election ever to the european parliament. During this term we will move closer to a federation than ever. Still it is predicted to be a record low in voting participation. We obviously do not care who will run the EU, whos the president or what power that office will have. We are all guilty to let bad politicians get to office.
But the basic problem is that our choices are as bad as the american ones.
As for Hitler, I do read and understand german. It does not help to understand how intelligent people took the racist bullshit to them. But as I have come to understand at least in my family, it was not about that.
I´m writing a book about my family history. If not published at least for my kids and future generations to read. This is a great place to find facts and leads. I´m putting up my camp here.
I´m in for the beers.
-
sid guttridge
- on "time out"
- Posts: 8055
- Joined: Thu Oct 10, 2002 4:54 am
Hi Anton,
I think you may have the figures for regular British church attendance rather than belief in God.
In public opinion surveys a clear majority of Britons claim to believe in some form of God, but very few attend church. The Church of England, which has official status, has about a million people attending Sunday services out of a population of 58 million. Add in Catholics and other believers, including Moslems, and you have your 6%.
I think in much of Western Europe people no longer believe that morality and social worth are necessarily dependent on religious belief. However, in the USA a more "backward" or "fundamentalist" belief in formal religion still seems widespread and still sometimes influences the actions of some of those in power.
Cheers,
Sid.
I think you may have the figures for regular British church attendance rather than belief in God.
In public opinion surveys a clear majority of Britons claim to believe in some form of God, but very few attend church. The Church of England, which has official status, has about a million people attending Sunday services out of a population of 58 million. Add in Catholics and other believers, including Moslems, and you have your 6%.
I think in much of Western Europe people no longer believe that morality and social worth are necessarily dependent on religious belief. However, in the USA a more "backward" or "fundamentalist" belief in formal religion still seems widespread and still sometimes influences the actions of some of those in power.
Cheers,
Sid.
Sid
It (faith )influences the actions of some of us little people too! I'll put my money on two thousand years of Western Civilization. Old Pascal (or was it Descartes?) had it right. I find it significant that after many years of studying the history of many different eras, that each one considered itself fin de siecle - the most modern and wisest. Yup... That's why I stick with what works.
I admit though - that Jerry Falwell and Co. have done more harm to the faith than most heretics could ever dream of doing. That's why a lot of folks stay home on Sunday and read their Bible in private. Can't say I blame them.
btw - I got an interesting tip sheet from a friend in Iraq. Its specific to guys who do what you and I used to do. Sounds like it is bit hairy (and lucrative) to be involved in that mess - at least in the private sector.
Let me know and I'll PM you a copy.
cheers
Reb
It (faith )influences the actions of some of us little people too! I'll put my money on two thousand years of Western Civilization. Old Pascal (or was it Descartes?) had it right. I find it significant that after many years of studying the history of many different eras, that each one considered itself fin de siecle - the most modern and wisest. Yup... That's why I stick with what works.
I admit though - that Jerry Falwell and Co. have done more harm to the faith than most heretics could ever dream of doing. That's why a lot of folks stay home on Sunday and read their Bible in private. Can't say I blame them.
btw - I got an interesting tip sheet from a friend in Iraq. Its specific to guys who do what you and I used to do. Sounds like it is bit hairy (and lucrative) to be involved in that mess - at least in the private sector.
Let me know and I'll PM you a copy.
cheers
Reb