View Full Version : World War II
MLabreche
04-04-2010, 08:39 PM
What if Japan didn't attack us, should we have minded our own business when 50 million people were getting killed? If so, wouldn't this have been a little cowardly?
Nate-ForLiberty
04-04-2010, 08:43 PM
your fallacy is in the assumption that America was minding it's own business before we officially entered the war. Pearl Harbor was designed to get the support of the American people, but other American "forces" were already deeply involved in Europe. The people who run America are directly responsible for the conditions that led to the extermination of 50 million people. We should have been non-interventionists before WW2 and WW1.
Paulfan05
04-04-2010, 08:45 PM
We should not police the world if you feel we should then get congress to sign a real war declaration first.
Slutter McGee
04-04-2010, 08:47 PM
No we should not have minded our own business. I am not a complete non-interventionist though, so maybe my opinion doesn't count. Germany and Japan were both serious threats engaged in genocide. It was a declared war. It was fought to win, and when we were done, outside of a couple military bases, we did not rebuild either country in our image.
Sincerely,
Slutter McGee
Fox McCloud
04-04-2010, 08:48 PM
we basically forced Japan's hand in WWII; we did everything short of actually firing upon them to get them to attack--finally they got so aggravated they launched the attack on Pearl Harbor.
I'm not as familiar with the European side of things other than to say we indirectly helped and funded the UK, so we weren't totally neutral.
If we had 100% neutrality, I often wonder how things would have turned out---there's little doubt in my mind that if we had minded our own business that the USSR would have never formed, and, consequently, the Cold War.
sofia
04-04-2010, 08:50 PM
What if Japan didn't attack us, should we have minded our own business when 50 million people were getting killed? If so, wouldn't this have been a little cowardly?
most of those 50 million died AS A RESULT OF US ENTRY INTO THE WAR.
Before FDR manipulated us into the war, the casualties were mainly sustained by Russian, Japanese, Chinese, and German soldiers. The war would have ended in 1942 had we stayed out.
Once we got in, massive killing of German and Japanese civilians balloned the death totals....not to mention 400,000 dead Americans whose lives were wasted.
It was the West that turned a minor conflict between Germany and Poland (in which Germany was justified)...into a senseless bloodbath that saved communism and established the roots of the present day EU, UN, IMF etc.
Slutter McGee
04-04-2010, 08:52 PM
most of those 50 million died AS A RESULT OF US ENTRY INTO THE WAR.
Before FDR manipulated us into the war, the casualties were mainly sustained by Russian, Japanese, Chinese, and German soldiers. The war would have ended in 1942 had we stayed out.
Once we got in, massive killing of German and Japanese civilians balloned the death totals....not to mention 400,000 dead Americans whose lives were wasted.
It was the West that turned a minor conflict between Germany and Poland (in which Germany was justified)...into a senseless bloodbath that saved communism and established the roots of the present day EU, UN, IMF etc.
Fucking seriously? nevermind. I am not even going to say anything. Just gonna shake my head in amazment.
Sincerely,
Slutter McGee
freshjiva
04-04-2010, 08:52 PM
Hey Nate, please do everyone a favor and stay away from a career in public/private/homeschooling education. Thanks.
ClayTrainor
04-04-2010, 08:52 PM
YouTube - Myths of World Wars (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ke2hloDrb1c)
YouTube - Freedomain Radio - Myths of World Wars Part 2 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e5EsnQUybKU)
sofia
04-04-2010, 08:54 PM
Fucking seriously? nevermind. I am not even going to say anything. Just gonna shake my head in amazment.
Sincerely,
Slutter McGee
From Hitler's last testament just before taking his own life....
"It is untrue that I or anyone else in Germany wanted war in 1939. It was wanted and provoked solely by international statesmen either of Jewish origin or working for Jewish interests. I have made too many offers for the limitation and control of armaments, which posterity will not be cowardly enough always to disregard, for responsibility for the outbreak of this war to be placed on me. Nor have I ever wished that, after the appalling First World War, there would ever be a second against either England or America. Centuries will go by, but from the ruins of our towns and monuments the hatred of those ultimately responsible will always grow anew against the people whom we have to thank for all this: international Jewry and its henchmen. "
aravoth
04-04-2010, 08:57 PM
What if Japan didn't attack us, should we have minded our own business when 50 million people were getting killed? If so, wouldn't this have been a little cowardly?
America was not minding it's own business before Pearl Harbor, in fact we were financing the Allies, and the Nazi's at the same time. Even During the period when the United States had officially entered the War, American interests were financing the Third Reich.
An American company even sold a patented additive to the Nazi's which was used in the Gas chambers at every death camp across europe, making it possible to kill millions of people in one the most grotesque ways ever concieved.
So you tell me, should we have minded our own business?
Danke
04-04-2010, 09:04 PM
America was not minding it's own business before Pearl Harbor, in fact we were financing the Allies, and the Nazi's at the same time. Even During the period when the United States had officially entered the War, American interests were financing the Third Reich.
An American company even sold a patented additive to the Nazi's which was used in the Gas chambers at every death camp across europe, making it possible to kill millions of people in one the most grotesque ways ever concieved.
So you tell me, should we have minded our own business?
IBM supplied them them the numbering system for the prisoners.
And we had the Flying Tigers training in China before we entered WWII. etc. etc.
CountryboyRonPaul
04-04-2010, 09:05 PM
Stalingrad was the turning point in WWII.
Not D-Day.
I think Europe could have possibly fended off Hitler without us.
And who knows how history would have changed if the Soviets had completely expended themselves in the process.
speciallyblend
04-04-2010, 09:11 PM
if i am correct we kinda forced japan into war by using trade sanctions!! we basically cornered japan into war!!
Anti Federalist
04-04-2010, 09:11 PM
America was not minding it's own business before Pearl Harbor, in fact we were financing the Allies, and the Nazi's at the same time. Even During the period when the United States had officially entered the War, American interests were financing the Third Reich.
An American company even sold a patented additive to the Nazi's which was used in the Gas chambers at every death camp across europe, making it possible to kill millions of people in one the most grotesque ways ever concieved.
So you tell me, should we have minded our own business?
IBM supplied them them the numbering system for the prisoners.
And we had the Flying Tigers training in China before we entered WWII. etc. etc.
Some will say that corporations can do no wrong and that they were just supplying a market demand.
sofia
04-04-2010, 09:11 PM
Stalingrad was the turning point in WWII.
Not D-Day.
I think Europe could have possibly fended off Hitler without us.
And who knows how history would have changed if the Soviets had completely expended themselves in the process.
without US military aid, the Soviet Union would have been finished after the 1942 thaw.
No way in hell Stalin could have held off Hitler without a second front to divert German troops....and the massive influx of US armored trucks, tanks, and tommy guns.
The war would have ended in 1942. All Germany ever wanted was to reclaim its stolen territory and live in peace with UK
sofia
04-04-2010, 09:13 PM
if i am correct we kinda forced japan into war by using trade sanctions!! we basically cornered japan into war!!
the Zionists arond FDR knew that the only way to get us into the war was the backddoor of Japan.
Japan was relentlessly provoked and corned into making the Pearl Harbor attack.
Germany and Japan were bound to a mutual defense pact.
aravoth
04-04-2010, 09:13 PM
Some will say that corporations can do no wrong and that they were just supplying a market demand.
Yes, but a corporation is a goverment sposered entity, in fact a corporation cannot exist without the government. Which flies right in the face of that arguement.
Anti Federalist
04-04-2010, 09:14 PM
There would have been no WWII had there never been a WWI.
Wilsonian democratization had just as much to with it as FDR.
sofia
04-04-2010, 09:15 PM
There would have been no WWII had there never been a WWI.
Wilsonian democratization had just as much to with it as FDR.
In WW1...Wilson promised Germany "peace without victory" is she would lay down arms.
Once the gullible Germans disarmed....they were raped at Versailles and then occupied for 10 years by the French.
Anti Federalist
04-04-2010, 09:16 PM
Yes, but a corporation is a goverment sposered entity, in fact a corporation cannot exist without the government. Which flies right in the face of that arguement.
There is no argument.
I agree.
All I said is that "some would say".
I used an absurd statement to draw out the replies that I, in essence, agree with.
A dirty trick, I know.
akforme
04-04-2010, 09:16 PM
We also got into WW1 so Wilson could bring the "league of Nations". Now at the time the war was pretty much in the trenches, and if a treaty had been made it would have been pretty fair. By America getting into WW1 we pushed the allies and the result was the treaty of Versailles Now say what you want, that led to the rise of hitler and stalin.
So maybe if America had minded it's own business a long time before WW2 might never have happened.
But aside from that,the truth is so hard to figure out around WW2 that I think arguments from both sides are valid. I have changed my view on ww2 since becoming libertarian. I no longer believe we needed to drop the bombs nor do I believe Perl Harbor was an un-provoked attacked. We were doing plenty of provoking.
Slutter McGee
04-04-2010, 09:16 PM
The war would have ended in 1942. All Germany ever wanted was to reclaim its stolen territory and live in peace with UK
I am trying hard to refrain from insults. So I am going to tell you what you sound like rather than what you are. You sound like a wacked out, anti-semite. And I don't like it.
Its one thing to believe that we should not be funding the Jewish state, as I don't believe we should be funding ANY other state. Its another to defend a man who tried to fucking exterminate them. Seriously. You are fucking nuts.
Sincerely,
Slutter McGee
sofia
04-04-2010, 09:19 PM
I am trying hard to refrain from insults. So I am going to tell you what you sound like rather than what you are. You sound like a wacked out, anti-semite. And I don't like it.
Its one thing to believe that we should not be funding the Jewish state, as I don't believe we should be funding ANY other state. Its another to defend a man who tried to fucking exterminate them. Seriously. You are fucking nuts.
Sincerely,
Slutter McGee
What evidence is there of this "extirmination"????
The only thing that those "gas chambers" exterminated was typhous spreading lice....
typhous killed millions of inmates as war conditions in bombed out Germany deteriorated...
The "extirmination" myth originated in a Soviet propaganda report released after the war ended.
From Hitler's last testament just before taking his own life....
"It is untrue that I or anyone else in Germany wanted war in 1939. It was wanted and provoked solely by international statesmen either of Jewish origin or working for Jewish interests. I have made too many offers for the limitation and control of armaments, which posterity will not be cowardly enough always to disregard, for responsibility for the outbreak of this war to be placed on me. Nor have I ever wished that, after the appalling First World War, there would ever be a second against either England or America. Centuries will go by, but from the ruins of our towns and monuments the hatred of those ultimately responsible will always grow anew against the people whom we have to thank for all this: international Jewry and its henchmen. "
Well if Hitler said that about the Jews it must be true.
MLabreche
04-04-2010, 09:20 PM
I am trying hard to refrain from insults. So I am going to tell you what you sound like rather than what you are. You sound like a wacked out, anti-semite. And I don't like it.
Its one thing to believe that we should not be funding the Jewish state, as I don't believe we should be funding ANY other state. Its another to defend a man who tried to fucking exterminate them. Seriously. You are fucking nuts.
Sincerely,
Slutter McGee
It's kind of where I was leaning. Even if WW2 was basically our fault and if we didn't do everything in our power to make Japan attack us, should we have gone in anyway?
Anti Federalist
04-04-2010, 09:20 PM
Aw shit...
Hot topics in three...two...one...
nate895
04-04-2010, 09:22 PM
There would have been no WWII had there never been a WWI.
Wilsonian democratization had just as much to with it as FDR.
There would have been no WWII if the peace in WWI hadn't been so punitive towards the Central Powers.
Furthermore, the allies could have won the war in 1939 because they had over 100 full strength divisions on the western front, with many of those being mechanized, and all that stood between them and Berlin were 26 half-strength German divisions, very few of which were mechanized. Of course, the British and the French thought the whole war was a joke and sat around having tea, wine, and cheese parties among the top officer corps. Then they totally blew the Battle of France by literally falling for every trap Hitler setup. I mean, Hitler was so vulnerable in those early battles that if the allies hadn't danced right along with him the whole way.
nate895
04-04-2010, 09:25 PM
What evidence is there of this "extirmination"????
The only thing that those "gas chambers" exterminated was typhous spreading lice....
typhous killed millions of inmates as war conditions in bombed out Germany deteriorated...
The "extirmination" myth originated in a Soviet propaganda report released after the war ended.
Really now? What about the millions of witnesses? Historically speaking, if we don't know the holocaust happened, then the Roman Empire is worst than a fairy tale.
almantimes2
04-04-2010, 09:25 PM
Zero
Imperial
04-04-2010, 09:26 PM
There would have been no WWII if the peace in WWI hadn't been so punitive towards the Central Powers.
I was about to post something similar to this. I would have supported intervention in WWII for the sole reason of the genocide of the Jews occurring. However, the key reason for WWII ever happening was because of World War I and our intervention in that war. We gave France and Britain the ability to land such a crushing defeat on Germany to make such horrible surrender conditions.
Anti Federalist
04-04-2010, 09:26 PM
There would have been no WWII if the peace in WWI hadn't been so punitive towards the Central Powers.
Furthermore, the allies could have won the war in 1939 because they had over 100 full strength divisions on the western front, with many of those being mechanized, and all that stood between them and Berlin were 26 half-strength German divisions, very few of which were mechanized. Of course, the British and the French thought the whole war was a joke and sat around having tea, wine, and cheese parties among the top officer corps. Then they totally blew the Battle of France by literally falling for every trap Hitler setup. I mean, Hitler was so vulnerable in those early battles that if the allies hadn't danced right along with him the whole way.
Like so many stunning failures of government, ask yourself, honestly, is incompetence, sloth and boneheaded decision making really at fault here?
Or is there more to the picture?
Slutter McGee
04-04-2010, 09:26 PM
What sucks is that this was a decent topic before people started coming in here and fucking defending Hitler.
Sincerely,
Slutter McGee
nate895
04-04-2010, 09:26 PM
[QUOTE=sofia;2628466]What evidence is there of this "extirmination"????
QUOTE]
How about the HUNDREDS of testimonials from holocaust survivors?
They are part of the evil Jewish conspiracy to overthrow the west and establish total dominion over our lives, don't you know?
sofia
04-04-2010, 09:28 PM
[QUOTE=sofia;2628466]What evidence is there of this "extirmination"????
QUOTE]
How about the HUNDREDS of testimonials from holocaust survivors?
hmmmmm
How exactly does one "survive" a gas chamber????
How do we account for these millions of "survivors?"...Doent that alone disprove the extirmination theory?......
They survived their stay in an INTERNMENT camp...not an extirmination camp.
pcosmar
04-04-2010, 09:28 PM
I am trying hard to refrain from insults. So I am going to tell you what you sound like rather than what you are. You sound like a wacked out, anti-semite. And I don't like it.
Its one thing to believe that we should not be funding the Jewish state, as I don't believe we should be funding ANY other state. Its another to defend a man who tried to fucking exterminate them. Seriously. You are fucking nuts.
Sincerely,
Slutter McGee
I certainly don't defend Hitler,
But if it were not for Wilson dragging us into WWI and the Treaty of Versailles, nd the League of Nations (forerunner of the UN) Hitler would have been a no name nobody.
He would have never come to Power. Now when you add that several "interests" were activly funding him and aiding him. It does look suspicious.
That is in no way condoning him. Just rational observation.
almantimes2
04-04-2010, 09:30 PM
[QUOTE=almantimes2;2628482]
hmmmmm
How exactly does one "survive" a gas chamber????
How do we account for these millions of "survivors?"...Doent that alone disprove the extirmination theory?......
They survived their stay in an INTERNMENT camp...not an extirmination camp.
They're in business reports of people selling crematoriums, German prison camp wardens sending pitching fits about the crematoriums not working as advertised. They're in German War Department memorandums detailing the gasketing of truck exhaust pipes to "improve the strangulating effect of the trucks" and in marching orders to round up Jews in Poland, Czechoslovakia, France, Finland, Belgium, Denmark.
nate895
04-04-2010, 09:30 PM
Like so many stunning failures of government, ask yourself, honestly, is incompetence, sloth and boneheaded decision making really at fault here?
Or is there more to the picture?
Given military history, I'd have to say that it is entirely possible that there is nothing more to the picture. Sadly most appointments to the General's Corps wind up being politically motivated, especially in peacetime. Some generals in the early stages of WWII shouldn't have been in charge of a small platoon, let alone commanding an entire wing of the Allied Army.
sofia
04-04-2010, 09:31 PM
What sucks is that this was a decent topic before people started coming in here and fucking defending Hitler.
Sincerely,
Slutter McGee
ever occur to you that the same global elites who LIED to you about Global Warming.....who LIED to you about the FED.....who LIED to you about WMD's......and so many other topics.......may have fudged the truth about WW2??
Remember...it was Hitler who dismantled Germany's FED and issued debt free currency.
There lies the rub!
nate895
04-04-2010, 09:33 PM
[QUOTE=almantimes2;2628482]
hmmmmm
How exactly does one "survive" a gas chamber????
How do we account for these millions of "survivors?"...Doent that alone disprove the extirmination theory?......
They survived their stay in an INTERNMENT camp...not an extirmination camp.
Oh...that makes it all better. Forced labor to death is so much better than the gas chamber, I just can't wait to get in line.
If you'd actually read any of the testimonials, then you'd know that the Nazis would separate out those who were fit to work and those who weren't, and send those who couldn't to the gas chambers, and then send those could to work until they starved to death.
sofia
04-04-2010, 09:33 PM
Another Hitler fairy tale debunked.....
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/othersports/olympics/6008196/Adolf-Hitler-did-shake-hands-with-Jesse-Owens.html
Adolf Hitler 'did shake hands with Jesse Owens'
A veteran German sports reporter has claimed that Adolf Hitler did in fact shake hands with black US athlete Jesse Owens at the 1936 Berlin Olympics.
Published: 7:03AM BST 11 Aug 2009
Jesse Owens: Owens felt the newspapers of the day reported 'unfairly' on Hitler's attitude towards him,
At the time, it was reported that Hitler had stormed out of the stadium furious that Owens, who had just run his way to the first of four gold medals in the 100 metres, had beaten his Aryan sportsmen.
However, Siegfried Mischner, 83, said that Owens carried around a photograph in his wallet of Hitler shaking his hand before he left the stadium.
Mischner, who was a reporter at the time, claimed Owens showed him the photograph and told him: "That was one of my most beautiful moments."
He said: "It was taken behind the honour stand and so not captured by the world's press. But I saw it, I saw him shaking Hitler's hand.
"The predominating opinion in post-war Germany was that Hitler had ignored Owens.
"We therefore decided not to report on the photo. The consensus was that Hitler had to continue to be painted in a bad light in relation to Owens."
Mischner's claims cannot be verified because all other witnesses, including Owens, are dead.
Owens, who died in 1980 aged 66, was the son of sharecroppers and won four track and field gold medals - the 100m, the long jump, the 200m and the relay race - at Berlin.
He insisted that he had not been snubbed by Hitler but made no reference to meeting him and shaking hands.
"When I passed the Chancellor he arose, waved his hand at me, and I waved back at him. I think the writers showed bad taste in criticising the man of the hour in Germany," he said.
aravoth
04-04-2010, 09:38 PM
There is no argument.
I agree.
All I said is that "some would say".
I used an absurd statement to draw out the replies that I, in essence, agree with.
A dirty trick, I know.
I see what ya did thar!
AmericaFyeah92
04-04-2010, 09:38 PM
Ugh....
-People who are defending Hitler FUCK OFF
-People denying the Holocaust FUCK OFF
There is a debate to be had here, but you guys are ruining it. Why hasn't someone cracked down on the Jew-hating here? It gives Ron Paul a bad friggin name. Stormfront will be happy to have you.
Anyway, as for the original OP, those 50 million people were largely the result of the War's escalation. You phrase it as if Hitler and Hirohito killed 50 million people via genocide. And what do you mean by "cowardly"? I consider incinerating two cities with nuclear weapons pretty cowardly myself.
nate895
04-04-2010, 09:38 PM
Another Hitler fairy tale debunked.....
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/othersports/olympics/6008196/Adolf-Hitler-did-shake-hands-with-Jesse-Owens.html
Adolf Hitler 'did shake hands with Jesse Owens'
A veteran German sports reporter has claimed that Adolf Hitler did in fact shake hands with black US athlete Jesse Owens at the 1936 Berlin Olympics.
Published: 7:03AM BST 11 Aug 2009
Jesse Owens: Owens felt the newspapers of the day reported 'unfairly' on Hitler's attitude towards him,
At the time, it was reported that Hitler had stormed out of the stadium furious that Owens, who had just run his way to the first of four gold medals in the 100 metres, had beaten his Aryan sportsmen.
However, Siegfried Mischner, 83, said that Owens carried around a photograph in his wallet of Hitler shaking his hand before he left the stadium.
Mischner, who was a reporter at the time, claimed Owens showed him the photograph and told him: "That was one of my most beautiful moments."
He said: "It was taken behind the honour stand and so not captured by the world's press. But I saw it, I saw him shaking Hitler's hand.
"The predominating opinion in post-war Germany was that Hitler had ignored Owens.
"We therefore decided not to report on the photo. The consensus was that Hitler had to continue to be painted in a bad light in relation to Owens."
Mischner's claims cannot be verified because all other witnesses, including Owens, are dead.
Owens, who died in 1980 aged 66, was the son of sharecroppers and won four track and field gold medals - the 100m, the long jump, the 200m and the relay race - at Berlin.
He insisted that he had not been snubbed by Hitler but made no reference to meeting him and shaking hands.
"When I passed the Chancellor he arose, waved his hand at me, and I waved back at him. I think the writers showed bad taste in criticising the man of the hour in Germany," he said.
Oh...I now feel so much better about Hitler. Even if it were true...so?
AmericaFyeah92
04-04-2010, 09:38 PM
Another Hitler fairy tale debunked.....
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/othersports/olympics/6008196/Adolf-Hitler-did-shake-hands-with-Jesse-Owens.html
Adolf Hitler 'did shake hands with Jesse Owens'
A veteran German sports reporter has claimed that Adolf Hitler did in fact shake hands with black US athlete Jesse Owens at the 1936 Berlin Olympics.
Published: 7:03AM BST 11 Aug 2009
Jesse Owens: Owens felt the newspapers of the day reported 'unfairly' on Hitler's attitude towards him,
At the time, it was reported that Hitler had stormed out of the stadium furious that Owens, who had just run his way to the first of four gold medals in the 100 metres, had beaten his Aryan sportsmen.
However, Siegfried Mischner, 83, said that Owens carried around a photograph in his wallet of Hitler shaking his hand before he left the stadium.
Mischner, who was a reporter at the time, claimed Owens showed him the photograph and told him: "That was one of my most beautiful moments."
He said: "It was taken behind the honour stand and so not captured by the world's press. But I saw it, I saw him shaking Hitler's hand.
"The predominating opinion in post-war Germany was that Hitler had ignored Owens.
"We therefore decided not to report on the photo. The consensus was that Hitler had to continue to be painted in a bad light in relation to Owens."
Mischner's claims cannot be verified because all other witnesses, including Owens, are dead.
Owens, who died in 1980 aged 66, was the son of sharecroppers and won four track and field gold medals - the 100m, the long jump, the 200m and the relay race - at Berlin.
He insisted that he had not been snubbed by Hitler but made no reference to meeting him and shaking hands.
"When I passed the Chancellor he arose, waved his hand at me, and I waved back at him. I think the writers showed bad taste in criticising the man of the hour in Germany," he said.
Sofia....dude
Just stop.
AmericaFyeah92
04-04-2010, 09:39 PM
Oh...I now feel so much better about Hitler. Even if it were true...so?
Can those of us who want to have a real discussion start a new thread?
Bergie Bergeron
04-04-2010, 09:39 PM
I dare you to go say that in Peter Schiff's face.
freshjiva
04-04-2010, 09:40 PM
Slutter, just ignore sophia. I just read his/her posts for good comedy. :D
Bergie Bergeron
04-04-2010, 09:43 PM
Here's the Southern Avenger on this:
YouTube - SA Radio - World War 2 and American Intervention (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XFjEGst1yZg)
sofia
04-04-2010, 09:43 PM
Oh...I now feel so much better about Hitler. Even if it were true...so?
it proves that lies can easily become institutionalized. Why dismiss the possibility that everything we were taught in school about Hitler is all lies?
The fact that people here are telling me to fuck and acting as iff they want to lynch me is indictive of the level of emotion driven brainwashing...
exactly like Plato's allegory of the cave.
How many times have we been fed this crap about Hitler "storming out of the stadium" after Jesse Owens won?....How many people believe this?
So, is it not at least in the realm of possibity that other lies have been instilled in your head since early childhood...when your school first showed you a "holocaust" film?
YouTube - Charles Lindbergh's - September 11, 1941 Des Moines Speech (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K_F48oaOskI)
noxagol
04-04-2010, 11:03 PM
World War 2 was a direct result of World War 1. World War 1 ended like it did because of US entering the war. Had we not entered the war, then the stand still that was going on would have never been broken. Russia would have remained strong enough to not fall to the Bolshevik revolution. Germany and Britain and France would have come to a peace agreement as equals rather than a surrender with a winner and a loser. Wilson did pretty much everything he could to get Germany to attack anything American so we could enter the war. He wanted to enter the war and win it so he could have a seat at the deal table.
Had we not entered into World War 2, the Nazi's and the Communists would have turned each other into piles of meat.
TLDR, no, as a nation we should have remained neutral, REAL neutral, not the neutral we were, which wasn't really neutral as we supplied Russia and Britain with large amounts of supplies. The government is obligated to defend this country, and this country alone. If a group of people want to band together and go fight on their own, that's their business and is always an option of course.
revolutionisnow
04-04-2010, 11:27 PM
YouTube - Multiracial SS Waffen Army (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=78826G28GBg)
Non whites fighting for white supremacy? Doesn't make sense....or maybe that is a lie and they all just wanted self rule?
"Pride in one's own race - and that does not imply contempt for other races - is also a normal and healthy sentiment. I have never regarded the Chinese or the Japanese as being inferior to ourselves. They belong to ancient civilizations, and I admit freely that their past history is superior to our own. They have the right to be proud of their past, just as we have the right to be proud of the civilization to which we belong."
http://www.radioislam.net/historia/hitler/testam/eng/testa.htm
Son of Detroit
04-04-2010, 11:38 PM
Lol @ defending Hitler and the Nazis on a Ron Paul forum.
nate895
04-04-2010, 11:49 PM
World War 2 was a direct result of World War 1. World War 1 ended like it did because of US entering the war. Had we not entered the war, then the stand still that was going on would have never been broken. Russia would have remained strong enough to not fall to the Bolshevik revolution. Germany and Britain and France would have come to a peace agreement as equals rather than a surrender with a winner and a loser. Wilson did pretty much everything he could to get Germany to attack anything American so we could enter the war. He wanted to enter the war and win it so he could have a seat at the deal table.
Had we not entered into World War 2, the Nazi's and the Communists would have turned each other into piles of meat.
TLDR, no, as a nation we should have remained neutral, REAL neutral, not the neutral we were, which wasn't really neutral as we supplied Russia and Britain with large amounts of supplies. The government is obligated to defend this country, and this country alone. If a group of people want to band together and go fight on their own, that's their business and is always an option of course.
Problems in your analysis: The October Revolution had little to do with US intervention, and more to do with the crazy political and social situation at the time. After the Tsar left the throne, the Russian military collapsed. All that stood between the Germans and the capital Petrograd (St. Petersburg now and under the Tsars, Leningrad under the communists) when the communists started their take over were a few disheartened divisions who were in full retreat mode.
Russia would have been out of the war in any situation. The Central Powers would have won the war quite handily if it weren't for US intervention after the Russians surrendered. The only reason why they didn't win the war in early 1918 is because Ludendorff moved too late with his new men from the Russian front, and the United States Expeditionary Force arrived in force when the Germans were just miles from Paris.
TastyWheat
04-05-2010, 12:01 AM
I'm much less familiar with the reasons for Japan's aggression in WWII but we definitely laid the groundwork for Hitler to come into power. According to Wikipedia Japan was in need of natural resources, as they had little of their own, so if the US and other nations were limiting or refusing to trade with Japan that would be the perfect excuse for them to take the resources they needed by force.
When goods do not cross borders, soldiers will.
- Frederic Bastiat
nate895
04-05-2010, 12:11 AM
I'm much less familiar with the reasons for Japan's aggression in WWII but we definitely laid the groundwork for Hitler to come into power. According to Wikipedia Japan was in need of natural resources, as they had little of their own, so if the US and other nations were limiting or refusing to trade with Japan that would be the perfect excuse for them to take the resources they needed by force.
When goods do not cross borders, soldiers will.
- Frederic Bastiat
The Japanese went to war with us because we had an oil embargo on them after they invaded China. Japan had been bent on empire ever since they came out of isolation, which was our doing (the coming out isolation, not necessarily imperial ambition). They fought on both sides of the European powers, basically in an effort to gain territory in the Pacific. They were allies in WWI to get control of German Pacific colonies. They gambled wrong in WWII though and picked the wrong side of the European conflict.
Imperial
04-05-2010, 12:13 AM
ever occur to you that the same global elites who LIED to you about Global Warming.....who LIED to you about the FED.....who LIED to you about WMD's......and so many other topics.......may have fudged the truth about WW2??
Remember...it was Hitler who dismantled Germany's FED and issued debt free currency.
There lies the rub!
Have you ever studied Hitler's economy? It was not free market....
Your statements lack practically all nuance whatsoever. Make an academic case for your claims, not sheer speculation (which I think an academic case would illustrate that this is the extent such a position can proceed). As it stands, I believe your claims are extremely absurd.
revolutionisnow
04-05-2010, 12:18 AM
So the communist economy was free market? Or the US economy was or is?
"Germany's unforgivable crime before the Second World War was her attempt to extricate her economic power from the world's trading system and to create her own exchange mechanism which would deny world finance its opportunity to profit."
— Winston Churchill
emazur
04-05-2010, 12:50 AM
Keep in mind that the US involvement in WWII involved allying with the Soviet Union. A point that Harry Browne would make is that though Western Europe was free after WWII ended, the US funded and armed the Soviet Union which spread communism after WWII into Eastern Europe, China, and Korea. That's a pretty damn big chunk of the world. Oh, and there was also that 50 year Cold War we had to contend with.
Where did the Soviets get their nukes from? This is a controversial subject, but you may be interested in the views of Major George Racey Jordan, author of "From Major Jordan's Diaries". He was a lend lease officer during WWII, and his first hand accounts of the items being transferred to the Soviet Union eventually led to this 1949 Time story in which Jordan is quoted as saying:
"It is now apparent that Harry Hopkins gave Russia the A-bomb on a platter," said Jordan.
Read more: http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,854011,00.html#ixzz0kCjMS6kQ
An article from 50 years later:
Unfortunately, later evidence proved Jordan’s charges correct: The Soviets had indeed been given large amounts of nuclear materials and had stolen documents by the planeload.
http://www.americanheritage.com/articles/magazine/ah/1999/8/1999_8_94.shtml
FDR blockaded Japan and seized Japanese financial assets. Had he not done that Japan would not have attacked Pearl Harbor and we could have stayed out of WWII. The Japanese were working on an atom bomb (perhaps w/ technology received from the Soviets?)
http://search.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/nn20060804a2.html
and given that they already attacked us (albeit with provocation), I don't have an objection to the decision to nuke Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
GunnyFreedom
04-05-2010, 02:40 AM
What sucks is that this was a decent topic before people started coming in here and fucking defending Hitler.
Sincerely,
Slutter McGee
It has been my experience that the more you respond to it, the more bile it spews.
Ricky201
04-05-2010, 03:20 AM
It has been my experience that the more you respond to it, the more bile it spews.
Maybe we should practice "non-intervention" towards those that are defenders of Hitler.
GunnyFreedom
04-05-2010, 03:31 AM
Maybe we should practice "non-intervention" towards those that are defenders of Hitler.
reaching out with reasoned discourse is not exactly akin to military intervention, but some people are impervious to reason, and any such attempt to bridge the divide with them serves only to multiply the disconnect and the vulgarity of the discourse. with such, yes, I believe that silence is the best remedy.
Why dismiss the possibility that everything we were taught in school about Hitler is all lies?
Sofia, you do understand that when Nazi soldiers started hearing rumors of some shady stuff going on they kept their mouths shut out of fear that they may find out first hand if they questioned the rumors?
I will say I think Stalin and Soviet Russia was a much bigger stain on humanity, but that being said Hitler was far from a good guy. We all know that history is written by the victors, but to think Nazi Germany and Hitler are complete fabrications is absurd at best. The testimony is too vast amongst far too many different persons, cultures, and countries to be dismissed in the manner you are suggesting.
sofia
04-05-2010, 07:41 AM
Have you ever studied Hitler's economy? It was not free market....
Your statements lack practically all nuance whatsoever. Make an academic case for your claims, not sheer speculation (which I think an academic case would illustrate that this is the extent such a position can proceed). As it stands, I believe your claims are extremely absurd.
Hitler's economy was the strongest and most dynamic in the world. His policies lifted Germany up from ruins while FDR's America remained mired in Depression.
The economy in Germany was much freer than FDR's. A debt free currency ushered in explosive growth with no inflation. There's your "academic case."
You have been trained to salivate at the mere mention of Hitler's name...ever since you were a child. That's not "academic"...thats Pavlovian conditioning and you dont even realize it.
Question the facts and open your mind. We live in the matrix!
fatjohn
04-05-2010, 07:50 AM
Lest not forget that Japan was very tempted to attack china and always was. So with america pushing them or not they would have gone into war methinks. And with no US the UK would have a though job to defend its kolonies in africa against italy and in azia against japan. So they would be tempted to sign an agreement with hitler after hitlers gesture in Dieppe in 41. The european war would then be one front Germany vs Russia with germany ending up victorious. Japan would make greater advancements in azia gaining foothold in China and perhaps UK kolonies and italy would either be defeated by the UK in africa or would get help of germany later on. The world would probably then be left with four superpowers Japan controling south asia, either Italy or UK controlling africa, Germany controlling europe and US in control of america with no bruises of war.
This is my fifty cents. Does it seem better? Not for me it does not, I live in Belgium. Lol
paulim
04-05-2010, 08:12 AM
YouTube - Charles Lindbergh's - September 11, 1941 Des Moines Speech (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K_F48oaOskI)
What a man! Where are the Lindberghs of today?
noxagol
04-05-2010, 08:42 AM
Lest not forget that Japan was very tempted to attack china and always was. So with america pushing them or not they would have gone into war methinks. And with no US the UK would have a though job to defend its kolonies in africa against italy and in azia against japan. So they would be tempted to sign an agreement with hitler after hitlers gesture in Dieppe in 41. The european war would then be one front Germany vs Russia with germany ending up victorious. Japan would make greater advancements in azia gaining foothold in China and perhaps UK kolonies and italy would either be defeated by the UK in africa or would get help of germany later on. The world would probably then be left with four superpowers Japan controling south asia, either Italy or UK controlling africa, Germany controlling europe and US in control of america with no bruises of war.
This is my fifty cents. Does it seem better? Not for me it does not, I live in Belgium. Lol
Japan was at war with China. We were also involved there, the Flying Tigers being the most famous. Perhaps another intervention that lead to the rise of more communism.
revolutionisnow
04-05-2010, 09:13 AM
Sofia, you do understand that when Nazi soldiers started hearing rumors of some shady stuff going on they kept their mouths shut out of fear that they may find out first hand if they questioned the rumors?
I will say I think Stalin and Soviet Russia was a much bigger stain on humanity, but that being said Hitler was far from a good guy. We all know that history is written by the victors, but to think Nazi Germany and Hitler are complete fabrications is absurd at best. The testimony is too vast amongst far too many different persons, cultures, and countries to be dismissed in the manner you are suggesting.
Do you realize that the majority of claims against Germany come from the communists? All the camps the Brits and the Americans liberated were proven to be labor internment camps, where some died from disease and starvation, while all the camps the communists liberated were said to be death camps with huge death tolls, which there is no physical evidence to prove. Then entire story falls apart upon actual honest investigation, why do you think they need the rule of thought crime laws to protect it? In a real court of law you have to accept the entire testimony as fact, if you suspect them of lying or embellishing the truth, then the entire testimony must be thrown out, so how much of these confessions do you believe?
child surviving six gassings in a gas chamber that never existed
woman survived three gassings because Nazis kept running out of gas
erupting and exploding mass graves
mass graves expelling geysers of blood
injections into the eyes of inmates to change their eye color
forcing prisoners to lick stairs clean, and collect garbage with their lips
blasting of 20,000 Jews into the twilight zone with atomic bombs
mass murder by tree cutting: forcing people to climb trees, then cutting the trees down
http://www.vho.org/GB/Books/dth/fndvalue.html
Or do you all realize that there were about 5 million German POW's that were forced into slavery after WW2 was over? Or that Eisenhower had his own very efficient death camps in which he put a fence around people and starved them to death? There is a book called Other Losses by James Bacque which tells more of these stories.
http://i42.tinypic.com/t03fr6.jpg
M House
04-05-2010, 09:28 AM
The "Allies" weren't nice people either. Though there are a few death camps. I did quick bit of research and was surprised there were only a few elaborate ones. Rest were labor camps. However between Germany and the Soviet Union they basically annihilated the jewish population of Poland. Ironically German jews weren't killed in such a high number. Kinda made me wonder if there was something a bit more ethnic about the holocaust, not religious.
libertarian4321
04-05-2010, 10:01 AM
without US military aid, the Soviet Union would have been finished after the 1942 thaw.
No way in hell Stalin could have held off Hitler without a second front to divert German troops....and the massive influx of US armored trucks, tanks, and tommy guns.
The war would have ended in 1942.
Your ignorance runs deep, little one.
There was no "second front" opened when the USA entered the war. The "second front" in Europe wasn't opened until the Allies invaded Italy in LATE 1943- more than a year and a half after D-day- and by then the Soviets were rolling the German Army back. If the "second front " you are referring to is North Africa, that front was established in early 1940, long before the USA got into the war.
Regarding equipment- the USSR didn't get American lend- lease equipment in significant amounts until the second half of 1942. The Germans had lost the initiative long before that.
Operation Barbarossa- the German Plan to knock the Soviets out of the war= officially failed on 5 December 1941 (note the date- BEFORE Pearl Harbor) when German forces attempting to take Moscow stalled, then were pushed back. From that point forward, the Germans were never again able to mount a theater wide advance. The Eastern Front became a meat grinder- with both sides sometimes advancing and sometimes retreating. The Germans never again got close to Moscow.
The Soviets eventually did get huge quantities of equipment from the USA, and that equipment helped the Soviets defeat the German Army more quickly, but the Soviets had effectively blunted the German assault before the USA got into the war, and before receiving significant amounts of equipment.
Another thing. My uncle served as a medic with the 42nd "Rainbow" Division (a unit made up largely of National Guardsmen from New York State). The 42nd was one of the Divisions that liberated Dachau. As a medic, he was called upon to try and treat some of the concentration camp prisoners, and he told me the camps were the most gruesome thing he ever saw (and as a medic treating wounded infantrymen, I suspect he saw plenty of gruesome wounds).
I know, I know. You'll claim that all those Jews (and others) were so thin because they were on the Jenny Craig diet (or some similar nonsense) and those giant ovens were just there for baking cookies. I'm just throwing it out there for the rational people on this forum.
revolutionisnow
04-05-2010, 10:31 AM
It was a war zone, the allies were bombing supply lines, and they did also not know about DDT, so typhus was a problem. Why didn't the US share DDT with the world? The official mainline numbers on Dachau is that 25,613 prisoners are believed to have died in the camp. About 30k sickly people dying of disease does not equal millions of people being systematically executed. If you go visit Iraq or Haiti today I am sure you will see sickly people, does that mean there are holocausts happening there? The local morgues have "giant ovens" also, does that mean there are holocausts happening there? If you just buried diseased people in the ground you would pollute your onsite well water supply. BTW Over 60 million people were killed in WW2.
Son of Detroit
04-05-2010, 10:35 AM
Can we please move this thread to hot topics?
CountryboyRonPaul
04-05-2010, 10:41 AM
without US military aid, the Soviet Union would have been finished after the 1942 thaw.
No way in hell Stalin could have held off Hitler without a second front to divert German troops....and the massive influx of US armored trucks, tanks, and tommy guns.
The war would have ended in 1942. All Germany ever wanted was to reclaim its stolen territory and live in peace with UK
I have no problem with US companies supplying goods on the open market while we remain neutral.
We could have sold them tanks all war long and I would be fine with it.
The Soviet counter offensive was regaining ground from the Nazis by the time DDay began.
DDay would have happened anyway without the Americans, even so, the Mediterranean front, and the mere presence of the UK diverted troops from the eastern front.
Just look at how fast Russia gained ground after the second front was opened.
I would have been content to see the USSR completely exhaust it's economy and it's morale in the process of fighting an even harsher prolonged war on the eastern front.
hmmmmm
How exactly does one "survive" a gas chamber????
How do we account for these millions of "survivors?"...Doent that alone disprove the extirmination theory?......
They survived their stay in an INTERNMENT camp...not an extirmination camp.
My grandfather was there, I've seen the pictures, and he's told me straight up, anyone who denies that this happened doesn't know wtf they are talking about. I believe my grandfather who was there, not some revisionist amateur historian who takes the side of a totalitarian dictator.
PS. Hitler was probably the worst thing to ever happen to the German people.
revolutionisnow
04-05-2010, 10:51 AM
My grandfather was there, I've seen the pictures, and he's told me straight up, anyone who denies that this happened doesn't know wtf they are talking about. I believe my grandfather who was there, not some revisionist amateur historian who takes the side of a totalitarian dictator.
PS. Hitler was probably the worst thing to ever happen to the German people.
Your grandfather was in the Red Army? When did you all immigrate to the states?
RyanRSheets
04-05-2010, 10:58 AM
It wouldn't have been the first or last time we let millions die (Stalin, Mao, etc.), so would you say we should have intervened in those situations as well?
John Taylor
04-05-2010, 11:18 AM
What if Japan didn't attack us, should we have minded our own business when 50 million people were getting killed? If so, wouldn't this have been a little cowardly?
Yet another "stellar" thread from Mr. Labreche.
MelissaWV
04-05-2010, 11:24 AM
TLDR to most of the thread... perhaps I'll go back and look when there's a lot more time.
To address the OP, as I'm sure others have, I would have to point out that WWII was a direct result of how WWI ended. The US had a very big role in how WWI was "settled." This helped set the stage for any charismatic opportunist to advance their agenda in Germany especially.
The US also meddled when they blockaded Japan in the Pacific, which directly led to their reaction via Pearl Harbor.
Finally, the US was already meddling aplenty in WWII.
Things are seldom as simple as "do something or utterly ignore it." This country "did" a lot of things that ultimately led to more problems. I don't like going back and second-guessing the decisions that were made in the past, because they were definitely made in a totally different context. Where we are now, though, and what we do in the future should be based on sound logic and the current context.
sofia
04-05-2010, 11:47 AM
Your ignorance runs deep, little one.
There was no "second front" opened when the USA entered the war. The "second front" in Europe wasn't opened until the Allies invaded Italy in LATE 1943- more than a year and a half after D-day- and by then the Soviets were rolling the German Army back. If the "second front " you are referring to is North Africa, that front was established in early 1940, long before the USA got into the war.
Regarding equipment- the USSR didn't get American lend- lease equipment in significant amounts until the second half of 1942. The Germans had lost the initiative long before that.
Operation Barbarossa- the German Plan to knock the Soviets out of the war= officially failed on 5 December 1941 (note the date- BEFORE Pearl Harbor) when German forces attempting to take Moscow stalled, then were pushed back. From that point forward, the Germans were never again able to mount a theater wide advance. The Eastern Front became a meat grinder- with both sides sometimes advancing and sometimes retreating. The Germans never again got close to Moscow.
The Soviets eventually did get huge quantities of equipment from the USA, and that equipment helped the Soviets defeat the German Army more quickly, but the Soviets had effectively blunted the German assault before the USA got into the war, and before receiving significant amounts of equipment.
Another thing. My uncle served as a medic with the 42nd "Rainbow" Division (a unit made up largely of National Guardsmen from New York State). The 42nd was one of the Divisions that liberated Dachau. As a medic, he was called upon to try and treat some of the concentration camp prisoners, and he told me the camps were the most gruesome thing he ever saw (and as a medic treating wounded infantrymen, I suspect he saw plenty of gruesome wounds).
I know, I know. You'll claim that all those Jews (and others) were so thin because they were on the Jenny Craig diet (or some similar nonsense) and those giant ovens were just there for baking cookies. I'm just throwing it out there for the rational people on this forum.
All Russia could do was use its vast geography and brutal climate to play defense. Germany had to spread its forces all over Europe and Africa long before D-Day. You're crazy if you think the Soviets could have rolled into Berlin without Patton pounding the Germans from the West.
As to the "gruesomeness of the camps".....they became like that as a result of Allied destruction of German infrastructure. Camps were all equiped with swimming pools and theaters. US soldiers only saw the tail end of the camps when the situation had already detriorated.
There was no esxtirmination...and no gas chambers. Forensic science has even proven that there were no gassings at Auschwitz. It was a Stalinist fairy tale that the Zionists used to gain sympathy for their coming invasion and devastation of the poor Palestinians.
Do you realize that the majority of claims against Germany come from the communists?
Yes.
And I have my problems with certain information, other information I do not. Hitler was a bad man. Plain and simple, and regardless of what numbers should be applied to him, they are applied with ease because of a grave he dug himself.
libertarian4321
04-05-2010, 04:03 PM
All Russia could do was use its vast geography and brutal climate to play defense. Germany had to spread its forces all over Europe and Africa long before D-Day. You're crazy if you think the Soviets could have rolled into Berlin without Patton pounding the Germans from the West.
No, I'm not crazy. I'm a military officer and military history buff.
You seem to be completely clueless of military history in any sense beyond vague generalities.
Patton didn't start "pounding the Germans from the West" until the latter half of 1944. By late 1944, the Russians had been continuously rolling the cream of the German military back for almost 2 years.
About all "Patton" and the other allied troops did was shorten the time it took for the Soviets to reach Berlin by a small amount- but the Russians had been on the offensive long before the Western Front was opened up. By D-Day, the Russians had retaken all of Russia and the Ukraine, most of the Baltic states, and most of Poland- in fact, by D-Day, the Russians were only days away from invading Germany itself.
BTW, the battles on the Western Front (France) were small compared to the battles on the Eastern Front. D-Day and the Normandy operations and "The Battle of the Bulge" were little more than skirmishes compared to the massive battles fought on the Eastern Front- Stalingrad, Kursk, Moscow and many others were simply massive battles.
revolutionisnow
04-05-2010, 04:15 PM
Yes.
And I have my problems with certain information, other information I do not. Hitler was a bad man. Plain and simple, and regardless of what numbers should be applied to him, they are applied with ease because of a grave he dug himself.
So how should they have responded to hyperinflation, the financial and moral bankrupting of Germany, Bloody Sunday, the communist threat, worldwide boycotts, and the reneging on the passage of the Dazing Corridor? Eisenhower was a bad man, and Stalin was much worse than Hitler even if you believe each and every Holocaust story.
The brutal occupation of France - it looks worse than Vietnam or Iraq doesn't it?
YouTube - Léo Marjane & Paris sous l'Occupation, 1942 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CxPiI8_jRvc)
Slutter McGee
04-05-2010, 04:51 PM
There was no esxtirmination...and no gas chambers. Forensic science has even proven that there were no gassings at Auschwitz. It was a Stalinist fairy tale that the Zionists used to gain sympathy for their coming invasion and devastation of the poor Palestinians.
My grandfather fought in world war 2. Forgive me if I take his word over that of some stormfront moron. You are a fucking idiot. Dumb as a fucking brick.
It is ok to believe in conspiracy theories, even if I think you are wrong. Its ok to believe in a zionist plot. Even though I think you are wrong. Its another thing to out yourself as a Hitler loving, Jew hating, neo-nazi idiot. Seriously, go fuck yourself, and then when you have fucked yourself, go fuck yourself again. And then do it again.
I have been advised to ignore you. But fuck that. Seriously. you are a fucking dellusional racist, and I am sick of the fucking bullshit that spews copiously from your keyboard. I don't even care if I get banned or reprimanded for this. Because you deserve it. I seriously hope you don't fucking breed. But unlike the Hitler you seem to love so much, I wont sterilize you. I promise. But the last thing we need is more idiots like you demeaning the good name of liberty you ignorant fuck.
Goddamn moron,
Slutter McGee
Son of Detroit
04-05-2010, 05:34 PM
I just don't understand how Hitler sympathizing and liberty can coincide with each other.
sofia
04-05-2010, 05:34 PM
My grandfather fought in world war 2. Forgive me if I take his word over that of some stormfront moron. You are a fucking idiot. Dumb as a fucking brick.
It is ok to believe in conspiracy theories, even if I think you are wrong. Its ok to believe in a zionist plot. Even though I think you are wrong. Its another thing to out yourself as a Hitler loving, Jew hating, neo-nazi idiot. Seriously, go fuck yourself, and then when you have fucked yourself, go fuck yourself again. And then do it again.
I have been advised to ignore you. But fuck that. Seriously. you are a fucking dellusional racist, and I am sick of the fucking bullshit that spews copiously from your keyboard. I don't even care if I get banned or reprimanded for this. Because you deserve it. I seriously hope you don't fucking breed. But unlike the Hitler you seem to love so much, I wont sterilize you. I promise. But the last thing we need is more idiots like you demeaning the good name of liberty you ignorant fuck.
Goddamn moron,
Slutter McGee
lol.....
its ironic....but the first time i was exposed to WW2 truth, I reacted the same way you didd.
I started foaming at the mouth and calling the guy every filthy name in the book. Psychological barriers die hard.....which is why I am not offended by your insults.
Chieppa1
04-05-2010, 05:36 PM
lol.....
its ironic....but the first time i was exposed to WW2 truth, I reacted the same way you didd.
I started foaming at the mouth and calling the guy every filthy name in the book. Psychological barriers die hard.....which is why I am not offended by your insults.
Do you carry a copy of the Protocols with you? :rolleyes:
revolutionisnow
04-05-2010, 05:37 PM
My grandfather fought in world war 2. Forgive me if I take his word over that of some stormfront moron. You are a fucking idiot. Dumb as a fucking brick.
It is ok to believe in conspiracy theories, even if I think you are wrong. Its ok to believe in a zionist plot. Even though I think you are wrong. Its another thing to out yourself as a Hitler loving, Jew hating, neo-nazi idiot. Seriously, go fuck yourself, and then when you have fucked yourself, go fuck yourself again. And then do it again.
I have been advised to ignore you. But fuck that. Seriously. you are a fucking dellusional racist, and I am sick of the fucking bullshit that spews copiously from your keyboard. I don't even care if I get banned or reprimanded for this. Because you deserve it. I seriously hope you don't fucking breed. But unlike the Hitler you seem to love so much, I wont sterilize you. I promise. But the last thing we need is more idiots like you demeaning the good name of liberty you ignorant fuck.
Goddamn moron,
Slutter McGee
How does him fighting in WW2 prove anything? Like I said before, each and every camp the Americans and Brits liberated are admitted to being LABOR camps, none of them are said to have been death camps or to have systematically executed people, gas showers, electrocution floors, or whatever other wild stories the communists claimed, yet somehow you offer this as "proof of the holocaust". I think it is a great example of proof of propaganda. Why would supporters of liberty support communists? Why would they support the enslavement of 5 million German POW's? Why would they support the creation of East Germany? Again, 60 million people died in WW2, why the obsession over Jews?
I just don't understand how Hitler sympathizing and liberty can coincide with each other.
I don't understand how supporting communists and being opposed to intellectual debate and discussion can coincide with liberty. People can easily accept that we went to Iraq twice over lies, and that Civil war was about slavery lie, but they cannot entertain any possibilities that lies were involved in WW2.
sofia
04-05-2010, 05:38 PM
I just don't understand how Hitler sympathizing and liberty can coincide with each other.
Because Hitler hated communism, believed in peaceful commerce with all nations, national sovereignty, light taxes and sound money.
Son of Detroit
04-05-2010, 05:49 PM
Because Hitler hated communism
Is Nazism much better than Communism? I'd argue it's much worse.
Believed in peaceful commerce with all nations
:confused:
Right before he invaded and took over those same countries.
national sovereignty
How can one believe in national sovereignty and use his military to take over neighboring countries?
light taxes
Ooooh! Low taxes! Great! I sure wish I lived in Nazi Germany. I mean, screw personal liberties and a non-imposing government. Less money is taken from me than in other countries!
sound money.
That settles it. What a great man.
Vessol
04-05-2010, 05:54 PM
Because Hitler hated communism, believed in peaceful commerce with all nations, national sovereignty, light taxes and sound money.
I'd like to know what history you are reading from.
Hitler was a totalitarian fascist.
But I guess anyone that hates Jews=Good. Or is it America?
Iran, a total theocratic nation with no rights to their people, I don't support any invasion or w/e of them, but I don't support their government one bit. But they must be jolly good to you.
I support your right to believe whatever you want. But you should try looking at history from more then one-side. You attack others for viewing history only from one side, then you do the same.
Slutter McGee
04-05-2010, 06:10 PM
Because Hitler hated communism, believed in peaceful commerce with all nations, national sovereignty, light taxes and sound money.
And believed in noninterventionism. oh wait. And believed in equality under the law. oh wait. and believed in equality of race. oh wait. And believed in freedom of religion, oh wait. And believes in not murdering Jews. oh wait.
Hitler = Lover of Liberty.
I swear, I don't know why the GOP thinks we are a bunch of kooks. I just can't fucking figure it out.
Sincerely,
Slutter McGee
revolutionisnow
04-05-2010, 06:47 PM
Define totalitarian fascist. What are some things that he did that made life there bad. How is Nazism worse than communism?
He took a nation that was morally and financially bankrupt and turned them around 180 degrees. Hitler was a Zionist, who believed in giving a homeland for the Jews. He believed that Jews and Gentiles were like oil and water, incompatible. He actually worked with zionists on finding a new homeland for them. The idea of wearing a yellow star actually came from a zionist. The labor camps were teaching them skills that they would need in their future home. We can debate the morality of forced evacuation, but Jews have evicted Arabs from Palestine, a land which they just arrived in, so they are as morally guilty as the Germans, if not much more so, because it was not even their land to begin with, and they have not even worked to provide them with another land to immigrate to, which the Germans did have exploratory teams working on. Americans also put Japanese in internment camps in WW2, which were one room shacks-much worse places than the German camps were.
Zionism = Jewish nationalism, Nazism = German nationalism
YouTube - Auschwitz theater2 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fjp1ved5xeg)
Also, Jewish communists killed 30+ million people, mostly Christians, so why would we ally with them? And I still haven't received an answer about who is responsible for the other tens of millions of deaths communism caused after we helped them take control.
Slutter McGee
04-05-2010, 07:05 PM
Intelligent People - Dude, Hitler was an evil asshole. He killed the Jews. Invaded countries. And was a genuine bad guy.
Other People - But Hitler was not as bad as Stalin. Stalin killed even more million people. And Hitler shook hands with a black guy. Its all a zionist plot. All of it, to defame the good name of Adolf Hitler.
Intelligent People - Dude I am not saying Stalin was better. Hell maybe he was worse, but that doesn't change the fact that Hitler was an evil bastard responsible for the deaths of millions under a facist state.
Other People - You are just uneducated.
Intelligent People - You are an idiot
Other People - See all you can do is insult when you do not have an argument. You are brainwashed.
Intelligent People - I should walk away. But I really really think your an idiot, and I just can't stop saying it.
Sincerely,
Slutter McGee
revolutionisnow
04-05-2010, 08:23 PM
Intelligent People - Dude, Hitler was an evil asshole. He killed the Jews. Invaded countries. And was a genuine bad guy.
Other People - But Hitler was not as bad as Stalin. Stalin killed even more million people. And Hitler shook hands with a black guy. Its all a zionist plot. All of it, to defame the good name of Adolf Hitler.
Intelligent People - Dude I am not saying Stalin was better. Hell maybe he was worse, but that doesn't change the fact that Hitler was an evil bastard responsible for the deaths of millions under a facist state.
Other People - You are just uneducated.
Intelligent People - You are an idiot
Other People - See all you can do is insult when you do not have an argument. You are brainwashed.
Intelligent People - I should walk away. But I really really think your an idiot, and I just can't stop saying it.
Sincerely,
Slutter McGee
When you don't have an argument its best to stick to ad hom attacks.
sofia
04-05-2010, 08:34 PM
Great Hoaxes of the last 110 years...
1. Sinking of USS Maine (blamed on Spain)
2. Lusitania sinking (caused by smuggled US munitions)
3. Pearl Harbor "surprise attack"
4. Holocaust (typhous epidemic in the internment camps)
5. JFK assassination
6. Tonkin Gulf non-attack
7. Global Warming
8. 9/11 attacks (CIA & MOSSAD)
9. Weapons of Mass Destruction
bunklocoempire
04-05-2010, 09:37 PM
What if Japan didn't attack us, should we have minded our own business when 50 million people were getting killed? If so, wouldn't this have been a little cowardly?
Mind our own business? :rolleyes: The U.S. has no clue of the concept.
Keep asking questions though!:)
Our forces were attacked in Hawaii right?
Just a quick Wiki about what we were doing "minding our own business in Hawaii":
Speaking of "cowardly"....
1887 Constitution
In 1887, Kalākaua was forced to sign the 1887 Constitution of the Kingdom of Hawaii, which stripped the king of much of his authority. There was a property qualification for voting, which disenfranchised many poorer Hawaiians and favored the wealthier white community. Resident whites were allowed to vote, but resident Asians were excluded. Because the 1887 Constitution was signed under threat of violence, it is known as the "Bayonet Constitution". King Kalākaua, reduced to a figurehead, reigned until his death in 1891. His sister, Liliʻuokalani, succeeded him on the throne.
Ship's landing force at the time of the overthrow of the Hawaiian monarchy, January 1893.In 1893, Queen Liliʻuokalani announced plans for a new constitution. On January 14, 1893, a group of mostly Euro-American business leaders and residents formed a Committee of Safety to overthrow the Kingdom and seek annexation by the United States. United States Government Minister John L. Stevens, responding to a request from the Committee of Safety, summoned a company of uniformed U.S. Marines. As one historian noted, the presence of these troops effectively made it impossible for the monarchy to protect itself.[36]
Overthrow of 1893 — the Republic of Hawaii (1894–1898)
In January 1893, Queen Liliʻuokalani was overthrown and replaced by a Provisional Government composed of members of the Committee of Safety. Controversy filled the following years as the queen tried to re-establish her throne. The administration of President Grover Cleveland commissioned the Blount Report, which concluded that the removal of Liliʻuokalani was illegal. The
U.S. Government first demanded that Queen Liliʻuokalani be reinstated, but the Provisional Government refused. Congress followed with another investigation, and submitted the Morgan Report on February 26, 1894, which found all parties (including Minister Stevens) with the exception of the queen "not guilty" from any responsibility for the overthrow.[37] The accuracy and impartiality of both the Blount and Morgan reports has been questioned by partisans on both sides of the debate over the events of 1893.[36][38][39][40]
Bunkloco
Hallowcaust
04-06-2010, 12:27 AM
First post here from a long time Libertarian going back to Ed Clark's presidential run and also a long time Historical Revisionist. I'm actually a bit heartened by the attempted scholarly, thoughtful, and perhaps even civil postings by many in this thread with just one exception, of course, (no big deal). A discussion like this would be impossible in a republocrat forum. Why is that? Because the republocrat/demoplicans have bought into all the WWII lies, especially the zero proof 'hollow'-caust story to the extent that it is considered hallowed ground, a new secular religion, if you will- a 'Hallowcaust'. That's a big reason why they are republocrats in the first place. They think that WWII was a good war and the big government spending for it was justified. That's why Hitler, the Nazis, and WWII appears in the news from time to time, more often than not because sooner or later some mainstream political entity attempts to justify the latest war effort, military expediture, or armed mission by the U.S. or it's allies around the world with one more emotional appeal to the Hallowcaust religion. It seems like all U.S. wars and foreign policy disasters since WWII are associated with an appeal to WWII mythology.
So, how can we have this discussion by Libertarians? It's because some Libertarians have treated this subject as they would any other big government program and researched it in sufficient depth to see through the government propaganda. But whether you are a believer or disbeliever in the holocaust and regardless of your take on WWII in general, we're practically all going to vote for Ron Paul if he runs again for president, right? Many nudists or atheists will vote for Ron Paul. Does Ron Paul have to distance himself from nudists and atheists too? Is Ron Paul afraid of being labeled as a child molester or baby killer if he associates his name with nudists or atheists? Is someone who believes that Ron Paul is associated with child molesters, baby killers, or Hitler lovers just because he heard that nudists, atheists, and holocaust deniers vote for Ron Paul even going to vote Libertarian in the first place? It doesn't sound very Libertarian to me.
Imperial
04-06-2010, 01:16 AM
Hitler's economy was the strongest and most dynamic in the world. His policies lifted Germany up from ruins while FDR's America remained mired in Depression.
The economy in Germany was much freer than FDR's. A debt free currency ushered in explosive growth with no inflation. There's your "academic case."
You have been trained to salivate at the mere mention of Hitler's name...ever since you were a child. That's not "academic"...thats Pavlovian conditioning and you dont even realize it.
Question the facts and open your mind. We live in the matrix!
That isn't an academic case. If you think that you can make an academic case in two sentences then no wonder you believe this drivel. To give an academic case, FA Hayek shows the socialist tendencies of Nazism in The Road to Serfdom.
How is Nazism worse than communism?
That is a lesser of two evils argument. I would argue both are extremely immoral (well, at least state-sponsored communism).
He took a nation that was morally and financially bankrupt and turned them around 180 degrees. Hitler was a Zionist, who believed in giving a homeland for the Jews. He believed that Jews and Gentiles were like oil and water, incompatible. He actually worked with zionists on finding a new homeland for them. The idea of wearing a yellow star actually came from a zionist. The labor camps were teaching them skills that they would need in their future home. We can debate the morality of forced evacuation, but Jews have evicted Arabs from Palestine, a land which they just arrived in, so they are as morally guilty as the Germans, if not much more so, because it was not even their land to begin with, and they have not even worked to provide them with another land to immigrate to, which the Germans did have exploratory teams working on. Americans also put Japanese in internment camps in WW2, which were one room shacks-much worse places than the German camps were.
Zionism = Jewish nationalism, Nazism = German nationalism
Again your entire thinking process appears to only be able to conceive of two comparative entities at any one moment- a key skill to have, but one that can blind you to putting things in perspective. Your argument here was basically, "Zionists were okay with some of the stuff too!" as if by illustrating the similarity of two groupings that means the moral implications suddenly disappear
revolutionisnow
04-06-2010, 02:03 AM
http://mises.org/books/TRTS/
So your argument is that they were both bad? Then why get involved at all? If you had the choice of aiding the crips, the bloods, or neither, why wouldn't you choose neither? Why risk American lives to go partner with evil? I just read the cartoon book, and was going to do a point by point rebuttal, but the entire thing is a wild idea about what might happen. Let's talk specifics about actual life in Germany, and how it was bad. Hitler took a country that was in a depression with joblessness and hyperinflation, and turned it into a superpower in a few years. What did the communists bring to the table? Poverty and enslavement? Every single one of the things pictured did happen in Communist Russia and East Germany, yet some here are claiming we were just in allying with them.
Imperial
04-06-2010, 02:17 AM
That isn't really the actual Road to Serfdom written by Hayek; instead, that is an EXTREMELY condensed version. It is a 300 pageish book comparing USSR to Nazi Germany.
Speaking of Mises though, a decent article on the Nazi economy (although it has flaws though) http://mises.org/daily/1937
So your argument is that they were both bad? Then why get involved at all? If you had the choice of aiding the crips, the bloods, or neither, why wouldn't you choose neither? Why risk American lives to go partner with evil?
Because millions of innocent Jews were left hanging in the balance between two despicable regimes. We left the fodder for war to start with the punitive Treaty of Versailles and our intervention in World War I. We had already risked moral hazard.
Hitler took a country that was in a depression with joblessness and hyperinflation, and turned it into a superpower in a few years
Keynesian economics can bring short-term prosperity to a nation, yes.
Every single one of the things pictured did happen in Communist Russia and East Germany, yet some here are claiming we were just in allying with them.
I actually havent commented at all on if we should have allied with the Russians at all or not. The only threat I identified was a humanitarian intervention for the Jewish people during the Holocaust- nothing more (although I am not commenting on Japan here at all, since it appears irrelevant to this topic).
So how should they have responded to hyperinflation, the financial and moral bankrupting of Germany, Bloody Sunday, the communist threat, worldwide boycotts, and the reneging on the passage of the Dazing Corridor? Eisenhower was a bad man, and Stalin was much worse than Hitler even if you believe each and every Holocaust story.
I agree 100% with Stalin, not the same with Eisenhower. Regardless you can't defend an asshole by saying someone else was more of an asshole.
Yes I agree that there are two parts to every story and that when push comes to shove sooner or later all hell will break loose and the initiation of hell is rarely one sided. Still doesn't make Hitler any less of an asshole.
CountryboyRonPaul
04-06-2010, 09:11 AM
Your grandfather was in the Red Army? When did you all immigrate to the states?
So this is why people accuse Ron Paul supporters of being Neo-Nazis.
Seriously, don't associate with me, don't talk to me, don't even reply to me, you're holding us back, why don't you do us a favor and attach your support to Lindsey Graham, or Nancy Pelosi.
Whoever you support will get smeared, along with the rest of us that think you are completely insane, and completely incompatible with liberty.
revolutionisnow
04-06-2010, 10:57 AM
I actually havent commented at all on if we should have allied with the Russians at all or not. The only threat I identified was a humanitarian intervention for the Jewish people during the Holocaust- nothing more (although I am not commenting on Japan here at all, since it appears irrelevant to this topic).
Have to laugh about this statement from the article.
"In the United States at the present time, we do not have socialism in any form."
Your average citizen does not care about the intricate details of the economy, they just care if it works or not, and once they had a labor backed currency life was much better for the average person than the hyperinflation period before.
"In fifteen years that have followed this resolve, he (Hitler) has succeeded in restoring Germany to the most powerful position in Europe, and not only has he restored the position of his country, but he has even, to a very great extent, reversed the results of the Great War ... whatever else may be thought about these exploits they are certainly among the most remarkable in the whole history of the world."
- Winston Churchill,
Prime Minister and Statesman,
Great Britain.
As far as the Holocaust, well the International Red Cross had access to the camps the entire time, and they recorded the total deaths at less than 300k.
http://i43.tinypic.com/2mnnkaa.jpg
http://www.onethirdoftheholocaust.com
http://www.holohoax101.com
This sums up the entire thing in one photo- a chimney to nowhere.
http://www.newp.org/holohoax102/GasChamberChimney.jpg
Rylick
04-06-2010, 11:03 AM
Jesus, it is my first day on this board and I get confronted with Holocaust denials and conspiracy theories.
It is just disgusting to say that there was no holocaust. I thought the ideas of the revolution would be shared by rational libertarian thinkers and not dumb ass fascists.
paulim
04-06-2010, 11:14 AM
Jesus, it is my first day on this board and I get confronted with Holocaust denials and conspiracy theories.
It is just disgusting to say that the was no holocaust. I thought the ideas of the revolution would be shared by rational libertarian thinkers and not dumb ass fascists.
Thats the only excuse for your ad hominems, that it is your first day on this board. You will learn to debate based on something soon. And if its too late for you (lifelong indoctrination, you know). In this case you have my prayers.
Slutter McGee
04-06-2010, 11:32 AM
Jesus, it is my first day on this board and I get confronted with Holocaust denials and conspiracy theories.
It is just disgusting to say that there was no holocaust. I thought the ideas of the revolution would be shared by rational libertarian thinkers and not dumb ass fascists.
1/8th of the people on this board are conspiracy theorists who are rational, thoughtful, and intelligent, even if often think they are wrong. Good people these.
1/8th are lunatic wacko conspiracy theorists who hate Jews, love nazis, and are secret facists who you can't reason with. Or they think everyone else here is a zionist GOP spy.
1/8th of the people here are anarcho-capitalist purists who are philosophically intelligent, but have no common sense in the practical. Good to debate libertarianism with. Bad to discuss campaign strategy with.
1/8th of the people here have no real understanding of liberty. But they try.
And 1/2 of the people here simply want to expand and grow liberty in our lifetime.
So don't let the crazies run you off. They have gotten a little more vocal lately.
Sincerely,
Slutter McGee
sofia
04-06-2010, 12:28 PM
Jesus, it is my first day on this board and I get confronted with Holocaust denials and conspiracy theories.
It is just disgusting to say that there was no holocaust. I thought the ideas of the revolution would be shared by rational libertarian thinkers and not dumb ass fascists.
The only "holocaust" of WW2 (burnt offering) occuured during the murderous firebombings of Dresden, Stuttgart, Tokyo....and the A-bobs of Hiroshima, Nagasaki.........or didnt they teach you that in your traitorous German school system?
If the mainstream consensus behind the events of that era are so undisputable people would not be thrown in prison for merely asking questions about it.
sofia
04-06-2010, 01:03 PM
If the mainstream consensus behind the events of that era are so undisputable people would not be thrown in prison for merely asking questions about it.
BRILLIANT DEDUCTION!!!...
I'm surprised that others haven't at least been intrigued by the fact that the Neo-Cons, Communists, Zionists, Globalists and every other main power group you can think of all say the exact same thing about the WW2 official story.
Differ from orthodoxy and people (even on this forum!) will salivate at you like trained dogs....hate you...and in Europe.....even imprison you. That alone is what first inspired me to study the revisionist version of WW2.
Imperial
04-06-2010, 03:45 PM
Have to laugh about this statement from the article.
"In the United States at the present time, we do not have socialism in any form."
Your average citizen does not care about the intricate details of the economy, they just care if it works or not, and once they had a labor backed currency life was much better for the average person than the hyperinflation period before.
"In fifteen years that have followed this resolve, he (Hitler) has succeeded in restoring Germany to the most powerful position in Europe, and not only has he restored the position of his country, but he has even, to a very great extent, reversed the results of the Great War ... whatever else may be thought about these exploits they are certainly among the most remarkable in the whole history of the world."
- Winston Churchill,
Prime Minister and Statesman,
Great Britain.
As far as the Holocaust, well the International Red Cross had access to the camps the entire time, and they recorded the total deaths at less than 300k.
http://i43.tinypic.com/2mnnkaa.jpg
http://www.onethirdoftheholocaust.com
http://www.holohoax101.com
This sums up the entire thing in one photo- a chimney to nowhere.
http://www.newp.org/holohoax102/GasChamberChimney.jpg
I guess you don't understand the difference between the socialism pre-1950ish (excepting certain places like USSR, Cuba, and other states) and today's welfare system. There are important distinctions to be made. FA Hayek made this clearly known in his work, and von Mises similarly attacked the old-school socialism with a totalitarian bent.
Today what we call socialism can be called many things. Politically it is a welfare state, philosophically it is a liberal egalitarian system (to take a page from Rawls here). It doesn't advocate near the degree of state control as the pre-1950 socialism. Of course there are certain similiarities with that old framework of ideas, but they are definitely not the same. (Note, I am not advocating it- but it is important to understand the nature of the opposition)
I wouldn't describe Winston Churchill as a statesman. He was pretty interventionist in the affairs of the world, a typical hawk. And his philosophy if I remember right was pretty screwy (although it has been some time since I studied it)
I find your statement on the economy interesting, as that would be a GREAT justification for Obama's economic system. After all, Keynesian economics when fully implemented would be more effective than most economic systems in the short-term. Or for pilfering Social Security and other programs like this- after all, it provides a great benefit for the people before the damage is noticed!
A good economist would look at ALL aspects of a policy- not one that fails on a long-term and requires war to keep it moving.
Forgot the Red Cross thing. I would argue even 300k is bad. But even considering that, it is one single source. It still doesn't change the thousands of independent testimonials from those who were not picked off yet when the war ended.
andrewh817
04-06-2010, 05:39 PM
Like so many stunning failures of government, ask yourself, honestly, is incompetence, sloth and boneheaded decision making really at fault here?
Or is there more to the picture?
*thumbs up*
It was fought to win, and when we were done, outside of a couple military bases, we did not rebuild either country in our image.
But we did rebuild Germany (not sure about Japan) and the rest of Europe destroyed by military occupation. The Marshall Plan was a way for the US and European governments to centrally plan the economy.
Germany and Japan were both serious threats engaged in genocide. It was a declared war.
Well, right now the US military is engaging in geographical genocide in Iraq and Afghanistan. So my question is, if the US was doing the same thing it is now, but the war was declared, would you support the genocide?
revolutionisnow
04-06-2010, 05:49 PM
I'm not talking about welfare, I am talking about the communist planks already put in place here in the USA.
http://www.chuckypita.com/is-america-a-communist-country-10-planks-of-the-communist-manifesto/
It might be justification if Obama's economic system was working, but it is not, and will not. The key thing to their economic success was money backed by LABOR. If you watch the documentary Money as Debt, this is actually the solution they filmmakers give.
Sure, any life lost is bad, but there is a huge difference in 300k dying of disease, and 6 million being systematically executed. About 300k died in the firebombing of Dresden. Thousands of independent testimonies does not change science and facts. Many of the stories are ridiculous but most don't dare question them. They receive BILLIONS of dollars in reparations from Germany and use the holocaust to justify and divert attention from whatever actions Israel does.
Do you believe this story?
Dailymotion - A Holocaust Story - Irene Weisberg - a News & Politics video (http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xcoubk_a-holocaust-story-irene-weisberg_news)
The soap lies have been debunked years ago, but this guy is still telling the stories about it. Guess he didn't get the memo.
YouTube - No Soap, No Lampshades (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qgGbEeXbM2A&)
It wasn't a lie, in his imagination he believed it?
YouTube - Rosenblat's Holocaust story was a Hoax! (ABC) (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UaCI4cqdPks)
YouTube - Nazi Shrunken Heads -edited version (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EnShHYyCFWY)
paulim
04-06-2010, 06:50 PM
The successfull british jazz musician Gilad Atzmon was born in Israel and had to discover history for himself. When he left public israeli school he had the common hate filled worldview someone could easily get there.
However, he writes a wonderfull philosophical blog with some astonishing conclusions. One of them is that the "holocaust" as a story is there to kill the dignity of history and heritage (remember Orwells 1984 ?) and therefore robs mankind of its humanity. I know, for some here this is too far fetched, but give this intelligent man a chance:
http://www.gilad.co.uk/writings/truth-history-and-integrity-by-gilad-atzmon.html
KramerDSP
04-06-2010, 07:23 PM
Intelligent People - Dude, Hitler was an evil asshole. He killed the Jews. Invaded countries. And was a genuine bad guy.
Other People - But Hitler was not as bad as Stalin. Stalin killed even more million people. And Hitler shook hands with a black guy. Its all a zionist plot. All of it, to defame the good name of Adolf Hitler.
Intelligent People - Dude I am not saying Stalin was better. Hell maybe he was worse, but that doesn't change the fact that Hitler was an evil bastard responsible for the deaths of millions under a facist state.
Other People - You are just uneducated.
Intelligent People - You are an idiot
Other People - See all you can do is insult when you do not have an argument. You are brainwashed.
Intelligent People - I should walk away. But I really really think your an idiot, and I just can't stop saying it.
Sincerely,
Slutter McGee
+1776
This thread is getting ridiculous. Can we move this to Hot Topics?
sofia
04-06-2010, 10:37 PM
...a real monster eh?
YouTube - Hitler and his dog. Technicolor images. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KC9XfcJFeOM&feature=related)
Vessol
04-06-2010, 10:51 PM
...a real monster eh?
YouTube - Hitler and his dog. Technicolor images. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KC9XfcJFeOM&feature=related)
Are you seriously trying to pass that off as proof that Hitler was a good person?
rpindy
04-06-2010, 10:55 PM
Jesus, it is my first day on this board and I get confronted with Holocaust denials and conspiracy theories.
It is just disgusting to say that there was no holocaust. I thought the ideas of the revolution would be shared by rational libertarian thinkers and not dumb ass fascists.
Welcome here; hope you stick around. You might have a point, but consider this: since you live in Germany, you would get ~5 years in jail for disputing the official holocaust story. As supporters of liberty we should fight for freedom of speech for everyone, even those we disagree with.
Vessol
04-06-2010, 11:01 PM
Welcome here; hope you stick around. You might have a point, but consider this: since you live in Germany, you would get ~5 years in jail for disputing the official holocaust story. As supporters of liberty we should fight for freedom of speech for everyone, even those we disagree with.
I couldn't agree more.
Trigonx
04-06-2010, 11:06 PM
your fallacy is in the assumption that America was minding it's own business before we officially entered the war. Pearl Harbor was designed to get the support of the American people, but other American "forces" were already deeply involved in Europe. The people who run America are directly responsible for the conditions that led to the extermination of 50 million people. We should have been non-interventionists before WW2 and WW1.
Here is a good article(booklet) from John T. Flynn written about Roosevelt and Pearl Harbor back in 1944.
It explains how USA was conducting its war on Japan and Germany prior to Pearl Harbor.
http://www.lewrockwell.com/vance/vance189.html
Andrew Ryan
04-07-2010, 01:20 PM
//
Adolfo Mena Gonzalez
11-12-2010, 02:26 AM
What if Japan didn't attack us, should we have minded our own business when 50 million people were getting killed? If so, wouldn't this have been a little cowardly?
America should have never aided France and England, who declared War on Germany first. If England and France never declared War on Germany for securing majority German areas such as Danzig and the Prussian Corridor(where German populations were being persecuted by the Poles and who wanted to be part of Germany) there would have been no World War Two, and if America cared about the plight of the Jews, they would have allowed them in in the 30s instead of having a closed border policy.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gdańsk#History
http://www.jrbooksonline.com/polish_atrocities.htm
JohnEngland
11-12-2010, 02:45 AM
Personally, I'm just glad Britain had the allies that it had. Our cities had been destroyed, our resources dwindling. From what I understand of the history of the period, I don't know how much longer Britain could have held out.
Thank goodness we won the Battle of Britain - and thank goodness the German socialists decided to invade the Soviets. What an idiotic move!
TheHumblePhysicist
11-12-2010, 02:51 AM
Why does war happen again and again, year after year, generation after generation? There are always revolutions, and tyrannies, and rival states.
Do you think that there is something in war which is necessary to the spirit of man? Jefferson said that every new generation needs a revolution. Well maybe every new generation needs a war. The vigorous energies of youth need an escape, and that escape has always been the battlefield. People need a cause to fight for, they need an enemy, they need comrades, and they need the world on their shoulders.
Think about it. The men that served in WW2 became legends, and with our entry into the war, America itself became legendary. For the rest of history, they will be remembered, they have bought themselves eternal glory. The men that died on the battlefield died noble, heroic deaths, and I think in death they are not dissatisfied.
It is my theory that people will always find a way to create war one way or another. Plato said "Only the dead have seen the end of war." He was right.
I think that in the scheme of things, war is good for society. It provides for a world of vigorous change, energy, and passionate emotion. Does that mean I think war is good? No, anyone who thinks so must be crazy. I simply think that it should be accepted, the same as the tides, and the same as the setting sun.
Adolfo Mena Gonzalez
11-12-2010, 02:53 AM
Personally, I'm just glad Britain had the allies that it had. Our cities had been destroyed, our resources dwindling. From what I understand of the history of the period, I don't know how much longer Britain could have held out.
Thank goodness we won the Battle of Britain - and thank goodness the German socialists decided to invade the Soviets. What an idiotic move!
Eh, I have never cared much for the Brits, being a Spaniard(of Spanish descent), I would have been happy to leave you guys high and dry after declaring war on Germany.
sofia
11-12-2010, 07:26 AM
IN CHRONOLOGICAL ORDER...FOR YOUR READING PLEASURE........
PLEASE...SPARE ME THE MORONIC AD HOMINEMS.....
1. 1916......Germany is winning World War 1, and makes a generous peace offer to Great Britain. Germany, which was the last nation to mobilize for WWI, offers to basically go back to how everthing was before the war.
2. Zionists approach the UK leaders with a dirty deal. "Don't make peace. You can still win this war if the USA joins on your side." They offer to use their influence to bring the USA into the war on UK's side. The price the UK must pay is to take over Palestine from the German-allied Ottoman Empire after the war - and to then allow jewish immigration into Palestine.
3. The Brits agree to "The Balfour Declaration" , later issued to Zionist Lord Rothschild. (Edit: Agreement was made privately in 1916...but not made public until 1917)
4. ....Anti German war propaganda in the US suddenly goes full blast. "Beat Back the Huns!"
5. Zionist owned puppet Woodrow Wilson manuevers the USA into this senseless war. The "yanks" arrive to take on the Germans and "make the world safe for democracy", while the Brits head south to concentrate on the Ottoman Turks.
6. Instead of fighting for America, 10,000 American zionists join the British front lines to fight against the Turks.
7. In Germany, Zionist and Marxist jewish leaders begin organizing wartime labor strikes in the German weapons factories. The Zionist press begins underming the war effort. UK drops fliers (written in Yiddish) all over Germany...promising the jews a piece of Palestine after the war.
8. After many months of bloody fighting, Wilson offers Germany a just "peace without victory." Trusting Wilson's words, the Germans lay down their arms and retreat
9. The Brutal Treaty of Versailles is imposed upon occupied Germany (1918). Zionist bankers crafted the monetray reperations clause which crushed the German economy.
10. After the war was over, the German people realized that Zionist and Marxist jews had stabbed her in the back. A distrous hyper-inflation followed. Germany was to remain under occupation until 1932.
11. German and Austrian territory was stripped away and parceled out to the newly created states of Poland and Czechoslavkia. One section of Germany was actually cut off from the mainland like an island, leaving a "Polish corridor" cutting right through Germany.
12. A talented artist and gifted orator named Adolf Hitler rose to prominence through his fiery speeches denouncing Versailles, the Marxists, the "November Criminals" who collaborated with the West, and the jewish newspapers and jewish central bankers.
13. Hitler was elected Chancellor in 1932. The worldwide depression hit Germany particulary hard. The German economy lay in ruins.
14. Hitler quickly moved to consolidate power and to arrest or deport communists.
15. Jews were permitted to live and work in Germany, but they were barrd from sensitive areas such as government, media, and banking. Many jews emigrated peacefully. Many also stayed.
16. Hitler pulled Germany out of the League of Nations and he took over Germany's Warburg/Rothschild "Fed." New currency was issued interest-free. This would be like an American president pulling us out of the UN and "Ending The Fed."
17. Globalist and Zionist propaganda began immediately. Boycotts of Germany and other threats were issued throughout the 1930's. Sulzberger-Ochs owned NY Times began agitating against Germany. In 1933, Fed Chairman Eugene Meyer resigned from his position so that he could buy the Washington Post. He quickly turned it into a Stalin friendly / Hitler hating propaganda sheet. (His grandson Donald Graham runs the Post today)
18. Within 3 years, the German economy was booming while the rest of the world was mired in Keynesian Depression. The autobahn was built and Volkswagens were mass produced. Germany was back!..Even Hitler's critics agree....the German people of all classes loved Hitler.
19. A conference of France, UK, Italy, and Germany agreed that the German Sudetland should be transferred from Czechoslovakia and placed under the German Reich. The Sudetan Germans celebrated, while the warmongering drunken Churchill called UK Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain "an appeaser."
20. Without a shot being fired, Austria (Hitler's birthplace) merged with Germany in 1938, uniting the German speaking people of Europe. Hitler was given a hero's welcome upon his return to Austria. But the western media called this voluntary Austro-German reunification "a conquest."
21. Hitler offered a deal to Poland. Return Eastern Prussia and the German city of Danzig to us (stolen by Versailes), and we'll let you have a mile wide corridor to the Baltic Sea so that you won't be landlocked.
22. Poles consider the offer but are urged by FDR behind the scenes to not make a deal. (as confirmed in the diary of Polish ambassador to the US)
23. Germans are severely mistreated under the Polish military dictatorship. (Czecks stranded in Poland made the same complaint.) On Sept 1, 1939, Germany puts an end to this nonsense and reclaims it's stolen land & people by force. Hitler makes no further claims against Polish territory.
24. UK and France immediately declare war against Germany for it's "invasion" of Poland. US media goes bonkers as well. Of course, no one complains about the fact that the Soviet Unon invades Poland just two weeks later....swallowing up the whole country, and murdering much of Poland's intellectual and military elite!!!
25. From Sept 1939 to April 1940, UK and French mass 500,000 troops along the Belgian and Holland border. Immense political pressure is placed upon these two small nation to allow Allied bases to be established there.
26. Hitler issues numerous pleas for the UK and France to withdraw their war declarations...but the cross channel Allied build up continues.
27. The Allies finally strike a deal with Holland/Belgium. The invasion of Germany is not to come through it's re-fortified border with France (The Rhineland)...but through Holland/Belgium.
28. Hitler's hand is forced. The German Blitz in the West is a PRE-EMPTIVE defensive measure. The entire allied force is caught unprepared and ends up being pinned on the beaches of Dunkirk.
29. Of course, the western press (as well as today's History Books) portray this as "Germany conquers Holland/Belgium/Luxembourg"
30. As a show of good faith to the British, Hitler deliberately allows the Allied force to be boat lifted by local British fishermen. He could have captured the entire force, but he believed that if the Brits could make a dignified retreat, he could achieve peace with them.
31. The Mad Dog, Alcholic, Neo-Con Churchill becomes Prime Minister....vowing to "fight them on the beaches...in the streets"
32. France accepts Germany's peace terms. Germany occupies northern France and fortifies its beaches against a British Invasion. The new French government under Marshall Petain is based in Vichy and is totally autonomus. Life in France goes on quietly.
33. Remember, Britian is an island, so in order to wage war against Germany, Churchill needs to re-establish his forces near Germany and/or on the European mainland somewhere. He is negotiating with the Danes and the Norwegians to establish bases there.
34. A Norwegian politician named Quisling gets wind of this dirty deal, and he informs the Germans. Again, as a pre-emptive move, Hitler quickly takes ports in Denmark and Norway. The Germans assure the Scandinavians that they have no intention of conquest. Life goes on quietly and peacefully for the Danes and Norwegians. After the war, Quisling's name becomes a word for treason..."quisling"....a totally unfair characterization.
35. The UK and German war was confined to the air. UK has bombed German civilian areas 8 times but Hitler never responded in kind. Finally, Hitler issued a warning that if there was one more air raid on civilian targets, Germany would respond likewise. When this happened, the western press hyped Germany's "bombing of civilians."
36. FDR secetly urged Churchill to keep fighting, assuring him that he would find a way to get the US into the war.
37. Germany was allied with Japan and Italy in an anti communist defense pact. This is the card that FDR would later play to get the USA into war.
38. In 1941, Mussolini (who fancied himself the new Caesar) attacked Greece. This was totally unrelated to Germany's war. The Italian were unsuccessful and this gave the British a potential opening on the mainland. The Brits said to the Greeks: "Hey. Would you like some help against the Italians?"....So Germany had to come and end this Italian-Greek war so that the Brits could not set up shop in Southern Europe....Again, the western press portrayed this as a "conquest."....A similar scenario played out in Yugoslavia.
39. Soviet troops begin massing in the west. Hitler knew that sooner or later, Joe Stalin would break his peace pact and invade Europe while Germany and UK were pre-occupied with each other. In June of 1941, Hitler catches the Soviets flat footed....taking millions of POW's and driving the Soviet killers deep into the Russian heartland. The liberated Ukrainians and Baltic peoples welcomed the German columns with cheers and showers of roses.
40. The communist underground in America goes nuts! FDR starts sending war supplies to the Soviets...thus rescung Soviet communism from extinction.... Communist underground groups throughout Europe (including many jews) begin waging guerrilla attacks against German troops. By December of 1941, Germany occupies most of Europe...but is still pleading with the Brits to end the war.
41. Charles Lindbergh gives his famous speech in which he warns that FDR, the British, and the jews were trying to drive us into war. Joseph Kennedy expressed similar concerns (confirmed in diary of James Forrestal)
42. Hitler refused to respond to FDR's provokations (USA actually helped the Brits to spot and sink the Bismark, killing hundreds of German sailors)...so FDR decides to bait Japan instead. He cuts off their oil shipments, closes the Panama Canal to them, sails his destroyers through Japanese waters etc. Realizing that sooner or later the Americans would enter the war, Japan decides to take the first shot by sinking as many US ships as possible at Pearl Harbor. FDR KNEW the attack was coming but allowed 2000 sailors to die...just so we could enter the war.
43. The US enters the war. Italy quickly collapses...leaving Germany to wage war on THREE fronts. .....South (Italy)....(East) Russia....and the west after the Normandy invasion. During this time, hundreds of thousands of German women and children are being burned alive by cruel Allied firebombings. Jews, communists, and thieving gypsies are interned in concentration camps. As war conditions detriorate, typhus epidemics spread throughout the camps....killing many.
44. Germany's days are numbered. General Patton wants to take Germany so that the Russians do not. But FDR and Eisenhower are preserving East Germany for Stalin...whose beastly communists would go on to gang rape an estimated 2 million German women. Patton later stated that "We fought the wrong people."....Patton would later be assassinated under orders from Eisenhower or higher.
45. Rather than submitting himself to "the spectacle of a jewish show trial", Hitler commits suicide on April 30, 1945. In his final testament, he writes: "It is untrue that either I or anyone else in Germany wanted war with Britai or America. This war was wanted solely by International Jewry and its henchmen."
46. Germany surrenders unconditionally on May 1, 1945. That SAME DAY....Stalin issues a report stating that the German Camp in Auschwitz , Poland used gas chambers to kill millions of people. A myth was born...a myth that suited the Marxists, the Globalists, and the Zionists....a myth that led to the sympathetic establishment of Israel.
47. Japan was trying to make a surrender deal...but Truman was determined to nuke them (FDR had also died in April 1945). The MURDEROUS nukes ended the war in Japan.
48. North Korea and Manchuria were given to Stalin. Stalin had declared war on Japan AFTER the two A bombs were dropped!!!! This was his reward ! This was how commnism spread to Asia. As a result of FDR/Truman's gift to Stalin...the Korean War and Viet Nam War would later be fought.
49. German military leaders were tried before the kangaroo court of Nuremburg and then MURDERED.
50.Out of the ashes of WW2, the UN, the IMF, and the World Bank were established.... as well as the seeds of the socialist EU and the war making NATO.
51. 1948...ISRAEL IS ESTABLISHED....OPENING UP A WHOLE OTHER CAN OF WORMS!
So you see....Hitler was put down because HE DEFIED THE NEW WORLD ORDER. It is necessary for the Powers That Be to demonize and vilify him to this day....
Think about it......is it even possible to have a conversation obout politics today ...either from the "left" or the "right" without Hitler eventually being mentioned???? Bush is Hitler....Obama is Hitler......lol
__________________
TheHumblePhysicist
11-15-2010, 12:34 AM
I think Sofia wants attention. Leave her alone with her crazy theories. It would be a shame to see this thread die on her account.
RonPaulwillWin
11-15-2010, 01:42 AM
What evidence is there of this "extirmination"????
The only thing that those "gas chambers" exterminated was typhous spreading lice....
typhous killed millions of inmates as war conditions in bombed out Germany deteriorated...
The "extirmination" myth originated in a Soviet propaganda report released after the war ended.
This is where I stop supporting your argument.
heavenlyboy34
11-15-2010, 01:47 AM
I think Sofia wants attention. Leave her alone with her crazy theories. It would be a shame to see this thread die on her account.
Many of the points Sofia made are also made by the likes of Pat Buchannan. Is he "crazy" too? (I'm neutral on this issue, as I haven't done enough research)
cindy25
11-15-2010, 01:48 AM
while some of this might be considered crazy, it is a fact that FDR ordered American planes to remain on the ground at Clark field, Philippines instead of taking to the air to fight.
these planes might have been able to prevent a Japanese invasion of the Philippines.
it is also a fact that FDR refused to issue passports to American ex-pats in Manila so they would be stranded there as POWs
British Singapore needlessly surrendered to a Japanese force far inferior, a force than was nearly out of ammo
sofia
11-15-2010, 07:17 AM
I think Sofia wants attention. Leave her alone with her crazy theories. It would be a shame to see this thread die on her account.
instead of cheap ad homineme...how about you attempt to rebut any of the points of WW2 that I listed.
I can support each one with evidence and logic AND not have to insult you.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.