Most controversial thread ever (enter at your own risk)


(Silvanito) #141

I thought you all might be interested in these lesser known facts about WW2 that I’ve presented, but apparently not

Maybe it’s still a sensitive subject to many even after 65 years


(Stanton) #142

Yes, they did, but after all what the German army (and not only the SS) did to the Russians, the Germans were the last to complain (which they of course do until today). The German army destroyed complete areas in Russia killing everybody around (childs, women, the aged and infirm). Don’t tell me the German army was a fair one, there are enough photos which show what they did.

War crimes happen in every war, from every involved army (don’t know if there are any exceptions). The allies also shot some war prisoners and surely some rapes happened, but these were individual cases, while the Germans committed mass murder.

The bombing of the German cities was maybe a war criminal, but as far as I remember this was also started by the Germans bombing British cities. But dropping the A-bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki was also mass murder and absolutely not necessary.

It was a dirty war, and the Germans had a great share in making it dirty.


(Stanton) #143

Saying they were executed is correct, and at the same time a belittlement of bestial mass murder.


(Stanton) #144

[quote=“Lindberg, post:116, topic:2465”]The SPD was also marxist even though they were social-democrats, advocating class struggle and being internationalists, so probably not an alternative for former NSDAP members

And whether you like it or not Stanton, the NSDAP, the National Socialist German Workers Party, was extremely concerned with social issues and raising the standard of the working class from their poor conditions during the Weimar era. At the same time the National Socialist society was filled with a sense that everyone was working for the benefit of all the community, the volksgemeinschaft. This in contrast to marxists who put different classes against each other to disunite society. You could say it’s two different forms of socialism. The NSDAP was also quite radical, not conservative[/quote]
I don’t know if that is true.
But even if so, it doesn’t change the fact that most Nazis had a right wing thinking and went after WW2 straight into right wing and conservative German parties.


(El Topo) #145

And this shit goes on, I really think that Sebastian should close this thread.
I don’t have any issues with freedom of speech whatsoever, one of my all time favourite bands it’s Death in June and Douglas Pearce always played in an artitistic way with all that militar symbolism, I have also deal with all the skinheads bunch in concerts, in the night life in general, in the armed forces, football games, and in general they are dumb as doors, so for me anyone it’s free to do what they want as long they respect the democratic laws, hey Hitler did won it’s first elections fair and square so.
If Lindberg is doing all this nonsense and inappropriate nazi thing in this friendly international SW forum as some sort of joke it’s a bad joke I tell you, if his doing this as an agent provocateur , trying to start this political nonsence discussions about who have rape kill or destroy more in a war, with the objective of distracting us and trying to create an hostil environment among the forum users as I believe he’s trying to do (I’ve read all his nazi posts), it’s also stupid and it wont work because we are all intelligent people here regardless of our believes, today’s Europe was created from WWII ashes.
Lindberg I’ve been in Bosnia and one my missions during my period there in the Nato SFOR Command was to give cover to the UN and International court, while they were looking for hidden mass graves, so all we need it’s one few mad mens and the rest will have to follow, sometimes only to survive, so even in a small scale I really don’t want to see that again at least in Europe, it’s enought all the shit that happens around the world.
That’s why I would prefere to see this thread erased, If I was given the choice I would always prefer to be the Churchill of the Forum not the Chamberlain.


(korano) #146

[quote=“Stanton, post:142, topic:2465”]But dropping the A-bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki was also mass murder and absolutely not necessary.[/quote]The A-bomb in Japan was and still is an unimaginably horrible thing. But think of what would have happened if it didn’t happen? Some say that due to the Japanese’s strong sense of duty and honor, it is fairly possible they would have fought to the last man. I’m trying as hard as possible to not sound like I’m defending it because it’s hard to. More people would have probably died without it. But we’ll never know.

the A-bomb was terrible, about as terrible as war in general.

@Reds:
The Red Army is about as guilty as the germans. However, the Russians atleast helped stop the German war machine and end WWII.


(Major Clyde) #147

Of course you will! :wink:


(Stanton) #148

[quote=“korano, post:146, topic:2465”]The A-bomb in Japan was and still is an unimaginably horrible thing. But think of what would have happened if it didn’t happen? Some say that due to the Japanese’s strong sense of duty and honor, it is fairly possible they would have fought to the last man. I’m trying as hard as possible to not sound like I’m defending it because it’s hard to. More people would have probably died without it. But we’ll never know.

the A-bomb was terrible, about as terrible as war in general.[/quote]

I can understand that they dropped the A-bomb to end the war (and Germany was damn lucky that they had already capitulated), but maybe it wasn’t necessary to drop it on a city to show its destroying power.
But I can’t see any reason to destroy another city a few days later.

And in both cases it meant to kill many civilians, and not only the destroying of industry.


(Major Clyde) #149

Deleting this thread does NOT remove “odious” political discussions from the Forum-- with every one of your posts I am hit in the face with Communist mass-murderers via your avatar. Think about it…


(Major Clyde) #150

Under Che, Havana’s La Cabana fortress was converted into Cuba’s Lubianka. He was a true Chekist: “Always interrogate your prisoners at night,” Che commanded his prosecutorial goons, “a man is easier to cow at night, his mental resistance is always lower.”

A Cuban prosecutor of the time who quickly defected in horror and disgust named Jose Vilasuso estimates that Che signed 400 death warrants the first few months of his command in La Cabana. A Basque priest named Iaki de Aspiazu, who was often on hand to perform confessions and last rites, says Che personally ordered 700 executions by firing squad during the period. Cuban journalist Luis Ortega, who knew Che as early as 1954, writes in his book Yo Soy El Che! that Guevara sent 1,897 men to the firing squad.

In his book Che Guevara: A Biography, Daniel James writes that Che himself admitted to ordering “several thousand” executions during the first year of the Castro regime. Felix Rodriguez, the Cuban-American CIA operative who helped track him down in Bolivia and was the last person to question him, says that Che during his final talk, admitted to “a couple thousand” executions. But he shrugged them off as all being of “imperialist spies and CIA agents.”

Vengeance, much less justice, had little to do with the Castro/Che directed bloodbath in the first months of 1959. Che’s murderous agenda in La Cabana fortress in 1959 was exactly Stalin’s murderous agenda in the Katyn Forest in 1940. Like Stalin’s massacre of the Polish officer corps, like Stalin’s Great Terror against his own officer corps a few years earlier, Che’s firing squad marathons were a perfectly rational and cold blooded exercise that served their purpose ideally. His bloodbath decapitated literally and figuratively the first ranks of Cuba’s anti-Castro rebels.

Five years earlier, while still a Communist hobo in Guatemala, Che had seen the Guatemalan officer corps with CIA assistance rise against the Red regime of Jacobo Arbenz and send him and his Communist minions hightailing into exile. (For those leftists who still think that Arbenz was an innocent “nationalist” victimized by the fiendish United Fruit Company and their CIA proxies, please note: Arbenz sought exile not in France or Spain or even Mexico – the traditional havens for deposed Latin-American politicians – but in the Soviet satellite, Czechoslovakia. Also, the coup went into motion, not when Arbenz started nationalizing United Fruit property, but when a cargo of Soviet-bloc weapons arrived in Guatemala. “Arbenz didn’t execute enough people,” was how Guevara explained the Guatemalan coup’s success.)

Fidel and Che didn’t want a repeat of the Guatemalan coup in Cuba. Equally important, the massacres cowed and terrorized. Most of them came after public trials. And the executions, right down to the final shattering of the skull with the coup de grace from a massive .45 slug fired at five paces, were public too. Guevara made it a policy for his men to parade the families and friends of the executed before the blood, bone and brain spattered firing squad.

Had Ernesto Guevara De La Serna y Lynch not linked up with Raul and Fidel Castro in Mexico city that fateful summer of 1955 – had he not linked up with a Cuban exile named Nico Lopez in Guatemala the year before who later introduced him to Raul and Fidel Castro in Mexico city – everything points to Ernesto continuing his life of a traveling hobo, mooching off women, staying in flophouses and scribbling unreadable poetry. Che was a Revolutionary Ringo Starr. By pure chance, he fell in with the right bunch at just the right time and rode their coattails to fame. His very name “Che” was imparted by the Cubans who hob-knobbed with him in Mexico. Argentines use the term “Che” much like Cubans use “Chico” or Michael Moore fans use “dude.” The Cubans noticed Guevara using it so they pasted it to him. And it stuck.

Fidel had brought the recently monikered “Che” on the Granma invasion of Cuba as the rebel group’s doctor, based on his bogus credentials. On the harrowing boat ride through turbulent seas from the Yucatan to Cuba’s Oriente province in the decrepit old yacht, a rebel found Che lying comatose in the boat’s cabin. He rushed to the commander, “Fidel, looks like Che’s dead!”

“Well, if he’s dead,” replied Castro. “Then throw him overboard.” In fact Guevara was suffering the combined effects of seasickness and an asthma attack. Evidently, Che was not regarded as an invaluable member of the expedition at the time.

But today his famous photo by Alberto Korda ranks as the most reproduced print in the world. Last year Burlington Industries introduced a line of infant wear bearing his famous image. Even the Pope, on his visit to Cuba in 1998, spoke approvingly about Che’s “ideals.” Che owes all this hype and flummery to the century’s top media swindler, Fidel Castro, who also dispatched the hero deliberately to his death. As those who know say, “Fidel only praises the dead.”

                                *****************

(Major Clyde) #151

[quote=“Silence”]… or just cruel people.

Still no evidence…[/quote]

That’s right-- execute “cruel” people. Would you execute Lindberg? (Sorry, Lindberg, I’m just making a point.)

I am aware that it is futile to try to argue with True Believers.

But then you never did answer my question— What is to be done with those people who refuse to cooperate in the building of your Radiant Future? All you said was that life isn’t fair. That’s okay. I know the answer…


(scherpschutter) #152

An interesting question is why we are far more lenient towards communism (or the far left in general) than towards fascism (or the far right in general). This problem was put forward by Dutch politician Frits Bolkenstein in the early nineties. He had noticed that former communists were still in politics and hardly anybody was making any fuzz over it, while former fascists were treated like dirt by the media (and other politicians). Things have changed a little in the last decade (mainly because of the problems with mass immigration), but essentially we still tend to think more positively about communism than about fascism. Many of us have the feeling that Hitler was a dictator or a mass murderer because he was a fascist, while Stalin was a dictator and a mass murderer although he was a communist (you also often hear that he wasn’t a ‘true’ communist). There’s still a communist party in Belgium; it’s rather small, but they’re treated nicely by the press, and they all but hide their communist sympathies. There are right-wing parties in most western European countries, but usually they strongly deny they’re fascists (while others accuse them of being fascists). It’s still thought to be a shame when somebody was a member of the fascist movement when he was young. If it comes out, people are forced to withdraw from public life. I don’t know if this is true in other European countries (you often hear that former fascists became members of main stream, centre right political parties in Germany), but in Holland several politicians have been forced to end their political career after someone had dug up a document that proved that the person in question had been a member of a far right movement.

I have often noticed that people who have lived under a communist dictatorship, think otherwise. They are often appalled that people, especially intellectuals, in western countries have sympathy for communist or at least far-left politics. The fact that we, in Western Europe that is, have never lived under a communist dictatorship, is of course part of the explanation why we think more positively about communism than about fascism, but it’s not the entire explanation. I have often discussed this problem with students and colleagues, and I’ve never heard a good, perfectly acceptable explanation for the phenomenon.


(El Topo) #153

My father fought agaisnt Cuban militar advisers (among others) in Angola, they capture some, even a cuban capitan was capture, but in Guine (where the war was more thought), try to tell him that.

Anyway if someone enters this forum for the first time and see this Hitler thing wath it’s gonna think about it, I just can’t cope with that, and hey, we in Portugal did not have a left dictadorship but a fascist one, well it didn’t transform us in an Albania or something, but it wasn’t far from that.


(Stanton) #154

[quote=“scherpschutter, post:152, topic:2465”]An interesting question is why we are far more lenient towards communism (or the far left in general) than towards fascism (or the far right in general). This problem was put forward by Dutch politician Frits Bolkenstein in the early nineties. He had noticed that former communists were still in politics and hardly anybody was making any fuzz over it, while former fascists were treated like dirt by the media (and other politicians). Things have changed a little in the last decade (mainly because of the problems with mass immigration), but essentially we still tend to think more positively about communism than about fascism. Many of us have the feeling that Hitler was a dictator or a mass murderer because he was a fascist, while Stalin was a dictator and a mass murderer although he was a communist (you also often hear that he wasn’t a ‘true’ communist). There’s still a communist party in Belgium; it’s rather small, but they’re treated nicely by the press, and they all but hide their communist sympathies. There are right-wing parties in most western European countries, but usually they strongly deny they’re fascists (while others accuse them of being fascists). It’s still thought to be a shame when somebody was a member of the fascist movement when he was young. If it comes out, people are forced to withdraw from public life. I don’t know if this is true in other European countries (you often hear that former fascists became members of main stream, centre right political parties in Germany), but in Holland several politicians have been forced to end their political career after someone had dug up a document that proved that the person in question had been a member of a far right movement.

I have often noticed that people who have lived under a communist dictatorship, think otherwise. They are often appalled that people, especially intellectuals, in western countries have sympathy for communist or at least far-left politics. The fact that we, in Western Europe that is, have never lived under a communist dictatorship, is of course part of the explanation why we think more positively about communism than about fascism, but it’s not the entire explanation. I have often discussed this problem with students and colleagues, and I’ve never heard a good, perfectly acceptable explanation for the phenomenon.[/quote]

And people still go to the church and believe in the benignity of god, even if in the last 1000 years the church and other people who called themselves Christian have done every imaginable cruelty to other people. In the name of god and too often with the best intentions.

I think people still see the idea behind the communism, which was perverted by the communists, like the Christian ideals were too often perverted by the Christians.
While I think that Hitler was more honest, albeit also often a hypocrite. He did what he wanted to do. Fighting against what he thought were inferior races and destroying the Jews.

We detest Hitler not only for what he did but also for his ideas, but we detest the communist leaders for what they did to the idea of Marxism.

The last approximated figures I read a few years ago were 50 mio for Hitler, 50 mio for Stalin and 70 mio dead people for Mao.
The figures for Stalin and Mao are without being responsible for a World War and it is still hard to imagine how that can be possible. But I have not much doubt that they are true, or let’s say even half or a tenth of the figures are shocking and hard to believe.


(Andy) #155

[quote=“scherpschutter, post:152, topic:2465”]An interesting question is why we are far more lenient towards communism (or the far left in general) than towards fascism (or the far right in general). This problem was put forward by Dutch politician Frits Bolkenstein in the early nineties. He had noticed that former communists were still in politics and hardly anybody was making any fuzz over it, while former fascists were treated like dirt by the media (and other politicians). Things have changed a little in the last decade (mainly because of the problems with mass immigration), but essentially we still tend to think more positively about communism than about fascism. Many of us have the feeling that Hitler was a dictator or a mass murderer because he was a fascist, while Stalin was a dictator and a mass murderer although he was a communist (you also often hear that he wasn’t a ‘true’ communist). There’s still a communist party in Belgium; it’s rather small, but they’re treated nicely by the press, and they all but hide their communist sympathies. There are right-wing parties in most western European countries, but usually they strongly deny they’re fascists (while others accuse them of being fascists). It’s still thought to be a shame when somebody was a member of the fascist movement when he was young. If it comes out, people are forced to withdraw from public life. I don’t know if this is true in other European countries (you often hear that former fascists became members of main stream, centre right political parties in Germany), but in Holland several politicians have been forced to end their political career after someone had dug up a document that proved that the person in question had been a member of a far right movement.

I have often noticed that people who have lived under a communist dictatorship, think otherwise. They are often appalled that people, especially intellectuals, in western countries have sympathy for communist or at least far-left politics. The fact that we, in Western Europe that is, have never lived under a communist dictatorship, is of course part of the explanation why we think more positively about communism than about fascism, but it’s not the entire explanation. I have often discussed this problem with students and colleagues, and I’ve never heard a good, perfectly acceptable explanation for the phenomenon.[/quote]

Excellent post. I couldn’t have said it better myself. I have been tempted to comment on this thread for a while but have resisted because I didn’t want to get involved with all of this Hitler talk. I just think scherpschutter is making an excellent point here.


(korano) #156

I don’t pick least or most in this pick. I hate all three. Hitler was anti semetic mass murderer, Stalin was a vile wife beater who murdered millions of his own country men. Mao pretty much the same. All terrible people.


(Stanton) #157

There are always differences between people


(korano) #158

Eery! very eery


(John Welles) #159

Be afraid. Be very afraid. It gives you food for thought doesn’t it?

As Stanton said, there are always differances in people: no one person’s mind is alike, not even identicle twins. Hitler, I think, is possibly the worse because he spread his destruction to the rest of the word, whereas Mao and Stalin (although I’m sure he would’ve liked to) didn’t to the same extent. But all three were monsters whose lives overlapped. Perhaps that tells you something about the last centuary. Remember: never buy into the good old days rubbish, because they certainly weren’t any better than now.


(El Topo) #160

People do not have the notion but in this days of today the world have become a very dangerous place, and I’m afraid the future won’t a bright one, by the contrary.