Quote: |
Those are quite the same as SS units, NKVD units in WW2. |
Quote: |
I would class the average WW2 Japanese soldier as a fanatic. |
Blackstump wrote (View Post): |
This post is inspired by a recent CCs survey.
Fanatic by definition usally applies to those who have (or suffers from) a religous fervour. |
Quote: |
I dont believe that the average SS soldier was a fanatic. Maybe Hitler had some esoteric bent, but im sure his religion was left of Atillas. I would class the average WW2 Japanese soldier as a fanatic. |
Quote: |
No doubt some SS soldiers where terroists but since they were uniformed regular soldiers probably sadists would be a better description. These are found in all armies and all walks of life. |
Quote: |
Is the Muslim minority hardliners with a large moderate Muslim community as a possible back up, our worst threat to world peace. Those i would call Religous fanatics. |
Quote: |
Or could Iran or North Korea be the real threat of tommorow. Those i would call Political fanatics. Or maybe its China with its fast expanding power and the worlds largest army the latter probably qualifying for a warrior nation these days. |
7A_Woulf wrote (View Post): |
Let me see if I got this anti-German crusade right? |
7A_Woulf wrote (View Post): |
-Every German citizens, from 1933 to present days are guilty of the war-crimes committed during WWII? |
7A_Woulf wrote (View Post): |
-The entire German 'army' (including Heer, Luftwaffe, Kriegsmarine and SS) are guilty of war-crimes and holocaust, regardless if they committed any or not? |
7A_Woulf wrote (View Post): |
-But in a war or any other armed conflict, there are no 'good' or 'bad' guys. |
7A_Woulf wrote (View Post): |
What about war-crimes, atrocities and crimes against humanity committed by the Allied during WWII? Have there ever been a Nuremberg Trial about that? |
Therion wrote (View Post): |
No, it's a crusade against Nazi Germany, more precisely against German war of aggression. |
Therion wrote (View Post): |
Nice try to whitewash the history and hiding behind Holocaust and so called "war crimes". Do you have trouble comprehending why participating in German war of aggression was fucking evil? WWII was about German soldiers illegally crossing borders of other countries, murdering government servicemen trying to stop them, destroying government property, murdering civilians with bombs and artillery, destroying unimaginable amounts of private property, mass robbery, mass kidnappings, slavery, etc. The rest was attempt to stop them and to make them give back what they have stolen. |
Therion wrote (View Post): |
While I can sympathize with German soldiers that fought because they were forced to fight, I absolutely condemn those who participated in German wars of aggression because of stuff like "duty", "honour", "patriotism", "nationalism", etc. or enjoyed the idea of German conquest in any way. |
Therion wrote (View Post): |
There are bad guys. Those who start wars of aggression and those who willingly participate in them. |
Quote: |
The entire German 'army' (including Heer, Luftwaffe, Kriegsmarine and SS) are guilty of war-crimes and holocaust, regardless if they committed any or not? |
Quote: |
Have you forgotten the Nuremberg Trials? The Germans have already been trialled, sentenced or freed from all allegations. (under more, or less, correct forms...) |
Quote: |
What about war-crimes, atrocities and crimes against humanity committed by the Allied during WWII? Have there ever been a Nuremberg Trial about that |
Quote: |
The Western Allied have a 70-year old tradition of terror-bombing their opponents to submission. |
Quote: |
GW Bush used lies about WMD to invade Iraq; -But one of the few country that have used WMD in an armed conflict is USA! |
Quote: |
There were a Swed during WWII that became a Concentration-camp guard, not because he hated Jews or was a hard-core Nazi. -He wanted to go to Germany and become a policeman, since he admired the German society, but once there he ended up as a guard against his intentions since he had applied to SS-vt without knowing it... |
Dima wrote (View Post): | ||
how come one could be so naive? |
Dima wrote (View Post): | ||
in comparison to the German atrocities they are nothing.. |
Dima wrote (View Post): | ||
haha, so true for A.Hitler and his army . |
Dima wrote (View Post): | ||
there were much more sweds fighing in SS against USSR. If you check CSO site, i quoted number of sweds hold as POW in 1946. Hopefully, Wiking has very fast people turnover on EF . |
7A_Woulf wrote (View Post): | ||
Isn't all wars wars of aggression? |
7A_Woulf wrote (View Post): |
-There have been many wars of aggression since WWII, why are all people so quick to condemn Nazi-Germany, while another country can start them over and over again with the silent-approval from the rest of the world? My answer: "winners-and-loosers", money and rhetoric... |
7A_Woulf wrote (View Post): |
I have never, and will never, whitewash the crimes committed by Nazi-Germany! Adolf was a sick puppy, and the crimes committed due to him should never be forgotten. The risk if we forget is another dogmatic leader like Adolf may rise again somewhere and do it all over again. |
7A_Woulf wrote (View Post): |
My point is that there were an unique situation after WWII, with the Nuremberg Trials, so the majority of those guilty of crimes were trialled. |
7A_Woulf wrote (View Post): |
My point is that there were an unique situation after WWII, with the Nuremberg Trials, so the majority of those guilty of crimes were trialled. We can't keep blaming Germany and those who were born in 'the wrong country' for decade after decade. It's been 65 since the war ended, it's maybe time to forgive and forget some parts of what happened? |
7A_Woulf wrote (View Post): |
My point is that there were an unique situation after WWII, with the Nuremberg Trials, so the majority of those guilty of crimes were trialled. We can't keep blaming Germany and those who were born in 'the wrong country' for decade after decade. It's been 65 since the war ended, it's maybe time to forgive and forget some parts of what happened? And maybe we should take the leaf from our eyes? All participants committed crimes, it's the human nature of war to do that... |
7A_Woulf wrote (View Post): |
If those aren't reasons to fight a war, aggressive or not, we better scrap every army in the world. (A good idea on its own, but not a realistic one...) Ask any soldier and that's the reasons he thinks he fights; -Unless he's a cold-hearted realist and does it for money. Any army is indoctrinated with words like "duty", "honour", "patriotism", "nationalism", etc. |
7A_Woulf wrote (View Post): |
And are all 'Bad Guys' really bad? There were a Swed during WWII that became a Concentration-camp guard, not because he hated Jews or was a hard-core Nazi. -He wanted to go to Germany and become a policeman, since he admired the German society, but once there he ended up as a guard against his intentions since he had applied to SS-vt without knowing it... |
7A_Woulf wrote (View Post): |
It is the nature of an armed force to follow order without discussion. If you don't do it, you are committing a crime, just as much as if you follows an order to murder civilians or bomb a village. The problem for a soldier is the fact that he is bound to follow orders, but he can't use the fact that he followed orders as a defence if he commits a crime... |
7A_Woulf wrote (View Post): |
And yes, the people on the streets demonstrates against the war, then they listen to the political rhetoric of those supporting the war (the self-good, lying, political-bastards in our governments) and votes for them another mandate-period. Sadly, every democracy today is a joke; -It's not the people that rules a country today, it is the money! (and I'll guess that it answers your question if I believe in "justice of courts and politics"?) But, I'm no the one that claims I'm the self-righteous one who defend democracy and freedom. I'm just a grumpy old man that wants people to look beyond the 'truth' they feed us with. And if that means I have to defend the 'wrong side' to create a debate and make people think, so be it. |
7A_Woulf wrote (View Post): |
I'm just a grumpy old man that wants people to look beyond the 'truth' they feed us with. |
7A_Woulf wrote (View Post): |
What I mean is that we can't keep bashing the Germans for what happened over 60 years ago, they don't have a genetic liability for WWII. |
7A_Woulf wrote (View Post): |
And you can't blame every soldiers of the Riech for what some of them did with the approval and orders of the system; -Just as little as you can blame the entire US Army for what have happened in Vietnam, Afghanistan and Iraq, or every muslim for what some fanatics have done. |
7A_Woulf wrote (View Post): |
It is the nature of an armed force to follow order without discussion. If you don't do it, you are committing a crime, just as much as if you follows an order to murder civilians or bomb a village. The problem for a soldier is the fact that he is bound to follow orders, but he can't use the fact that he followed orders as a defence if he commits a crime... |
7A_Woulf wrote (View Post): |
Self-defence and protection of innocents are beautiful words and a just cause to fight, but sadly you don't here those words very often when professional soldiers talks about why they are fighting. "Even the old Greeks" talked about honour, duty and patriotism, nationalism came much later with the creation of the National states as we know them today. I'm not only defending the Prussian officers who fought for Hitler under those banners, but every soldier that are broken into believing that: -Werther it is before or after enlisting. |
vonB wrote (View Post): |
Any individual whose conscience (or intelligence) found themselves at odds with this, could certainly find themselves suffering the consequences themselves from their own side. There are those who refused to accept the brutalities, and some of those paid with their lives, which merely illustrates the mistake in generalising. |
vonB wrote (View Post): |
As with everything in life, context is important. A fanatic is someone who is intolerant to any alternative (to their view). This does not mean that it is by definition malignant. However, because the psychology of the fanatic is obsessional, it can often manifest maliganantly.
It is not limited to religion; it is more a characteristic of human nature. In most (all?) religions, you can see a distribution of 'believers', who range from the loose to the fundemental. A fundementalist 'Christian' is as dangerous as a fundementalist 'Muslim'. The abherrance is the fundementalism, not the religion. |
Quote: |
Can atrocities and crimes be graded? If the 'Good Guys' kills a POW, it's less of a crime than if a nazi does it? -Didn't the Allies go to war to fight for human rights and freedom? And I'm not talking about the Holocaust or aggressive war here, I'm talking about crimes against the Geneva Convention, rap, murder, pillaging, terror-bombings etc. |
Quote: |
I'm talking about crimes against the Geneva Convention, rap, murder, pillaging, terror-bombings etc. |
Quote: |
Maybe you can enlighten me here Dima? I've heard rumours about casualty-numbers on the Eastern Front that indicates the use of gas, but did any side ever use it? |
Quote: |
For instance, Guderian had enough guts and moral firmness to ignore stupid order about non-retreating in face of the Soviet 1941/42 offensive. He was sacked because of it, and he might have been even shot! |
output generated using printer-friendly topic mod. All times are GMT