I got into an interesting debate with an American friend of mine who is currently living in Germany. We discussed whether or not WWII German soldiers should be honored as veterans. We had different viewpoints -- although not entirely polar opinions.

He doesn't think they should be honored, but doesn't think that they should be ashamed of their Nazi service either.

I believe that they should be honored as the veterans that they are. They served their nation for a cause they believed to be the right one, and should be honored as any other veteran in their country. They served during a different time period, but with the same distinction and honor as any other German soldier currently serving.

It is true that many of the Nazis committed some of the most evil acts in recent history, but not all of them did -- and most of them were just low or middle ranking members with no major decision making authority, but who carried out the duties assigned to them with diligence, respect, and discipline.

History would judge these men if they were the victors. I judge the high ranking politicians and generals as the tyrants and war criminals that they are, and because of the evil policy making that they did.

How does anyone else feel?

Note: I am not aware of how WWII Nazi veterans are treated in Germany, and I am very interested in any perspective from someone who has spent time in Germany.

I'm willing to bet a good deal of those soldiers, perhaps even a substantial majority didn't necessarily support Hitler, or the Nazi movement at all.

Yes, they should. Whether or not they were on "our side" or not, they still served their country, either by force or decision.

I'm willing to bet a good deal of those soldiers, perhaps even a substantial majority didn't necessarily support Hitler, or the Nazi movement at all.

Yes, they should. Whether or not they were on "our side" or not, they still served their country, either by force or decision.

I second this notion.

I'm willing to bet a good deal of those soldiers, perhaps even a substantial majority didn't necessarily support Hitler, or the Nazi movement at all.

Yes, they should. Whether or not they were on "our side" or not, they still served their country, either by force or decision.

I third this notion.

I'm willing to bet a good deal of those soldiers, perhaps even a substantial majority didn't necessarily support Hitler, or the Nazi movement at all.

Yes, they should. Whether or not they were on "our side" or not, they still served their country, either by force or decision.

I fourth this notion.

Why don't you discuss why you agree with me? It will make for a better totse.

Because it would be like people saying the poor sons of bitches in Iraq shouldn't be considered veterans because of Bush 20 years from now.

I sincerely hope you're not really a Lieutenant in the armed forces. We both agree with each other, but the means to which you reached your conclusion is full of fallacies.

all people who fought in wars should be veterans because they all had to go through the shit that is battle, and a lot of them didnt have a choice.

though im also going to have to say that all veterans should not be proud of what they did, but did as an act of necessity

btw, how about japanese veterans? im pretty sure most of them supported their regime

Anyone willing to fight for what they believe in has my deepest respect.

You always have a choice.

-F☺rd

It is true that many of the Nazis committed some of the most evil acts in recent history

give me the name of ONE big country in this world who hasn´t. if you REALLY think hitler did worse stuff than stalin or hussein or ho chi-min or mao zedung, the japanese in ww2 or any dictator in africa or south america then you need to leave the my little pony forums for being informed about the world ..

Note: I am not aware of how WWII Nazi veterans are treated in Germany, and I am very interested in any perspective from someone who has spent time in Germany.

it depends on their branch of service. and how long they were in russian jails or if they fled to south america. 2 remarkable pilots were http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erich_Hartmann and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerhard_Barkhorn because of this dueling romantic view on air battles that was created in ww1 the actions of pilots weren´t considered as war crimes. unless you were the controversial rudel http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rudel
being in the marine was a bit honourful too http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_D%C3%B6nitz http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Otto_Kretschmer
many high ranked nazi soldiers worked for the nato, most other countries were babies compared to the experience the germans had. in 1940 the us army was smaller than the army of romania, and the equipment was from ww1 ..

yes they should be remembered but i think Nazi Germany is something that i think the Germans would rather forget. i mean i dont think it would be entirely appropriate for some of the veterans to turn up to the remeberance day parade in their Waffen SS uniforms. having said that, i do beleive that there should be at least some sort of service for the veterans and indeed those who lost their lives in the war.

give me the name of ONE big country in this world who hasn´t. if you REALLY think hitler did worse stuff than stalin or hussein or ho chi-min or mao zedung, the japanese in ww2 or any dictator in africa or south america then you need to leave the my little pony forums for being informed about the world

Canada, Sweden, Denmark, The Netherlands, etc.

Arguing that Hitler did not 'commit some of the most evil acts of recent times' is ridiculous. 6 000 000 Jews killed. Not to mention countless others in gas chambers for being black, gay, handicapped, etc. Not to mention the torture, Gestapo, etc.

Actions committed in Hitlers name > Hiroshima
| | > Bombing of Dresden
| | > Guantanamo and Iraq War

To be fair you DO have a point that Stalin and Mao caused millions of deaths as well - more than Hitler in fact. But you must admit, historically we have regarded 'world history' from a Western/Eurocentric viewpoint, and totse itself holds a 'Western' perspective (how many Chinese/Russian members are there?) Hitler has caused the most evil acts in recent Western (i.e. the first world) history. His actions detroyed the lives of millions and effected millions more. Cities in the West were decimated and had to be rebuilt at a huge cost. The social cost in poverty, homelessness, etc. was also astronomical. Millions more were sent home from the front lines living with their wartime experiences (many didn't speak of them, including my grandfather) and carrying them with them to their graves. These scars were passed down through the generations as well - ask your parents if their parents ever mentioned their time in the war or etc. These scars effected most of Europe, changed the way Brits saw themselves in relation to the world (stiff upper lip, take courage, defend these shores, etc) and changed the way we view things like nationalism, cult of personality , etc.

As 'The West' IS the cultural and political center of the world, you can than extrapolate that if something effects the West drastically, it affects the world drastically. Mao and Stalin were awful, racking up higher kill counts than Hitler and etc., but were they 'more evil' than Hitler in terms of effecting the world? I submit no.

Tinpot dictators in SA and Africa are the same thing. Even though they torture and kill their own people, does it affect you? No. Nobody gives a fuck except the people being tortured and killed (because they aren't in an area of the world that people care about) - the Third world).

Maybe you should fuck off and try thinking things through before you come out swinging with your oh-so-educated rhetoric about how Hitler really wasn't that bad in the grand scheme of things.

As a black, homosexual, jewish, disabled jazz musician...I have to say...Fuck the nazis. :mad:

6 000 000 Jews killed.

I stopped reading there.

You always have a choice.

-F☺rd
not necessarily, that is of course assuming you want to stay alive to be able to keep making choices though.

I'm willing to bet a good deal of those soldiers, perhaps even a substantial majority didn't necessarily support Hitler, or the Nazi movement at all.
.

I oppose this motion, I've spoken to a handful and they all confessed that they followed Hitler and Nazism, you've got to remember that most of the young men fighting in the Wehrmacht would have had a up to six years of Nazi indoctrination, from 1936 onwards membership of the Hitler Youth was mandatory for all boys, and it's membership was 5 million. During the war, when its membership was almost double that of 1936 80-90% of all HY members were drafted.

To suggest that Nazi soldiers didn't support Nazism is like suggesting Red Army troops weren't communist, while the ideology may seem totally alien to you its not that much different than the fact that most people born in a capitalist society believe that capitalism is a superior system to socialist planned economics.

As for the original question, no they shouldn't be honored, blindly serving your government and committing atrocities in its name is not something worthy of praise.

I think they should, well except for the SS.

I stopped reading there.

I stopped reading when he mentioned denmark and netherlands as big countries. funny he wrote so much and failed so hard at start ..

Many were drafted, it's not like they had a choice, I want to see somebody trying to argue with the Gestapo, making them understand that you're a conscientious objector and you refuse to serve in the armed forces, that would have probably earned you a one way ticket to a camp as a "weakling degenerate".

I stopped reading when he mentioned denmark and netherlands as big countries. funny he wrote so much and failed so hard at start ..

Oh, I guess you meant 'big' in the (retardedly) geographic sense? How big is big enough? Is Canada?

And to the rabbitweed - This isn't conspiracy. I know there are always going to be ignorant H-caust deniers here on &t but I think in this case we can agree that the most widely viewed historical standpoint is that yes, 6 000 000 jews did die.

If you want to debate historiography and say that in some post-modern sense none of us can 'really' know what happened, please do it in another thread.

Oh, I guess you meant 'big' in the (retardedly) geographic sense? How big is big enough? Is Canada?

the funny thing is that you think big numbers do the job, but then think 6 million jews are much more than what other dictators did. in fact 6 million jews are jackshit compared to what stalin did or in world history anyway. he killed more than 60 million people just in ww2. and he gave a fuck about jews, he hated them not any less than the nazis. antisemitism is not a concept created by the nazis, and there´s a reason why the first jews that tried to flee to america were sent back. that´s why it belongs to conspiracy, because the only reason why uninformed people like you think 6 million jews is a lot is because they are still crying the loudest. it´s part of their religion to tell everyone they are oppressed, hunted and therefor the chosen ones ..
oh you think you are better informed than me? then tell me please how many blacks as you said died in concentration camps? none of them died there, they were all part of the film industry or those who were part of ancient royal courts fought brave in the army. there´s a reason why josefine baker could travel all over nazi germany without any problems. and the number of blacks in germany at that time is much smaller than 100 ..
any how many blacks died on slave ships to the us? how many were killed, raped or battered without a reason? how many million native americans were killed or put into concentration camps? how many million chinese were killed by mao or the japanese in ww2? if you think 6 million is a big number your perception is very limited and your knowledge about history too small ..

And to the rabbitweed - This isn't conspiracy. I know there are always going to be ignorant H-caust deniers here on &t but I think in this case we can agree that the most widely viewed historical standpoint is that yes, 6 000 000 jews did die.

Six million is an exxageration, respectable estimates place it much closer to five. Millions of people also died who weren't Jews.

BSK : Did you eve read my original post? I explain why, even though Hitler had smaller numbers, affected the world more. I didn't think you were serious when you said you 'stopped reading' right at the beginning but I guess you were. Instead of bickering over #'s and fucking garbage go read the meat of my text and address that - stop zmanning this shit.

and you didn´t get my point about your limited perception ..

and you didn´t get my point about your limited perception ..

Did you mean it's wrong to see the West as the most widely viewed section in modern history? I am aware that we all have a 'limited perception' (also fuck you for your ad-hominum) because we live in the West, but I also suggest you do a bit of history. The West has been the center of world affaires at least since Charlemange in 800 AD, the establishment of Oxford in 1000 and Cambridge in 1200 was the beginning of the contemporary intellectual society (none in Moscow or Beijing, this early at least). To suggest the actions of Stalin or Mao affected the cities and culture of the West more than Hitler is both ignorant and irresponsible.

My point - The West is (and has been for a thousand years or more) the most powerful political area on a global scale. Mao and Stalin killed an assload of Russians and Chinese, African tinpot dictators killed Africans, ditto South America. Hitler killed A FUCKLOAD OF PEOPLE FROM THE WEST. Also decimated major cities, left the populations of the worlds financial and political centers (London, Washington, Paris, Berlin) with fractured views of themselves and the world.

Hitler affects the West a whole bunch - historically, culturally, politically, etc. The West affects the world. I.e. Hitler affected the world a whole bunch.

Mao and Stalin are not the same. Go to any major city in Europe, London, Paris, Rome and ask any 80 y/o who affected their lives more, Mao or Hitler.

Go to any major city in Europe, London, Paris, Rome and ask any 80 y/o who affected their lives more, Mao or Hitler.

so you justify your perception by perception of others? yeah that makes sense and gives you full right to call my conclusions retarded ..

just fyi, churchill had the plan to kill 15 million german civilians by his bombings. so who is more evil now? to be true, I give a fuck about your opinion, you´re none gram better than the nazis as you value life of jews more than others. that´s what the nazis did when they attacked east europe and killed all jews for "lebensraum" for their own people. oh wait, the same countries stalin attacked. so how can the same people that hitler killed count less when stalin kills them?

don´t answer, you failed ..

Eastern Europe isn't The West.

I see theres no point in arguing though, I even find it hard to pin down exactly exactly what kind of idiot you are. It seems like you're trying to argue different degree's of 'evil' (although that can't be it because that would be ridiculous, as evil is a construction), but than you keep mentioning Jews (I didn't value them over others, I value everyone equally, history and the global political structure values Westerners over the lives of others) so you might be a H-caust denier? I'm not quite sure. As for you're little 'alternate history' of "well..durrr...Churchill WAS GUNNA kill mIllIonNsssss!!!111" that's just retarded. He didn't do that, so history cannot judge him for it.

Again, I'm not quite sure what you're point is - it seems to wildly fluctuate with every post you make...Please in a short, clear sentence - explain exactly what it is you're trying to say. Keep in mind levels of 'evil' are impossible to judge and what we are discussing is the relative affect of these different leaders on the world (or The West, as we've already agreed that the West is the political, cultural, and financial epicenter of world affairs)

Eastern Europe isn't The West.

eastern european jews aren´t west. finally you got that ..

in fact 6 million jews are jackshit compared to what stalin did or in world history anyway. he killed more than 60 million people just in ww2.

Ahahaha priceless, source please?

a good history book, get it ..

I have plenty but none which are stored in your anus, which is probably why you can't actually source it.

argueing on such a low level is a waste of time ..

argueing on such a low level is a waste of time ..

There's no argument, you pulled an absurd figure out of your arse, I said back it up, you can't.

I´m not here to talk about fecal fantasies or on a level 12 year olds like to chat. thereby you are winning this as a self fullfilling prophecy. good job, you know the truth by your polemic flaming ..

Maybe your used to "debating" among the sub-human degenerates of far-right forums, but among people with an IQ above 70 you need to actually prove outlandish claims like "Stalin killed more than 60 million just in WW2" with some form of proof, if this 'fact', which you claim is cited in " a good history book", exists all you need to do is cite it, or admit that there is no actual basis for your ridiculous claim.

[Pro-Tip - Next time you accuse the other person of debating like a 12 year old, at least try to use a level of punctuation above that of said level]

All warriors deserve praise.

God damnit, I was beat to the "60 million" comment.

Kids these days :rolleyes:

I think they should be honored as veterans anyone who doesn't is a dumb fucking idiot

you need to actually prove outlandish claims like

no I don´t. you´re right. I don´t care. your way to argue is the right one. you win ..

They served their country as soldiers, therefore they should be entitled to the benefits that accompany veteranship.

I dont have much to add to this thread but here's a funny tidbit.

An ex nazi soldier in my old town (Valley Stream, Long Island NY) lives across the street from a holocaust survivor.

I dont have much to add to this thread but here's a funny tidbit.

An ex nazi soldier in my old town (Valley Stream, Long Island NY) lives across the street from a holocaust survivor.


I lol'd

[Pro-Tip - Next time you accuse the other person of debating like a 12 year old, at least try to use a level of punctuation above that of said level]

at least try to use a level of punctuation above that of said level

You dont pronounce shit while your typing.

you sound like a fool

The argument isnt important to me, the future holds more challenges than the past - reflection upon history is important to learn from our mistakes and set the stage for future development, but it should not consume us so much that we are apathetic to the challenges of the day.

You dont pronounce shit while your typing.



What the fuck are you blathering on about you cretin? Who said anything about pronunciation?

you both fail so hard, can you guys plz stay out of this? you have no relevant knowledge and I don´t feel the need to explain it to you. take your anal-retentive flaming and your failing with you to some other forums, thank you ..

you both fail so hard, can you guys plz stay out of this? you have no relevant knowledge and I don´t feel the need to explain it to you. take your anal-retentive flaming and your failing with you to some other forums, thank you ..

Yeah, I have no relevant knowledge, because I've been the one throwing around fictitious statistics and suggesting that Saddam Hussein killed more people than Hitler among other ludicrous rubbish.
Did you know Hitler killed 7 billion babies, after molesting them first? That was way more than any other leader. Prove it? I don't need to! It's a perfectly valid way of debating apparently.

It's a perfectly valid way of debating apparently.

your anal-retentive flaming way surely is better ..

your anal-retentive flaming way surely is better ..

Yeah because sticking to things like "facts" and "the truth" is anal retentive and a personal style of debating haha.

but none which are stored in your anus

yes after reading this I´m sure you are absolutely interested in a serious discussion about history. sry, from now on due to continous failing my only answer for you will be "don´t feed the troll" ..

yes after reading this I´m sure you are absolutely interested in a serious discussion about history. sry, from now on due to continous failing my only answer for you will be "don´t feed the troll" ..
On the contrary as a history graduate I would seriously like to discuss the 60 million Stalin killed in World War II, because its simply bullshit and you simply haven't proven otherwise.
The book/anus comment was in regards to the fact that you were pulling statistics out of your arse e.g making up facts, you're pathetic attempt at trying to cover for your lack of knowledge and ability to back up any of the ridiculous assertations you made by fixating on my etiquette has become embarassing, because its clear to anyone who has taken more than a cursory glance at the last few pages that you could have simply posted the statistics of 60 million and ended all controversy or criticism.

Instead you continue to justify your refusal to back up your lies because I used some naughty words and claim that making up facts in a debate isn't bad practice, its your own personal style and my anal-retentive usage of things like "facts" and the burden of proof is alien to you.
You're an absolute joke.
I'm done with this thread unless you decide to turn it into something interesting like actually discussing a historical period with some grounding in the truth, if you can show me that Stalin was responsible for killing 60 million people in World War II I will personally send you $100 via Paypal.

it´s too late to take the exit of being done until I bring up facts when I was done with your repetetive anal-retentive flaming pages back. pretending to be someone with relevant knowledge is irrelevant when you lose your reputation after immature behavior. you fail troll ..

Some academics would argue that Hitler actually killed upwards up 1 000 000 000 people both in his concentration camps and with his habits of sending soldiers to the eastern front (to die) as punishment.

Not to mention the crimes against humanity that his soldiers committed as they raped and pillaged their way across europe.

Also, Britain or the United States never did anything that could possibly be compared.

Don't ask me for a source on any of my wild claims or assertions because I don't feel that they are necessary for a debate.

of course they should be honored as veterans. they are veterans after all.

or is there something i am missing here?

Did you know Hitler killed 7 billion babies, after molesting them first? That was way more than any other leader. Prove it? I don't need to! It's a perfectly valid way of debating apparently.

*chuckles*

:cool:

I think the dead soldiers are the one's who deserve to be honored more...

...but yeah, the shit they went through for their country? I'd say they deserve to be honored

Ahahaha priceless, source please?

Stalin: Portrait of a monster in blood

To 60 million is basically an average between te ridiculous claims of 100 million and the likely real number of 20 million.

Is there a difference between WW2 German soldiers and Nazis? I thought Nazis were like a special division. Or is that the SS? Or both?

*scratches head in confusion*

Anyone willing to fight for what they believe in has my deepest respect.

What if me and you fight to the death over a dollar bill?

Canada, Sweden, Denmark, The Netherlands, etc.

Oh Canada. :o Is there anything you can't do?

They deserve honor just as much as any American WW2 veteran although that's not saying much. . .

Maybe you should fuck off
Don't ask me for a source on any of my wild claims or assertions because I don't feel that they are necessary for a debate.

you should look up what debate means before you set a standard you can´t fullfill. and I already mentioned what the uk and the us have done which is comparable ..

Stalin: Portrait of a monster in blood

To 60 million is basically an average between te ridiculous claims of 100 million and the likely real number of 20 million.

Thank you for actually approaching this thread in the manner of someone with more than one brain cell, BSK you could learn from this gentleman.

However I have to dispute your post.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Stalin#Number_of_victims

Firstly, I haven't heard of this 100 million claim, which can't have been that much higher than the overall population of the USSR which is simply ridiculous considering that the population grew under Stalin's time as General Secretary.
Furthermore the 60 million seems to have been discredited, a documentary should not be held up on a par with a serious historical work.
Further, to say "there is one outlandish claim of 100 million therefore we should triple the most commonly trumpeted claim of 20 million to get an average" seems a little bizarre, what if some idiot claims its 500 million, do we then claim the average to be around 250 million?
Finally, BSK's original, hilarious, claim was that Stalin killed 60 million in World War II alone! As most historians attribute the Ukrainian famine (unfairly in my view) in their list of Stalin's victims we can safely cut away a sizable chunk of his supposed fatalities.

As most historians attribute the Ukrainian famine (unfairly in my view).

Are you retarded then? Obviously it was his doing. He intentionally exported every single piece of food out of Ukraine for the sole purpose of starving the Ukrainians to death.

Are you retarded then? Obviously it was his doing. He intentionally exported every single piece of food out of Ukraine for the sole purpose of starving the Ukrainians to death.

Its not that simple, what would Stalin gain from starving as many Ukrainians to death as possible?
He wouldn't have needed to take food out of the Ukraine if there wasn't a shortage which was caused by terroristic actions of kulaks and their sympathisers who deliberately slaughtered their cattle and burnt their goods. Why should these people get off lightly when their deliberate sabotage could have caused workers to starve to death?

the manner of someone with more than one brain cell, BSK you could learn from this gentleman.

coming from a flaming anal-retentive 12 year old pretending to be someone, but with no knowledge about logic reasoning ..

Its not that simple, what would Stalin gain from starving as many Ukrainians to death as possible?
He wouldn't have needed to take food out of the Ukraine if there wasn't a shortage which was caused by terroristic actions of kulaks and their sympathisers who deliberately slaughtered their cattle and burnt their goods. Why should these people get off lightly when their deliberate sabotage could have caused workers to starve to death?

Russians and Ukrainians fucking hate each other historically. They didn't like the Soviet Empire so he tried to starve them to death. During that period of time the Soviet Empire was one of the top grain exporters in the world despite the fact that millions of people inside the country were starving so I think you might be retarded?

The Italian boat 'Jantzen' carrying 2100 POW's was torpedoed by the HM submarine 'Porpoise'.
About 500 POWs were killed that day.
44 of them Kiwis
As in NZ, I am related to at least one of them.
I know people who know some of the ones that were saved.

Basicly it was a case of friendly fire, the boat didn't have a POW flag & the Porpoise was under orders to 'sink every boat' in that area.
Orders are orders.

As it was sinking the italian crew took all the lifeboats & a lot got away from the boat, lots were killed as they dropped boats onto other boats & lowered then into the water as the Jantzen was still moving.
They kept the hull doors locked so the POW's couldn't get out & kill them.

Every boat was taken except for one.
A German soldier took it at gunpoint & shot two people who tried to take it.

Once the Italians were off ship, they got picked up by another Italian boat, one that didn't stop for the POWs, it also didn't care if the POWs in the water were hit or chewed up by its props.
Once it had loaded up with the crew, it left.

The German ordered the hull doors to be opened & all the POWs to go to the back of the ship, that lifted the bow out of the water & they started to bail out the water.

The German also ordered the food that there was to be divided up between the POWs.
There were a lot of black soldiers & they were not originaly given any food or water.

Once the sinking was sorted out a bit, the German ordered the boat to be driven full ahead onto the shore & beached.
Theres photos of this.
The boat was literally 'surfed' onto the rocks, it amazed everyone.
They described it as a 'Miracle', it felt as if the boat was 'picked up & thrown onto the rocks'.

Any other place the boat would have sunk as it was exposed to the forces of the water & wind, except where it beached, the picture shows this.

Once it was on the rocks, the German ordered ropes to be thrown onto the beach & fastened onto rocks so the prisoners could get off the boat.
That didn't work well as the rope was going from slack, to tight & several people were thrown against the rocks or pinged up into the air & into the water.

The German then ordered that the last life raft (the one he keep on the boat) to be lashed onto the main boat/shore rope.
They spent hours using this 'flying fox' to get the POWs to shore.

I forgot to mention, it was in the middle of a storm & it was snowing with hail & sleet.

The prisoners were set up in a camp on shore & many more died before getting to safety.
The locals were dieing at about 2500 a week in those conditions, no food, no heating or shelter.

Now that single German saved over 1500 POWs lives, he stayed on the boat when nobody else would, he gave up his own safety & left it in the hands of the POWs.

The same POWs that were being killed by a British submarine.

He organised them, with trust they would do what he said, in terrible conditions so that they could have a chance to live.
It worked.

He got no credit for it, no one knows his name, where he was from, what he did later.
Anything at all, except he was a German.
One that saved 1500 people when no one else would.

No honour, no glory.

http://www.angelfire.com/art/happiclown/Jan.html

but with no knowledge about logic reasoning ..

Rich coming from someone who has no concept of the burden of proof.

Russians and Ukrainians fucking hate each other historically. They didn't like the Soviet Empire so he tried to starve them to death. During that period of time the Soviet Empire was one of the top grain exporters in the world despite the fact that millions of people inside the country were starving so I think you might be retarded?

I think you might be retarded as actually grain exports dropped significantly during the years of the famine (32-33), if you're expecting Stalin to let the entire Soviet Economy to come a grinding halt because of sabotage then you are even more retarded.
HOT SAUCE: http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=7ULWRnskfr4C&pg=PA204&lpg=PA204&dq=soviet+grain+exports&source=web&ots=k-gI5E4ldl&sig=7c_VS3l8W1JItCzpdOjrVU-Flek&hl=en&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=10&ct=result
and: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holodomor#Export_of_grain

Now as for your bizarre generalization that Russians and Ukrainians hated each other so Stalin (a Georgian) decided to kill the later - why were there over half a million organised Ukrainian partisans in Eastern Ukraine alone during World War II, why were there over four and a half million Ukrainians in the Red Army compared to the Ukrainian National Army's size of fifty thousand. Surely if Stalin had carried out genocide on a country in the manner you claim the figures would be closer to the opposite?

Lastly while you're attempts at blaming Stalin have been shown to be half-baked the actions of sabotage paint a very different picture: from 1928-33 the number of horses in the Soviet Union fell from 30 to 15 million, cattle from 70 to 38 million, sheep and goats from 147 to 50 million.
If terrorists attempt to destroy a country, to ensure that its occupants starve to death, but instead they end up starving to death at the cost of saving the rest of the country, you are tellling me that the leader who carries out this rescue is a mass murderer? How many people do you think would have "been murdered by Stalin" if he hadn't acted? How many people do you think would have "been murdered by Stalin" if he had left Soviet agriculture in its backwards form when drought hit in 1932 and 1933 or when their country was invaded by Nazi invaders?

Rich coming from someone who has no concept of the burden of proof.

do you?

do you?

If you actually knew what the burden of proof was you wouldn't have written that. Its the logical method which states that when someone asserts something in a debate or argument i.e "x did this" then you must prove it, kind of like the way I have provided proof of the claims I have made re Stalin and the USSR and kind of the opposite of what you have done throughout this entire thread.

in fact you used your anal-retentive flaming and talked about grain and animals. haven´t seen ANY reliable proof about human casualties that could prove my statement wrong ..

in fact you used your anal-retentive flaming and talked about grain and animals. haven´t seen ANY reliable proof about human casualties that could prove my statement wrong ..

Grain and animals is a pretty relevant area when someone is talking about famine you cretin, and I was talking about sabotage as a cause of blame.
As for the second part of your post, I have no idea what you're talking about. You haven't made any statement associated with Holdomar, and if you're suggesting that is up to me to disprove an unverified and fictitious claim (which are the only ones you've come up with in this thread) then you fail even harder at understanding the burden of proof (no I'm not getting to spoon-feed you any more information about this basic logical method, if you don't know why you fail at this then you can stay an ignoramus)

you cretin

stopped reading there, if you know shit you don´t need flaming nor insults. take your exit again or learn to write ..

Thank you for actually approaching this thread in the manner of someone with more than one brain cell, BSK you could learn from this gentleman.

However I have to dispute your post.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Stalin#Number_of_victims

Firstly, I haven't heard of this 100 million claim, which can't have been that much higher than the overall population of the USSR which is simply ridiculous considering that the population grew under Stalin's time as General Secretary.
Furthermore the 60 million seems to have been discredited, a documentary should not be held up on a par with a serious historical work.
Further, to say "there is one outlandish claim of 100 million therefore we should triple the most commonly trumpeted claim of 20 million to get an average" seems a little bizarre, what if some idiot claims its 500 million, do we then claim the average to be around 250 million?
Finally, BSK's original, hilarious, claim was that Stalin killed 60 million in World War II alone! As most historians attribute the Ukrainian famine (unfairly in my view) in their list of Stalin's victims we can safely cut away a sizable chunk of his supposed fatalities.

I'm not trying to side with him just pointing out that there is in fact a source no matter discredible (on that note, avoid using wikipedia as your source if you can). But I'd say there's more than 1 claim of 100 million. It's only reasonable to take the highest claim and the lowest and average them.

And it seems if you don't count the famine and, I suppose, BSK does-as do most historians according to you- there's no way you'll ever come to agreement.

stopped reading there, if you know shit you don´t need flaming nor insults. take your exit again or learn to write ..
For someone who tried to justify their complete inability to support their claims with proof on the grounds that I'm anal retentive, you're awfully hung-up on minute aspects of my posting style.
Ironic? It would be if it wasn't so obvious that you're only trying to distract attention away from your glaring ignorance in a pathetic attempt to save face, which hasn't worked as others have already ridiculed you throughout this thread.
Give up you fucking retard. (Btw you don't get to respond to this post as I insulted you in it, or do you only ignore the posts which you don't have the mental capacity to deal with)

I'm not trying to side with him just pointing out that there is in fact a source no matter discredible (on that note, avoid using wikipedia as your source if you can). But I'd say there's more than 1 claim of 100 million. It's only reasonable to take the highest claim and the lowest and average them.

We'll have to agree to disagree, in terms of historical statistics I would opt for a modal score of statistics as the discredited work of some kooks should not factor into an average.
Also the only source I've found for the absurd claim of 100 million is a documentary, hardly a solid source and that is it, if you can find more I'd be interested to read them, as previously stated, I think its unlikely seeing as that number is bordering on impossible when you take into account the population of the USSR.


And it seems if you don't count the famine and, I suppose, BSK does-as do most historians according to you- there's no way you'll ever come to agreement.

There's no way we'll come to an agreement because he stated that "Stalin killed 60 million people in ww2 alone" the famine happened in 1932-1933 so if he is including the famine its because he has no idea what he is talking about, but we already knew that.
If he had said Stalin killed 60 million people, I probably would have said "that is a very high estimate, most historians agree on 20 million which has problems of its own." Of course he could easily have admitted his mistake but instead, due to some sort of psychological complex, he attempted to save himself the embarrassment of this by carrying on like an idiot for several pages, claiming the facts existed in a non-existent book, claiming he didn't need too logically and then when that was rubbished, claiming he didn't need to because I was rude.

hitler is a personal idol of mine.

you always have a choice.

-f☺rd

qfmft

They defiantly should be honored as veterans , It is disgusting that they are not!! They fought and died for Germany whether it was a true cause or not. ( I believe it was) I believe any country that was involved in the world wars deserve to be honored, not just our 'allies' or 'enemys' ALL who fought and shed there blood. I don't believe the world wars should of happened! But the Nazi Germans deserve great respect , They had the world on there shoulders. Imagine what that must of felt like, Everyone hates you.

Propaganda is comming out of New York saying the most hateful and slanderous things to Germany. Australia is calling them baby killers! World wide they have a huge propaganda machine against them , People automatically believe it , thinking it must be correct. But what they didn't realize , Is propaganda isnt about truth, its about influencing people with emotion. The average Nazi German army were just average Germans protecting there country. They weren't involved in the so called ' Mass killing of innocent Jews' So therefore even going by today's thinking. The German army deserve respect as vets.

Also I think its very wrong that they are prosecuting 'old Nazi war criminals' I mean come on , its 2008!!!! How you going to have a legit court case when it happened in the 40's most of the witness's are dead. Leave them alone , get over it!

you're awfully hung-up on minute aspects of my posting style

your style has never changed. you´re still an immature, flaming, non-reputable source. if you know shit you don´t need flaming ..

But I'd say there's more than 1 claim of 100 million.

indeed. that´s when people count in 20 million soldiers which were meant to be nothing but cannonfodder and include his actions in east asia ..

indeed. that´s when people count in 20 million soldiers which were meant to be nothing but cannonfodder and include his actions in east asia ..

So every single loss in the Red Army can be counted as "Stalin killing them"? Even though the USSR was invaded? Why doesn't this apply to other war-time leaders?

just like the armenian massacres are part of ww1 casualties. how come a graduate in history doesn´t know that?

just like the armenian massacres are part of ww1 casualties. how come a graduate in history doesn´t know that?

I'm afraid I don't understand what you're trying to say, if you are stating that the Armenian Genocide counts as WWI casualties and therefore Holdomar should count as World War II deaths that is completely nonsensical again check the dates, the Genocide occured during World War I, Holdomar happened 7 years before World War II and 9 years before the USSR joined the war.

If you are comparing The Red Army to the Armenian Genocide, then that is one of the worst historical comparisons I've ever heard of. Armenian's in active service were taken out of the Ottoman Forces on the basis of their ethnicity and put in unarmed labour batalions were they were then executed, and yet this was only one, small aspect of the Armenian genocide, which mainly focused around the deportation of Armenians into concentration camps.

Stalin didn't send 10 million Red Army troops to unarmed labour batallions were they were executed, if you want to attribute deaths in World War II then it is a much easier case to argue that they should be attributed to your hero Hitler, he invaded the USSR, his forces killed them and over 10 million Soviet citizens to boot - which would give him an incredibly high kill count, much more than the paltry 5 million jews of the holocaust

then that is one of the worst historical comparisons I've ever heard of.

probably because I´m not comparing. your statements are more based on emotions than on facts ..

probably because I´m not comparing. your statements are more based on emotions than on facts ..

How are they based on emotion, again you give no clue as to what you're refering to.
If you weren't making a comparison why did you quote me? Why did you bring it up in the first place? You really just get worse and worse.
Are you just randomly typing down whatever spurious thought enters your head?

Are you just randomly typing down whatever spurious thought enters your head?

is a 12 year old anal-retentive pretending to be someone but failing, worth any more? prove me wrong with reliable statistics or I will just push buttons and make you fail more ..

They defiantly should be honored as veterans

DEFIANTLY!
:mad:

is a 12 year old anal-retentive pretending to be someone but failing, worth any more? prove me wrong with reliable statistics or I will just push buttons and make you fail more ..

you have proven NOTHING in this thread you haven't posted a single source and you've made more claims than anyone. I don't have to post statistics to prove a negative you idiotic little troll, for the last time learn what the burden of proof is.

[b]you idiotic little troll

will you ever learn to watch your tongue?

The moon is made of green cheese and Unicorns live in a magical cloud kingdom in the sky.

Arguing with somebody who doesn't believe in 'proof' is ridiculous and time consuming.

Nazi veterans are no worse than Allied veterans. Both were lied to and killed their brothers and the behest of the Edomite Pharisee Jews who engineered the entire war, like they've done so many times before and after.

Fight for freedom? Germany never attacked America directly and FDR had foreknowledge of Pearl Harbor. Fighting for the 'master race'? Adolf Hitler was a fucking Jew! :mad:

Nazi veterans are no worse than Allied veterans. Both were lied to and killed their brothers and the behest of the Edomite Pharisee Jews who engineered the entire war, like they've done so many times before and after.

Fight for freedom? Germany never attacked America directly and FDR had foreknowledge of Pearl Harbor. Fighting for the 'master race'? Adolf Hitler was a fucking Jew! :mad:

Oh Rolloffle, will it never end? WILL IT NEVER END??!!

NO

they served their country for a horrible reason

they didn't think about what they were doing and did horrible things because of it, they should not be honored for that.

we wouldn't have any wars if people refused to fight.

NO

they served their country for a horrible reason

they didn't think about what they were doing and did horrible things because of it, they should not be honored for that.

we wouldn't have any wars if people refused to fight.

...so should today's Iraq veterans be treated the same if the future looks upon the Iraq war as genocide?

hmm... well i think they the us soldiers thought they were doing a good thing for their country and iraq, whereas the nazi's were putting innocent people en masse in ovens, so it's was pretty obvious to the nazis what was right and what was wrong.

maybe the commanders that bombed and napalmed the civs in iraq should be not honored as veterans, idk.

The moon is made of green cheese and Unicorns live in a magical cloud kingdom in the sky.

Arguing with somebody who doesn't believe in 'proof' is ridiculous and time consuming.

If there's one thing to be learnt from this thread, it is exactly that (and that Hitler killed over 7 billion babies after molesting them first.)

If there's one thing to be learnt from this thread, it is exactly that (and that Hitler killed over 7 billion babies after molesting them first.)

This. :)

hmm... well i think they the us soldiers thought they were doing a good thing for their country and iraq, whereas the nazi's were putting innocent people en masse in ovens, so it's was pretty obvious to the nazis what was right and what was wrong.

maybe the commanders that bombed and napalmed the civs in iraq should be not honored as veterans, idk.

But see, not all of them were putting people in ovens, most were just fighting the Russians or the French. What about submarine captains? Where does one stop?

Arguing with somebody who doesn't believe in 'proof' is ridiculous and time consuming.

what do you expect from people that you call retarded from the start and then to fuck off when they disagree?

hmm... well i think they the us soldiers thought they were doing a good thing for their country and iraq, whereas the nazi's were putting innocent people en masse in ovens, so it's was pretty obvious to the nazis what was right and what was wrong.

maybe the commanders that bombed and napalmed the civs in iraq should be not honored as veterans, idk.

And the German soldiers didn't think that they were doing the right thing for their country?

Has anybody posting here ever been to Germany or met any Germans?

Has anybody posting here ever been to Germany or met any Germans?


Yes.
They were lovely.
I did not think it would be tactful to bring up Nazi Germany.

Has anybody posting here ever been to Germany or met any Germans?

Yes, been to Germany twice and I'm part German (more than half). I have more respect for any German soldier from WWII than any other modern soldier. The shit they were put through after the war was just fucked.

My grandfather (fought in Russia, 2nd Panzer division I think) was treated like shit when he came to Australia. They had propoganda all over Germany back then, telling them America, Australia, England etc etc was great, they would be treated well and have well paid jobs.

So he came here (Aus) and dragged his family along only to have a worse job here than he did in Germany, no one treated him well, my mum was bullied at school because she was German. So if anyone complains about how the Nazi's were so cruel, you're not any better. You usually treat the Germans how the Nazi's treated jews.

And for those of you who say "But they killed 6 million jews, we didn't" no, but I'm sure that if you had half the chance you would try to wipe out the Germans, how many times I've been given shit and been told "All Germans should be killed" is amazing, even 2 generations down the track people still hate Germans for what the Nazi's did.

Germans=/=Nazis

Yes, been to Germany twice and I'm part German (more than half). I have more respect for any German soldier from WWII than any other modern soldier. The shit they were put through after the war was just fucked.

My grandfather (fought in Russia, 2nd Panzer division I think) was treated like shit when he came to Australia. They had propoganda all over Germany back then, telling them America, Australia, England etc etc was great, they would be treated well and have well paid jobs.

So he came here (Aus) and dragged his family along only to have a worse job here than he did in Germany, no one treated him well, my mum was bullied at school because she was German. So if anyone complains about how the Nazi's were so cruel, you're not any better. You usually treat the Germans how the Nazi's treated jews.

And for those of you who say "But they killed 6 million jews, we didn't" no, but I'm sure that if you had half the chance you would try to wipe out the Germans, how many times I've been given shit and been told "All Germans should be killed" is amazing, even 2 generations down the track people still hate Germans for what the Nazi's did.

lol y u deutsch me?

Deutschland alles uber..

. You usually treat the Germans how the Nazi's treated jews.


been told "All Germans should be killed" is amazing, even 2 generations down the track people still hate Germans for what the Nazi's did.

for those unaware, look up the Morgenthau Plan

also see
http://hnn.us/roundup/entries/32869.html

ignore the bullshit in

Mistreatment of German and Japanese POWs at the hands of US troops doubtless was far less pervasive and far less brutal than that or Allied POWs at the hands of their Axis captives. But it doesn't mean that that torture marked only our adversaries, but not us. The Americans who fought World War II were the good guys, but we do their memory no disservice when we remind ourselves that they were no angels. They were tough men who fought a horrific war and, from time to time, without niceties.

though.

Germans=/=Nazis

Exactly, in addition to that German soldiers =/= Nazis. I don't have any evidence of this other than what people say but I'm pretty sure people don't join the army to fight for their government, they usually do it for their country. So just because German soldiers joined the Wehrmacht, doesn't mean they believed in what government preached.

Anyway, I think GERMAN (not Nazi) veterans from WWII deserve as much respect and honour as any other veteran.

Exactly, in addition to that German soldiers =/= Nazis.

doesn't mean they believed in what government preached.



Anyway, I think GERMAN (not Nazi) veterans from WWII deserve as much respect and honour as any other veteran.

ignoring the absolute bullshit that went on regarding Nuremberg (Victors Justice, torture of "War criminal" suspects, no mention of Hamburg/Dresden/etc. or Soviet acts, etc) the trials did admit that the Wehrmacht was deemed not guilty of any "crimes" as an organization

I could ask my German (or Bavarian as he adamantly claims) roommate how they view veterans or what-have-you. I wouldn't find it odd - we've discussed the war before - both our grandparents were in it (I think..we were loaded when we discussed it haha)