Who started both World Wars?

[Belz...]

When was the last time you saw somebody convincing somebody else in a public discussion.

On the JREF ? Not long ago.

Ego is too much of a hindrance for this to occur.

And because of this you decided to embrace your own ?

I could of course put anybody on ignore who insults me, but that would be the end of the discussion.

The reverse would also be true.

They just parrot the self-serving lies the victors of WW1/2 have constructed to make themselves look good.

The problem here is that you do not apply the same "skepticism" to what the Nazis said during the same period or before. You have a clear preference for the Axis, for some reason. Also, there is the issue of the overwhelming testimonial, photographic and document evidence.

You really think that I am sacrificing a large part of my summer holiday just to mock a few Anglos?

No. In fact the answer to your question lies in the bit you quoted: It's all about how he perceives his own performance in this thread, not about the truth of history or some other important thing.

A New Explanation of what really happened in history can be very helpful in bringing changes about.

Uh-huh, 60 years too late for that. If evidence from WWII doesn't convince you to change your mind, how can you expect to make this change happen withOUT evidence ?

 

[Belz...]

They never wanted that to happen. They wanted a pure racialist German state.

The concept of which is nonsensical.

 

[9/11-investigator]

The problem here is that you do not apply the same "skepticism" to what the Nazis said during the same period or before. You have a clear preference for the Axis, for some reason. Also, there is the issue of the overwhelming testimonial, photographic and document evidence.

In the beginning of this thread there was a Brit (I believe) with an avater displaying a guy with a pipe. He was asking me if I would have liked to see the Axis won. I am not so sure how I will answer that question once I am finished with this exercise.

No. In fact the answer to your question lies in the bit you quoted: It's all about how he perceives his own performance in this thread, not about the truth of history or some other important thing.

I do admit that this thread causes of a lot of joy, indeed. So far I keep you guys busy and this me against the rest gives the drama a heroic quality. Well sort of. But you are mistaken if you think that I have not set sight on something higher than pleasure derived from performance.

Not that I need it, but thanks for the implicit compliment anyway.

Uh-huh, 60 years too late for that. If evidence from WWII doesn't convince you to change your mind, how can you expect to make this change happen withOUT evidence ?

In the communist block they also thought that they had patented the truth. There is far less difference between the political correct climate in the West and that in the post-1970 communist block than many would like to admit. Everybody knows what you have to say regarding WW2, Hitler and the H-word. And most shut up accordingly. Otherwise you'll be branded a 'Nazi', whatever that may mean in 2010.

 

[Tolls]

What is an Anglo anyway?
Are the Welsh Anglos?
Scots?

I know it's already been pointed out about Jutes and Angles and Saxons...but I really am slightly intrigued as to where on 9/11's Anglo-Spectrum I might sit. Currently he just seems to be using it as a catch-all for anyone who fought Germany and wasn't part of the Soviet Union.

 

[9/11-investigator]

The concept of which is nonsensical.

No it is not.

Modern Poland is an almost pure ethnic state. So is the rest of Eastern Europe. East-China is. Japan is.

Holland was when I went to school. I saw the first black person in my life in 1965, a shocking experience.

I felt sorry for him.

But Belz is probably from France, Wallonia, Geneva or Quebec, territories with little to celebrate in this respect...

 

[9/11-investigator]

What is an Anglo anyway?
Are the Welsh Anglos?
Scots?

I know it's already been pointed out about Jutes and Angles and Saxons...but I really am slightly intrigued as to where on 9/11's Anglo-Spectrum I might sit. Currently he just seems to be using it as a catch-all for anyone who fought Germany and wasn't part of the Soviet Union.

Close. A modern day white native English speaking person from the UK, US, Canada and Down Under. Scots also, but indeed a tad less vicious than the others.

Not that difficult.

 

[dafydd]

What is an Anglo anyway?
Are the Welsh Anglos?
Scots?

I know it's already been pointed out about Jutes and Angles and Saxons...but I really am slightly intrigued as to where on 9/11's Anglo-Spectrum I might sit. Currently he just seems to be using it as a catch-all for anyone who fought Germany and wasn't part of the Soviet Union.

Anglo used to be a brand of chewing gum.I'm half Scottish,half Welsh.I know nothing of the "Anglos" that our dimwitted Hitler groupie speaks of.

 

[Tolls]

Close. A modern day white native English speaking person from the UK, US, Canada and Down Under. Scots also, but indeed a tad less vicious than the others.

Not that difficult.

So a pointless description then, which adds nothing at all to the discussion? I understand.

Indeed, if I were a less than generous sort, I might even think you used such terminology to disguise the fact you haven't a clue what you're talking about.

Oh...any answer to my question re: March 1939 and the Franco/British attitude towards Hitlers promises over Poland?

 

[ddt]

You are aware that 15 November 1940 the Eastern part was occupied by Russia, I hope? So to where exactly were these Poles 'deported'? Where was the 'Generalgouvernement area' located before Barbarossa? You are sure you are not talking about Polish Jews fleeing eastwards?

Read the verdict. We're talking about Jews that were deported from areas that were annexed by the Reich into the General-Government - you know, that area that was governed by the fine Hans Frank. And really, you don't even know where the GG was and you want to discuss this stuff?

 

[9/11-investigator]

.
Between 1939 and 1945, at least 1.5 million Polish citizens were deported to German territory for forced labor.

Of course, this doesn't count the close to 2 million non-Jews they killed outright, nor the close to 3 million Polish Jews.
.

I agree that after 1940 and certainly after Barbarossa things turned vicious on all sides. I am interested though in the deportation and other behavior of the Germans before May 1940. When I read Hitler's speech of October 6, 1939, a few weeks after the completion of the Polish campaign, he comes across as a, may I say, decent guy?

 

[aggle-rithm]

But you will probably say that Kennedy was an antisemite, which he was, for good reason. Fine, so let us rely on someone else instead.

Yes, poor Joseph Kennedy...(sob)...all he wanted to do was to make it in America. He might have been a rich and powerful man if it weren't for those lousy Jews...why wouldn't they just leave him alone?

America has already more enemies it can handle. Such a move would unite it's enemies against it earlier than otherwise would happen (the war against Iran will unite everybody against IZ-US-UK).

This is completely irrelevant. I'm asking if you would support America's right to do this just as you support Germany's right to invade Poland.

You should not mix morals with politics.

It is you who bring morality into this discussion. You have been arguing all along that Germany's actions in WW2 were justified.

Justified in what way? "Morally" is the only thing I can think of. It certainly wasn't justified according to treaty or international law or any other reasonable measure.

The reality 8 months later was that France was crushed within 6 weeks. No reason to assume that in September 1939 that balance was much different.

The balance made absolutely no difference. It was strategy that defeated France in 1940. In 1939, France was on the offensive and Germany was largely unprotected. By the time the Wehrmacht was recalled from Poland, it would have been too late to save Germany.

In 1940, the Wehrmacht was IN France. They achieved surprise by attacking through the Ardennes. They used tactics that caught the French commanders completely by surprise. They quickly got behind the French troops and cut their lines of communication. Any force that can manage this can defeat an army that is far superior to them in numbers.

You cannot use Blitzkrieg tactics in defense. It's too risky. That's why the Germans were so successful when they were on the offensive, but crumbled when they had to fall back and regroup (when Hitler would let them do this).

 

[9/11-investigator]

Read the verdict. We're talking about Jews that were deported from areas that were annexed by the Reich into the General-Government - you know, that area that was governed by the fine Hans Frank. And really, you don't even know where the GG was and you want to discuss this stuff?

I know that very well, but we were talking about the deportation of Poles before Barbarossa, remember?

My original question was: "What relocation did the Germans do to the Poles?"

Then you quote Nixkor: "T/362 shows that up to 15 November 1940 nearly
300,000 Polish deportees were transferred into the Generalgouvernement area."

Sneakingly confusing Poles and Jews.

The real answer is: 0 Poles were deported, at least before Barbarossa, making a mockery of Lebensraum BS.

 

[aggle-rithm]

Close. A modern day white native English speaking person from the UK, US, Canada and Down Under. Scots also, but indeed a tad less vicious than the others.

Not that difficult.

So German-Americans are Anglos?

How soon after they move to America do they become Anglos?

 

[aggle-rithm]

I know that very well, but we were talking about the deportation of Poles before Barbarossa, remember?

My original question was: "What relocation did the Germans do to the Poles?"

Then you quote Nixkor: "T/362 shows that up to 15 November 1940 nearly
300,000 Polish deportees were transferred into the Generalgouvernement area."

Sneakingly confusing Poles and Jews.

The real answer is: 0 Poles were deported, at least before Barbarossa, making a mockery of Lebensraum BS.

Wrong. Hitler put someone in charge of relocating non-Germans before the body of Poland was cold.

I'll get the specifics for you when I can.

 

[JimBenArm]

So German-Americans are Anglos?

How soon after they move to America do they become Anglos?

Immediately after their holy feet touch our foul shores. The DNA is realigned by mere contact with North American dirt.

 

[ddt]

I agree that after 1940 and certainly after Barbarossa things turned vicious on all sides. I am interested though in the deportation and other behavior of the Germans before May 1940. When I read Hitler's speech of October 6, 1939, a few weeks after the completion of the Polish campaign, he comes across as a, may I say, decent guy?

No he doesn't. And again, read the Eichmann verdict. What sense does it make to deport people from the Wartheland to the GG? The campaigns against France and against Russia are entirely immaterial to those efforts. Anyway, they started right away. From the Holocaust museum:

Beginning in October 1939, the SS began to expel Poles and Jews from the Wartheland and the Danzig corridor and transport them to the General Government. By the end of 1940, the SS had expelled 325,000 people without warning and plundered their property and belongings.

I hope you just have enough braincells left to find a map which shows where the Wartheland is.

 

[Belz...]

No it is not.

Yes it is. Even in ancient times the very concept of racial purity is nonsensical.

But Belz is probably from France, Wallonia, Geneva or Quebec, territories with little to celebrate in this respect...

Actually, multiculturalism goes a long way towards global understanding, something that seems decidedly alien to you.

 

[aggle-rithm]

I agree that after 1940 and certainly after Barbarossa things turned vicious on all sides. I am interested though in the deportation and other behavior of the Germans before May 1940.

Unless it supports your position, I seriously doubt that.

When I read Hitler's speech of October 6, 1939, a few weeks after the completion of the Polish campaign, he comes across as a, may I say, decent guy?

Jesus Tap-dancing CHRIST.

Hitler was a politician. Do you know what that means? Of COURSE he came across as a decent guy! He had people on the payroll whose JOB it was to make him look like a decent guy!

Do you seriously think he would have come to power if people knew what he was really like?

 

[Belz...]

I do admit that this thread causes of a lot of joy, indeed.

I have posted the same quote THREE times already, and you still FAIL to understand what it means.

In the communist block they also thought that they had patented the truth.

"Also" ? Who ever said anything about absolute truth ?

 

[9/11-investigator]

Yes, poor Joseph Kennedy...(sob)...all he wanted to do was to make it in America. He might have been a rich and powerful man if it weren't for those lousy Jews...why wouldn't they just leave him alone?

He was a rich and powerful man, becoming even more powerful after the Roosevelt gang had gone.

This is completely irrelevant. I'm asking if you would support America's right to do this just as you support Germany's right to invade Poland.

I do not support Germany's right to invade Poland. I am just examining your BS stories about what happened to see if I can shoot some holes in your stories. Piece of cake as it turns out.

It is you who bring morality into this discussion. You have been arguing all along that Germany's actions in WW2 were justified.

I do not justify every German action during WW2, far from it. But I have yet be convinced that they were the more barbaric party in the entire drama.

Justified in what way? "Morally" is the only thing I can think of. It certainly wasn't justified according to treaty or international law or any other reasonable measure.

Versailles was not a treaty between equals, it was a robbery at gun point. To hell with your international law. It were the extra-Europeans + Britain/France who destroyed this continent. An at the root of the WW1 conflict was the creation of Germany in 1871, that was never accepted by Britain and France. No Jews involved here. The Jews only came along when they saw their chance in capturing Palestine at the expense of Germany, by trading US war entry in exchange for Palestine (Balfour). Germany was first f***** by the Jews and second by Britain and France. Hitler was an accident waiting to happen, something even prominent British politicians predicted.