The World War II Discussion Thread.

1567911

Comments

  • j_w_pepperj_w_pepper Born on the bayou. I can still hear my old hound dog barkin'.
    Posts: 8,823
    007Blofeld wrote: »
    j_w_pepper wrote: »
    Ah, now you'r", ae talking. This is not about some right-wingers' current fantasies, but what most positively happened in history. And I sometimes wonder whether you're ignorant, a Breivik fan, or simply a troll. I would much prefer the latter to be the case. Notwithstanding the many witty posts that you send outside political discussions. But no, this discussion has nothing to do with jihad, and the combined victims of Islamism (maybe unless you go back to the age of the Crusades, when the self-styled Christians were certainly no better) do not nearly add up to the victims of Nazism. And why don't you treat the Islamists neutrally, as just another political orientation if you claim that should apply to the Nazis? Oh, isn't it all so neutral? Aren't there "good people on all sides"...oops, sorry.

    @j_w_pepper I'm right wing and Christian and don't have those disgusting fantasies stop being stereotypical.

    I'm not talking about today's Christians, but then (in this case) Thunderfinger shouldn't compare present Islamists - or even worse, current Muslims, which is not the same - to Nazis either just because their predecessors killed people in the Middle Ages. Just saying that in the name of Christianity, the number of victims is endless over time, even if I assume that present Christians have learned more in the meantime than "the Islamists" have. I also don't see where I mentioned "disgusting fantasies" and attributed to all "right-wingers" by the way. I mentioned only some right-wingers and don't throw them all together, for the record. I may have mentioned before that I'm certainly nowhere near left-wing in my society (which no sane person would consider socialist over here), but would pass for being conservative-liberal (which in Europe is definitely ANTI-socialist).

    I think that a conservative position that respects other people's rights is all right (which doesn't mean I always share it), such as that of the likes of John McCain and quite a number of past Republican politicians BEFORE the rise of the Tea Party. That being said, I won't keep mum when someone is spewing stuff that appears to be at least tacitly or implicitly racist or makes Nazism, Fascism, racism or similar kind of stuff seem normal or acceptable. It isn't, it has to be opposed by every decent person, and I regret if you feel offended - depending on whether your position does or doesn't fit the aforementioned definition, which you have to decide for yourself.
  • 007Blofeld007Blofeld In the freedom of the West.
    edited April 2019 Posts: 3,126
    j_w_pepper wrote: »
    007Blofeld wrote: »
    j_w_pepper wrote: »
    Ah, now you'r", ae talking. This is not about some right-wingers' current fantasies, but what most positively happened in history. And I sometimes wonder whether you're ignorant, a Breivik fan, or simply a troll. I would much prefer the latter to be the case. Notwithstanding the many witty posts that you send outside political discussions. But no, this discussion has nothing to do with jihad, and the combined victims of Islamism (maybe unless you go back to the age of the Crusades, when the self-styled Christians were certainly no better) do not nearly add up to the victims of Nazism. And why don't you treat the Islamists neutrally, as just another political orientation if you claim that should apply to the Nazis? Oh, isn't it all so neutral? Aren't there "good people on all sides"...oops, sorry.

    @j_w_pepper I'm right wing and Christian and don't have those disgusting fantasies stop being stereotypical.

    I'm not talking about today's Christians, but then (in this case) Thunderfinger shouldn't compare present Islamists - or even worse, current Muslims, which is not the same - to Nazis either just because their predecessors killed people in the Middle Ages. Just saying that in the name of Christianity, the number of victims is endless over time, even if I assume that present Christians have learned more in the meantime than "the Islamists" have. I also don't see where I mentioned "disgusting fantasies" and attributed to all "right-wingers" by the way. I mentioned only some right-wingers and don't throw them all together, for the record. I may have mentioned before that I'm certainly nowhere near left-wing in my society (which no sane person would consider socialist over here), but would pass for being conservative-liberal (which in Europe is definitely ANTI-socialist).

    I think that a conservative position that respects other people's rights is all right (which doesn't mean I always share it), such as that of the likes of John McCain and quite a number of past Republican politicians BEFORE the rise of the Tea Party. That being said, I won't keep mum when someone is spewing stuff that appears to be at least tacitly or implicitly racist or makes Nazism, Fascism, racism or similar kind of stuff seem normal or acceptable. It isn't, it has to be opposed by every decent person, and I regret if you feel offended - depending on whether your position does or doesn't fit the aforementioned definition, which you have to decide for yourself.

    @j_w_pepper ok you didn't say disgusting fantasies I was just reacting to (right wing fantasy) you said in your previous statement. People should be talking rather than go to violence. Violence goes nowhere in society plain and simple.
  • j_w_pepperj_w_pepper Born on the bayou. I can still hear my old hound dog barkin'.
    Posts: 8,823
    007Blofeld wrote: »
    j_w_pepper wrote: »
    007Blofeld wrote: »
    j_w_pepper wrote: »
    Ah, now you'r", ae talking. This is not about some right-wingers' current fantasies, but what most positively happened in history. And I sometimes wonder whether you're ignorant, a Breivik fan, or simply a troll. I would much prefer the latter to be the case. Notwithstanding the many witty posts that you send outside political discussions. But no, this discussion has nothing to do with jihad, and the combined victims of Islamism (maybe unless you go back to the age of the Crusades, when the self-styled Christians were certainly no better) do not nearly add up to the victims of Nazism. And why don't you treat the Islamists neutrally, as just another political orientation if you claim that should apply to the Nazis? Oh, isn't it all so neutral? Aren't there "good people on all sides"...oops, sorry.

    @j_w_pepper I'm right wing and Christian and don't have those disgusting fantasies stop being stereotypical.

    I'm not talking about today's Christians, but then (in this case) Thunderfinger shouldn't compare present Islamists - or even worse, current Muslims, which is not the same - to Nazis either just because their predecessors killed people in the Middle Ages. Just saying that in the name of Christianity, the number of victims is endless over time, even if I assume that present Christians have learned more in the meantime than "the Islamists" have. I also don't see where I mentioned "disgusting fantasies" and attributed to all "right-wingers" by the way. I mentioned only some right-wingers and don't throw them all together, for the record. I may have mentioned before that I'm certainly nowhere near left-wing in my society (which no sane person would consider socialist over here), but would pass for being conservative-liberal (which in Europe is definitely ANTI-socialist).

    I think that a conservative position that respects other people's rights is all right (which doesn't mean I always share it), such as that of the likes of John McCain and quite a number of past Republican politicians BEFORE the rise of the Tea Party. That being said, I won't keep mum when someone is spewing stuff that appears to be at least tacitly or implicitly racist or makes Nazism, Fascism, racism or similar kind of stuff seem normal or acceptable. It isn't, it has to be opposed by every decent person, and I regret if you feel offended - depending on whether your position does or doesn't fit the aforementioned definition, which you have to decide for yourself.

    @j_w_pepper ok you didn't say disgusting fantasies I was just reacting to (right wing fantasy) you said in your previous statement. People should be talking rather than go to violence. Violence goes nowhere in society plain and simple.

    I'm all with you on your conclusion. Whatever the other differences may be.
  • 007Blofeld007Blofeld In the freedom of the West.
    edited April 2019 Posts: 3,126
    j_w_pepper wrote: »
    007Blofeld wrote: »
    j_w_pepper wrote: »
    007Blofeld wrote: »
    j_w_pepper wrote: »
    Ah, now you'r", ae talking. This is not about some right-wingers' current fantasies, but what most positively happened in history. And I sometimes wonder whether you're ignorant, a Breivik fan, or simply a troll. I would much prefer the latter to be the case. Notwithstanding the many witty posts that you send outside political discussions. But no, this discussion has nothing to do with jihad, and the combined victims of Islamism (maybe unless you go back to the age of the Crusades, when the self-styled Christians were certainly no better) do not nearly add up to the victims of Nazism. And why don't you treat the Islamists neutrally, as just another political orientation if you claim that should apply to the Nazis? Oh, isn't it all so neutral? Aren't there "good people on all sides"...oops, sorry.

    @j_w_pepper I'm right wing and Christian and don't have those disgusting fantasies stop being stereotypical.

    I'm not talking about today's Christians, but then (in this case) Thunderfinger shouldn't compare present Islamists - or even worse, current Muslims, which is not the same - to Nazis either just because their predecessors killed people in the Middle Ages. Just saying that in the name of Christianity, the number of victims is endless over time, even if I assume that present Christians have learned more in the meantime than "the Islamists" have. I also don't see where I mentioned "disgusting fantasies" and attributed to all "right-wingers" by the way. I mentioned only some right-wingers and don't throw them all together, for the record. I may have mentioned before that I'm certainly nowhere near left-wing in my society (which no sane person would consider socialist over here), but would pass for being conservative-liberal (which in Europe is definitely ANTI-socialist).

    I think that a conservative position that respects other people's rights is all right (which doesn't mean I always share it), such as that of the likes of John McCain and quite a number of past Republican politicians BEFORE the rise of the Tea Party. That being said, I won't keep mum when someone is spewing stuff that appears to be at least tacitly or implicitly racist or makes Nazism, Fascism, racism or similar kind of stuff seem normal or acceptable. It isn't, it has to be opposed by every decent person, and I regret if you feel offended - depending on whether your position does or doesn't fit the aforementioned definition, which you have to decide for yourself.

    @j_w_pepper ok you didn't say disgusting fantasies I was just reacting to (right wing fantasy) you said in your previous statement. People should be talking rather than go to violence. Violence goes nowhere in society plain and simple.

    I'm all with you on your conclusion. Whatever the other differences may be.

    @j_w_pepper ok

    This is interesting
    https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.history.com/.amp/news/wwii-nazi-atomic-secrets-alsos-mission-kidnap-heisenberg
  • edited April 2019 Posts: 377
    My favorite WW2 movies are The Great Escape, Where Eagles Dare, and The Dirty Dozen.
  • Posts: 5,904
    j_w_pepper wrote: »
    Probably nothing wrong with that...whatever their individual shortcomings in terms of character. Not saying their biographical movies are authentic or even just relevant all the way...but Schaffner's Patton (and I love that movie!) is a genius but an asshole, Sargent's MacArthur is kind of "meh..." (as a movie, not necessarily the titular character), and I haven't noticed any Eisenhower movie but at least applaud his very un-Republican criticism of the military-industrial complex at the time.

    There was a TV mini-series in 1979, featuring Robert Duvall as Ike and Lee Remick as Kay Summersby.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ike_(miniseries)
  • Posts: 19,339
    My favourite US President and a hero to me re WWII died today in 1945...such a shame he never saw the end of the war properly,so close :

    fdrjr.jpg?resize=865,452

    FDR_1944_Color_Portrait.jpg

    God bless you F.D.R.
  • edited April 2019 Posts: 2,904
    Greatest president of the 20th century--nobody else comes close. The United States was extremely fortunate to have been led by him during the most perilous time in the history of humankind.
  • CommanderRossCommanderRoss The bottom of a pitch lake in Eastern Trinidad, place called La Brea
    Posts: 8,121
    Yep, brightest of the bunch by far.
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    edited April 2019 Posts: 18,003
    Agreed, FDR was undoubtedly a great man and a great president who won an unprecedented fourth term in office in the 1944 presidential election. Of course they changed the US constitution after that so that a president could only serve two terms of office, but it's still an amazing achievement and shows the great level of popularity FDR retained until the end.
  • Posts: 7,653
    Dragonpol wrote: »
    Agreed, FDR was undoubtedly a great man and a great president who won an unprecedented fourth term in office in the 1944 presidential election. Of course they changed the US constitution after that so that a president could only serve two terms of office, but it's still an amazing achievement and shows the great level of popularity FDR retained until the end.

    It also showed that the American public recognised a great Statesman when they saw it. Those were the days.
  • Posts: 19,339
    Indeed...how times have changed for the US & UK lately,and not for the better.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
  • CommanderRossCommanderRoss The bottom of a pitch lake in Eastern Trinidad, place called La Brea
    Posts: 8,121
  • CommanderRossCommanderRoss The bottom of a pitch lake in Eastern Trinidad, place called La Brea
    Posts: 8,121
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    Birdleson wrote: »

    A couple of yours ago I went (I actually took about 35 students) to an extensive exhibit of all such propaganda (Ally and Axis) at the SF MOMA. Plenty of swell cartoons and posters.

    Yes, there was much brilliant propaganda on both sides. Disney were perhaps the masters, but then again they were heavily infuenced by German expresionism in their work in the 30s and 40s.

    I see parallells to this day in both political and religious indoctrination, both here and elsewhere.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    Posts: 15,696
    80 years ago today...

    invasion-poland-2.jpg
    CN1-Si-F5-Wg-AAb-Og2.png

    ... The world's deadliest conflict in history started.
  • Posts: 19,339
    Yep....must have been awful for citizens world wide to see the headlines that appeared.
  • Posts: 1,314
    I do some film work through my job and have gotten to interview some extremely interesting British army vets over the years. I interviewed One chap who lost his leg in 1944 during the allied airborne invasions about his experiences. One thing he said to will always stick with me.

    “I went into one house in this village, and it was piled right to the ceiling with all these naked bodies where the Germans had put their dead. A terrible thing to see, but that’s war.

    The futility of war, some say.

    But who wouldn’t go to war when they thought of Belsen or dachau? That answers the question”

    Inspiring man and a privilege to spend a morning with him.
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    Posts: 15,696
    Today marks 75 years since WWII ended.

    rawImage.jpg
  • j_w_pepperj_w_pepper Born on the bayou. I can still hear my old hound dog barkin'.
    Posts: 8,823
    Thanks to @NickTwentyTwo who rediscovered it, I'm just "bumping" this thread for further good use, while war is closer to Europe than during the last 77 years.
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    Posts: 18,003
    j_w_pepper wrote: »
    Thanks to @NickTwentyTwo who rediscovered it, I'm just "bumping" this thread for further good use, while war is closer to Europe than during the last 77 years.

    Yes, sadly we're back to the bad old days in Europe again. We surely thought we'd seen the last of this type of thing in 1945. It seems we were wrong.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 23,828
    I can't predict the future, but I'm not sure we're headed in the same direction.
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    edited October 2022 Posts: 18,003
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    I can't predict the future, but I'm not sure we're headed in the same direction.

    No, things are different this time but I was just referring to there being war in Europe for the first time in nearly 80 years. It's dangerous to draw too many parallels with past history but naked aggression and territorial expansion is certainly nothing new. It's just not something many of us have experienced before in our lifetimes.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 23,828
    Dragonpol wrote: »
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    I can't predict the future, but I'm not sure we're headed in the same direction.

    No, things are different this time but I was just referring to there being war in Europe for the first time in nearly 80 years. It's dangerous to draw too many parallels with past history but naked aggression and territorial expansion is certainly nothing new. It's just not something many of us have experienced before in our lifetimes.

    That's the thing: this is new to most of us.

    My grandmother used to tell me stories of knifings that happened "all the time" when she was young (in the 1930s). No one was impressed by them. Someone stabbed someone in a town nearby? Well, water is wet; what else is new? Nowadays, a stabbing can easily make the headlines. Everyone is in shock; it's national news. People say, "what's the world come to!" and "things were better in the past." Except that they weren't. Knifings and other violent incidents upset us more today because they happen less frequently, because they have become more inconceivable, and because we condemn them almost unanimously.

    We see similar trends in wars. Fewer wars, with fewer casualties, resulting in more explicit disapproval from foreign nations, fought with different weapons, and so on. Objectively speaking, we are living in better and more peaceful times than ever before. Most of us have never even been close to any wars before, fortunately. So the war in Ukraine upsets us tremendously. And yes, I too fear for the future, though I always try to be as optimistic as I can. I kept my cool during the pandemic; I'm trying to hope for the best in this conflict as well. I watch the news with the proper filters, looking for the bits that are true while trying to blind myself from the cheap spectacle and sensational doomsday reporting that journalism excels at.

    That said, Putin and his entourage deserve nothing but the cruellest punishments, in my opinion. These forms of aggression cannot be condoned. We are witnessing war crimes that cannot be excused and mustn't ever be forgotten.
  • CommanderRossCommanderRoss The bottom of a pitch lake in Eastern Trinidad, place called La Brea
    Posts: 8,121
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    Dragonpol wrote: »
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    I can't predict the future, but I'm not sure we're headed in the same direction.

    No, things are different this time but I was just referring to there being war in Europe for the first time in nearly 80 years. It's dangerous to draw too many parallels with past history but naked aggression and territorial expansion is certainly nothing new. It's just not something many of us have experienced before in our lifetimes.

    That's the thing: this is new to most of us.

    My grandmother used to tell me stories of knifings that happened "all the time" when she was young (in the 1930s). No one was impressed by them. Someone stabbed someone in a town nearby? Well, water is wet; what else is new? Nowadays, a stabbing can easily make the headlines. Everyone is in shock; it's national news. People say, "what's the world come to!" and "things were better in the past." Except that they weren't. Knifings and other violent incidents upset us more today because they happen less frequently, because they have become more inconceivable, and because we condemn them almost unanimously.

    We see similar trends in wars. Fewer wars, with fewer casualties, resulting in more explicit disapproval from foreign nations, fought with different weapons, and so on. Objectively speaking, we are living in better and more peaceful times than ever before. Most of us have never even been close to any wars before, fortunately. So the war in Ukraine upsets us tremendously. And yes, I too fear for the future, though I always try to be as optimistic as I can. I kept my cool during the pandemic; I'm trying to hope for the best in this conflict as well. I watch the news with the proper filters, looking for the bits that are true while trying to blind myself from the cheap spectacle and sensational doomsday reporting that journalism excels at.

    That said, Putin and his entourage deserve nothing but the cruellest punishments, in my opinion. These forms of aggression cannot be condoned. We are witnessing war crimes that cannot be excused and mustn't ever be forgotten.

    I'm sorry to have to awaken you rudely my friend, but up until februari of this year you were right. However, it seems that the Russian losses the Ukrainians post every day aren't that far off the mark. So, if it indeed is around 60k, and the average killing goes 1:6 as the Ukrainians have claimed (some areas more, some less) that would amount to 70k soldiers dead in almost 8 months. Adding the 1:3 rule for wounded, gives another 140k wounded and maimed. In comparison, the USSR lost 10k in over ten years of fighting in Afghanistan . The Americans and Vietnamese losses (military) combined in 9 years amount to 900k - 1 million. That's 100k a year. As you can see they're right on track. And then the impact on the civilian population. Over 5 million fled Ukraine to the west, over 1 million ended up in Russia, either voluntarily or forced, and over ten million are displaced within Ukraine . That's more people together than that live in your home country. How many civilians have died is impossible to say, but considering the fact that the Russians have been aiming for them, it's most likely it comes close to the Russian numbers. Not mentioning the systematic rape and torture that the Russians use in their military doctrine to terrorise the population into submission .
    Then the wider impact: Ukraine used to be responsible for 1/5th of the world grain export. The blocking of most of this threatens the direct liven of over 100 million people.
    This is all not just media hype. This is real. I understand it's easier to stick your head in the sand, but the fact is the west has done that for all the Putin years, and hence let him go his marry way, developing his imperialistic ambitions and summising his view that the west is weak. Chechnya (2x), Moldova, Georgia, Syria and finally Crimea and Donbass were all warnings of what was coming. And yes, he still thinks he can win and will not stop escalating, putting you and me in a 'cold winter' first. But considering the attacks on the pipelines and now possibly on the internet cables, even an invasion of the Baltic States is not implausible. I'd recommend to start paying attention, as escalation is around the corner, and yes, this time last year WAS better than now .
  • j_w_pepperj_w_pepper Born on the bayou. I can still hear my old hound dog barkin'.
    edited October 2022 Posts: 8,823
    Sounds almost as if we should change the name of this to "The World War III Discussion Thread". I hope not.

    But I don't think Putin will attack one of the Baltic states (or, say Poland or Romania), because they are NATO members, as he knows that there will be a sudden end to his Soviet Union 2.0 dreams if he does. The rest of the world may go down with him, but at least his plans will fail terminally if he gets crazy ideas.

    He didn't start the raid on Ukraine because it was too close to NATO. But instead because it's not been close enough to NATO, i.e. not a member. It's not a coincidence that the Baltic states chose to get into NATO as soon as possible, thanks to Russia's record of regularly subduing and enslaving (and "Russifying") their neighbouring nations, as they are trying in Ukraine now as well.

    Vlad the Impaler may ramble about using nuclear weapons if the area of Mother Russia is threatened. But if his propaganda has any meaning, his newly annexed areas are already threatened.

    And nuclear deterrent works both ways. It has always been NATO's official stance during the Cold War that an attack on NATO territory may immediately trigger a nuclear response. Why should it be different just because the present authoritarian dictator of Russia, KGB-trained, claims to be no longer a Communist (probably correctly, since he is clearly a Fascist)? In fact, I'd feel quite a bit safer if we had the old Soviet Union back. Without the surrounding "Warsaw Pact" countries, but definitely without Putin. Wasn't Khrushchev (a Ukrainian, by the way, who decided that the Krimean peninsula should be part of Ukraine rather than Russia in the 1950s) a really lovable person in comparison, with his cute thumping his shoe on the desk at the UN?

    But no kidding, during the classical Cold War I felt safer than now.
  • CommanderRossCommanderRoss The bottom of a pitch lake in Eastern Trinidad, place called La Brea
    Posts: 8,121
    Well, that would be the rational response, but Putin also knows that NATO doctrine up until this year stated that the Baltic States could be lost, and then recaptured in a few weeks. Putin has been playing the nuclear fiddle to scare the west into not taking action. It worked as far as the west vering unwilling to fight in Ukraine, even though the Budapest memorandum gave them all the rights to do so.
    I don't know the details, but Crimea has always been part of Ukraine. The fact that the Soviets started to actively deport Ukrainians and Tartars out of the area does not change that. Just like Sudetenland, it was all a myth.
Sign In or Register to comment.