German Pres: WWII was fault of Britain, Allies.

[Jon_in_london]

Oh No!! its all our fault lads!!!

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-833882,00.html


Weighing into the debate on his country’s role in the second world war, Rau also criticised the allies for seizing territory, forcing 12m Germans to flee their homes in eastern Europe.

Rau, 72, a veteran Social Democrat, likened the suffering of the expelled Germans — a powerful lobby known as the Vertriebenen — to the fate of victims of ethnic cleansing in the Balkans in the 1990s.


Heres a hint you silly little Gerry! Dont go around invading other countries without provocation, dont try and commit acts of genocide against ethnic minorities and most other nations may be quite happy to live and let live.

But most of all, dont blame the shamefull and criminally abhorent past of your people on us! :mad:

[Iconoclast]

Originally posted by Jon_in_london
Oh No!! its all our fault lads!!!
Basil (to Polly): "Don't mention the war. I mentioned it once, but I think I got away with it.

Basil (to Germans): So it's all forgotten now and let's hear no more about it. So that's two egg mayonnaise, a prawn Goebbels, a Herman Goering and four Colditz salads....no, wait a minute...I got confused because everyone keeps mentioning the war."

German: "Will you stop mentioning the war?"

Basil: "You started it."

German: "We did not start it."

Basil: "Yes you did, you invaded Poland..."

[Ed]

I'm sure that AUP would agree that we started it.

[Skeptic]

Acutally, it's all Wagner's fault. As Woody Allen said, "Every time I hear Wagner, I get this sudden urge to invade Poland."

[Jon_in_london]

I didnt know his daughter was called Poland.

[Lord Emsworth]

Originally posted by Jon_in_london
Heres a hint you silly little Gerry! Dont go around invading other countries without provocation, dont try and commit acts of genocide against ethnic minorities and most other nations may be quite happy to live and let live.

But most of all, dont blame the shamefull and criminally abhorent past of your people on us! :mad:

Two wrongs don't make a right...

[LuxFerum]

Originally posted by Jon_in_london
I didnt know his daughter was called Poland. :roll:

[American]

True, it is the Allies fault. They should have bombed Germany in 1935, and Japan a year later.

[Dancing David]

I think that the role of reparations in the economic decline and the building of angst in Germany between the wars is very well established. However I think it is very hard to prove that the Allies actualy provoked the wars.

The is a book called The German Wars where the author present the idea that since the Allies benefitted from the war they must have started it.

I don't think this will be hashed out for at least one hundred more years. My goodness the debate still rages on what caused the American civil war.

[Crossbow]

Originally posted by Jon_in_london
Weighing into the debate on his country’s role in the second world war, Rau also criticised the allies for seizing territory, forcing 12m Germans to flee their homes in eastern Europe.

Rau, 72, a veteran Social Democrat, likened the suffering of the expelled Germans — a powerful lobby known as the Vertriebenen — to the fate of victims of ethnic cleansing in the Balkans in the 1990s.

But most of all, dont blame the shamefull and criminally abhorent past of your people on us! :mad:

Do not fret about that guy!

When a politican running for office has a choice between blaming his constituents for something bad or blaming someone else for that bad thing, they will almost always blame someone else.

Par for the course man!

[Chaos]

Originally posted by Crossbow


Do not fret about that guy!

When a politican running for office has a choice between blaming his constituents for something bad or blaming someone else for that bad thing, they will almost always blame someone else.

Par for the course man!

Rau isn´t running for office. He has publicly declined to run for a second term some weeks ago.


Also, judging from the part that was quoted, he didn´t blame WWII one the Allies. He blamed all those Germans being expelled or killed in Eastern Europe on the Allies.
I did not yet have a chance to read anything the german news services said about this. Guess it will be in the newspapers and magazines before long.

[arcticpenguin]

Rau also criticised the allies for seizing territory, forcing 12m Germans to flee their homes in eastern Europe.
Are those the Germans who made "their" homes in Poland, Czechoslovakia, etc?

Lebensraum!

[Lord Emsworth]

Originally posted by arcticpenguin

Are those the Germans who made "their" homes in Poland, Czechoslovakia, etc?

Lebensraum!

I don't know which Germans you are talking about.

Lebensraum?

No I don't think so! Those people living there had nothing to do with Lebensraum. Those Germans had been living there for some years. If I'm not wrong they had been living there even before Germany stated to exist in 1871!

[Chaos]

I guess he mean those living in Silesia and Eastern Prussia and the area aroung Königsberg. These areas belong to Germany even before the Third Reich. In ´45 they were added to Poland and the Soviet Union.

[Lord Emsworth]

Originally posted by Chaos
I guess he mean those living in Silesia and Eastern Prussia and the area aroung Königsberg.

Silesia was conquered by Frederick the Great. From Austria.

Originally posted by Chaos
These areas belong to Germany even before the Third Reich. In ´45 they were added to Poland and the Soviet Union.

Well Russia got the area around Königsberg and parts of Poland (I guess it was the part that fell to Russia when Hitler and Stalin divided Poland before Barbarossa). Whereas Poland got parts of Prussia. Thus Poland sort of moved to the west.

[Crossbow]

Originally posted by Chaos


Rau isn´t running for office. He has publicly declined to run for a second term some weeks ago.


Also, judging from the part that was quoted, he didn´t blame WWII one the Allies. He blamed all those Germans being expelled or killed in Eastern Europe on the Allies.
I did not yet have a chance to read anything the german news services said about this. Guess it will be in the newspapers and magazines before long.
OK, may be I should expand a bit.

I do agree that Rau himself is not personally running for office: as you pointed out, he has decided not to run.

However, he was President of Germany and he would like his party to see his party expand its influence in the next German election cycle.

So while he himself may not be an active politican, he is still very involved in politics.

[ZeeGerman]

Originally posted by Jon_in_london
Oh No!! its all our fault lads!!!

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-833882,00.html



Heres a hint you silly little Gerry! Dont go around invading other countries without provocation, dont try and commit acts of genocide against ethnic minorities and most other nations may be quite happy to live and let live.

But most of all, dont blame the shamefull and criminally abhorent past of your people on us! :mad:

Pipe down folks!

He is referring to people expelled from Czechia who had lived there for generations. The discussion whether one could point out the fate of some Germans in the aftermath of WWII as the result of unjust treatment - like ethnical cleansing - or not is led since 1945. The topic makes it to the press usually once a year when the orginazation of those "Vertriebenen" ( expelled) meet for their annual convent in Nuremberg. They are very right wing and actually demand compensation or even restitution of property in Czechia. Which they definitely owned far before 1933.
Personally, I don't agree with them, if it was unjust or not. Regarding what Germany got up to in those 12 years I would say Tough Luck and quote Chirac: They missed all good opportunities to shut up. They're gonna die out pretty soon anyway. Calling them a "powerful lobby" is just laughable.

Now, President Rau (who is definitely NOT running for office) is - as a social democrat - hardly the guy to side with these people from yesterday.

He is very much of the conciliative kind ( he is actually called "Bruder Johannes" or Brother John). Interpreting the part of the article (which I can't access fully because it costs - NOTHING is in the German news about it) like you did is way over the top.

Zee

[Nikk]

Originally posted by arcticpenguin

Are those the Germans who made "their" homes in Poland, Czechoslovakia, etc?

Lebensraum!

I think they had been living there for centuries long before there was a Czechoslovakia, a Germany or even really a Poland. At the end of WWll the Soviets helped themselves to a large chunk of Poland and gave a chunk of Germany ( largely inhabited by Germans ) to Poland. The German inhabitants were "ethnically cleansed" by the Poles. Needless to say the Western allies weren't about to start WWII (b) by attacking the Soviet Union and didn't make a fuss. Oh and the German inhabitants of Czechoslovakia were largely "ethnically cleansed" as well.

Ah, the benefits of 19th century nationalist political philosophy!

[Mike B.]

Could someone tell me the status of part of what used to be East Prussia that is between Poland and Lithuania?
Kalingrad
I realize it is part of Russia now.

However, are the people there German speakers or ethnically German?

[Dancing David]

I regret the fate of all the millions of epople relocated as a result of WWII, and given the Soviet's pnchant for revenge, I would assume there were many germans who fled hard and fast.

Lord E., thank you for your contributions.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Ed
I'm sure that AUP would agree that we started it.

How did you guess? I am just typing up my thesis on this matter now.

[Ed]

Can't we just agree that it was the Jews?

[Giz]

Originally posted by Jon_in_london
Oh No!! its all our fault lads!!!

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-833882,00.html



Heres a hint you silly little Gerry! Dont go around invading other countries without provocation, dont try and commit acts of genocide against ethnic minorities and most other nations may be quite happy to live and let live.

But most of all, dont blame the shamefull and criminally abhorent past of your people on us! :mad:

And the Red Army should have put to work refurbishing Berlin after the war. I mean, did you see the mess they made, tragic just tragic. Your heart bleeds - what were the Soviets thinking?

I mean surely we can all agree that its only fair that Chamberlain shares some of the blame for starting world war two.
(And Churchill prolonged it.)

[Nitpick]

Originally posted by Jon_in_london

Heres a hint you silly little Gerry!

Once again I'd like to express my admiration for people who manage to perceive the populations of entire countries as being silly/evil/stupid/good/etc. Oh, how discerning!
Anyway, I think it makes life and thoughts much easier to handle - and I suppose this fills me with envy.

Hey all of you who believe that "Americans are stupid", "Russians are brutal" "French are I-don't-know-how" or the like - you're talking about millions of people! People ranging from saint to mass murderer (in every country ), from those with the IQ of a boiled carrot to those matching the IQ of Gauss (or Newton, Einstein, just pick your favorite)

If someone ever tells you that the inhabitants of X (a country you've never been to and maybe never even heard of before) are (for example) stupid, this will be a precious piece of information.
It won't teach you anything about the intelligence of the X-inans, but a lot about that of the talker.
No, thinking of it, not even that. All those people who believe that whole people are reducible to one ore two attributes, they can't all be stupid. They're too many. And too different otherwise.

[Giz]

Originally posted by Nitpick


Once again I'd like to express my admiration for people who manage to perceive the populations of entire countries as being silly/evil/stupid/good/etc. .

Uhhh, Jon actually said "you silly little gerry", that sounds like he's addressing a single person...

As opposed to "you silly little gerries"

No ones suggested that the German people as a whole (or even a majority) supported WW2 (until they started to lose), or voted for the Nazis.

It was just a clique, a few bad apples that ruined it for everyone.

[Nitpick]

Originally posted by Giz


Uhhh, Jon actually said "you silly little gerry", that sounds like he's addressing a single person...

As opposed to "you silly little gerries"


Well, maybe I over-reacted, but I think that Gerry (like Yank or Frog etc) has something of a built-in plural form.

Originally posted by Giz

No ones suggested that the German people as a whole (or even a majority) supported WW2 (until they started to lose), or voted for the Nazis.

It was just a clique, a few bad apples that ruined it for everyone.
There were quite a few bad apples... Or stupid or blinded. More than a third voted for the Nazis

[Jon_in_london]

Originally posted by Nitpick


Once again I'd like to express my admiration for people who manage to perceive the populations of entire countries as being silly/evil/stupid/good/etc. Oh, how discerning!
Anyway, I think it makes life and thoughts much easier to handle - and I suppose this fills me with envy.


Gerry= singular
Gerries/Gerrys=plural.

stupid yank.

[Jon_in_london]

Originally posted by Giz

No ones suggested that the German people as a whole (or even a majority) supported WW2 (until they started to lose), or voted for the Nazis.


Of course, we will never know how many of them supported the war since there were no free or fair polls on the matter at the time.

Like Giz/nitpick said though, the Nazis didnt come to power because no-one liked them. They were democratically elected.

Does anyone else find it strange though how no-one was ever a Nazi? I mean looking at these old war doccies where the ex-SS guy says "I was never a Nazi, i just fought for Germany".... strange that.... no Nazis at all....just like there are no white South Africans who supported Aparthied....

[Nitpick]

Originally posted by Jon_in_london

stupid yank.

Location: Usually 50°56'N,06°59'E

I'm afraid you'll have to exercise the latitude/longitude stuff a little.

Ok, I know, you didn't really mean the "yank" :)

[LW]

Originally posted by Jon_in_london

Gerry= singular
Gerries/Gerrys=plural.


While reading English WWI books I've occasionally encountered singular "The Hun" or "The Gerry" to denote Germans in general. Like, "The Hun always counterattacks at evening". I took your comment to follow this usage. I fail to see how the singular interpretation could have made any sense as the person quoted was about 8 years old when the war started so he probably didn't go around invading other countries.

[Michael Redman]

Of course the Allies caused the war. Hitler just wanted to control the world. If we had simply gone along, there never would have been a war.

Remember, kids, it takes two to fight a war.

[ZeeGerman]

Originally posted by Jon_in_london


Of course, we will never know how many of them supported the war since there were no free or fair polls on the matter at the time.

Like Giz/nitpick said though, the Nazis didnt come to power because no-one liked them. They were democratically elected.

Does anyone else find it strange though how no-one was ever a Nazi? I mean looking at these old war doccies where the ex-SS guy says "I was never a Nazi, i just fought for Germany".... strange that.... no Nazis at all....just like there are no white South Africans who supported Aparthied....

That's precious.
First you post an unsubstantiated rant against our president and now you blame us for hushing up our past. What's wrong with you? Have you been passed by too many German cars on the motorway?

How about adressing the points brought up in response to your first post, hm?

Zee

[Lord Emsworth]

Originally posted by Mike B.
Could someone tell me the status of part of what used to be East Prussia that is between Poland and Lithuania?
Kalingrad

I have heard it being referred to as "Kaliningradskaja Oblast"

I realize it is part of Russia now.

However, are the people there German speakers or ethnically German?

If you are talking about the present: Neither, they are Russians who speak Russian.

[Shane Costello]

Originally posted by Jon_in_london:
Like Giz/nitpick said though, the Nazis didnt come to power because no-one liked them. They were democratically elected.

This is only partly right. The Nazis exploited a flawed democratic and constitutional process to gain power. They never gained a majority of seats in the Reichstag, and ultimatley gained power by sidestepping the conservative politicians who thought they could contain them as part of a coalition.

[Giz]

Originally posted by Nitpick


Well, maybe I over-reacted, but I think that Gerry (like Yank or Frog etc) has something of a built-in plural form.


There were quite a few bad apples... Or stupid or blinded. More than a third voted for the Nazis

Yeah, that "just a clique..." should have had a :rolleyes: after it to make it clear I was being sarcastic.

I am surprised that our German pollsters here appear to agree with Herr Rau that Germany should be given equal victim status with other groups that suffered... Are they suggesting that the western allies should have taken on the Soviets in 1945 with the goal of keeping Silesia German???

[Chaos]

Originally posted by Giz
I am surprised that our German pollsters here appear to agree with Herr Rau that Germany should be given equal victim status with other groups that suffered... Are they suggesting that the western allies should have taken on the Soviets in 1945 with the goal of keeping Silesia German???

No. But

(1) they might at least have put a bit of pressure on their (then still) allies - this happen largely during the war - to stop this or at least keep it as civilized as possible.

(2) they had no problems with exposing any actual or imagined crime "the Commies" ever commited - except those commited against German civilians in WWII. Strange, isn´t it?

[Giz]

Originally posted by Chaos


No. But

(1) they might at least have put a bit of pressure on their (then still) allies - this happen largely during the war - to stop this or at least keep it as civilized as possible.

(2) they had no problems with exposing any actual or imagined crime "the Commies" ever commited - except those commited against German civilians in WWII. Strange, isn´t it?

Well, points taken but - in order

(1) What influence over Stalin do you think the west had? - Short of dropping A-bombs (on silesia!).

(2) Because when those were being committed the far greater enemy was Nazi Germany, why hand the Germans an anti-bolshevik propaganda victory just when the struggle was reaching it's climax?

Everyone agrees that to be a refugee or to have the Red Army roll through looting and raping is terrible BUT compared to what the Wehrmacht and SS had done in Russia - there's no comparison. And the Soviet assualt was a counter-attack, not quite the same thing as a genocidal invasion for lebensraum.

[ZeeGerman]

Originally posted by Giz


Yeah, that "just a clique..." should have had a :rolleyes: after it to make it clear I was being sarcastic.

I am surprised that our German pollsters here appear to agree with Herr Rau that Germany should be given equal victim status with other groups that suffered... Are they suggesting that the western allies should have taken on the Soviets in 1945 with the goal of keeping Silesia German???

And I'm surprised about your interpretation of Chaos' and my posts (I guess we are the two German pollsters you're talking about). Where did we say anything that goes in that direction?

Zee

[Lord Emsworth]

Originally posted by Giz
I am surprised that our German pollsters here appear to agree with Herr Rau that Germany should be given equal victim status with other groups that suffered...Are they suggesting that the western allies should have taken on the Soviets in 1945 with the goal of keeping Silesia German???

No, disagreeing with the claim that Johannes Rau blamed the whole of WW II on the allies, which he clearly did not do.

If you think that somebody is suggesting what you stated above ... it is called straw man.

The opinion that the British and Americans did not do enough to stop Stalin and Benes driving out and promoting atrocities among the Germans exists, however.



Rereading the part of the article that Jon quoted I find this bit a little confusing:


Weighing into the debate on his country’s role in the second world war, Rau also criticised the allies for seizing territory, forcing 12m Germans to flee their homes in eastern Europe.

As far as I know the Allies (GB and US) didn't seize any terrritory at all. This is either an inaccuracy on the part of Rau or a translation mistake. He seems to be referring to the victorios powers ('Siegermächte'), particularly the SU, Poland and Czechoslovakia.

It would be quite useful to read what he really said ...

[Jon_in_london]

Originally posted by Lord Emsworth

The opinion that the British and Americans did not do enough to stop Stalin and Benes driving out and promoting atrocities among the Germans exists, however.


I guess we should have started WWIII on behalf of the NAZIs then?

Originally posted by Lord Emsworth
As far as I know the Allies (GB and US) didn't seize any terrritory at all. This is either an inaccuracy on the part of Rau or a translation mistake. He seems to be referring to the victorios powers ('Siegermächte'), particularly the SU, Poland and Czechoslovakia.


Given the scale of the German's crimes against the human race, they are bloody lucky there is any such thing as Germany at all and IMO, should shut the feck up.

[Mike B.]

Originally posted by Jon_in_london


Given the scale of the German's crimes against the human race, they are bloody lucky there is any such thing as Germany at all and IMO, should shut the feck up.

:eek:
Do you really mean this?

[ZeeGerman]

Originally posted by Jon_in_london


I guess we should have started WWIII on behalf of the NAZIs then?



Given the scale of the German's crimes against the human race, they are bloody lucky there is any such thing as Germany at all and IMO, should shut the feck up.

Who is "they" Jon?

Zee

[Jon_in_london]

Originally posted by ZeeGerman


Who is "they" Jon?

Zee

You and your countrymen.

Dont come tell me that the Germans werent to blame for WWII. The two major wars of the 20th century were the fault of the German people.

Do you accept your countrie's historic responsibility Zee? Or are you in denial?

I dont have anything against any Germans except those who would care to make excuses for the obscenities commited by thier parents/grandparents/greatgrandparents.

[Jon_in_london]

Originally posted by Mike B.


:eek:
Do you really mean this?

Yes.

[ZeeGerman]

Originally posted by Jon_in_london


You and your countrymen.

Dont come tell me that the Germans werent to blame for WWII. The two major wars of the 20th century were the fault of the German people.

Of course they WERE. Did I or any of the other Germans on this board say otherwise?

The question that bugs me from time to time (especially when I'm confronted with rants like yours) is "ARE we, i.e. the present day Germans, still to blame for the Wars and the atrocities carried out between 33 and 45? If yes, will my daughters (now 8 and 2 years old) be to be blamed for it as well and justly so? In other words, is there some kind of original sin "we" have to live with until the end of time?

Just to clarify, I'm talking about guilt here, not about Germany's obligation to bear "our" history in well documented rememberance. That obligation doesn't expire IMO. But what about the guilt?

BTW, I would appreciate it if you could adopt a more civilized tone. You do realize that there is a logical inconsistancy when you demand of me to shut the feck up just to question my standpoint in the next sentence, don't you.


Zee

[Lord Emsworth]

Originally posted by Jon_in_london
I guess we should have started WWIII on behalf of the NAZIs then?

I guess, you will have to ask the people holding this opinion.

Originally posted by Jon_in_London
Dont come tell me that the Germans werent to blame for WWII.

He doesn't. [shrug]

Originally posted by Jon_in_london
The two major wars of the 20th century were the fault of the German people.

And nobody did claim otherwise ...


But if you search long enough, perhaps you will be able to find someone.

Originally posted by Jon_in_london
I dont have anything against any Germans except those who would care to make excuses for the obscenities commited by thier parents/grandparents/greatgrandparents.

So, to turn the tables, you as a Brit (I guess) must be really ashamed for the obscenities the British Empire committed around the world.

Well, well ...

[Nikk]

Originally posted by Jon_in_london


You and your countrymen.

Dont come tell me that the Germans werent to blame for WWII. The two major wars of the 20th century were the fault of the German people.
------------------------------------------------------------------------


Originally posted by ZeeGerman


Of course they WERE. Did I or any of the other Germans on this board say otherwise?

Perhaps you should say otherwise. The causes of WWI are certainly more complex than Jon's " the fault of the German people". But I am sure you know that better than I do.

The question that bugs me from time to time (especially when I'm confronted with rants like yours) is "ARE we, i.e. the present day Germans, still to blame for the Wars and the atrocities carried out between 33 and 45? If yes, will my daughters (now 8 and 2 years old) be to be blamed for it as well and justly so? In other words, is there some kind of original sin "we" have to live with until the end of time?

Just to clarify, I'm talking about guilt here, not about Germany's obligation to bear "our" history in well documented rememberance. That obligation doesn't expire IMO. But what about the guilt?

Of course it expires. Germany has done far more to confront its past failings than many other countries, e.g. Russia, China, Japan, Spain, arguably the UK, US, France, Australia and lets not even start on the muslim world.



Zee

[Chaos]

On WW I:
Actually, the war started with the Austrian Ultimatum against Serbia, or rather, when that expired and Austria declared war. The German Emperor Wilhelm II and the German people were very eager to join that war, however. On the part of the people, it was a very good example of runaway patriotism.

On confronting failings:
What´s galling most reasonable people is not that we are confronting our parents´and grandparents´ failing, wether willingly or forcedly, but that we appear to be the only ones to do so.

[LW]

Originally posted by Chaos
On WW I:
Actually, the war started with the Austrian Ultimatum against Serbia, or rather, when that expired and Austria declared war.

Even then it might have remained a local conflict if Nicholas II hadn't ordered mobilization. That was the final straw that ensured that all major powers would get in.

[Agammamon]

Originally posted by Jon_in_london
Oh No!! its all our fault lads!!!

Of course it's your fault. If you hadn't resisted the invasion there would have been no need for a war.

[Malachi151]

I guess we should have started WWIII on behalf of the NAZIs then?

Its easy to see why they would think that given the post war Nazi-American collaberation against the Communists.

Given the scale of the German's crimes against the human race, they are bloody lucky there is any such thing as Germany at all and IMO, should shut the feck up. [/B]

However it did pale in comparison to the actions of the Japanese, who today are even more apologetic for thier own past.

[Malachi151]

Of course it expires. Germany has done far more to confront its past failings than many other countries, e.g. Russia, China, Japan, Spain, arguably the UK, US, France, Australia and lets not even start on the muslim world.

I fully agree, but it was not volentary, it was because they were forced to do so, yet still, it is true.

Dont come tell me that the Germans werent to blame for WWII. The two major wars of the 20th century were the fault of the German people.

If you want to really get down to it then no it was not "the German people's fault", it was the fault of the entire Western community for both WWI and WWII.

In WWI Germany was just reacting to British and French imperialist threat in a proactive manner. The threat though was presented by the Brits, and Franks, and a Russian Czars, and others.

WWI was the product of runaway international capitalist competition. Dont' forget that many of England's colonies joined the Germans in a fight for their own freedom from British oppression during with WWI and WWII (including of course Iraq).

WWII was brought on by social stress caused by the economic burden placed on Germany, and essentially all of Europe, ultimately by America (who had a nice 12 year hay day while Europe festered in ruin) and by the rise of the global Communist Revolution.

WWII was the anti-Communist counter revolution, which was why the Nazi were allowed to go as far as they did without anyone preventing their actions sooner, because at that time, the wolrd only saw a force cleansing the world of Communsits and Bolsheviks, and thus the Western leaders were pleased with, in fact aiding, the Nazis, including Churchill. When he allied with Stalin then the sh%t hit the fan and the West really got worried, but until then, and after then everyone just hoped they would go on a nice Commie killing spree and then be done with it.

It was the complacency, support, and cooperation with the anti-Communist agenda that by all Western powers that lead to WWII.

[Mike B.]

Originally posted by Malachi151
[B]

However it did pale in comparison to the actions of the Japanese, who today are even more apologetic for thier own past.

Maybe I am misunderstanding you Malachi,
But I do not think the Japanese are more "apologetic."

Politicians frequently get in trouble for remarks that upset Koreans and Chinese.

And remember the Japanese government has never recognized the "rape of Nanking" took place.

In fact a Japanese leftist, (name escapes me right now) took the Japanese educational system to court to prevent what he saw as a coverup of the actions in that period. He lost...

As far as Germany is concerned,
I believe they do deserve credit. No nation that I know of has tried to deal with the past as they have.

And I hope we can all agree that Zee's daughters are not responsible for what occurred...:)

[Malachi151]

I meant they are apologists for their own actions, i.e. they make excuses to say that what they did back then was not really that bad.

Maybe I'm using the word wrong, but anyway I mean they are not taking responsibility for their actions.

[Ed]

Originally posted by Malachi151

If you want to really get down to it then no it was not "the German people's fault", [/B]

Who was wearing that snappy field grey? Who was firing the guns?

You are taking the "blame the victim" approach to new absurd heights.

[ZeeGerman]

Originally posted by Ed


Who was wearing that snappy field grey? Who was firing the guns?

You are taking the "blame the victim" approach to new absurd heights.

I too find Malachi's analysis far to academic. Of course you can construct causal chains with say WWII at the rear end and actions/decisions/omissions of others at the front end. Doing so, one could probably find a way to blame the holocaust on the jews.

IMO when talking about responsibility the concept of intent and shortfall (i.e. knowing what somebody is up to and doing nothing about it) is crucial and it were clearly the German people and important players of the German political establishment who supported the Nazis coming to power. After all, the NSDAP got 44% of the seats in parlament on march 5th 1933. That was AFTER the "Reichstagsbrand" and the establishment of the "Notverordnung zum Schutze von Volk und Staat" (a kind of mega drastic patriot act). So it shouldn't have been too difficult to envision how an NAZI governed Germany would look like. Also Hitler's "Mein Kampf" was written in the 20s and he had made his plans quite clear. Obviously, it hasn't been taken seriously enough.

As to WWII being caused by an anti-Communist agenda of all Western powers, I disagree. It might be true that they didn't stop NAZI Germany from rearming to have a stronghold against Stalin's Russia. But the war started at September 1st 1939 because Hitler wanted it so. And he had full support of the Wehrmacht's chain of command and the German people were quite pleased when their army brought home victory after victory.


Zee

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Jon_in_london


You and your countrymen.

Dont come tell me that the Germans werent to blame for WWII. The two major wars of the 20th century were the fault of the German people.

Do you accept your countrie's historic responsibility Zee? Or are you in denial?

I dont have anything against any Germans except those who would care to make excuses for the obscenities commited by thier parents/grandparents/greatgrandparents.

That is not true. WWI was not just the fault of the Germans. Everyone was spoiling for a fight. Britain as doing a US. That is, it was the world power, and any attempt to challenge that was to be met with extreme prejudice.

The Battleship arms race was in full flight. When the war happened, all the elites of the countries involved welcomed it. The actual people had to die. WWII was a direct result of the unresolved aspects of WWI. You can't seperate the two.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by ZeeGerman


As to WWII being caused by an anti-Communist agenda of all Western powers, I disagree. It might be true that they didn't stop NAZI Germany from rearming to have a stronghold against Stalin's Russia. But the war started at September 1st 1939 because Hitler wanted it so. And he had full support of the Wehrmacht's chain of command and the German people were quite pleased when their army brought home victory after victory.


Zee

Not quite true, Hitler wanted to be chums with the West, who he saw as racially equal, but they didn't see it that way.

[rolf]

Originally posted by Jon_in_london
Given the scale of the German's crimes against the human race, they are bloody lucky there is any such thing as Germany at all and IMO, should shut the feck up.

The Russians? Didn't Stalin kill nearly 20 million of his own people?

And the British? Didn't they already have concentration camps in Africa in the 19th century? Didn't they suppress and exploit the natives in their entire empire?

How about the Spanish? Didn't they commit crimes against the native populations in South and Central America way back when. And the Inquisition?

And the Americans? Didn't they effectively do ethnic cleansing against the American Indians? I think many tribes were wiped out. Oh wait, we're giving them (and the bankrollers behind them) casinos now, to make up for the fact that their entire cultures and way of life have been obliterated........

Before you criticize countries as a whole, remember you yourself are probably part of a country that has a blood stained past.

I say be mature and judge people individually.

[Giz]

Originally posted by a_unique_person


That is not true. WWI was not just the fault of the Germans. Everyone was spoiling for a fight. Britain as doing a US. That is, it was the world power, and any attempt to challenge that was to be met with extreme prejudice.

The Battleship arms race was in full flight. When the war happened, all the elites of the countries involved welcomed it. The actual people had to die. WWII was a direct result of the unresolved aspects of WWI. You can't seperate the two.

Everyone was spoiling for a fight? Does this include Britain (under the Liberals) where half the cabinet wanted to stay out of it and to hell with any obligation to the French (the French having already - as per Entente Cordiale agreements - having sent their fleet to the Med, entrusting the defence of the Channel to the Royal Navy).
The other half of the cabinet thought that abandoning France would lead to:
a) German victory, leaving Britain in a vastly more vunerable position in any future conflict.
b) A "betrayed" France and rather a frosting of diplomatic relations. No allies for the UK in any future conflict (see (a))
c) Zee's daughters probably blameless.

It was the rape of belgium that got a majority of the cabinet set for war (though the strategic reasoning was to maintain the balance of power).

Hardly "all the elites of the countries involved welcomed it" :rolleyes:

Next you'll be rolling out the old chestnut of the alliance structure making a world war inevitable rather than each countries descision being made on its own perception of it's national self interest.

[Diamond]

Originally posted by Iconoclast

Basil (to Polly): "Don't mention the war. I mentioned it once, but I think I got away with it.

Basil (to Germans): So it's all forgotten now and let's hear no more about it. So that's two egg mayonnaise, a prawn Goebbels, a Herman Goering and four Colditz salads....no, wait a minute...I got confused because everyone keeps mentioning the war."

German: "Will you stop mentioning the war?"

Basil: "You started it."

German: "We did not start it."

Basil: "Yes you did, you invaded Poland..."

I had forgotten this dialogue. Hilarious.:D

[Malachi151]

Everyone was spoiling for a fight? Does this include Britain (under the Liberals) where half the cabinet wanted to stay out of it and to hell with any obligation to the French

LOL, of course the British wanted to stay out, the British already had the largest empire in the world, they had to reason to fight, they had already done their fighting 100 years earlier.

See, this is what is stupid. People think, ohhh, WWI, but in reality WWI was not the first world war, we just call it that. The REAL first World War was fought during the American Revolution between Britain, Spain, France, and the Dutch. The American Revolution was one part of a World War. And it was a war that went on for quite some time with the British as the ultimate winners of that war. By the mid 1800s the British had come out on top as the dominate world superpower, through force. The Boer War was the final last straw that showed true British unbridaled aggressionand its ultimate movites, global economic domination, and they killed thousnad fo people including women and children in condentration camps in South Africa in order to conquer the largest gold mine in the world.

So, the Spanish were arguably the first aggressors, against the Natives of the Americas, then the British were the aggressors against Spain then the French joined the fray and the British came out on top, everyone was at fault in that gorup for doing some bad stuff, but essentially the beginning of the 20th century started with the large British empire which had conquered much of the world. At that point the British had no more need for war, they had already conquered everything they could so they then puched for "peace", yeah right, what a crock.

The Germans had every right to fight British global aggression, however the Germans were no better in thier motives though, and certianly no better in thier practices, in fact worse.

The British were the ones pumping the naval arms race too BTW.

Thats why the Communist Revolution happened, it was obvious to everyone that WWI was a product of global capitlaist aggression, so Communist support grew.

After the war was over the Communsits were taking over everywhere and so WWII grew as the counter revolutionary reaction against Communist global takeover.

In the eyes of the Communists everything was going as predicted. Massive global imperialist war, followed by devestation and a ruined European economy with a growing American power, only to be followed by a global economic depression even in America, seen by many as the proof of the failure of capitaism as unable to survive without imperialist war.

The view at the time was that capitlaism required imperilaism to survive, which is why the Gemrans were set on expansion to recover their economy, all of this was exatly according to the gospel of the Communsits it was all going exactly as they said things would go, but after WWII a whole new era came in and things changed in many ways which made the old models of all types obsolete, which was where Keneysianism and Fabian Socialism came into play.

[Giz]

"American Revolution was one part of a World War. And it was a war that went on for quite some time with the British as the ultimate winners of that war."
- The Americans didn't do too badly either!

"The Germans had every right to fight British global aggression"
- Wow. Like the treaty of Brest-Litovsk (taking Finland, Baltic States, Poland and the Ukraine) from the Russians? That socked it to those Brits! A blow, a veritable blow at the foundations of British global aggression!

"it was obvious to everyone that WWI was a product of global capitlaist aggression"
- Say political and ethnic tension perhaps, but saying it was the result of the massive increase in European wealth over the previous 50 years? Pople are sooo much more excitable when they have full bellies...

"The Boer War was the final last straw that showed true British unbridaled aggressionand its ultimate movites, global economic domination"
- OK, the worlds largest economies/richest nations in 1914:
First; USA
Second; Germany

"The British were the ones pumping the naval arms race too BTW."
- Britain had decided not to contest Naval arms races with either the US or Japan. Germany was a special case as its Navy threatened the home isles. Most Navies are used to support / protect overseas possessions/trade. The German Navy appeared to be being built with one role in mind. An offensive threat to the heart of the British Empire - hence the inevitable response.

[LW]

Originally posted by Giz

- Wow. Like the treaty of Brest-Litovsk (taking Finland, Baltic States, Poland and the Ukraine) from the Russians?

Germans? Taking Finland from Russians? In the treaty of Brest-Litovsk?

The treaty was made on 3 March 1918. Finland declared indepence on 6 December 1917, and the Bolsheviks had acknowledged the independence on 31 December 1917.

What the Russians agreed to do in the treaty was to cancel their support to Finnish Red Army (Finland was in the middle of a civil war).

[Malachi151]

The Americans didn't do too badly either!

America was generally uninvolved in the global battle. The wars raged in Africa, Asia, the Indies, a little in South America, the Carribean, and Europe.

Wow. Like the treaty of Brest-Litovsk (taking Finland, Baltic States, Poland and the Ukraine) from the Russians? That socked it to those Brits! A blow, a veritable blow at the foundations of British global aggression!

That was territory that was taken by the Russian Czars, the Bolsheviks gave it back as a jesture of anti-imperialism and in hopes to bring peace to the region.

OK, the worlds largest economies/richest nations in 1914

Sources?

I know the US was on top, but Britain definately had the largest empire, and I assumed the largest European economy.

Britain had decided not to contest Naval arms races with either the US or Japan. Germany was a special case as its Navy threatened the home isles. Most Navies are used to support / protect overseas possessions/trade. The German Navy appeared to be being built with one role in mind. An offensive threat to the heart of the British Empire - hence the inevitable response.

The British were in cooperation with the Japanese, they built the Japanese fleet for them becuase they didn't have enough money to build it for themselves but since Japan financed the building of the fleet they went ahead and built it for them, used it as a learning tool, then used the money from that to build their own better fleet.

Yes, the Germans were being the aggressors in the whole deal, I agree, but the reason is quite simple. The British had already done their aggression over the past 200 years and built their empire, they had no need to be aggressive anymore.

[Giz]

Originally posted by Malachi151
Wow. Like the treaty of Brest-Litovsk (taking Finland, Baltic States, Poland and the Ukraine) from the Russians? That socked it to those Brits! A blow, a veritable blow at the foundations of British global aggression!

That was territory that was taken by the Russian Czars, the Bolsheviks gave it back as a jesture of anti-imperialism and in hopes to bring peace to the region.


I'd forgotten Soviet Russia's non-exxpansionist credentials (though perhaps the Czecks, Hungarians, Afghans, Finns etc haven't).

Perhaps what you meant was that faced with a war weary populace, unchecked German forces and an incipient civil war the Bolsheviks had to make peace to have a chance of consolidating their hold on power.

[Malachi151]

Originally posted by Giz


I'd forgotten Soviet Russia's non-exxpansionist credentials (though perhaps the Czecks, Hungarians, Afghans, Finns etc haven't).

Perhaps what you meant was that faced with a war weary populace, unchecked German forces and an incipient civil war the Bolsheviks had to make peace to have a chance of consolidating their hold on power.

Notice I said the Bolsheviks, virtually all of which were killed by Stalin.

[egslim]

The British were in cooperation with the Japanese, they built the Japanese fleet for them becuase they didn't have enough money to build it for themselves but since Japan financed the building of the fleet they went ahead and built it for them, used it as a learning tool, then used the money from that to build their own better fleet.

Not sure if I'm reading this right. Since the battle at Travalgar the Royal Navy had been the most powerful navy on earth. After (sometime around 1850?) Japan had been threatened by the US fleet (because the Japanese were killing stranded sailors and refused trade) they decided to build their own modern navy. Because Britain was geographically similar to Japan and had the most powerful navy in the world, they asked the British for help. This culminated in the Rusian/Japan war of 04/05, when the Japanese fleet smashed the Russian East Sea fleet. At no time until at least 1920 was the Japanese fleet close to equal to the Royal Navy.

After studying the sea battle between Russia and Japan the Royal Navy designed a new class of battleship, Dreadnought. (Btw, does anyone know what happened to this ship?) Because all other battleships were made obsolete, every navy had to start from scratch and the Germans saw an opportunity to build a fleet able to challenge the Royal Navy. This was one of the tensions between Britain and Germany.