Wrath of Dagon Posted November 23, 2009 Share Posted November 23, 2009 (edited) And so I guess you paint all members of the National Socialist German Workers Edited November 23, 2009 by Wrath of Dagon "Moral indignation is a standard strategy for endowing the idiot with dignity." Marshall McLuhan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hurlshort Posted November 23, 2009 Share Posted November 23, 2009 Disclaimer: I'm Jewish.ROFLASDASFASDKHJ And I'm a scientologist. Who asked you and, more pertinently, who the **** cares? In all seriousness though, I suppose we're required to take a Palestinian's opinion at face value on whether an IDF member can be a hero as well, then, if your opinion as a Jew is somehow especially relevant. I'm not sure where you are going with this vitriol. First off, the scientology comment makes no sense. He's not just spouting off about his religion, he is part of an ethnic group that was targeted by Nazi's. And as for who asked, it was Lare, he quite specifically asked if a Nazi soldier can be a war hero. I want teh kotor 3 also qualified his answer by explaining his family connection to the holocaust and why his opinion is not only relevant, but emotionally charged. I appreciate his perspective, it is entirely real and human, rather than just a simple regurgitation of a wikipedia article from an uninvolved forum poster. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hurlshort Posted November 23, 2009 Share Posted November 23, 2009 Not really, the vast majority of soldiers in the Wehrmacht were fighting for their country, not a political party. Honestly most historians target the SS as the main perpetrators of war crimes, so I'm not sure where you are going to go with this argument. I have to think you don't know much about WW2 history. Yes, you must be right. Other than the degree in history and the few classes on World War 2 I took in college, I have little knowledge on the subject. Please enlighten us all on your vast knowledge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
213374U Posted November 23, 2009 Share Posted November 23, 2009 I'm not sure where you are going with this vitriol.And I'm not sure where his being Jewish, Polish, Russian or French fits in with the unrelated issue of whether a WWII German soldier can be a hero or not. Oh wait, it doesn't fit anywhere. Not to mention the fact that kotorsomethingorother didn't experience the war himself, so he's about as qualified to make value judgements as you or me. His perspective isn't any more "real and human" than any Wikipedia article, but unlike wiki articles, his perspective has no citations attached. By the way, you may have all the college degrees in the world, but you are still failing basic reading comprehension. Lare didn't ask which ethnic or religious group anyone belongs to, which is what I was referring to. - When he is best, he is a little worse than a man, and when he is worst, he is little better than a beast. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wrath of Dagon Posted November 23, 2009 Share Posted November 23, 2009 Not really, the vast majority of soldiers in the Wehrmacht were fighting for their country, not a political party. Honestly most historians target the SS as the main perpetrators of war crimes, so I'm not sure where you are going to go with this argument. I have to think you don't know much about WW2 history. Yes, you must be right. Other than the degree in history and the few classes on World War 2 I took in college, I have little knowledge on the subject. Please enlighten us all on your vast knowledge. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_war_crimes Notice the references to Wehrmacht, or follow specific links. "Moral indignation is a standard strategy for endowing the idiot with dignity." Marshall McLuhan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lare Kikkeli Posted November 23, 2009 Share Posted November 23, 2009 (edited) Just to clarify by nazi soldier I meant a german soldier in WW2 who didn't turn against his country. I think it's always kind of dangerous to label a soldier a hero since in every war there are noble and heroic deeds committed on all sides no matter who the winner is. If you say an american soldier who killed lots of enemies and saved his comrades is a hero you have to aknowledge that a german soldier who did the same deeds is a hero as well, no matter what Germany was trying to accomplish. Lots of east europeans fought side by side with the nazis against the soviet invasion and ended in a worst state than if Germany would have won. Things are never black and white and despite what all these computer games and american movies and yes I'm saying it jews are saying the Allied forces were far from the heroes and "good guys" in every aspect. Edited November 23, 2009 by Lare Kikkeli Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hurlshort Posted November 23, 2009 Share Posted November 23, 2009 Not really, the vast majority of soldiers in the Wehrmacht were fighting for their country, not a political party. Honestly most historians target the SS as the main perpetrators of war crimes, so I'm not sure where you are going to go with this argument. I have to think you don't know much about WW2 history. Yes, you must be right. Other than the degree in history and the few classes on World War 2 I took in college, I have little knowledge on the subject. Please enlighten us all on your vast knowledge. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_war_crimes Notice the references to Wehrmacht, or follow specific links. Wonderful. And here is a link to the Allied war crimes: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allied_war_cr...ng_World_War_II I'm really not getting your point here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hurlshort Posted November 23, 2009 Share Posted November 23, 2009 I'm not sure where you are going with this vitriol.And I'm not sure where his being Jewish, Polish, Russian or French fits in with the unrelated issue of whether a WWII German soldier can be a hero or not. Oh wait, it doesn't fit anywhere. Not to mention the fact that kotorsomethingorother didn't experience the war himself, so he's about as qualified to make value judgements as you or me. His perspective isn't any more "real and human" than any Wikipedia article, but unlike wiki articles, his perspective has no citations attached. By the way, you may have all the college degrees in the world, but you are still failing basic reading comprehension. Lare didn't ask which ethnic or religious group anyone belongs to, which is what I was referring to. He added the Jewish part as a disclaimer, so we would understand where his opinion was coming from. You jumped on him for it. Congratulations on that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alanschu Posted November 23, 2009 Share Posted November 23, 2009 The only reason why the bulk of the Wermacht is seen as villains is a combination of ignorance and the fact that they lost the war. We could link Soviet War crimes too while we're at it. Not only that, but looking at Nuremburg, the Allies started to have a field day. One of the charges against Admiral Doenitz was that he employed unrestricted submarine warfare. Fortunately he was able to point out that Admiral Nimitz, did the same thing. Here's a fun quote of Doenitz's: "One of the Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
213374U Posted November 23, 2009 Share Posted November 23, 2009 He added the Jewish part as a disclaimer, so we would understand where his opinion was coming from. You jumped on him for it. Congratulations on that.And I added the Scientology part as obvious nonsense, so he would understand that belonging to a certain group or other is irrelevant with regards to what's being discussed (possible heroism of WWII Germans, in case you got that mixed up with war crimes). You brain farted on that. I'd offer my congratulations, but the situation is already embarrassing enough. - When he is best, he is a little worse than a man, and when he is worst, he is little better than a beast. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hurlshort Posted November 23, 2009 Share Posted November 23, 2009 How is the Holocaust not relevant to a discussion on WW2? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lare Kikkeli Posted November 23, 2009 Share Posted November 23, 2009 How is the Holocaust not relevant to a discussion on WW2? I see it this way, it's the same as a black person saying all white men are evil b/c his or her relatives were kept as slaves. So not really relevant at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gorgon Posted November 23, 2009 Share Posted November 23, 2009 I don't think there is much in the way of respectability to serving your country in war time if you are part of the problem. However, many of them may not have been fully aware of what Hitler was all about before it was too late, and it's not like you can just leave the army. Na na na na na na ... greg358 from Darksouls 3 PVP is a CHEATER. That is all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hurlshort Posted November 23, 2009 Share Posted November 23, 2009 How is the Holocaust not relevant to a discussion on WW2? I see it this way, it's the same as a black person saying all white men are evil b/c his or her relatives were kept as slaves. So not really relevant at all. I see that as totally relevant. I can disagree with the assessment, but I can clearly see where the opinion is coming from. I also think the analogy makes more sense if the black person thinks all southerners during the era of slavery are evil, which again, makes sense even though we can dispute that most southerners didn't own slaves and many probably did not support slavery as an institution. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
213374U Posted November 23, 2009 Share Posted November 23, 2009 (edited) How is the Holocaust not relevant to a discussion on WW2?No, you (or kotorperson) tell me how precisely it relates to the particular WWII subject being discussed. I thought that adding the IDF thing and Palestinians would better illustrate my point. No such luck. But anyway, please explain how the Holocaust is relevant when discussing, say, the Battle of the Bulge? How is it relevant to the development of alternative fuel sources from, for instance, potato alcohol? How is it relevant to war crimes committed by the IJA? How is it relevant to the Battle of Midway? EDIT: Thinking about it, it's not even the the Holocaust, itself. It's the relevance of someone belonging to a group that was targeted for extermination by one of the belligerents during WWII, but without direct connection to the Holocaust himself. So, um, unless prejudice is now somehow a valid form of argument, there isn't much to be said for "relevance". Edited November 23, 2009 by 213374U - When he is best, he is a little worse than a man, and when he is worst, he is little better than a beast. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lare Kikkeli Posted November 23, 2009 Share Posted November 23, 2009 How is the Holocaust not relevant to a discussion on WW2? I see it this way, it's the same as a black person saying all white men are evil b/c his or her relatives were kept as slaves. So not really relevant at all. I see that as totally relevant. I can disagree with the assessment, but I can clearly see where the opinion is coming from. I also think the analogy makes more sense if the black person thinks all southerners during the era of slavery are evil, which again, makes sense even though we can dispute that most southerners didn't own slaves and many probably did not support slavery as an institution. Sure I can see where the opinion is coming from, but that doesn't make it even remotely true or relevant to this discussion. He's biased and wrong, flat out. I mean he basically said "as a jew I have the right to condemn the people of Germany because my relatives suffered under the Nazi regime". Sure, and I have the right to condemn all russians and swedes for treating finns like crap for hundreds of years and actually the allied forces for declaring war on Finland when we were only trying to keep our Sovereignty. The world isn't black and white. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hurlshort Posted November 23, 2009 Share Posted November 23, 2009 Sure I can see where the opinion is coming from, but that doesn't make it even remotely true or relevant to this discussion. He's biased and wrong, flat out. I mean he basically said "as a jew I have the right to condemn the people of Germany because my relatives suffered under the Nazi regime". Sure, and I have the right to condemn all russians and swedes for treating finns like crap for hundreds of years and actually the allied forces for declaring war on Finland when we were only trying to keep our Sovereignty. The world isn't black and white. It's an opinion, so right or wrong doesn't really come into play here. He also isn't condemning Germans. You asked about Nazi soldiers, he answered about them. He does not believe German soldiers during WW2 can be considered heroes. I disagree with him, as do a few other folks here. But I take exception to attacking his disclaimer about being Jewish and having a familial connection to the tragedies of WW2. It's in bad taste to attack someone for sharing that information. Go after his opinion, sure, but attacking the validity of his personal experience to the issue? Weaksauce. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wrath of Dagon Posted November 23, 2009 Share Posted November 23, 2009 (edited) Not really, the vast majority of soldiers in the Wehrmacht were fighting for their country, not a political party. Honestly most historians target the SS as the main perpetrators of war crimes, so I'm not sure where you are going to go with this argument. I have to think you don't know much about WW2 history. Yes, you must be right. Other than the degree in history and the few classes on World War 2 I took in college, I have little knowledge on the subject. Please enlighten us all on your vast knowledge. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_war_crimes Notice the references to Wehrmacht, or follow specific links. Wonderful. And here is a link to the Allied war crimes: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allied_war_cr...ng_World_War_II I'm really not getting your point here. My point is that your attempt to absolve Wehrmacht from responsibilty for war crimes is invalid. Edited November 23, 2009 by Wrath of Dagon "Moral indignation is a standard strategy for endowing the idiot with dignity." Marshall McLuhan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lare Kikkeli Posted November 23, 2009 Share Posted November 23, 2009 (edited) Not really, the vast majority of soldiers in the Wehrmacht were fighting for their country, not a political party. Honestly most historians target the SS as the main perpetrators of war crimes, so I'm not sure where you are going to go with this argument. I have to think you don't know much about WW2 history. Yes, you must be right. Other than the degree in history and the few classes on World War 2 I took in college, I have little knowledge on the subject. Please enlighten us all on your vast knowledge. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_war_crimes Notice the references to Wehrmacht, or follow specific links. Wonderful. And here is a link to the Allied war crimes: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allied_war_cr...ng_World_War_II I'm really not getting your point here. My point is that your attempt to absolve Wehrmacht from responsibilty for war crimes is invalid. I didn't see any americans on trial after the war. Edited November 23, 2009 by Lare Kikkeli Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wrath of Dagon Posted November 23, 2009 Share Posted November 23, 2009 Because we won? You should try it some time. "Moral indignation is a standard strategy for endowing the idiot with dignity." Marshall McLuhan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lare Kikkeli Posted November 23, 2009 Share Posted November 23, 2009 Well you sure don't seem to like to put your soldiers to trial in any situation, even when they rape and kill civilians in an illegal war. So nice going I guess? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alanschu Posted November 23, 2009 Share Posted November 23, 2009 Not really, the vast majority of soldiers in the Wehrmacht were fighting for their country, not a political party. Honestly most historians target the SS as the main perpetrators of war crimes, so I'm not sure where you are going to go with this argument. I have to think you don't know much about WW2 history. Yes, you must be right. Other than the degree in history and the few classes on World War 2 I took in college, I have little knowledge on the subject. Please enlighten us all on your vast knowledge. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_war_crimes Notice the references to Wehrmacht, or follow specific links. Wonderful. And here is a link to the Allied war crimes: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allied_war_cr...ng_World_War_II I'm really not getting your point here. My point is that your attempt to absolve Wehrmacht from responsibilty for war crimes is invalid. I'll keep this giant quote tags alive, since it contains Hurlshot's original post. At no point does he absolve the Wehrmacht from responsibility of war crimes. The links you posted do not refute Hurlshot's post that the vast majority of the Wehrmacht's soldiers were fighting for their country. Did some of them commit war crimes? Sure, just like the American's committed war crimes. Given that your statement was confrontational ("I have to think you don't know much about WW2 history."), and as it seems motivated by a complete misunderstanding of what Hurlshot was actually saying, it seems as though you don't know much about World War 2 history. That is, unless you aren't trying to equate the Wehrmacht's contributions to war crimes to be similar to those perpetrated by the SS. Particularly in enforcing Hitler's Final Solution. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wrath of Dagon Posted November 23, 2009 Share Posted November 23, 2009 (edited) I did not misunderstand Hurlshot, he said "Honestly most historians target the SS as the main perpetrators of war crimes, so I'm not sure where you are going to go with this argument." clearly implying the Wehrmacht was not significantly responsible for war crimes, which is simply not true. Well you sure don't seem to like to put your soldiers to trial in any situation, even when they rape and kill civilians in an illegal war. So nice going I guess? You have any evidence of that? Edited November 23, 2009 by Wrath of Dagon "Moral indignation is a standard strategy for endowing the idiot with dignity." Marshall McLuhan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
213374U Posted November 23, 2009 Share Posted November 23, 2009 But I take exception to attacking his disclaimer about being Jewish and having a familial connection to the tragedies of WW2. It's in bad taste to attack someone for sharing that information. Go after his opinion, sure, but attacking the validity of his personal experience to the issue? Weaksauce.You ARE being anal. Okay, let's assume I'm a Protestant. Does that give me a more informed perspective on French Catholics because they happened to murder a whole bunch of Huguenots? And so on and so forth with any number of massacres throughout history. Kotorguy has NO personal experience of the tragedies of WWII. I'm not even attacking the validity of the claims of his grampa or whatever. But those are, to us, secondary sources, and their value is not certified because they are being presented by a Jew - so his being a Jew has no bearing on this discussion. My point is that your attempt to absolve Wehrmacht from responsibilty for war crimes is invalid.But the Wehrmacht as an organization was acquitted. - When he is best, he is a little worse than a man, and when he is worst, he is little better than a beast. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alanschu Posted November 23, 2009 Share Posted November 23, 2009 (edited) clearly implying the Wermacht was not significantly responsible for war crimes, which is simply not true. No he's not. He's saying that historians target the SS as the main perpetrators of the war crimes. Which is true. This is mostly because people, including historians, don't immediately think of things like unrestricted submarine warfare as examples of war crimes. If you think that the Wehrmacht is targeted as much as the SS for the contributions to Germany's WW2 atrocities, you're obviously not reading the very links you provide. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_crimes_of_the_Wehrmacht (one of the "specific links" you told us to follow) "War crimes of the Wehrmacht were those carried out by German armed forces during World War II. While the principal perpetrators of the Holocaust amongst German armed forces were the Nazi German political armies (the SS-Totenkopfverb Edited November 23, 2009 by alanschu Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now