|
Why 13 percent of Germans would welcome a 'Führer
Gilgamesh.Thedreamer
サーバ: Gilgamesh
Game: FFXI
Posts: 422
By Gilgamesh.Thedreamer 2010-10-19 18:50:21
Quote: The french President was just as much to blame as Hitler for WWII
i cant even understand why you say that...
Anyway, wow this shitty thread still alive ?
Peoples really like talk on crappy things...
(without even askin about from where this number comin, who got asked and wich period is concerned...so potentialy meanin nothin at all)
Phoenix.Excelior
サーバ: Phoenix
Game: FFXI
Posts: 2093
By Phoenix.Excelior 2010-10-19 18:58:48
Gilgamesh.Thedreamer said: Quote: The french President was just as much to blame as Hitler for WWII i cant even understand why you say that... Anyway, wow this shitty thread still alive ? Peoples really like talk on crappy things... (without even askin about from where this number comin, who got asked and wich period is concerned...so potentialy meanin nothin at all)
Well then you should look at what went into the Treaty of Versailles and who wanted it there. Actually I'll tell you:
French President Clemenceau insisted that Germany be punished by these terms on the treaty:
-Massive military restrictions on troops, warships, tanks etc
-Massive economic restrictions on Germany in the form of reparations.
-There was a war guilt clause that blammed Germany.
-The Rhineland was made into a demilitarized zone.
So when the great depression hit germany was ***. Germany wouldn't have been *** as badly if it wasn't for your french president demanding those restrictions. If the french president *** off instead of demanding that Germany take the blame then Germany wouldn't have been led into WWII by necessity. For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. They probably don't teach you that in French History though, because god knows the French are never wrong.
[+]
サーバ: Ifrit
Game: FFXI
Posts: 63
By Ifrit.Frenchy 2010-10-19 20:01:55
Phoenix.Excelior said: Gilgamesh.Thedreamer said: Quote: The french President was just as much to blame as Hitler for WWII i cant even understand why you say that... Anyway, wow this shitty thread still alive ? Peoples really like talk on crappy things... (without even askin about from where this number comin, who got asked and wich period is concerned...so potentialy meanin nothin at all)
Well then you should look at what went into the Treaty of Versailles and who wanted it there. Actually I'll tell you:
French President Clemenceau insisted that Germany be punished by these terms on the treaty:
-Massive military restrictions on troops, warships, tanks etc
-Massive economic restrictions on Germany in the form of reparations.
-There was a war guilt clause that blammed Germany.
-The Rhineland was made into a demilitarized zone.
So when the great depression hit germany was ***. Germany wouldn't have been *** as badly if it wasn't for your french president demanding those restrictions. If the french president *** off instead of demanding that Germany take the blame then Germany wouldn't have been led into WWII by necessity. For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. They probably don't teach you that in French History though, because god knows the French are never wrong. I learned that actually, and a great deal more than what public schools here in the US teach to their students. Funny how everyone says French people are arrogant, but you sir, take the proverbial cake. For someone who claims to possess a high IQ, you're pretty ignorant.
[+]
Gilgamesh.Thedreamer
サーバ: Gilgamesh
Game: FFXI
Posts: 422
By Gilgamesh.Thedreamer 2010-10-19 20:10:30
it is teach in france...
but maybe u didnt followed that was signed after WW I and was for germany pay BACK what they did...
so of course they got pissed at it, but lol, they shouldnt had start ***at all if they didnt want lost and pay...
サーバ: Siren
Game: FFXI
Posts: 516
By Siren.Flunklesnarkin 2010-10-19 20:12:38
I'm ready for the nuclear zombie holocaust.. bring it on >:U
Phoenix.Excelior
サーバ: Phoenix
Game: FFXI
Posts: 2093
By Phoenix.Excelior 2010-10-19 20:46:45
Ifrit.Frenchy said: Phoenix.Excelior said: Gilgamesh.Thedreamer said: Quote: The french President was just as much to blame as Hitler for WWII i cant even understand why you say that... Anyway, wow this shitty thread still alive ? Peoples really like talk on crappy things... (without even askin about from where this number comin, who got asked and wich period is concerned...so potentialy meanin nothin at all) Well then you should look at what went into the Treaty of Versailles and who wanted it there. Actually I'll tell you: French President Clemenceau insisted that Germany be punished by these terms on the treaty: -Massive military restrictions on troops, warships, tanks etc -Massive economic restrictions on Germany in the form of reparations. -There was a war guilt clause that blammed Germany. -The Rhineland was made into a demilitarized zone. So when the great depression hit germany was ***. Germany wouldn't have been *** as badly if it wasn't for your french president demanding those restrictions. If the french president *** off instead of demanding that Germany take the blame then Germany wouldn't have been led into WWII by necessity. For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. They probably don't teach you that in French History though, because god knows the French are never wrong. I learned that actually, and a great deal more than what public schools here in the US teach to their students. Funny how everyone says French people are arrogant, but you sir, take the proverbial cake. For someone who claims to possess a high IQ, you're pretty ignorant.
How the *** am I ignorant? I didn't say that french people were arrogant or ignorant just that they had a part in that war. You guys probably don't admit that you do, just like the US doesn't admit it had a big fault in the cold war. Hell the USA doesn't even talk about slavery in depth in public schools. Countries and their history programs are biased.
@ Thedreamer.
Perhaps you didn't know but most of the major wars in Europe after the peace of westphalia were French-started. French-Revolution, Napoleonic wars. Back then they didn't punish France though because of the balance of power system of international relations. You guys chose to punish Germany and ignored the fact that France has started wars as well.
The *** point was that you don't create peace by punishing people.
[+]
Gilgamesh.Thedreamer
サーバ: Gilgamesh
Game: FFXI
Posts: 422
By Gilgamesh.Thedreamer 2010-10-20 05:09:03
Say this to Bush LMAO
(i'm still chocked this guy is still not judged for humanity crime...)
Funny how you say ***of things like CENTURies old, but not talkin of what ur own country did lately (and even now).
Btw french and german are actually close friend, do you think u'll can say same of iraq ? corea (soldiers rapin girls there like every month still...) ? japan ? vietnam ? afghanistan ? etc etc
Gotta watch next Wikileak close.
p.s when napoleon finished his little wars, let me remember USA was goin with indian genocid, wich made at least like 10x more deads...
[+]
Caitsith.Mahayaya
サーバ: Caitsith
Game: FFXI
Posts: 3341
By Caitsith.Mahayaya 2010-10-20 07:26:05
Reminds me of the people who think that Japan attacked Pearl Harbor without any provocation, and then they think that it's conspiracy theory when you start telling them reasons why they did it.
History books don't tell you this stuff, and to a certain extent, I can agree with why they don't. If you stated every single cause->effect for a war, you'd have an entire book, just for that. Lower school to high school history books only touch on the topic of a lot of things.
Lower school to high school is breadth-first education. Lots of different topics to give a person a baseline education. From there, if they're curious enough, they can research their own interests. College is depth-first education. College assumes you've picked your interest out of the many topics you've explored through high school, and are willing to learn more about it.
So really, you can't bash the public schools unless they are explicitly making a false statement, or if they avoid talking about an extremely major event in history.
サーバ: Sylph
Game: FFXI
Posts: 3663
By Sylph.Beelshamen 2010-10-20 07:33:55
VladTepes said: France has more balls than America these days it seems. If we were living in the '40s we would have cut the throat of Islam and stop being pussy about burning a *** Quran.
I am intrigued by your ideas and wish to subscribe to your newsletter.
Leviathan.Pimpchan
サーバ: Leviathan
Game: FFXI
Posts: 756
By Leviathan.Pimpchan 2010-10-20 07:58:37
Sylph.Beelshamen said: VladTepes said: France has more balls than America these days it seems. If we were living in the '40s we would have cut the throat of Islam and stop being pussy about burning a *** Quran.
I am intrigued by your ideas and wish to subscribe to your newsletter.
One hundred year after the official laicity law from 1905. laicity is a good thing :
(% of atheist in europe)
picture
Phoenix.Excelior
サーバ: Phoenix
Game: FFXI
Posts: 2093
By Phoenix.Excelior 2010-10-20 12:05:32
Gilgamesh.Thedreamer said: Say this to Bush LMAO (i'm still chocked this guy is still not judged for humanity crime...) Funny how you say ***of things like CENTURies old, but not talkin of what ur own country did lately (and even now). Btw french and german are actually close friend, do you think u'll can say same of iraq ? corea (soldiers rapin girls there like every month still...) ? japan ? vietnam ? afghanistan ? etc etc Gotta watch next Wikileak close. p.s when napoleon finished his little wars, let me remember USA was goin with indian genocid, wich made at least like 10x more deads...
I didn't say that america was innocent. I pointed to WWII as an example because hitler was one of the people that Jaerik referenced. Hitler was antagonized by the French via that treaty. If you cant see this being used as an example in the broader context of a discussion then you should probably take a reading comprehension test. Yes, America has faults and no, Bush did not commit crimes against humanity.
Gilgamesh.Thedreamer
サーバ: Gilgamesh
Game: FFXI
Posts: 422
By Gilgamesh.Thedreamer 2010-10-20 12:20:28
If you begin like this EVERY nation have blood on his hands...in fact the fact himself of makin a nation is impossible without killin peoples...
so pointless to say this about french, every european nations was doin ***at this time, and a huge part of napoleon work was to put an end to this, wich of course failed like everyone know...
Cerberus.Arkhana
サーバ: Cerberus
Game: FFXI
Posts: 99
By Cerberus.Arkhana 2010-10-20 12:50:04
Excelior makes a point ! Treaty of Versailles is certainly responsible for the raise of german nationalism after the WW1. But it's not the only reason, other reasons would probably be USSR, antisemitism (which are not german-only things, btw). Stop this GOOD vs. EVIL ***, lol. France and Germany have commited and caused alot of crimes, and so did all the world greatests nations through their history.
サーバ: Odin
Game: FFXI
Posts: 19
By Odin.Nanolino 2010-10-22 07:37:22
Im sorry but Excelior is so totally right.
I pull my hat in front of you. Your president Wilson wanted to establish
a fair end to the never ending wars between the european states in that time.
And btw I think the USA was innocent! If you read Wilsons` memorials
you clearly see how disappointed he was because the other allied diplomats did AGAIN try to get a higher advantage of the "peace treaty".
I say again , not because i want to blame themm, it was practiced by all nations in that time.
Bismarck forced the french to sign a treaty in Versailles, that was totally directed to ashame them.
A vicious circle.
Thank god, or humans that we finally stopped with that.
French >< German conflicts took place the whole time over the exitance of those two nations, and so involved their allies which changed several times.
Anyways thats far away from topic.
I still think that those who are willing to learn of their history or the history in total wont commit same mistakes again.
Im an optimist and believer in humanity xD
Phoenix.Excelior
サーバ: Phoenix
Game: FFXI
Posts: 2093
By Phoenix.Excelior 2010-10-22 08:16:49
Odin.Nanolino said: Im sorry but Excelior is so totally right. I pull my hat in front of you. Your president Wilson wanted to establish a fair end to the never ending wars between the european states in that time. And btw I think the USA was innocent! If you read Wilsons` memorials you clearly see how disappointed he was because the other allied diplomats did AGAIN try to get a higher advantage of the "peace treaty". I say again , not because i want to blame themm, it was practiced by all nations in that time. Bismarck forced the french to sign a treaty in Versailles, that was totally directed to ashame them. A vicious circle. Thank god, or humans that we finally stopped with that. French >< German conflicts took place the whole time over the exitance of those two nations, and so involved their allies which changed several times. Anyways thats far away from topic. I still think that those who are willing to learn of their history or the history in total wont commit same mistakes again. Im an optimist and believer in humanity xD
Well Wilson had his fourteen points proposal and the league of nations. America failed to ratify the treaty and we were excluded from it. They are right that we have done some monsterous things on our own continent and to our own people but not that much to the outside world. A lot of people think that America is some warmongering force but it is a theory of international relations that democratic nations do not fight each other. So when America invades Iraq or trys to nation-build in another state we're simply trying to improve world-safety through this theory of Liberal Internationalism.
サーバ: Ifrit
Game: FFXI
Posts: 63
By Ifrit.Frenchy 2010-10-22 08:17:46
Odin.Nanolino said: Im sorry but Excelior is so totally right.
I pull my hat in front of you. Your president Wilson wanted to establish
a fair end to the never ending wars between the european states in that time.
And btw I think the USA was innocent! If you read Wilsons` memorials
you clearly see how disappointed he was because the other allied diplomats did AGAIN try to get a higher advantage of the "peace treaty".
I say again , not because i want to blame themm, it was practiced by all nations in that time.
Bismarck forced the french to sign a treaty in Versailles, that was totally directed to ashame them.
A vicious circle.
Thank god, or humans that we finally stopped with that.
French >< German conflicts took place the whole time over the exitance of those two nations, and so involved their allies which changed several times.
Anyways thats far away from topic.
I still think that those who are willing to learn of their history or the history in total wont commit same mistakes again.
Im an optimist and believer in humanity xD
While the treaty itself was a contributing factor, you can't go around saying one person is just as responsible as Hitler for the engenderment of WW2.
Phoenix.Excelior
サーバ: Phoenix
Game: FFXI
Posts: 2093
By Phoenix.Excelior 2010-10-22 08:21:30
Ifrit.Frenchy said: Odin.Nanolino said: Im sorry but Excelior is so totally right. I pull my hat in front of you. Your president Wilson wanted to establish a fair end to the never ending wars between the european states in that time. And btw I think the USA was innocent! If you read Wilsons` memorials you clearly see how disappointed he was because the other allied diplomats did AGAIN try to get a higher advantage of the "peace treaty". I say again , not because i want to blame themm, it was practiced by all nations in that time. Bismarck forced the french to sign a treaty in Versailles, that was totally directed to ashame them. A vicious circle. Thank god, or humans that we finally stopped with that. French >< German conflicts took place the whole time over the exitance of those two nations, and so involved their allies which changed several times. Anyways thats far away from topic. I still think that those who are willing to learn of their history or the history in total wont commit same mistakes again. Im an optimist and believer in humanity xD While the treaty itself was a contributing factor, you can't go around saying one person is just as responsible as Hitler for the engenderment of WW2.
Ok lets look at this way:
The Japanese made the first move on manchuria and the league failed to act. This was a precursor or WWII
The Italians moved on ethopia. Not long after the League imposed economic sanctions on them. This failed to stop Italy.
Then Hitler Annexed the Rhineland back to Germany(Which was taken from them in the treaty). Britain and the others protested but chose to appease him rather than engage him. He later annex poland and Britain declared war on Germany.
So from an aggression standpoint it was the Axis power's fault but if you look at the under lying motives of Hitler's rise to power it was born on a sense of extremely nationalism and xenophobia born from the animosity created in the Treaty. Hitler and Germany didnt just one day decide they were pissed for no reason.
サーバ: Ifrit
Game: FFXI
Posts: 63
By Ifrit.Frenchy 2010-10-22 08:30:23
Phoenix.Excelior said: Ifrit.Frenchy said: Odin.Nanolino said: Im sorry but Excelior is so totally right. I pull my hat in front of you. Your president Wilson wanted to establish a fair end to the never ending wars between the european states in that time. And btw I think the USA was innocent! If you read Wilsons` memorials you clearly see how disappointed he was because the other allied diplomats did AGAIN try to get a higher advantage of the "peace treaty". I say again , not because i want to blame themm, it was practiced by all nations in that time. Bismarck forced the french to sign a treaty in Versailles, that was totally directed to ashame them. A vicious circle. Thank god, or humans that we finally stopped with that. French >< German conflicts took place the whole time over the exitance of those two nations, and so involved their allies which changed several times. Anyways thats far away from topic. I still think that those who are willing to learn of their history or the history in total wont commit same mistakes again. Im an optimist and believer in humanity xD While the treaty itself was a contributing factor, you can't go around saying one person is just as responsible as Hitler for the engenderment of WW2.
Ok lets look at this way:
The Japanese made the first move on manchuria and the league failed to act. This was a precursor or WWII
The Italians moved on ethopia. Not long after the League imposed economic sanctions on them. This failed to stop Italy.
Then Hitler Annexed the Rhineland back to Germany(Which was taken from them in the treaty). Britain and the others protested but chose to appease him rather than engage him. He later annex poland and Britain declared war on Germany.
So from an aggression standpoint it was the Axis power's fault but if you look at the under lying motives of Hitler's rise to power it was born on a sense of extremely nationalism and xenophobia born from the animosity created in the Treaty. Hitler and Germany didnt just one day decide they were pissed for no reason.
I agree to an extent with what you're saying, but you're omitting several other factors. One of which is Hitler's rejection from art school. I could also argue anti-communism (Bolsheviks), Expansionism, Marxism, Racism, and Militarism.
サーバ: Odin
Game: FFXI
Posts: 19
By Odin.Nanolino 2010-10-23 05:32:40
Of course those factors had their influence on Hitler, but doesnt explain how a person like him was even able to gain power..
The reasons for that are mainly based on the high rate of disoccupation and the enorm rise of prizes for every goods substantial for the every day life.
And that just happened because of the treaty.
@Excelior: I really wouldnt try to connect WWII with the Iraqwar.
I understand what you`re pointing out and agree to a limit.
Phoenix.Excelior
サーバ: Phoenix
Game: FFXI
Posts: 2093
By Phoenix.Excelior 2010-10-23 14:51:29
Odin.Nanolino said: Of course those factors had their influence on Hitler, but doesnt explain how a person like him was even able to gain power.. The reasons for that are mainly based on the high rate of disoccupation and the enorm rise of prizes for every goods substantial for the every day life. And that just happened because of the treaty. @Excelior: I really wouldnt try to connect WWII with the Iraqwar. I understand what you`re pointing out and agree to a limit.
I'm trying to speak in abstract. The Iraq war was utter failure but the principle and concept of it was a good one. Had it been better planned and executed we woulda been stronger for it.
Gilgamesh.Thedreamer
サーバ: Gilgamesh
Game: FFXI
Posts: 422
By Gilgamesh.Thedreamer 2010-10-23 15:56:49
Phoenix.Excelior said: Odin.Nanolino said: Of course those factors had their influence on Hitler, but doesnt explain how a person like him was even able to gain power.. The reasons for that are mainly based on the high rate of disoccupation and the enorm rise of prizes for every goods substantial for the every day life. And that just happened because of the treaty. @Excelior: I really wouldnt try to connect WWII with the Iraqwar. I understand what you`re pointing out and agree to a limit.
I'm trying to speak in abstract. The Iraq war was utter failure but the principle and concept of it was a good one. Had it been better planned and executed we woulda been stronger for it.
wtf are you talkin about ???
Iraq have ALWAYS BEEN A HUGE MISTAKE no matter how you see it !
This war was only made for money and it stinked bad !
Your "chirugicals weapons" have kill more civils than any war in past (like 30-40% holy ***...)
Bush went at it AGAINST ONU vote and only nations lickin your *** went for it.
Bush made you eat a freakin lie about nuclears and chimics weapons (when all professionals there was agree to say there was NOT and said it...before gettin expelled from country w) and u all went for the heck of it...
All this war was *** and it smelled money blood !
God i think about peoples dead there and i can only hope Bush end up in hell rottin for as much ***he did alive !
Phoenix.Excelior
サーバ: Phoenix
Game: FFXI
Posts: 2093
By Phoenix.Excelior 2010-10-23 16:02:47
Gilgamesh.Thedreamer said: Phoenix.Excelior said: Odin.Nanolino said: Of course those factors had their influence on Hitler, but doesnt explain how a person like him was even able to gain power.. The reasons for that are mainly based on the high rate of disoccupation and the enorm rise of prizes for every goods substantial for the every day life. And that just happened because of the treaty. @Excelior: I really wouldnt try to connect WWII with the Iraqwar. I understand what you`re pointing out and agree to a limit. I'm trying to speak in abstract. The Iraq war was utter failure but the principle and concept of it was a good one. Had it been better planned and executed we woulda been stronger for it. wtf are you talkin about ??? Iraq have ALWAYS BEEN A HUGE MISTAKE no matter how you see it ! This war was only made for money and it stinked bad ! Your "chirugicals weapons" have kill more civils than any war in past (like 30-40% holy ***...) Bush went at it AGAINST ONU vote and only nation lickin your *** went for it. Bush made you eat a freakin lie about nuclears and chimics weapons (wich all professional was agree to say there was NOT) and u all went for the heck of it... All this war was *** and it smelled money blood ! God i think about peoples dead there and i can only hope Bush end up in hell rottin for as much ***he did alive !
The Iraq war was smart because:
1. We depend on oil from the middle east. Securing more democratic nations in that region can only help the US.
2. Spreading democracy in the middle east reduces the ammount of potential safe havens for terrorist groups.
3. Democractic nations do not go to war with other democratic nations
4. If we had succeeded in building the Iraqi nation it would make the US more favorable in the eyes of the Arab nations.
The Iraq war was a failure because:
1. We didn't plan for an extended time commitment
2. We underestimated cost and missions size
3. We failed to create a nation before we left.
While you may be some niave frenchmen who thinks only about the love and peace and harmony of the world, we americans are more realistic. We understand that war is evitable and sometimes you must have war to secure future peace and stability. I'm glad you think everything in this world can be solved through peaceful talks but that is just HELP I AM TRAPPED IN 2006 PLEASE SEND A TIME MACHINE. Even if we had gone there for the oil alone, it would have still be justified. Do you know why? Because oil is the most important resource for all industrialized nations INCLUDING THE EUROPEAN UNION.
Gilgamesh.Thedreamer
サーバ: Gilgamesh
Game: FFXI
Posts: 422
By Gilgamesh.Thedreamer 2010-10-23 16:06:51
Phoenix.Excelior said: Gilgamesh.Thedreamer said: Phoenix.Excelior said: Odin.Nanolino said: Of course those factors had their influence on Hitler, but doesnt explain how a person like him was even able to gain power.. The reasons for that are mainly based on the high rate of disoccupation and the enorm rise of prizes for every goods substantial for the every day life. And that just happened because of the treaty. @Excelior: I really wouldnt try to connect WWII with the Iraqwar. I understand what you`re pointing out and agree to a limit. I'm trying to speak in abstract. The Iraq war was utter failure but the principle and concept of it was a good one. Had it been better planned and executed we woulda been stronger for it. wtf are you talkin about ??? Iraq have ALWAYS BEEN A HUGE MISTAKE no matter how you see it ! This war was only made for money and it stinked bad ! Your "chirugicals weapons" have kill more civils than any war in past (like 30-40% holy ***...) Bush went at it AGAINST ONU vote and only nation lickin your *** went for it. Bush made you eat a freakin lie about nuclears and chimics weapons (wich all professional was agree to say there was NOT) and u all went for the heck of it... All this war was *** and it smelled money blood ! God i think about peoples dead there and i can only hope Bush end up in hell rottin for as much ***he did alive !
The Iraq war was smart because:
1. We depend on oil from the middle east. Securing more democratic nations in that region can only help the US.
2. Spreading democracy in the middle east reduces the ammount of potential safe havens for terrorist groups.
3. Democractic nations do not go to war with other democratic nations
4. If we had succeeded in building the Iraqi nation it would make the US more favorable in the eyes of the Arab nations.
The Iraq war was a failure because:
1. We didn't plan for an extended time commitment
2. We underestimated cost and missions size
3. We failed to create a nation before we left.
While you may be some niave frenchmen who thinks only about the love and peace and harmony of the world, we americans are more realistic. We understand that war is evitable and sometimes you must have war to secure future peace and stability. I'm glad you think everything in this world can be solved through peaceful talks but that is just HELP I AM TRAPPED IN 2006 PLEASE SEND A TIME MACHINE. Even if we had gone there for the oil alone, it would have still be justified. Do you know why? Because oil is the most important resource for all industrialized nations INCLUDING THE EUROPEAN UNION.
man...you make me vomit, srly...
Phoenix.Excelior
サーバ: Phoenix
Game: FFXI
Posts: 2093
By Phoenix.Excelior 2010-10-23 16:09:39
Gilgamesh.Thedreamer said: Phoenix.Excelior said: Gilgamesh.Thedreamer said: Phoenix.Excelior said: Odin.Nanolino said: Of course those factors had their influence on Hitler, but doesnt explain how a person like him was even able to gain power.. The reasons for that are mainly based on the high rate of disoccupation and the enorm rise of prizes for every goods substantial for the every day life. And that just happened because of the treaty. @Excelior: I really wouldnt try to connect WWII with the Iraqwar. I understand what you`re pointing out and agree to a limit. I'm trying to speak in abstract. The Iraq war was utter failure but the principle and concept of it was a good one. Had it been better planned and executed we woulda been stronger for it. wtf are you talkin about ??? Iraq have ALWAYS BEEN A HUGE MISTAKE no matter how you see it ! This war was only made for money and it stinked bad ! Your "chirugicals weapons" have kill more civils than any war in past (like 30-40% holy ***...) Bush went at it AGAINST ONU vote and only nation lickin your *** went for it. Bush made you eat a freakin lie about nuclears and chimics weapons (wich all professional was agree to say there was NOT) and u all went for the heck of it... All this war was *** and it smelled money blood ! God i think about peoples dead there and i can only hope Bush end up in hell rottin for as much ***he did alive ! The Iraq war was smart because: 1. We depend on oil from the middle east. Securing more democratic nations in that region can only help the US. 2. Spreading democracy in the middle east reduces the ammount of potential safe havens for terrorist groups. 3. Democractic nations do not go to war with other democratic nations 4. If we had succeeded in building the Iraqi nation it would make the US more favorable in the eyes of the Arab nations. The Iraq war was a failure because: 1. We didn't plan for an extended time commitment 2. We underestimated cost and missions size 3. We failed to create a nation before we left. While you may be some niave frenchmen who thinks only about the love and peace and harmony of the world, we americans are more realistic. We understand that war is evitable and sometimes you must have war to secure future peace and stability. I'm glad you think everything in this world can be solved through peaceful talks but that is just HELP I AM TRAPPED IN 2006 PLEASE SEND A TIME MACHINE. Even if we had gone there for the oil alone, it would have still be justified. Do you know why? Because oil is the most important resource for all industrialized nations INCLUDING THE EUROPEAN UNION. man...you make me vomit, srly...
Well you clearly don't understand international politics.
Phoenix.Avelle
サーバ: Phoenix
Game: FFXI
Posts: 179
By Phoenix.Avelle 2010-10-23 16:21:37
Phoenix.Excelior said: Gilgamesh.Thedreamer said: Phoenix.Excelior said: Odin.Nanolino said: Of course those factors had their influence on Hitler, but doesnt explain how a person like him was even able to gain power.. The reasons for that are mainly based on the high rate of disoccupation and the enorm rise of prizes for every goods substantial for the every day life. And that just happened because of the treaty. @Excelior: I really wouldnt try to connect WWII with the Iraqwar. I understand what you`re pointing out and agree to a limit. I'm trying to speak in abstract. The Iraq war was utter failure but the principle and concept of it was a good one. Had it been better planned and executed we woulda been stronger for it. wtf are you talkin about ??? Iraq have ALWAYS BEEN A HUGE MISTAKE no matter how you see it ! This war was only made for money and it stinked bad ! Your "chirugicals weapons" have kill more civils than any war in past (like 30-40% holy ***...) Bush went at it AGAINST ONU vote and only nation lickin your *** went for it. Bush made you eat a freakin lie about nuclears and chimics weapons (wich all professional was agree to say there was NOT) and u all went for the heck of it... All this war was *** and it smelled money blood ! God i think about peoples dead there and i can only hope Bush end up in hell rottin for as much ***he did alive !
The Iraq war was smart because:
1. We depend on oil from the middle east. Securing more democratic nations in that region can only help the US.
2. Spreading democracy in the middle east reduces the ammount of potential safe havens for terrorist groups.
3. Democractic nations do not go to war with other democratic nations
4. If we had succeeded in building the Iraqi nation it would make the US more favorable in the eyes of the Arab nations.
The Iraq war was a failure because:
1. We didn't plan for an extended time commitment
2. We underestimated cost and missions size
3. We failed to create a nation before we left.
I have only read the last page of this debate as I need to go back to doing homework but I am thoroughly impressed with your posts. I agree with pretty much every one of your points, though the first one makes me a little uncomfortable. I don't like the idea of going to war specifically to secure more oil but that wasn't our primary reason for going anyways so it's not a huge issue. A lot of people think that's the only reason we did so though. :/ You are, however, arguing with someone who has expressed very clearly in this thread and others that he thinks America is a nation of liars, thieves, murderers, and worse. You're really just wasting your breath.
Ragnarok.Corres
サーバ: Ragnarok
Game: FFXI
Posts: 1217
By Ragnarok.Corres 2010-10-23 16:26:08
okay now this is interesting.
what?
you want me to write a long and boring asnwer about why it is that way here? or maybe i should say: it's that way almost everywhere on this planet. And may i say in some countrys even more extreme. so what the *** keeps you up all night? that the bad german dog may come again? these days are gone man. all of out politicians are incompetent and suck ***.
whooo bad germany is gonna go up again. get the *** out here op.
oh and sorry for disturbing that interesting discussion. really brought back history-lessons. (no sarcasm)
but i don't need anyone to tell "no we are not racists and we want all to live together in harmony" sure we want it. but at a certain point some cultures clash together. sad but true.
second edit: on that Iraq stuff. America build one of the biggest military Bases in the world. this is not a temporary deal. was poorly executed in the media but well done on the efficient way.
I would too!!!
A new survey in Germany shows that 13 percent of its citizens would welcome a Führer a German word for leader that is explicitly associated with Adolf Hitler to run the country with a firm hand.
The findings signal that Europes largest nation, freed from cold-war strictures, is not immune from the extreme and often right-wing politics on the rise around the Continent.
The study, released Oct. 13 by the Friedrich Ebert Foundation, affiliated with the center-left Social Democratic Party, revealed among other things that more than a third of Germans feel the country is overrun by foreigners, some 60 percent would restrict the practice of Islam, and 17 percent think Jews have too much influence.
The study's overall snapshot of German society shows new forms of extremism and hate are no longer the province of far-right cohorts who shave their heads or wear leather jackets adorned with silver skulls but register in the tweedy political center, on the right and the left. Indeed, the study found, extremism in Germany isnt a fringe phenomenon but is found in the political center, "in all social groups and in all age groups, regardless of employment status, educational level or gender."
Far-right parties gain power across Europe
The year 2010 is marking a clear shift toward extremist politics across Europe, analysts say. An uncertain economy, a gap between elites and ordinary Europeans, and fraying of a traditional sense of national identity has just in the past month brought more hard-line politics and speech, often aimed at Islam or immigrants into a political mainstream where it had been absent or considered taboo.
On Oct. 10, the city of Vienna, a cosmopolitan and socialist stronghold since World War II, voted the far-right Freedom Party into a ruling coalition. The party, which ran on an anti-minaret platform in a city with only one mosque, was formerly associated with nationalist Jorg Haider, but has been reinvented by an animated former dental hygienist, Heinz-Christian Strache.
On Sept. 19, Sweden, long a Scandinavian redoubt of social tolerance and openness, put the far-right Sweden Democrats into parliament for the first time.
Further, this week the Netherlands saw the rise to influence, if not power, of the anti-Islam party of Geert Wilders, a social liberal who argues for gay rights but whose main platform is to ban the Quran and the practice of Islam in the Low Countries. Mr. Wilders' party will formally participate in the Dutch ruling coalition without specifically joining it.
This new governing architecture extreme parties that indirectly join a ruling coalition is now found in Denmark, where the government must rely on the far-right Peoples Party to operate. As author Ian Buruma notes, this form of government gives extreme parties power without responsibility.
Growing divide over immigrants' place
To be sure, German politics, which outlaws extremist parties, has no corollary to events taking place in the Netherlands, Sweden, Denmark, Austria, or Switzerland.
Yet xenophobic rhetoric has crept in. Germany is currently enswathed in debate over comments by Horst Seehofer, president of the Bavarian Christian-Social Union, who stated days ago, It is clear that immigrants from other cultures such as Turkey and Arabic countries have more difficulties. From that I draw the conclusion that we dont need additional immigration from other cultures. The CSU is a sister party of Chancellor Angela Merkels Christian Democrats.
Mr. Seehofers comments are seen as responding to German president Christian Wulff on Oct. 3, German Unity Day, in which he called for a second German unification that would more fully integrate those of immigrant background; he said that Islam also is part of Germany.
President Wulffs statement followed a month of furor over a new book by leftist German central banker Thilo Sarrazin, Germany Abolishes Itself, positing that immigrants from Turkey and Arab states are lowering German intelligence quotients due to high birth rates and less education, and have no productive function except in the fruit and vegetable trade.
Mr. Sarrazins analysis and statistics have been roundly denunciated, and he has resigned his federal bankers post but his book quickly sold 1.5 million copies.
Why extreme-right views are coming to the surface
The Friedrich Ebert Foundation study that came out this week is based on 2,411 respondents and was conducted in April, prior to the recent emotional immigration debate sparked by Sarrazin, Seehofer, and Wulff.
The rise of racism and intolerance argued in the study contrasts with similar foundation studies, prior to the economic crisis in Europe, showing a decrease in racism or xenophobia. However, today nearly a third of Germans polled would consider a policy repatriating immigrants if the job market suffers further.
The authors of the study urge fellow Germans not to underestimate right-wing sentiment.
Oliver Decker, one of the study's authors, says the findings indicate a new popular willingness to express hardcore opinions.
In the past the base for extreme-right views in Germany, though present, was more latent in nature. Now these views are being expressed more frequently, Mr. Decker says. The economic crisis seems to have allowed aggression come to the surface. Among those looking for a valve, foreigners in general and Muslims in particular fill that role.
|
|