Carnivore 69 wrote:
Of course. I was part of several overseas deployments in the 1990s in the Army. Anyone on this board worth a damn would gladly serve his country in war.
Which one were you? Admiral? Billionaire? General? Peon? Politician? You need to go to a re-education camp and get that propaganda flushed out of your head.
HRH wrote:
[quote]Balogna Guy wrote:
[quote]Stuffness wrote:
Holy crap. The point isn't that Hitler could or couldn't have killed every Jew in the world. He was trying to kill every one that he could get his hands on.
Nonsense. Had the plan actually been to kill all the Jews then all the Jews in the camps would have been killed.
Exactly, in actual fact, over 6 million ‘holocaust survivors’ successfully claimed billions in compensation from the post war German government.
A neat trick considering meticulous SS records show there were only 6 million of them throughout all the territory occupied by the Germans during 41-45.
Equally noticeable are the large numbers of Jews who held high positions in the Stalinist communist governments that replaced the short Nazi period of occupation in East Europe., despite the fact that Hitler had supposedly killed them all.
More Germans died in Eisenhower’s ‘death camps’ post-war from starvation and neglect than Jews died in concentration camps.
Also, International Jewry declared war to the death on Hitler the moment he became Chancellor in 1933 - no wonder he was a bit miffed!
Now Generation Three -- grandkids of "holocaust survivors" is on the gravy train. I kid you not
Stuffness wrote:
True Analytics wrote:
Up to 50 million died during WW2 fighting in Europe, civilian and military deaths. Soviets paid a heavy price. Many of front line Soviet soldiers with Oriental Asians. Millions of them died fighting Germans. Is it fair using your logic for millions of Asians to die to save an equal number of European Jews? That's not fair. If Soviet Union, 1943 to 1945 were more democratic, they would have decided, I am sure not to allow their citizens to be slaughtered.
You're misstating my "logic"....which if VERY simple - at both the individual and collective level: There are bad humans beings. Sometimes, the only way to stop bad human beings from doing really bad things to other humans is to physically stop them. At the collective level, this is sometimes "war." Doesn't make all war good, of course, but war intended to stop very bad people from doing really bad things is probably not a bad thing.
Funny that one has to feel like one is teaching Logic 101 to folks who, no doubt, fancy themselves as pretty smart.
You wrote in very general terms while responding to me. Civilian military scientists, admirals and generals will advocate sending in elite commando-type personnel who recognize the risk: may lose a dozen military personnel to save a dozen civilians. That rationale does not carry forward with thousands or in my statement millions of regular troops. Losing millions to save millions would not occur in a democratic society. The US mop-up job in WW2-Europe backs up my statement. US lost app. 400,000 fighting both Germany and Japan. Stalin politically got away with sacrificing Oriental Asians in WW2. You know that would not occur today.