I find this hypocritical...

लिखा द्वारा KYBL, 28.04.2014 at 08:26

लिखा द्वारा Unleashed, 28.04.2014 at 08:09

लिखा द्वारा zombieyeti, 24.04.2014 at 16:08

Do we agree that Nazis are by definition, racists?

You are no better. You are a racist zionist yourself. You are the very thing that you hate. Your hypocrisy is beyond anything that could be imagined, but it's to be expected given your heritage.

Here's what I wish OP would've said instead of comparing Hitler and Stalin:

I find it hypocritical that you are automatically declared monstrous, racist, and evil by society for supporting Nazism, while supporting Zionism is viewed as something virtuous.




"I could have annihilated all the Jews in the world, but I left some of them alive so you will know why I was killing them." - Adolf Hitler

Can you provide an argument for why Zionism is evil?

Can you provide an argument for why Nazism is evil? That's how ridiculous you sound

Guys please do not make this thread personal, lets keep it clean and try not to escalate it into a flame war, that will result in the thread being locked.

लिखा द्वारा Unleashed, 28.04.2014 at 08:42

लिखा द्वारा KYBL, 28.04.2014 at 08:26

लिखा द्वारा Unleashed, 28.04.2014 at 08:09

लिखा द्वारा zombieyeti, 24.04.2014 at 16:08

Do we agree that Nazis are by definition, racists?

You are no better. You are a racist zionist yourself. You are the very thing that you hate. Your hypocrisy is beyond anything that could be imagined, but it's to be expected given your heritage.

Here's what I wish OP would've said instead of comparing Hitler and Stalin:

I find it hypocritical that you are automatically declared monstrous, racist, and evil by society for supporting Nazism, while supporting Zionism is viewed as something virtuous.




"I could have annihilated all the Jews in the world, but I left some of them alive so you will know why I was killing them." - Adolf Hitler

Can you provide an argument for why Zionism is evil?

Can you provide an argument for why Nazism is evil? That's how ridiculous you sound

Don't answer a question with a question. Give me an actual answer.

लिखा द्वारा Unleashed, 28.04.2014 at 08:09

लिखा द्वारा zombieyeti, 24.04.2014 at 16:08

Do we agree that Nazis are by definition, racists?

You are no better. You are a racist zionist yourself. You are the very thing that you hate. Your hypocrisy is beyond anything that could be imagined, but it's to be expected given your heritage.

Here's what I wish OP would've said instead of comparing Hitler and Stalin:

I find it hypocritical that you are automatically declared monstrous, racist, and evil by society for supporting Nazism, while supporting Zionism is viewed as something virtuous.




"I could have annihilated all the Jews in the world, but I left some of them alive so you will know why I was killing them." - Adolf Hitler

Nazis are by definition, racist. I have presented my arguments and evidence.
If you have the courage, argument and/or evidence, refute it.

You claim I am a racist AND a zionist. Please provide your arguments and evidence.

I claim that you are stupid because you cannot structure a valid argument to save your very credibility in these forums.
I maintain this claim, and have presented why and how your arguments are invalid (or untrue) many many times.

Adolf Hitler never made the claim you post above, and there is no evidence I'm aware of that he intended to kill every jewish person worldwide.
On top of everything else, you invent shit that no reasonable person would believe.

So not only are you a terrible atheist, and a horrible argument-maker, you can't even create credible lies.
This makes you stupid.

लिखा द्वारा zombieyeti, 28.04.2014 at 22:30

लिखा द्वारा Unleashed, 28.04.2014 at 08:09

लिखा द्वारा zombieyeti, 24.04.2014 at 16:08

Do we agree that Nazis are by definition, racists?

You are no better. You are a racist zionist yourself. You are the very thing that you hate. Your hypocrisy is beyond anything that could be imagined, but it's to be expected given your heritage.

Here's what I wish OP would've said instead of comparing Hitler and Stalin:

I find it hypocritical that you are automatically declared monstrous, racist, and evil by society for supporting Nazism, while supporting Zionism is viewed as something virtuous.




"I could have annihilated all the Jews in the world, but I left some of them alive so you will know why I was killing them." - Adolf Hitler

Nazis are by definition, racist. I have presented my arguments and evidence.
If you have the courage, argument and/or evidence, refute it.

You claim I am a racist AND a zionist. Please provide your arguments and evidence.

I claim that you are stupid because you cannot structure a valid argument to save your very credibility in these forums.
I maintain this claim, and have presented why and how your arguments are invalid (or untrue) many many times.

Adolf Hitler never made the claim you post above, and there is no evidence I'm aware of that he intended to kill every jewish person worldwide.
On top of everything else, you invent shit that no reasonable person would believe.

So not only are you a terrible atheist, and a horrible argument-maker, you can't even create credible lies.
This makes you stupid.

Don't bother. He has no actual argument against Zionism, he just hates all things to do with religion and bases his arguments on crappy pictures he found on the internet which are either false or don't actually have a point to them.

लिखा द्वारा Skanderbeg, 29.04.2014 at 04:28

Nazism killed 75 million people and still counting. Many families in yugoslav, russian and chinese villages are massacred, family members, their neighboors and friends are killed so there were no witnesses to prove there were once a village. But we find mass graves and by laboratory examination they tell us its from WW2.

Communism killed around 10 million. All by famine. Famine occured because new USSR was 70% under snow, only Ukraine and Don produce little food, and China had 1/5 population of the whole world. System was changing and therefore economy suffered at beginning. Nazism used whole german population for slave labour since 1933 and thats why they didnt had crisis, germans worked 20h per day.

Capitalism killed so much we wont be able to count anytime. Millions of africans, half of them bringed to America for slave labour, other massacred in Africa. Millions of Indians by England, their king and companies like EIC. Indonesians by dutch. No wonder why Marx and Engels got idea to create new ideology which will liberate people and nations from system like this.

3,000,000 americans died from famine in USA during great depression. 3,000,000 died in USSR. USA wasnt any better place.

First of all, I want a source on the 75 million killed by Nazism.

Communism killed way more than 10 million. Let's count. You can do math, right?
Great Leap Forward -- The famine caused by this killed 45 million people. Yang Chisen, a Chinese journalists, says that another 40 million babies were left unborn which creates a death toll of already 85 million, although he asserts that the number of people killed amounts to 76 million and that only 36 million were starved to death by the famine.

Soviet Union -- Between prisoner executions, gulags, and forced resettlement, it is estimated that the death toll is about 3 million. It is approximated that including the Holodomor, the death toll is 61 million. Add another 4.6 million from the Russian Revolution abd that number reaches 68.6 million

Khmer Rouge -- 3.4 million plus another 600k as a result of famine after the genocide which brings the death toll to 4 million.

North Korean Famine -- 3.5 million and counting. The centrally planned system of North Korea has proven to be ineffective, especially after the collapse of the USSR.

So now let's count. 121 million people were killed by communist regimes if you do not include the Chinese unborn babeis which would result in the deaths of 157 million. So even if your "75 million" is correct, the death toll of communism is still double of what Nazism was.

लिखा द्वारा KYBL, 28.04.2014 at 22:52

लिखा द्वारा zombieyeti, 28.04.2014 at 22:30

लिखा द्वारा Unleashed, 28.04.2014 at 08:09

लिखा द्वारा zombieyeti, 24.04.2014 at 16:08

Do we agree that Nazis are by definition, racists?

You are no better. You are a racist zionist yourself. You are the very thing that you hate. Your hypocrisy is beyond anything that could be imagined, but it's to be expected given your heritage.

Here's what I wish OP would've said instead of comparing Hitler and Stalin:

I find it hypocritical that you are automatically declared monstrous, racist, and evil by society for supporting Nazism, while supporting Zionism is viewed as something virtuous.




"I could have annihilated all the Jews in the world, but I left some of them alive so you will know why I was killing them." - Adolf Hitler

Nazis are by definition, racist. I have presented my arguments and evidence.
If you have the courage, argument and/or evidence, refute it.

You claim I am a racist AND a zionist. Please provide your arguments and evidence.

I claim that you are stupid because you cannot structure a valid argument to save your very credibility in these forums.
I maintain this claim, and have presented why and how your arguments are invalid (or untrue) many many times.

Adolf Hitler never made the claim you post above, and there is no evidence I'm aware of that he intended to kill every jewish person worldwide.
On top of everything else, you invent shit that no reasonable person would believe.

So not only are you a terrible atheist, and a horrible argument-maker, you can't even create credible lies.
This makes you stupid.

Don't bother. He has no actual argument against Zionism, he just hates all things to do with religion and bases his arguments on crappy pictures he found on the internet which are either false or don't actually have a point to them.

He raises so many good points that could promulgate useful debate.
Then he shits it up with his unreasoning hate, irrelevant side-banter and invalid 'arguments'. But outright and stupid lies?

लिखा द्वारा zombieyeti, 29.04.2014 at 05:37

लिखा द्वारा KYBL, 28.04.2014 at 22:52

लिखा द्वारा zombieyeti, 28.04.2014 at 22:30

लिखा द्वारा Unleashed, 28.04.2014 at 08:09

लिखा द्वारा zombieyeti, 24.04.2014 at 16:08

Do we agree that Nazis are by definition, racists?

You are no better. You are a racist zionist yourself. You are the very thing that you hate. Your hypocrisy is beyond anything that could be imagined, but it's to be expected given your heritage.

Here's what I wish OP would've said instead of comparing Hitler and Stalin:

I find it hypocritical that you are automatically declared monstrous, racist, and evil by society for supporting Nazism, while supporting Zionism is viewed as something virtuous.




"I could have annihilated all the Jews in the world, but I left some of them alive so you will know why I was killing them." - Adolf Hitler

Nazis are by definition, racist. I have presented my arguments and evidence.
If you have the courage, argument and/or evidence, refute it.

You claim I am a racist AND a zionist. Please provide your arguments and evidence.

I claim that you are stupid because you cannot structure a valid argument to save your very credibility in these forums.
I maintain this claim, and have presented why and how your arguments are invalid (or untrue) many many times.

Adolf Hitler never made the claim you post above, and there is no evidence I'm aware of that he intended to kill every jewish person worldwide.
On top of everything else, you invent shit that no reasonable person would believe.

So not only are you a terrible atheist, and a horrible argument-maker, you can't even create credible lies.
This makes you stupid.

Don't bother. He has no actual argument against Zionism, he just hates all things to do with religion and bases his arguments on crappy pictures he found on the internet which are either false or don't actually have a point to them.

He raises so many good points that could promulgate useful debate.
Then he shits it up with his unreasoning hate, irrelevant side-banter and invalid 'arguments'. But outright and stupid lies?

Because hatred of Zionism has no use for debate, that is why all the BDS resolutions at universities in the US and Canada take place in a way that would make it hard for Jewish students to attend.

Unleashed, if you continue pretending that you didn't see this, I will think less of you and so will any reasonable debater. If you come here and forfeit, I will gain respect for you because I respect a man that can forfeit.

@Tito and @KyBall
I won't muck things up by replying to both and repeating my arguments.
I think there are problems with both of your numbers, but I'll leave that aside (as you'll see).

Americans and British killed millions of people in their past as an indirect consequence to profit or economic expansion.
Mostly, this stopped well over 100 years ago. According to international law and custom, at the time, not only were their actions *legal*, they weren't even definitely *immoral*. In recognition of emergent morality of the era ('human rights') Great Britain and the United States both took great strides to change. Britain outlawed slavery and the slave trade, and America ended up fighting the first Industrial War over the question of slavery, and had already made the African Slave Trade illegal (mostly for economic reasons frowny-face).
In any case, the genocides and death were consequences of amoral (driven by profit), vs immoral actions.

Nazi Germany (about 80 million Reich citizens in 1939, including Austria/Sudetenland) was responsible, morally and legally, for the systematic and intentional murders of 35-75 million people under prevailing contemporary laws and mores.
Whatever figure you use, there is no question that a large percentage of that number involves killing the citizens of other nations, notably the USSR.
Assuming the legal and moral culpability of every German (which I don't) that's .44-.94 deaths per Reich citizen in the 6 year period of the Reich. Therefore, we are looking at .073-.16 deaths per Reich citizen during the period examined.
Since, clearly, children weren't culpable, reduce that number by any reasonable amount you wish.
Number of deaths / number of people culpable / number of years of regime = magnitude of evil

Communism once encompassed about 1/2 of the globe. China, Cuba and North Korea are all, still, Communist. Considering the period 1917-1992 as the 'Golden Age' of the 75 years of Communism, we can estimate that there were at least 1 BILLION people under Communist governments (pure reason tells you that it was many more; China has 1.3 billion people alive right now). The vast majority of deaths blamed on Communist regimes are accounted for by famine/killing of its own citizens.
Do the same math I did with Germany. Use any credible number you want.

Number of deaths / number of people culpable / number of years of regime = magnitude of evil
300 million deaths / 1 billion people / 75 years = .004
1 billion deaths / 100 million people / 50 years = .02
For Communism's horror to get to half of that of Germany's 'least evil' projection, Communism would have to be responsible for 1 billion deaths, have only 100 million culpable people, ever, and have lasted only 50 years.

Even the most absurd claims of Stalin and Mao's evil being to any degree similar to Hitler's withers in this analysis.

For those interested in intent (the only quality which matters when making moral and legal judgments) IF Stalin and Mao had the same intent as Hitler, they must have been very very very bad at their jobs AND interested in primarily killing their own citizens OR Hitler was very good at his avocation and was externally focused.

लिखा द्वारा zombieyeti, 29.04.2014 at 06:33

@Tito and @KyBall
I won't muck things up by replying to both and repeating my arguments.
I think there are problems with both of your numbers, but I'll leave that aside (as you'll see).

Americans and British killed millions of people in their past as an indirect consequence to profit or economic expansion.
Mostly, this stopped well over 100 years ago. According to international law and custom, at the time, not only were their actions *legal*, they weren't even definitely *immoral*. In recognition of emergent morality of the era ('human rights') Great Britain and the United States both took great strides to change. Britain outlawed slavery and the slave trade, and America ended up fighting the first Industrial War over the question of slavery, and had already made the African Slave Trade illegal (mostly for economic reasons frowny-face).
In any case, the genocides and death were consequences of amoral (driven by profit), vs immoral actions.

Nazi Germany (about 80 million Reich citizens in 1939, including Austria/Sudetenland) was responsible, morally and legally, for the systematic and intentional murders of 35-75 million people under prevailing contemporary laws and mores.
Whatever figure you use, there is no question that a large percentage of that number involves killing the citizens of other nations, notably the USSR.
Assuming the legal and moral culpability of every German (which I don't) that's .44-.94 deaths per Reich citizen in the 6 year period of the Reich. Therefore, we are looking at .073-.16 deaths per Reich citizen during the period examined.
Since, clearly, children weren't culpable, reduce that number by any reasonable amount you wish.
Number of deaths / number of people culpable / number of years of regime = magnitude of evil

Communism once encompassed about 1/2 of the globe. China, Cuba and North Korea are all, still, Communist. Considering the period 1917-1992 as the 'Golden Age' of the 75 years of Communism, we can estimate that there were at least 1 BILLION people under Communist governments (pure reason tells you that it was many more; China has 1.3 billion people alive right now). The vast majority of deaths blamed on Communist regimes are accounted for by famine/killing of its own citizens.
Do the same math I did with Germany. Use any credible number you want.

Number of deaths / number of people culpable / number of years of regime = magnitude of evil
300 million deaths / 1 billion people / 75 years = .004
1 billion deaths / 100 million people / 50 years = .02
For Communism's horror to get to half of that of Germany's 'least evil' projection, Communism would have to be responsible for 1 billion deaths, have only 100 million culpable people, ever, and have lasted only 50 years.

Even the most absurd claims of Stalin and Mao's evil being to any degree similar to Hitler's withers in this analysis.

For those interested in intent (the only quality which matters when making moral and legal judgments) IF Stalin and Mao had the same intent as Hitler, they must have been very very very bad at their jobs AND interested in primarily killing their own citizens OR Hitler was very good at his avocation and was externally focused.

Stop to take numbers out of your ass, it didn't work in the other topic with your GDP claim either, don't even get people started to tear your numbers apart in this thread.

लिखा द्वारा Skanderbeg, 29.04.2014 at 04:28

Nazism killed 75 million people and still counting. Many families in yugoslav, russian and chinese villages are massacred, family members, their neighboors and friends are killed so there were no witnesses to prove there were once a village. But we find mass graves and by laboratory examination they tell us its from WW2.

Communism killed around 10 million. All by famine. Famine occured because new USSR was 70% under snow, only Ukraine and Don produce little food, and China had 1/5 population of the whole world. System was changing and therefore economy suffered at beginning. Nazism used whole german population for slave labour since 1933 and thats why they didnt had crisis, germans worked 20h per day.

Capitalism killed so much we wont be able to count anytime. Millions of africans, half of them bringed to America for slave labour, other massacred in Africa. Millions of Indians by England, their king and companies like EIC. Indonesians by dutch. No wonder why Marx and Engels got idea to create new ideology which will liberate people and nations from system like this.

3,000,000 americans died from famine in USA during great depression. 3,000,000 died in USSR. USA wasnt any better place.

3 million americans died from famine in the USA during the Great Depression? I have read that Pravda claimed 7 million.
I am interested in your source - in the meantime I did do some checking on the 'Pravda' reported argument.

America had a population of about 123 million in 1930. If 2.4% (3 million) of Americans in that period died of starvation there would have been a revolution like a Marxist wet dream, especially if they all died in 1932-33. There would also be documentation, and we would have heard about it during the recession of 2007.

There was a likelihood of accelerated death rates due to malnutrition - people *did go hungry*.
The Pravda claim is based on this observation of the US Census figures:

1910 92 million - 6.3 million immigrants to 1910-1919
1920 106 million 15.2% growth 4.3 imm. 1920-1929
1930 123 million 16% growth 700k imm 1930-1939
1940 132 million 7% growth 900k imm 1940-1949
The slower growth from 1930 - 1940 in the researcher's reasoning was caused by 7 million starvation deaths in 1932-33.

Of course America's (and the UK's) population growth is driven by native births AND net immigration. There were less of both in 1930-1940 including only 16% of the immigration from 1930-39 of the previous decade.

What if the census is just a lie?
Possible; but unlikely - because rival political factions rely on the data to determine representation, the competition keeps the numbers accurate.
Also, the census (back then) did *not* use statistical method to estimate population - each person counted had to have a name, birthdate, nation of origin etc.

http://english.pravda.ru/world/americas/19-05-2008/105255-famine-0/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Census#History
http://teacher.scholastic.com/activities/immigration/pdfs/by_decade/decade_line_chart.pdf

लिखा द्वारा Clovek30, 29.04.2014 at 06:45

लिखा द्वारा zombieyeti, 29.04.2014 at 06:33

@Tito and @KyBall
I won't muck things up by replying to both and repeating my arguments.
I think there are problems with both of your numbers, but I'll leave that aside (as you'll see).

Americans and British killed millions of people in their past as an indirect consequence to profit or economic expansion.
Mostly, this stopped well over 100 years ago. According to international law and custom, at the time, not only were their actions *legal*, they weren't even definitely *immoral*. In recognition of emergent morality of the era ('human rights') Great Britain and the United States both took great strides to change. Britain outlawed slavery and the slave trade, and America ended up fighting the first Industrial War over the question of slavery, and had already made the African Slave Trade illegal (mostly for economic reasons frowny-face).
In any case, the genocides and death were consequences of amoral (driven by profit), vs immoral actions.

Nazi Germany (about 80 million Reich citizens in 1939, including Austria/Sudetenland) was responsible, morally and legally, for the systematic and intentional murders of 35-75 million people under prevailing contemporary laws and mores.
Whatever figure you use, there is no question that a large percentage of that number involves killing the citizens of other nations, notably the USSR.
Assuming the legal and moral culpability of every German (which I don't) that's .44-.94 deaths per Reich citizen in the 6 year period of the Reich. Therefore, we are looking at .073-.16 deaths per Reich citizen during the period examined.
Since, clearly, children weren't culpable, reduce that number by any reasonable amount you wish.
Number of deaths / number of people culpable / number of years of regime = magnitude of evil

Communism once encompassed about 1/2 of the globe. China, Cuba and North Korea are all, still, Communist. Considering the period 1917-1992 as the 'Golden Age' of the 75 years of Communism, we can estimate that there were at least 1 BILLION people under Communist governments (pure reason tells you that it was many more; China has 1.3 billion people alive right now). The vast majority of deaths blamed on Communist regimes are accounted for by famine/killing of its own citizens.
Do the same math I did with Germany. Use any credible number you want.

Number of deaths / number of people culpable / number of years of regime = magnitude of evil
300 million deaths / 1 billion people / 75 years = .004
1 billion deaths / 100 million people / 50 years = .02
For Communism's horror to get to half of that of Germany's 'least evil' projection, Communism would have to be responsible for 1 billion deaths, have only 100 million culpable people, ever, and have lasted only 50 years.

Even the most absurd claims of Stalin and Mao's evil being to any degree similar to Hitler's withers in this analysis.

For those interested in intent (the only quality which matters when making moral and legal judgments) IF Stalin and Mao had the same intent as Hitler, they must have been very very very bad at their jobs AND interested in primarily killing their own citizens OR Hitler was very good at his avocation and was externally focused.

Stop to take numbers out of your ass, it didn't work in the other topic with your GDP claim either, don't even get people started to tear your numbers apart in this thread.

Interesting that you should claim this. Last I checked no one had replied to my most recent arguments there.
That being said, one of the counterclaims sure did make an impression! A recurring theme, over and over again: Nazis did what they did in just a few short years, and we should *all* remember that. They never had time to (expand the economy sustainably, supply the VWs the Volk were cheated out of, give everyone a kilo of meat A WEEK etc.)
But, they sure had time to kill kill kill'!

I have applied that lesson to my current discussion.
I remembered.
Thank you.

Please feel free to attack my reasoning. My *evidence* are the numbers of both T and K - my *argument* is that one can make intent-free evaluations of the evidence available and still come to the conclusion that there is just something different about Nazis. Once that is settled (if it is settled) the discussion becomes a matter of are Nazis different qualitatively, or quantitatively.
Previously I have argued that Nazis are different quantitatively - the ideology is racist and non-universal - at least so I thought.

http://www.vice.com/read/meet-russias-gay-aryan-skinheads-finally-bringing-homosexuality-to-the-neo-nazi-world <<< I'd post the logo because it is so fncking funny but that would violate some laws in Germany/Austria etc.

http://www.vice.com/read/the-malaysian-nazis-fighting-for-a-pure-race <<<< Almost as funny as Greek Nazis, except they soberly admit that Hitler wouldn't be a fan - sad, because some of the irony falls

http://www.vice.com/tag/neo-Nazi <<<< My go to place to see angry people of all colors, races and sexual proclivity who aspire to world domination and a (what-they-don't-like)-free life in the best traditions of National Socialism. I always thought that Slavic Nazis were ironically funny. Then there were Greek Nazis. Now there's Malay and Gay Slavic Nazis?

http://atwar-game.com/forum/board.php?board_id=8&page=1 <<<< My other go-to place to see nazi asshattery (asshattness?) in action.

It all, all reminds me of the absurdity of Mother Night and The Black Fuhrer of Harlem

लिखा द्वारा zombieyeti, 29.04.2014 at 07:23

Interesting that you should claim this. Last I checked no one had replied to my most recent arguments there.
That being said, one of the counterclaims sure did make an impression! A recurring theme, over and over again: Nazis did what they did in just a few short years, and we should *all* remember that. They never had time to (expand the economy sustainably, supply the VWs the Volk were cheated out of, give everyone a kilo of meat A WEEK etc.)
But, they sure had time to kill kill kill'!

I have applied that lesson to my current discussion.
I remembered.
Thank you.

Please feel free to attack my reasoning. My *evidence* are the numbers of both T and K - my *argument* is that one can make intent-free evaluations of the evidence available and still come to the conclusion that there is just something different about Nazis. Once that is settled (if it is settled) the discussion becomes a matter of are Nazis different qualitatively, or quantitatively.
Previously I have argued that Nazis are different quantitatively - the ideology is racist and non-universal - at least so I thought.

http://www.vice.com/read/meet-russias-gay-aryan-skinheads-finally-bringing-homosexuality-to-the-neo-nazi-world <<< I'd post the logo because it is so fncking funny but that would violate some laws in Germany/Austria etc.

http://www.vice.com/read/the-malaysian-nazis-fighting-for-a-pure-race <<<< Almost as funny as Greek Nazis, except they soberly admit that Hitler wouldn't be a fan - sad, because some of the irony falls

http://www.vice.com/tag/neo-Nazi <<<< My go to place to see angry people of all colors, races and sexual proclivity who aspire to world domination and a (what-they-don't-like)-free life in the best traditions of National Socialism. I always thought that Slavic Nazis were ironically funny. Then there were Greek Nazis. Now there's Malay and Gay Slavic Nazis?

http://atwar-game.com/forum/board.php?board_id=8&page=1 <<<< My other go-to place to see nazi asshattery (asshattness?) in action.

It all, all reminds me of the absurdity of Mother Night and The Black Fuhrer of Harlem

Comparing neo-nazis to the average german of the 40s? How is that relevant to your early evidence? While i agree that the germans commited war crimes as you and tito claim, plz provide me with a source that backs your claim of 35+ million deaths directly caused by the nazis, barking "nazi!" Is not gonna make anything a fact.

लिखा द्वारा zombieyeti, 29.04.2014 at 07:23

You dare show your face in this thread again, before replying to me?You accused me of many things and im calling you out to defend your arguments.If you fail to do so, dont ever put my name in your dirty, mouth, again.
I will provide the post again, under.

लिखा द्वारा zombieyeti, 28.04.2014 at 02:13

Here is your unqualified statement about race:

अवतरण:

Does the lifes of Jewish people matter more than those of Russians,Ukrainians,Chinese,Vietnamese?I will answer on this,the answer is no.Human life has the same worth, wether its black,white,yellow,Jewish,Indian or whatever.Saying otherwise would be racist.

.

unqualified : Not qualified, ineligible, unfit for a position or task.http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/unqualified

First of all my statement cannot be unqualified.I can be be unqualified though, to make a particular statement.Please enlighten me with the qualifications, i need to have, to effectively judge the worth of human life.I thought in the 21st century, it was universaly accepted, that all human life has the same worth, are you saying otherwise?Are you also saying, that only people with certain qualifications are eligible to judge human life worth?And if yes, what are those qualifications and who decided on them?And under what authority?

लिखा द्वारा zombieyeti, 28.04.2014 at 02:13

Hitler, Stalin, and Intentionality:
Whatever. Your hatred of jews means that you can't understand reason anyway. Saying intentions are irrelevant is idiotic, simple-minded and yet another example of your fevered, despicable, anti-Semitic mind.
Remember your words - where you ignore the obvious fact that Jewish people (e.g. Albert Einstein) represent <1% of all people, but hold >20% of all Nobel prizes, and even more in Science. Your reply continues this fine tradition.

अवतरण:

You are a zionist jewish american law student focused on civics or some shit, who enjoy playing with words because thats what he was taught to do.The most useless,bullshiting,wordtwisting,corrupted proffesion.In practice thats what you been taught and trained to do.Twist words,use them in your advantage and lie.
Go become a great lawyer,protect the goverment,the church,the elite or some murderers, i dont care.Just shut it about scientists, because i am very well aware why you do this.Scientists always threatened your kind and were always hunted down and controlled, either through money and bribes or intimidation.But none of the Jewish controlled media in America, ever said a damn thing about the cases of scientists being attacked,their laboratories trashed and even murdered, cause they wanted to share their inventions and knowledge with the people.

Had you been a worthwhile opponent, or even an honest one, I'd reply in a more respectful and useful manner. You have discredited yourself thoroughly and irredeemably in my eyes.

I already told you i dont hate jews.
Hatred (or hate) is a deep and emotional extreme dislike that can be directed against individuals, entities, objects, or ideas. Hatred is often associated with feelings of anger and a disposition towards hostility.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hatred

Regardless of my sincerity or not, i never provided you with any kind of evidence to support your claim, that i hate jews.I provided information, wether true or false is irrelevant, cause it is information and in no way shows any sign of emotion.If you think otherwise, feel free to make a valid, true and structured argument supporting your claim that i hate jews.I would like to see those premises.If you fail to do so, please take back your claim, because that would be deliberately lying and is insulting to me.

As for your accusations of being stupid and simple minded, again i will ask for a structured argument to support your claim.After all i wasnt the one just using ad hominem http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem

As for the Jews and their Noble Prizes, that is great.I am glad that Jews have that much success.Your point being?Except to show obvious signs of nationalism and how much you love you race, what is the point of all this?Just because Jewish people win noble prizes, their life's worth increases?

As for the old quote of mine, what is the purpose of this?Is this your evidence that i hate jews?Cause i never showed any personal emotion in my post,if i did show me where.I was just providing information and making a structured vaild argument, with very clear premises and certainly not insulting.Unless information is insulting.

(*edit.I did provide signs of emotion & hostility towards the proffesion of the lawyer.I firmly stand behind this, as i despise and hate everything about the said proffesion and most of its practicioners.)

But if we are gonna play this game (of old quotes) i can actually provide evidence, that you have been biased, disrespectfull, emotionally supercharged in your responses and racist.

लिखा द्वारा zombieyeti, 23.04.2014 at 23:09

Premise 1: Albanians are invading Italy
Premise 2: Most whores are albanian
Premise 3: whores are stupid
Premise 4: Khal is stupid
Premise 5: Khal's account claims to be italy-based
Conclusion 1: Khal is a whore because it is stupid.
Conclusion 2: As Khal is a stupid whore, it is likely that it is an albanian.
What if we were to find that Khal is Greek, not Italian?
Premise 6: Khal is a liar.
Conclusion 3: Khal is a lying, stupid whore who may or may not be Greek, Italian, or Albanian.

लिखा द्वारा zombieyeti, 28.04.2014 at 02:13

The remainder is for those few that demand I justify my argument. Don't bother reading it, it is a waste of your time and what little brain power you aren't spending on hating Jews.
===
A Child's Primer on Justice
If you hit a person with a car and the person dies, your intent makes no difference to the state of the person's existence.
They are dead.
Morally and legally, if it was a complete accident, you are no less responsible for the person's death, because the immediate cause of the person's death was your action/inaction, but morally and legally you are less blameworthy for the person's demise than if you intended to murder the person. This degree of blame is called culpability.

Varying degrees of blame for the same practical outcome of a person's action or inaction is a part of the larger concept known as 'justice'.
A key principle of 'justice' is that the 'punishment should fit the crime',
As individuals we judge people with whatever criteria we wish, reasonable or not.
The Law definitely recognizes the Action, then determines the magnitude of sanction based on intent. Depending on the legal system, the 'intent' IS the crime (conspiracy to commit a crime, intent to commit a crime) where even planning the crime IS a crime, even if no one dies, or nothing is stolen.
==

Correct.I agree with all this.Except that it doesnt apply to what we are talking about.Stalin is dead and so is Hitler, so it is physically impossible to both, interogate them,psychologically evaluate them and/or put them through our judicionary system channels.

लिखा द्वारा zombieyeti, 28.04.2014 at 02:13

Intent and Adolf Stalin.
Can I be *absolutely certain* that Hitler and Stalin had different intentions? No.
I can can say that Hitler espoused a racist ideology, described how once the NS Party gained power that he would use a variety of tactics to achieve his goals, and that, in practice, he did what he said he would do, until he was stopped (largely by the USSR).
When a person says he is going to do something, and then starts doing it, in law and morality this is known as 'pre-meditation', mens rea, or a 'guilty mind'.
While we cannot really 'know' what was in Hitler's mind, reasonable people generally agree he had a 'guilty mind', based on both his writings and the systematic approach NS took to killing Roma, Jews, Slavs etc.
The behaviors of Jews, Slavs, Roma etc. was of much less interest to Hitler than their existence.

I can also claim that Stalin did not espouse a racist ideology (but did become increasingly anti-Semitic, but not to the degree of genocidal-death camps) and that, generally, his goal was to propagate Communism worldwide.
When it appeared that would fail in the short term, he advocated 'Socialism in One Country' and abandoned direct military confrontation with the United States.
I am not aware of any systematic method, approach or event used by the USSR to kill and eliminate for all time a race or group of people for who they were by birth.

Stalin and Hitler, were both totalitarian mass murderers.Their main difference is in ideology (nobody really cares), apart from that, they are very much alike.They both intentionally (some times unintentionally- ill give you that) murdered and tortured, millions of people.They both eliminated their political oposition.They both censored freedom of speech, relied heavily on propaganda, used radio and newspapers to spread their lies, put their people to work like slaves and etc etc.Their tactics where almost identical.A key difference is Hitler used Jews as a scapegoat, thus you can say Hitler is racist because he genocided a specific ethnic group, whereas Stalin did exactly the same, but with religious people.The way i see it, those are excatly the same and no more than simple, good old "removal of threat".I will explain.After November 1917 , the Bolsheviks (mainly Jews) wanted to continue their work and incite social revolutions in Germany and Britain.That was an immediate threat to EVERY German Nationalist, not only Hitler.So when i said in my previous post "Jews had it coming" ofcourse i didnt meant, that Hitler's actions were moraly justified, but they were tacticaly justified and made sense strategicaly.Jews was inciting revolutions in countries and putting their own governments in charge, after.Thats is basicly a form of "invasion".The thing is Jews didnt have a "home country" that Hitler could just declare war upon,therefore, in his mind, the best method of removing that specific threat, was mass murdering them.I dont agree with him but there, i just gave you a possible explanation of Hitler's motives behind his actions and how. morals taken aside, made sense.

लिखा द्वारा zombieyeti, 28.04.2014 at 02:13

Did Stalin intentionally cause the lack of food for everyone?
Were ethnic Russians getting fat while Ukrainians starved?

Did Stalin take advantage of the disaster that was the famines of the 1930's? Sure. He was a horrible man, who was also ruthlessly practical. At some point there was not enough food to feed everyone. Did he do his best to ensure his political allies survived, if even to the detriment of his enemies? Sure.

Did Stalin then look to kill or imprison each Ukrainian? Not at all. He didn't want Ukrainians dead because they were Ukrainian, he wanted his political opponents to stop opposing him.

Stalin was not as "stupid" as you want to portray him.Stalin wanted to build a formidable industrial military machine, capable of holding its own against the west and in order to catch up, sacrifices had to be made.That being said, it is very clear that Stalin had a plan and was determined to see it through, no matter the casualties.Take advantage of the famine?Oh please, Stalin created the famine. In early 1930, Stalin had announced his intention to "liquidate" prosperous peasants ("kulaks") as a class so that the state could control agriculture and use capital extracted from the countryside to build industry. Tens of thousands of people were shot by Soviet state police and hundreds of thousands deported. Those who remained lost their land and often went hungry as the state requisitioned food for export. The first victims of starvation were the nomads of Soviet Kazakhstan, where about 1.3 million people died. The famine spread to Soviet Russia and peaked in Soviet Ukraine. Stalin requisitioned grain in Soviet Ukraine knowing that such a policy would kill millions. Blaming Ukrainians for the failure of his own policy, he ordered a series of measures, such as sealing the borders of that Soviet republic, that ensured mass death.
Bla..






To end my blabbering, i will provide a quote from "the economist".Apparently the journalists working for the economist, agree with me.

"There is no answer to the question which was more evil, Hitler or Stalin? Stalin's legacy, by the weight of time, has proved harder to offload. But both men defy moral measurement. It is like asking whether pulling out toenails or giving electric shocks to the genitals is the more acceptable form of torture."
http://www.economist.com/node/346857

लिखा द्वारा zombieyeti, 29.04.2014 at 07:23

http://www.vice.com/read/meet-russias-gay-aryan-skinheads-finally-bringing-homosexuality-to-the-neo-nazi-world <<< I'd post the logo because it is so fncking funny but that would violate some laws in Germany/Austria etc.

http://www.vice.com/read/the-malaysian-nazis-fighting-for-a-pure-race <<<< Almost as funny as Greek Nazis, except they soberly admit that Hitler wouldn't be a fan - sad, because some of the irony falls

http://www.vice.com/tag/neo-Nazi <<<< My go to place to see angry people of all colors, races and sexual proclivity who aspire to world domination and a (what-they-don't-like)-free life in the best traditions of National Socialism. I always thought that Slavic Nazis were ironically funny. Then there were Greek Nazis. Now there's Malay and Gay Slavic Nazis?

you bring "VICE" pages in a history forum discussion.LOL.What else can be said about you.Next time ill bring 4chan pages.But while you are at Vice, check some documentaries they have on gangs to see what is actually happening in L.A. cause in the other thread, you intervened again, knowing nothing and speaking out of your ass again.Or speaking out of your mothers basement actually.Cause a small kid that goes out only school-library-basement like you, cant possibly know anything about gangs right?I have friends in L.A. but you can also learn some stuff here http://www.streetgangs.com/billboard/.When we talk about "racial gang war" we are talking about neighborhood and war for corners and territories.Its about who controls what and where.Check the black and hispanic gangs territories in 80's, 90's, 00's and 12-13's and you will see what i am talking about.Check the murder rates also and the racially motivated gang murder rates and come back,hopefully a little better informed, next time.

This reminds me of a debate I watched between MP George Galloway and some guy who supported the Iraq War. Throughout the entire debate, Galloway kept pointing out that the other guy was a Zionist, even though that is irrelevant. Did he show any actual hatred? No. Is he hateful? Of course! Why else would he keep bringing this irrelevant point up?

The Bolsheviks were not mainly Jews. By 1907, only 10% of Bolsheviks were Jews, and if there was any actual pro-Jewish influence in the party, it ended when Trotsky left for Mexico, 6 years before Hitler came to power. The mass murder of Jews provided no tactical advantage and was, in fact, a tactical drawback because it wasted the lives of soldiers who had to guard the camps and wasted the lives of humans who could have helped the Reich.

लिखा द्वारा Khal.eesi, 29.04.2014 at 10:17

लिखा द्वारा zombieyeti, 29.04.2014 at 07:23

http://www.vice.com/read/meet-russias-gay-aryan-skinheads-finally-bringing-homosexuality-to-the-neo-nazi-world <<< I'd post the logo because it is so fncking funny but that would violate some laws in Germany/Austria etc.

http://www.vice.com/read/the-malaysian-nazis-fighting-for-a-pure-race <<<< Almost as funny as Greek Nazis, except they soberly admit that Hitler wouldn't be a fan - sad, because some of the irony falls

http://www.vice.com/tag/neo-Nazi <<<< My go to place to see angry people of all colors, races and sexual proclivity who aspire to world domination and a (what-they-don't-like)-free life in the best traditions of National Socialism. I always thought that Slavic Nazis were ironically funny. Then there were Greek Nazis. Now there's Malay and Gay Slavic Nazis?

you bring "VICE" pages in a history forum discussion.LOL.What else can be said about you.Next time ill bring 4chan pages.

Next thing you know, he is top poster on what was that shitty site's name, I forgot

REDDIT. Took me 1 minute to remember. Probably redit mouth breather morons actually see this guy as the new jesus.

लिखा द्वारा Unleashed, 29.04.2014 at 10:37

लिखा द्वारा Khal.eesi, 29.04.2014 at 10:17

लिखा द्वारा zombieyeti, 29.04.2014 at 07:23

http://www.vice.com/read/meet-russias-gay-aryan-skinheads-finally-bringing-homosexuality-to-the-neo-nazi-world <<< I'd post the logo because it is so fncking funny but that would violate some laws in Germany/Austria etc.

http://www.vice.com/read/the-malaysian-nazis-fighting-for-a-pure-race <<<< Almost as funny as Greek Nazis, except they soberly admit that Hitler wouldn't be a fan - sad, because some of the irony falls

http://www.vice.com/tag/neo-Nazi <<<< My go to place to see angry people of all colors, races and sexual proclivity who aspire to world domination and a (what-they-don't-like)-free life in the best traditions of National Socialism. I always thought that Slavic Nazis were ironically funny. Then there were Greek Nazis. Now there's Malay and Gay Slavic Nazis?

you bring "VICE" pages in a history forum discussion.LOL.What else can be said about you.Next time ill bring 4chan pages.

Next thing you know, he is top poster on what was that shitty site's name, I forgot

REDDIT. Took me 1 minute to remember. Probably redit mouth breather morons actually see this guy as the new jesus.

When you gonna stop ignoring me?

लिखा द्वारा Skanderbeg, 29.04.2014 at 10:04

https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20110316191423AAsjHt6
http://worldwar2.org.uk/how-many-people-died-in-world-war-2
http://www.statisticbrain.com/world-war-ii-statistics/
https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080518185729AAmahmh
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WW2_casualties

4 out of those 5 sources are irrelevant or lack credibility.

The question was "casualties directly caused by the nazis", you can't blame germany for military casualties because at the end, its war.

As your wikipedia source said: " The official Russian figure for total POW held by the Germans is 4,059,000; the number of Soviet POW who survived the war was 2,016,000, including 180,000 who most likely emigrated to other countries, and an additional 939,700 POW and MIA who were redrafted as territory was liberated. This leaves 1,103,000 POW dead. However, western historians put the number of POW held by the Germans at 5.7 million and about 3 million as dead in captivity (in the official Russian figures 1.1 million are military POW and remaining balance of about 2 million are included with civilian war dead).[159][165]
Conscripted reservists is an estimate of men called up, primarily in 1941, who were killed in battle or died as POWs before being listed on active strength. Soviet and Russian sources classify these losses as civilian deaths."

If we take that into account, the total number of russian civilian deaths, directly caused by the germans can be estimated as 3 million.

But hey! Didnt stalin killed 1.5 million in 1 purge alone!? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Purge

Wait, but he killed 10 million ukranians too! http://www.unitedhumanrights.org/genocide/ukraine_famine.htm

Thats more than the 3 to 6 million jews that died during ww2 (78% during the holocaust).

लिखा द्वारा Skanderbeg, 29.04.2014 at 10:04

https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20110316191423AAsjHt6

Yahoo answers as a source of information? Kill yourself.

लिखा द्वारा Unleashed, 29.04.2014 at 11:22

लिखा द्वारा Skanderbeg, 29.04.2014 at 10:04

https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20110316191423AAsjHt6

Yahoo answers as a source of information? Kill yourself.

I would consider using yahoo answers as a source for your argument more reliable than ignoring an argument all together as you have been doing.

लिखा द्वारा Unleashed, 29.04.2014 at 11:22

लिखा द्वारा Skanderbeg, 29.04.2014 at 10:04

https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20110316191423AAsjHt6

Yahoo answers as a source of information? Kill yourself.

I would consider using yahoo answers as a source for your argument more reliable than ignoring an argument all together as you have been doing.

लिखा द्वारा zombieyeti, 29.04.2014 at 07:23

Hitler was rascist u are rascist everyone is rascist i cant handle critic about my ethnic group like everybody else
ANTI-SEMITISM everywhere bla!!!!

The whole Nazi ideology was mostly a cover,that Hitler and the Nazi's used, if you read enough, you can reach at that conclusion yourself.The reasons Hitler might have hated the Jews, are endless, but the stronger, is unarguably, that Jews was the biggest threat to him at the time.You can read Professor David Cesarani's interview here http://ww2history.com/experts/David_Cesarani/The_Nazi_hatred_of_the_Jews (all 15 pages), he is a zionist english-jewish historian and while i disagree with some of his opinions, he can help you view the whole matter out of a different perspective.Plus you cant scream anti-semitism again, as a tactic for when you disagree with anything said here, like you did until now.Isnt that wonderfull?


"If all of the Jews had emigrated from Germany before 1939; if it had been possible to deport Jews from the German spheres of influence - the territories that they conquered - to Madagascar or Siberia, I think that probably would have sufficed for Hitler. I think he wanted to break the power of the Jews, I think he probably had some kind of benchmark of what would have indicated that their power had been broken. If, let us speculate, the German armies had got to Moscow in the Autumn of 1941, if the Communist apparatus had broken down, if the Soviet Union had collapsed, I think to Hitler that would have signified a very significant breaking of Jewish power, and then that would have made it possible to have the Jews deported, dumped in Siberia"

"Of course, Jewish power was still residing in Washington. The great showdown with America would have come and either militarily or politically Hitler might have prevailed over America and, again, I think that would have indicated to him that the Jews power had been broken, removing that cosmological and biological threat. And if the Jews were out of sight I think they would have been out of mind as well. But all the evidence is that as long as Jews were present within the Nazi sphere of influence, within Hitler's grasp, and as long as he thought that they were a threat, he believed they had to be destroyed and that their power had to be broken."



That being said,
On the point of HITLER VS STALIN, this very well respected holocaust defender states

"I think that Stalin takes it further than Hitler"

"We know that when the German Army with its allies invaded the Soviet Union at Hitler's orders that there was a plan for 30 million Soviet citizens to perish. It is almost certain that had Operation Barbarossa been successful 30 million Soviet citizens would have died, and, incidentally, the mass murder of the Jews would have paled into insignificance in comparison with that crime.
Equally if Stalin had not died when he did it's very likely that there would have been a state organised pogrom, a rounding up of the Jews in the Soviet Union and another million Jews would have been murdered there. The fate of the Tatars and the Chechens was redeemed simply because Stalin died when he did and the men who followed didn't have the kind of ruthlessness that he had and let the remnants of these groups survive"

"there are variations on the theme of genocide: politicide, ethnocide, for example. Stalin destroyed the national basis for the Chechen people for a period. Their culture outlawed, the social economic basis for a Chechen existence completely disrupted, the people physically separated from their lands for a period of time, which, had it been perpetuated, might have led to their entire disappearance as tribes and nations in human history have indeed disappeared if they have been so disrupted and driven from their traditional homelands. In a sense time and luck saved some of the ethnic and national groups targeted by Stalin. Stalin and his people never made the conceptual leap that certainly the Nazis made, to accelerating the process of destruction of a defined group, an ethnic, religious group; what they considered to be a biological racial group, and using modern technology to be able to achieve it within a very short period of time; within the foreseeable future."

"So what is the difference between engineering the starving to death of 900,000 people in Leningrad and shooting to death 900,000 Jews? I would say that the techniques are different but they are part of the same plan, which is to depopulate the Soviet Union of undesirable populations, populations unworthy of life. Useless mouths."



Back to the topic of removing Jews as a "threat" and not as a race, based on colour,beliefs,religion.

"Of course it did, but I think that there are moments of transition. If it had been possible to break the power of the Jews by segregating them, removing them from power and then shifting them to some place where they could be deemed non-threatening and then just ignore them, if they lived or died, I don't think it would really have mattered to Hitler or to the Nazi inner core that thought about these matters. The physical killing of the Jews comes about because in order to break their power it is not possible to dump them somewhere where they are no longer a threat. They remained within the sphere of influence of the Third Reich; they remain, in Hitler's vision, breathing down his neck.
There is the potential for the stab in the back. If they can't be removed to a place of safety, not safety for the Jews but safety for the Nazis, the Volk, for the rest of humanity; if they cannot be removed then they have to be got rid of in another way - to use a phrase of Goering in another context 'one way or another'. Well, the one way which was deportation and dumping may, indeed, as Peter Longerich has reminded us, have been genocidal. You send four million Jews from Europe to Madagascar and they're not going to have a very nice time. You send four million, five million Jews into the wastes of Siberia, and it's a death sentence for millions."


"Himmler authorised Eichmann to make his infamous offer via Jewish emissaries to the Allies to exchange a million Hungarian Jews for 10,000 trucks and various war materials to be used on the Eastern Front"

^ Evidence that the Nazi's were most interested in winning the war and the removal of Jews was one of the means to achieve that.If Nazis trully believed in their ideology i doubt they would want to trade Jews for war materials.

Also when he goes to Denmark, to round up the Jews there, they are already gone, hiding in Sweden.He doesnt really care, because he is not really interested in killing them, he just wantes them out of Germanie's sphere of influence.
quote
"They are out of the German sphere of influence, their power is broken, their ability to have a malign effect is ended, that's enough for the moment. And I think that is a concrete example of how if the Jews could have been removed from the Nazi sphere of influence that would have sufficed for the Nazis. "


Jews were rooting both Capitalism and Communism, and funding from behind.Hitler didnt like that obviously.But how is that possible bla bla ANTI-SEMITE bla!Proffesor gives his opinion on this matter as well : "It's nonsensical in one way but it's also very sensible in another way. In this country, in Britain in the 20th Century, you find many donors to political parties who will donate money to the Conservatives and to the Labour Party just in case one wins and the other loses. People always try and back both sides against the middle. It is not inconceivable to believe that there are certain political forces in the modern world in the 21st Century. It's very common for corporations to embody this, who are behind all political parties of the left or the right, and you make sure that whoever is on top's interests come through. So what appears to be a nonsensical belief that the Jews could be behind Capitalism and Communism at the same time is not that unusual, and in fact the great corporations during the 20th Century did have economic relations with the Capitalist countries and with the Communist countries. Fiat in Italy had jolly good relations with the Communist parties as well as being a backer of fascism."


Also if Nazis were really racist and aryan supremacists to the core, why would they allow muslims enter the SS?Why would they trade with Iran, a muslim dark-skinned non eurapean country?Why would they support arab uprisings in Middle east.I will tell you why.Because Nazi's were hypocrites, their ideology was a lie, a plan to attract supporters,unite the people and justify their actions.But you dont like that i suppose?You prefer Hitler to be seen as a mindless lunatic that hated Jews because he was murdering racist.He was a murderer ill give you that.

But to be able to speculate about Hitler's motives, you need to check the situation in Germany also.After all why would the German people vote for him, if he was so unreasonable. (in terms of the specific time and place we are talking about)
Before Hitler, during the Weimar Republic, Germany was in ruins. The hyper-inflation made many small business go bancrupt and the people's savings became worthless. Millions of germans became unemployed. A few people got richer but the poor got poorer. The stalinist Communist Party of Germany (KPD) and the Social Democrats started a class warfare, and the KPD shouted "Heil Moscow!" and wanted Germany to become a Soviet state. The KPD had stormtroopers that broke up meetings of other parties and attacked and sometimes killed political opponents.At the same time, lots of the press in Germany was filled with anti-german sentiments, and blamed Germany for the defeat in 1918. The crime syndicates flourished.A very high percentage of the communists and social democrats were jewish, and also many of the owners of the anti-german press, teathers, art-critics, lawyers and so on.Most of the big chains, also owned by Jewish.Half the banks also and most of the stockholders.It is said that, for a time, you couldnt get a loan, unless you were Jewish.Jews were very active and "loud" in Germany.
How about the communist coup in Bavaria in 1919, the short lived Bavarian Soviet Republic, run by the jews Kurt Eisner, Ernst Toller, Eugene Levine, Gustaf Landauer and Erich Muhsam.
It happened at the same time as the bloody coup in Hungaria led by the jews Bela Kun (Kohn), Tibor Szamuely, Jeno Landler and Jozsef Pogany (Schwartz). In Frankfurt a gang of marxist jews had started the Frankfurt School as an instrument to influnce the universities with marxist agendas. Jews like Max Horkheimer, Theodor Adorno, Herbert Marcuse, Walter Benjamin, Erich Fromm, Friedrich Pollock, Leo Lowenthal.

Also in Berlin there was an "Institute for Sexual Science" created by jews, Magnus Hirschfeld, Harry Benjamin and others, that promoted a sexual revolution. Now i wholeheartedly support this one but we are not talking about my opinions here, we are talking about Hitler and Hitler was a religious conservative bigoted caveman, so you can guess how he didnt like all these stuff.

So, taking into account the ww1 humiliation of Germany, the stab in the back theory,the anti-german revolutionary agendas of a non-german alien people,the terrible living conditions and poverty of simple German people in contrast with the hypocrisy of communist "pro-worker" Jews, who had accumulate most of the wealth in Germany (The jewish Rothschild banker family had more money than the whole german people combined!) and so on bla bla its not very hard to see, why there was a general feeling of anti-semitism, among German people.Germans did NOT want to murder all the Jews, they just believed that judaism and the jews were dangerous parasites, and that they should be removed from their posts and preferrably forced to emigrate.Hitler had more hate but HE ALSO DIDNT PLAN TO MURDER ALL OF THEM.The jewish proffesor agrees with me.The plan was to sent them away, away from German sphere of influence and break their power.He didnt care if they lived or died, he just wanted them far away from him and his country.Thats why the decision to "murder" the Jews came to late in the war and coincidentaly when the Nazis thought operation Barbarossa would be a win.And even after the decision was made, it took so many months, to actually be put on practise, that one can reach the conclution that even Hitler didnt know what to really do with them.


Anyway, i wont continue, i wrote enough i think, the point is ZOMBIEYETI stop being paranoid, nobody is here to hurt you and your people, nobody haves a secret agenda, we are all here to learn stuff and talk, so start becoming unbiased and take CRITISISM , like we all do and stop crying ANTI-SEMITISM all the time.Its annoying, imature, its a lie and make all the people in the world, not like you.You do more harm to your race than good, this way.

लिखा द्वारा Tunder4, 29.04.2014 at 09:34

लिखा द्वारा zombieyeti, 29.04.2014 at 07:23

Interesting that you should claim this. Last I checked no one had replied to my most recent arguments there.
That being said, one of the counterclaims sure did make an impression! A recurring theme, over and over again: Nazis did what they did in just a few short years, and we should *all* remember that. They never had time to (expand the economy sustainably, supply the VWs the Volk were cheated out of, give everyone a kilo of meat A WEEK etc.)
But, they sure had time to kill kill kill'!

I have applied that lesson to my current discussion.
I remembered.
Thank you.

Please feel free to attack my reasoning. My *evidence* are the numbers of both T and K - my *argument* is that one can make intent-free evaluations of the evidence available and still come to the conclusion that there is just something different about Nazis. Once that is settled (if it is settled) the discussion becomes a matter of are Nazis different qualitatively, or quantitatively.
Previously I have argued that Nazis are different quantitatively - the ideology is racist and non-universal - at least so I thought.

http://www.vice.com/read/meet-russias-gay-aryan-skinheads-finally-bringing-homosexuality-to-the-neo-nazi-world <<< I'd post the logo because it is so fncking funny but that would violate some laws in Germany/Austria etc.

http://www.vice.com/read/the-malaysian-nazis-fighting-for-a-pure-race <<<< Almost as funny as Greek Nazis, except they soberly admit that Hitler wouldn't be a fan - sad, because some of the irony falls

http://www.vice.com/tag/neo-Nazi <<<< My go to place to see angry people of all colors, races and sexual proclivity who aspire to world domination and a (what-they-don't-like)-free life in the best traditions of National Socialism. I always thought that Slavic Nazis were ironically funny. Then there were Greek Nazis. Now there's Malay and Gay Slavic Nazis?

http://atwar-game.com/forum/board.php?board_id=8&page=1 <<<< My other go-to place to see nazi asshattery (asshattness?) in action.

It all, all reminds me of the absurdity of Mother Night and The Black Fuhrer of Harlem

Comparing neo-nazis to the average german of the 40s? How is that relevant to your early evidence? While i agree that the germans commited war crimes as you and tito claim, plz provide me with a source that backs your claim of 35+ million deaths directly caused by the nazis, barking "nazi!" Is not gonna make anything a fact.

Historical NS
Not all Germans were Nazi party members, not all Nazi party members were believers, not all Nazi supporters were party members and therefore not all neo-nazis are true NS. The relevance is in regards to the anticipated qualitative vs. quantitative argument as I stated if you would merely read.

Re: 35 million - if my intent wasn't clear it isn't about numbers - put in any reasonable high or low estimates and the Nazis did so much killing in so few years that the horrors that *may or may not have been carried out* in the name of Communism failed. In the case of 75 million, I merely took T's claim, halved it, then rounded that down to a manageable number.

I'm comfortable with it however. Little thing called the Nuremberg Trials assigned guilt to the surviving members of Nazi leadership.
These people were found guilty of "Participation in a common plan or conspiracy for the accomplishment of a crime against peace" and "Planning, initiating and waging wars of aggression and other crimes against peace". Therefore most of the deaths in the European Theatre are attributable to the leaders of the Nazi party.
Hitler, notably, was not tried; because the Americans and Brits prevented it (trial in absentia; the principle established was that *people* are responsible for prosecuting war crimes). This number is clearly more than 35 million, even once you remove all the deaths caused in the Russian invasion of Poland and (arguably) Finland. The logic is simple, effective, and valid: If there had been no conspiracy to prosecute a war of aggression, the people wouldn't have died.
In this light (valid reasoning under international law, but not examined at Nuremberg) many of the terrible actions taken by the USSR were legal as they were taken under duress, and in self-defense.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuremberg_trials

लिखा द्वारा Khal.eesi, 29.04.2014 at 10:17

लिखा द्वारा zombieyeti, 29.04.2014 at 07:23

http://www.vice.com/read/meet-russias-gay-aryan-skinheads-finally-bringing-homosexuality-to-the-neo-nazi-world <<< I'd post the logo because it is so fncking funny but that would violate some laws in Germany/Austria etc.

http://www.vice.com/read/the-malaysian-nazis-fighting-for-a-pure-race <<<< Almost as funny as Greek Nazis, except they soberly admit that Hitler wouldn't be a fan - sad, because some of the irony falls

http://www.vice.com/tag/neo-Nazi <<<< My go to place to see angry people of all colors, races and sexual proclivity who aspire to world domination and a (what-they-don't-like)-free life in the best traditions of National Socialism. I always thought that Slavic Nazis were ironically funny. Then there were Greek Nazis. Now there's Malay and Gay Slavic Nazis?

you bring "VICE" pages in a history forum discussion.LOL.What else can be said about you.Next time ill bring 4chan pages.But while you are at Vice, check some documentaries they have on gangs to see what is actually happening in L.A. cause in the other thread, you intervened again, knowing nothing and speaking out of your ass again.Or speaking out of your mothers basement actually.Cause a small kid that goes out only school-library-basement like you, cant possibly know anything about gangs right?I have friends in L.A. but you can also learn some stuff here http://www.streetgangs.com/billboard/.When we talk about "racial gang war" we are talking about neighborhood and war for corners and territories.Its about who controls what and where.Check the black and hispanic gangs territories in 80's, 90's, 00's and 12-13's and you will see what i am talking about.Check the murder rates also and the racially motivated gang murder rates and come back,hopefully a little better informed, next time.

More of your absurd hatefulness.

Rather than addressing the evidence and arguments I present, you bring up stuff about the 1990's. Notice fewer deaths, even though the population is growing?
That's because even if there was a war, it's clearly over long ago.

Remember your words - where you ignore the obvious fact that Jewish people (e.g. Albert Einstein) represent <1% of all people, but hold >20% of all Nobel prizes, and even more in Science. Your reply continues this fine tradition. Remember your words where you deny the jewish participation in science and even your common sense because you are blinded by hate:

अवतरण:

You are a zionist jewish american law student focused on civics or some shit, who enjoy playing with words because thats what he was taught to do.The most useless,bullshiting,wordtwisting,corrupted proffesion.In practice thats what you been taught and trained to do.Twist words,use them in your advantage and lie. Go become a great lawyer,protect the goverment,the church,the elite or some murderers, i dont care.Just shut it about scientists, because i am very well aware why you do this.Scientists always threatened your kind and were always hunted down and controlled, either through money and bribes or intimidation.But none of the Jewish controlled media in America, ever said a damn thing about the cases of scientists being attacked,their laboratories trashed and even murdered, cause they wanted to share their inventions and knowledge with the people.

As a refresher, I have been 'promoted' from 'zionist jewish american law student focused on civics or some shit' to 'small kid'.

I have never been a member of a street gang - does this mean I am unable to examine the net effect of their murders? Do you claim your expertise based on your street gang membership?
You have CLEARLY never lived in Detroit OR Los Angeles - does this mean you are unable to discuss the matter? I have lived in both places (as well as others) not that this is relevant.
Regarding VICE: Apparently I have commited the 'sin' of bringing to light neo-nazis in a forum WHERE THE THIRD WORD is NAZIISM.

Even the most basic search for evidence (which is what I did) would lead you to believe that obesity or automobiles are responsible for WAAY more American deaths.

Now, a former 'zionist jewish american law student focused on civics or some shit turned small kid hasn't even needed to turn to your execrable evidence to refute your arguments. You argued yourself out of credible existence, again, and here's why:

You claim that my presumed lack of membership in a Street Gang, and my presumed youth and basement dwelling (instead of law-studenting), and lack of 'real knowledge' of LA and Detroit remove even the possibility of me being able to speak on the subject.

You are qualified, however, to speak on the subject because you *have friends in LA*.

I contrasted:
- Detroit, a 10 minute jog from an international border, with 5 times the murders 1/5 of the population of Los Angeles. More people are murdered in ALL of Spain in 2012 as were murdered in Detroit 2012.
- Los Angeles, a 3 hour drive on a VERY VERY good day from an international border, 5 times the population of Detroit, 1/5th of the murder rate.

And concluded that if there was a 'Race War' in Los Angeles, it must be fought with hugs and kisses AND/OR if the 'illegal immigrant' problem is the cause, Canadians are really violent people.

Now take a moment and read what I wrote, and how stupid you sound. If this was even the 10th time I had to point this out, I would still be considerate, courteous, honorable and polite. When you pulled the racist, antisemetic shit the third time, you went into the 'despise and discredit' pile.

लिखा द्वारा Tunder4, 29.04.2014 at 10:55

लिखा द्वारा Skanderbeg, 29.04.2014 at 10:04

https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20110316191423AAsjHt6
http://worldwar2.org.uk/how-many-people-died-in-world-war-2
http://www.statisticbrain.com/world-war-ii-statistics/
https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080518185729AAmahmh
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WW2_casualties

4 out of those 5 sources are irrelevant or lack credibility.

The question was "casualties directly caused by the nazis", you can't blame germany for military casualties because at the end, its war.

As your wikipedia source said: " The official Russian figure for total POW held by the Germans is 4,059,000; the number of Soviet POW who survived the war was 2,016,000, including 180,000 who most likely emigrated to other countries, and an additional 939,700 POW and MIA who were redrafted as territory was liberated. This leaves 1,103,000 POW dead. However, western historians put the number of POW held by the Germans at 5.7 million and about 3 million as dead in captivity (in the official Russian figures 1.1 million are military POW and remaining balance of about 2 million are included with civilian war dead).[159][165]
Conscripted reservists is an estimate of men called up, primarily in 1941, who were killed in battle or died as POWs before being listed on active strength. Soviet and Russian sources classify these losses as civilian deaths."

If we take that into account, the total number of russian civilian deaths, directly caused by the germans can be estimated as 3 million.

But hey! Didnt stalin killed 1.5 million in 1 purge alone!? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Purge

Wait, but he killed 10 million ukranians too! http://www.unitedhumanrights.org/genocide/ukraine_famine.htm

Thats more than the 3 to 6 million jews that died during ww2 (78% during the holocaust).

International law, and (now) custom holds most culpable the instigators of Aggressive War.
In fact, due to precedence (and logic), generally, a victim of Aggressive War gets to get away with a lot of bad things in self-defense because 'that which is necessary for survival is legal'.

लिखा द्वारा KYBL, 29.04.2014 at 10:18

This reminds me of a debate I watched between MP George Galloway and some guy who supported the Iraq War. Throughout the entire debate, Galloway kept pointing out that the other guy was a Zionist, even though that is irrelevant. Did he show any actual hatred? No. Is he hateful? Of course! Why else would he keep bringing this irrelevant point up?

The Bolsheviks were not mainly Jews. By 1907, only 10% of Bolsheviks were Jews, and if there was any actual pro-Jewish influence in the party, it ended when Trotsky left for Mexico, 6 years before Hitler came to power. The mass murder of Jews provided no tactical advantage and was, in fact, a tactical drawback because it wasted the lives of soldiers who had to guard the camps and wasted the lives of humans who could have helped the Reich.

I tend to agree, but I think the Nazis did the cost-benefit evaluation and came up with the optimal solution according to their valuation:
By the time when the troops guarding Concentration Camps (CCs) mattered, the fuel and rail diversions robbing the Eastern and Western fronts of nonexistent resources, the number of CC prisoners killed/day > benefit received from closing up shop.

Carrying the argument to its logical conclusion, why didn't Nazi Germany just blame everything on Jews, then once elected, kind of forget about it, or just pogrom on occasion? They might have kept thousands of Jewish scientists working on weapon science, had millions of conscripts or laborers, and saved billions of reichsmarks on camp construction, guard costs, railways and diverted rolling stock etc. Nazis might have even had the Atomic Bomb!
Its because elimination of undesirables wasn't a tactic or a sideline of National Socialism, it was a core value, even if to the detriment of the well being and security of the Volk.

लिखा द्वारा zombieyeti, 29.04.2014 at 16:48

लिखा द्वारा Khal.eesi, 29.04.2014 at 10:17

लिखा द्वारा zombieyeti, 29.04.2014 at 07:23

http://www.vice.com/read/meet-russias-gay-aryan-skinheads-finally-bringing-homosexuality-to-the-neo-nazi-world <<< I'd post the logo because it is so fncking funny but that would violate some laws in Germany/Austria etc.

http://www.vice.com/read/the-malaysian-nazis-fighting-for-a-pure-race <<<< Almost as funny as Greek Nazis, except they soberly admit that Hitler wouldn't be a fan - sad, because some of the irony falls

http://www.vice.com/tag/neo-Nazi <<<< My go to place to see angry people of all colors, races and sexual proclivity who aspire to world domination and a (what-they-don't-like)-free life in the best traditions of National Socialism. I always thought that Slavic Nazis were ironically funny. Then there were Greek Nazis. Now there's Malay and Gay Slavic Nazis?

you bring "VICE" pages in a history forum discussion.LOL.What else can be said about you.Next time ill bring 4chan pages.But while you are at Vice, check some documentaries they have on gangs to see what is actually happening in L.A. cause in the other thread, you intervened again, knowing nothing and speaking out of your ass again.Or speaking out of your mothers basement actually.Cause a small kid that goes out only school-library-basement like you, cant possibly know anything about gangs right?I have friends in L.A. but you can also learn some stuff here http://www.streetgangs.com/billboard/.When we talk about "racial gang war" we are talking about neighborhood and war for corners and territories.Its about who controls what and where.Check the black and hispanic gangs territories in 80's, 90's, 00's and 12-13's and you will see what i am talking about.Check the murder rates also and the racially motivated gang murder rates and come back,hopefully a little better informed, next time.

More of your absurd hatefulness.

Rather than addressing the evidence and arguments I present, you bring up stuff about the 1990's. Notice fewer deaths, even though the population is growing?
That's because even if there was a war, it's clearly over long ago.

Remember your words - where you ignore the obvious fact that Jewish people (e.g. Albert Einstein) represent <1% of all people, but hold >20% of all Nobel prizes, and even more in Science. Your reply continues this fine tradition. Remember your words where you deny the jewish participation in science and even your common sense because you are blinded by hate:

अवतरण:

You are a zionist jewish american law student focused on civics or some shit, who enjoy playing with words because thats what he was taught to do.The most useless,bullshiting,wordtwisting,corrupted proffesion.In practice thats what you been taught and trained to do.Twist words,use them in your advantage and lie. Go become a great lawyer,protect the goverment,the church,the elite or some murderers, i dont care.Just shut it about scientists, because i am very well aware why you do this.Scientists always threatened your kind and were always hunted down and controlled, either through money and bribes or intimidation.But none of the Jewish controlled media in America, ever said a damn thing about the cases of scientists being attacked,their laboratories trashed and even murdered, cause they wanted to share their inventions and knowledge with the people.

As a refresher, I have been 'promoted' from 'zionist jewish american law student focused on civics or some shit' to 'small kid'.

I have never been a member of a street gang - does this mean I am unable to examine the net effect of their murders? Do you claim your expertise based on your street gang membership?
You have CLEARLY never lived in Detroit OR Los Angeles - does this mean you are unable to discuss the matter? I have lived in both places (as well as others) not that this is relevant.
Regarding VICE: Apparently I have commited the 'sin' of bringing to light neo-nazis in a forum WHERE THE THIRD WORD is NAZIISM.

Even the most basic search for evidence (which is what I did) would lead you to believe that obesity or automobiles are responsible for WAAY more American deaths.

Now, a former 'zionist jewish american law student focused on civics or some shit turned small kid hasn't even needed to turn to your execrable evidence to refute your arguments. You argued yourself out of credible existence, again, and here's why:

You claim that my presumed lack of membership in a Street Gang, and my presumed youth and basement dwelling (instead of law-studenting), and lack of 'real knowledge' of LA and Detroit remove even the possibility of me being able to speak on the subject.

You are qualified, however, to speak on the subject because you *have friends in LA*.

I contrasted:
- Detroit, a 10 minute jog from an international border, with 5 times the murders 1/5 of the population of Los Angeles. More people are murdered in ALL of Spain in 2012 as were murdered in Detroit 2012.
- Los Angeles, a 3 hour drive on a VERY VERY good day from an international border, 5 times the population of Detroit, 1/5th of the murder rate.

And concluded that if there was a 'Race War' in Los Angeles, it must be fought with hugs and kisses AND/OR if the 'illegal immigrant' problem is the cause, Canadians are really violent people.

Now take a moment and read what I wrote, and how stupid you sound. If this was even the 10th time I had to point this out, I would still be considerate, courteous, honorable and polite. When you pulled the racist, antisemetic shit the third time, you went into the 'despise and discredit' pile.

you know absolutely shit about what you are talking about so stick to science and religion.I may havent lived there but apparently i know more than you.Can you tell me exactly where you lived in L.a.?And where you used to hang out?If you ever got out of the house and if you ever really lived there and if you werent 5 year old when you were living there, thus making your opinion carry zero wight.Not that it carries more now, but anyway.
We were talking about hispanic and black related homicides and in particular how all the mexicans flooding L.a. are taking control of black gang's territories, namely bloods and crips and started killing each other.Mostly hispanics attacking blacks and blacks trying to hit back.This had never happened before and its the first time black and hispanic gangs are organizing under their racial banners.Thats what we were talking about before, you were off-topic again, creating your own arguments and talking with yourself.

Anyway since you failed to adress my earlier posts,two in number, two posts full of arguments and information you didnt even touch, most likely because you are still searching the internet for a comeback, i will publicly declare you, a troll and a coward.