Post #508

Hitler who?

19th October 2004, mid-afternoon | Comments (49)

On IM:

I’ve just seen something called "The Nazism Exposed Project"
that’s, like, old news… surely?
I’ve heard of the nazis before
haven’t you?
they were quite well known here in Europe
how odd that they need ‘exposing’
oh, right… they sound vaguely familiar. ringing a few bells

Jump up to the start of the post

Comments (49)

Jump down to the comment form ↓

  1. Conan:

    Hitler? Wasn't he the leader of the runners-up in World War II?

    Posted 16 minutes after the fact
  2. Andrew Krespanis:

    Don't you guys get the 'History Channel' on cable? Over here we call it the 'Hitler Channel', just because he's almost their only topic.

    Posted 35 minutes after the fact
    Inspired: ↓ Sil
  3. David Barrett:

    They've been made obsolete by the Communists (I mean, let's face it... there ain't no party like a Bolshevik party).

    I think it's just a Nazi plot to try and drum up support. At least it's an ethos, though.

    Posted 40 minutes after the fact
  4. Jeff:

    I feel bad for Ethan.
    I don't want to make fun of him, but really, where did he go to school?

    Now I feel bad... sorry.

    Posted 1 hour, 2 minutes after the fact
  5. Mary:

    Keywords being "were known" and "old news". Hitler may be dead but people still practice Nazism ( Last I heard prejudice was still alive and kicking everywhere. :(

    Unless this was supposed to be funny -- then I don't get the joke.

    Posted 1 hour, 56 minutes after the fact
  6. Dante Evans:

    What was Hitler's last name?

    They asked this question on Street Smarts and one guy said he was like Cher, in that he had no last time. Americans are *so* daft.

    Fascism is, like, so 1940s. Communism is cool now. Communism doesn't really treat a certain race as scapegoats. Under Nazism, die juden were blamed for everything. Under communisn, everyone gets blamed for everything!

    In Soviet Russia, Government comments about you!

    Posted 2 hours, 15 minutes after the fact
  7. Dante Evans:

    Oh, looks like it's raining in Dorset as well. That was some storm today.

    Posted 2 hours, 16 minutes after the fact
  8. Jack:

    Dunstan, it won't be long before Google declares you as the no. 1 page on the topic of Hitler and the neo-nazi's start commenting here.

    Oh my, what a Pandora's box.

    Posted 3 hours, 53 minutes after the fact
  9. Ethan:

    [after a string of racist jokes to the German guests]

    Basil: Is something wrong?
    German Guest: Will you please stop talking about the war?
    Basil: Me? You started it!
    German Guest: We did *not* start it!
    Basil: Yes, you did! You invaded Poland!

    Posted 4 hours, 10 minutes after the fact
    Inspired: ↓ Rob Mientjes
  10. Rob Mientjes:

    That's probably one of the best jokes by John Cleese on screen.

    But Ethan, do you have any clue what he's talking about? :P

    Posted 5 hours, 58 minutes after the fact
    Inspired by: ↑ Ethan
  11. Sil:

    Not only do we in the UK get the Nazi^H^H^H^H History Channel; but we also get UK Nazi^H^H^H^H History, which is all very much the same thing.
    For a six-year period, there is a _lot_ of history in WWII. Of course, there's that much history in _any_ six-year period, it's just that most don't get the kind of close focus that the Second World War did.

    Posted 6 hours, 50 minutes after the fact
    Inspired by: ↑ Andrew Krespanis
  12. Pascal:

    Speaking of films.

    The whole "Hitler here", "Nazi there" craze which is currently going down here in continental Europe is because of this (IMHO) boring film called "Der Untergang"

    Speaking of conversation with "Ze Germans".

    One of my best friends is German (me being Swiss). I really don't know why, but he does not like being referred to as "World Wars Loser", where it is important to the stress "WarS". They lost both...

    Posted 7 hours, 32 minutes after the fact
  13. Mishka:

    Being Polish, I have found this rather amusing. :)

    Posted 7 hours, 58 minutes after the fact
  14. Jog:

    Well, I am German. And we have these kind of show on tv as well (and believe me, we know our history pretty well, as it's the main subject in school every second year). I guess we have to watch them, so we never forget what has happened and to avoid that it happens again.

    That's ok for me and I have arranged myself living with the - what I call it - big German guilt.

    Interesting though, that we - Germans - are reminded of that subject over and over again. Countless times in school and anytime later, while being in the US as an exchange-student the Vietnam-war was kind a left out in history class.

    But to come to my point. I did understand Ethan's "oh, right… they sound vaguely familiar. ringing a few bells" that way:

    _. Hitler invaded Poland, making up some lies. (Iraq-war II)
    _. Hitler wanted to make the world better. (get rid of Saddam)
    _. Hitler did not care about the Geneva Convention. (Guantanamo)

    So we all shall never forget, what has happened in Germany, it shall never happen again.

    @Pascal: I did not know that Swiss people have an opinion at all? ;-)

    Posted 9 hours, 54 minutes after the fact
    Inspired: ↓ Aleksandar, ↓ Pascal, ↓ David Barrett, ↓ David Barrett
  15. Aleksandar:

    Hmm...being Serbian, I can add some thoughts like Jopg's.
    - use leader & co. (Milosevic) to demonise the entire nation (Serbs)
    - stage the excuse to attack with a lie (village of Racak)
    - have no clue what to do when yesterday's good guys turn up not so good (

    I watched Band of Brothers recently, on DVD. The episode 9 is the one when Easy Company encounters one of the killing camps (btw, man carrying the elder is speaking Serbian). At the beginning of the episode, one of the American captains enters the house of the German high officer, and passes by his wife. He looks at him like he is a mere nuisance, like he is a bug. After a while, there is a line that "Germans claim they did not know what about the camp". After the entire city is forced to clean up the bodies there, the same captain sees the same lady. She has an entirely different look in her eyes, full of shame.

    I think those two expressions in the woman's eyes are one of the highlights of the BoB. It tells everything about the war, with no words at all. You need to be slapped hard in the face, to realize.

    Posted 11 hours, 1 minute after the fact
    Inspired by: ↑ Jog
  16. Pascal:

    @Jog. Touché.

    Posted 11 hours, 24 minutes after the fact
    Inspired by: ↑ Jog
  17. Mishka:

    I say bring back communism. Did I even spell that right?

    Posted 11 hours, 29 minutes after the fact
  18. David Barrett:

    Of course Hitler didn't care about the Geneva convention. It was only adopted in 1949, coming into force in 1950.

    The guy did a lot of horrendous things, but he can't be blamed for not following a treaty that did not then exist.

    Posted 11 hours, 48 minutes after the fact
    Inspired by: ↑ Jog
    Inspired: ↓ David Barrett, ↓ Jog
  19. David Barrett:

    Actually Jog, that reminds me.

    People are far too quick to compare subsequent wars to World War II, but it's usually not a good idea. Comparing the current campaign in Iraq to WW2 doesn't work, unless you get rid of so much of those troublesome details that it is reduced to some generic conflict.

    Posted 11 hours, 59 minutes after the fact
    Inspired by: ↑ Jog, ↑ David Barrett
    Inspired: ↓ Jog
  20. Jog:

    Well, I am sorry if I missunderstood something, but the Geneva_Conventions ( ) was original issued in 1864. Is that wrong?

    Posted 12 hours, 3 minutes after the fact
    Inspired by: ↑ David Barrett
    Inspired: ↓ David Barrett
  21. David Barrett:

    No, you appear to be right. My bad.

    Posted 12 hours, 12 minutes after the fact
    Inspired by: ↑ Jog
  22. Andy Budd:

    German Chap I believe. Very popular amongst American industrialist such as Henry Ford in the early 20's.

    Posted 12 hours, 32 minutes after the fact
  23. Jog:

    Sorry David,

    but I do not understand, why I should not point out these comparisons. In terms of "learning from history" we all should be concered what is going on and if bad things are about to be repeated.

    Maybe this is too pathetic, but I am agressive if I wonder why 50% of American consider to re-elect a president who declared war on a country (while most other nations did not want that war) and afterwards we all find out that the reasons for the war were just made up? Is it a bad thing to wonder why Clinton was nearly kicked out of office, because he lied about having sex with some chick, while Bush is about to be re-elected after lying about a war-reason (in which so many people died). When Hitler gained his power, most people just did not care what was going on, like most people do not care today. I rather compare now and find out that I am wrong (and maybe make a fool out of myself) than just don't caring at all.

    It does not work that on one hand I am supposed to watch exactly what I do and how I act as a Germany because of our German history ('my German guilt') and on the other hand I shall not compare the past with the present.

    [I hope I expressed myself in an understandable way, it's not easy to write things that come from the heart in a foreign language.]

    Posted 12 hours, 33 minutes after the fact
    Inspired by: ↑ David Barrett
    Inspired: ↓ Christian, ↓ Mr Ripley, ↓ David Barrett
  24. Christian:

    As a side note, only about 50% of eligible voters actually vote over here and since only about 50% of voters vote Republican, its more like 25% of the eligible voters that like war-mongering presidents. As a percentage of total population (including kids, etc) its more like 18%. Then there are the undocumented immigrants, etc. Kind of scary really.

    Posted 17 hours, 58 minutes after the fact
    Inspired by: ↑ Jog
  25. Trent:

    Some countries were against the war because they thought it was wrong, others had some secrets to hide:

    Read the section about oil vouchers two and three questions down.

    Posted 18 hours, 55 minutes after the fact
    Inspired: ↓ Mr Ripley
  26. Mr Ripley:

    Trent : Oh god not again with that pathetic "oil voucher" stuff.

    There direct from the article : "U.S. report as potential beneficiaries of the practice, which was not necessarily illegal." Keyword : "potential, not necessarily illegal"

    You see Iraq had alot of exterior debt ( still does ), plus they had to pay a debt to kuwait for invading them, it tried to work around those CRUSHING fees to survive. Keep in mind world war 2 started because the world made the mistake to try to crush germany's economy with fee and debts that had more to do with revenge.

    These kind of deal happen all the time, china own 12-20% of the USA public debt, essentially you are funding a communism party, it's illegal according to US laws, but then again nobody else will lend you money. Saudi Arabia funded terrorism but you still accept their money when they buy US debts.

    Jog: You seems to underestimate the power of the american media brain-washing. For exemple, we all know about the bad thing Saddam Hussein did, but a little less about the fact that Saddam Hussein let women divorce, let women have jobs, had laws against musulman honor crime ( when a men kill or torture is wife because she hurt his honor ). These are right that doesn't exist in most musulman countries like Saudi Arabia, Part of india, Iran. It's like Hitler and the effect he had on companies like BMW, Mercedes-Benz, BASF etc. People just don't want to remember.

    In the USA it's all about good news and good memories. Just do a quick survey about how many american know that Canada burnt the White House and the Capitol ( well pretty much washington D.C. has a whole ). You'll be amazed. They remember the Alamo thought.

    Posted 1 day after the fact
    Inspired by: ↑ Jog, ↑ Trent
    Inspired: ↓ Trent
  27. Peter Eliasson:

    Well, being Swedish, I have no opinion at all in this matter ;-)

    Posted 1 day, 10 hours after the fact
  28. Dirk:

    Speaking of Hitler, this reminds me of the not-so-good-but-at-least-funny entry in the IMDb about Hitler (

    Sometimes Credited As:
    Der Führer

    I find this "credited as" a little bit of bad taste.

    Posted 1 day, 10 hours after the fact
  29. Tom:


    You judging Americans by their responses on "Street Smarts" is about as silly as me judging you for actually watching such an idiotic show.

    I imagine you get my point :)


    Posted 1 day, 14 hours after the fact
    Inspired: ↓ Seth Thomas Rasmussen
  30. Seth Thomas Rasmussen:

    Let's not forget who allows our airwaves to be permeated with shit like Street Smarts, though...

    *cough* WE, THE PEOPLE... *cough*

    Well... *you* the people. I gave up on TV a long time ago.

    Posted 1 day, 15 hours after the fact
    Inspired by: ↑ Tom
    Inspired: ↓ Tom
  31. Tom:

    Seth said "
    Let's not forget who allows our airwaves to be permeated with shit like Street Smarts, though...

    *cough* WE, THE PEOPLE... *cough*

    Well... *you* the people. I gave up on TV a long time ago.

    I'd hardly consider the audience of ANY show of that caliber representative of the American people. Take Jerry Springer as an example as well. Have you ever seen some of these goofy shows coming out of the Orient? Yet I wouldn't judge them by those shows either.

    It certainly says something about certain segments of a society, but not about the society as a whole, I don't think.

    And lets face it the bottom line is money, always will be. The show makes money, it stays on.

    And for the record, I don't watch any of the crap either! :)


    Posted 1 day, 15 hours after the fact
    Inspired by: ↑ Seth Thomas Rasmussen
  32. Trent:

    Mr Ripley. You make some good points, but I think you're a little misguided on the American media. Yes, they can be very powerful in brainwashing. There's no doubt about that. As far as being all good news and memories, how do you explain the fact that when I turn on the nightly news an Iraq update is given with an updated casualty count within the first five minutes? New details of roadside bombs and attacks on supply lines and ambushes on coalition troops and car bombs are all readily dished out to the public. They very rarely give success stories of what's happening. Right now as it's happening, it's tough to find the good news. Perhaps in 20-25 years the fully story will be written. Good and bad.

    Posted 1 day, 16 hours after the fact
    Inspired by: ↑ Mr Ripley
    Inspired: ↓ Mr Ripley
  33. Mr Ripley:

    Trent : That is nothing, you see you are totally missing the point of the war, which is now to free the iraqui civilians from the oppressive Saddam Hussein ( as opposed to WMD, terrorist link or whatever ). How many iraqui civilians these "news" show you? Any casualties? Thanks for the memory hole you are able to see some ( warning, extremely graphic ) :

    We always hold the germans accountable for not stopping Hitler with the atrocities he committed on Jews, we can't imagine how they couldn't know about the extermination camp. Just look at the placement of those camp, most where in Poland, they never saw them, and germans media never talked about them. Now most americans don't understand why iraquis are mad about the US, but they never show WHY, they label them "terrorist" and kill them in droves. Is Iraq in civil war or taking over by terrorist? Do you know? You know how many american soldier, but what about iraqui civilians? If you were invaded by a countries and they kill, let says 30 000 of your fellow citizen, are you willing to fight to drive them off your land? Does that make you a terrorist?

    To answer your questions, anyone can tell you that a general can't lies about casualties. Ever. For the simple reason that we have more respect for the soldiers then the generals. If they were overlooking those US army casualties, you'll be seeing veterans revolting everywhere. All they can do is embellish their deaths, they died for freedom, they defended their country etc. Nazi Germany talked about their east front defeat, the US talked about Pearl Harbor, even if those defeat were the result of arrogance by the commanding generals.

    Posted 1 day, 22 hours after the fact
    Inspired by: ↑ Trent
    Inspired: ↓ Trent
  34. David Barrett:

    Hi Jog,

    I agree with the sentiment you expressed in your last post, I just don't think that the latest Gulf War can be compared to World War II. They are too different.

    I think it's far too easy to compare two wars by brushing over the specifics. We kid ourselves into believing we understand. World War II had a much more complex start than you let on.

    It also makes it easy to compare Bush to Hitler, which I don't think is fair. Just because both may have been bad, doesn't mean they are the same bad.

    Posted 1 day, 22 hours after the fact
    Inspired by: ↑ Jog
    Inspired: ↓ Martin
  35. Martin:

    I just wanted to praise this blog, it's so beautiful, its articles are really good and it's a place to discuss important topics without ending in a flame. Dunstan, (and of course all of the "commenters" ;) keep up the good work!

    Having said this, I also think that you may not compare George W. with Hitler and the Nazis across the board. But all of them instrumentalize(d) lifes of human beings for simple interests. The Nazi's intention was to rule the world, whereas George W. started the war for economical and personal interests. Of course he also wanted to save the world, but he didn't succeeded in the Afghanistan War, so he knew that he wouldn't succeed in Iraq either.

    Another example is the Republican patriotism. I don't know how all of the Americans practice this patriotism since I don't live there but I know that the Republicans propagate it so much. They talk about "The god's own country" and even the NBA calls its champion the "World Champion". The Nazis thought that their race would be the best and which had to rule the world. Their methods are not comparable to each other but there are the same basics...

    Posted 1 day, 23 hours after the fact
    Inspired by: ↑ David Barrett
  36. Trent:

    Mr. Ripley, please don't lecture me on the point of the war. I get it. I know that the point is now to free the Iraquis and help them rebuild their nation. I've grown up in an Army household since my father is a member of the Army/National Guard. His unit is scheduled to head over to the middle east sometime early next year. Yes, of course the news sources inform about the civilian casualties. They give wounded and dead counts, but they don't show the graphic pictures or footage like Al Jazeera is all too eager to show. My point was that they always show the negatives of war, which there are many, but never the positives. War is an ugly, ugly thing, and it would be nice to hear both sides. I heard last week that there are now over 100 free newspapers circulating in Iraq. How many existed before when Saddam was ruling? Zero.

    I can see why the Iraquis are angry at the US. I probably would be, too. We are an occupying force that is unwanted. But do you honestly believe the US and other troops are specifically targeting the civilian population? We are working with them and not against them. We need to get to a point where the Iraquis can defend themselves and then the occupying force won't be needed.

    Comparing Bush to Hitler is absolutely, 100% not fair.

    Posted 2 days after the fact
    Inspired by: ↑ Mr Ripley
    Inspired: ↓ Mr Ripley
  37. Mr Ripley:

    Trent, that's funny, I just went to see and Foxnews and I didn't saw iraqis civilians casualties count. Probably because there are none that exist, the closest we get it's an loose estimate.

    Like General Tommy Franks said : "We don't do body count". But I can see the name and picture of every US army servicemen killed in the conflict.

    You need to distance yourself from politic, I am not an american, I don't care about republican, democrat. Hell if you guys want to send you soldiers and money ( 4 billions a month ) to fight a war, I seriously don't care or could do anything about it. What Jog and I are trying to say is that we should learn from the past to make sure we don't do the same mistake today.

    For exemple, I have a complete belief that if during world war 2, the german population would have been aware of the atrocities committed in extermination camp, the nazi movement would have grinded to a halt. All the the germans population saw was victory for their country, they saw money made by their company ( BMW, Mercedes, BASF etc ), they saw a powerful and strong future. They never saw or made fully aware of the terrible toll Jews, Polish, Russians had to pay. Now lets forward to nowaday. You say that al-jazeera show civilians casualty and you aren't happy. This is war. This is the toll the iraqis pays.

    You see I have a complete belief that if I showed americans the pictures of these iraqi casualties, this war would grind to a halt. Like vietnam did. Call me naïve if you must, but I trust commonsense to prevail.

    If I can show you the picture of all the iraqis civilian casualties, and you can look in my eyes and tells me, "this is worth it", then that is your decision and I will respect it. But you at least would have seen the real picture.

    So the United States invaded iraq for free newspaper ( free being an odd word since they are funded through the US reconstruction fund ). What about China? Oh right they are the country that own the most US public debts.

    I don't think we are comparing Bush and Hitler, we are comparing war. I don't understand why no-one want to learn from the past. Didn't you learn from your past experience when you were younger?

    I think now, germans feel to much guilt over world war 2, because we keep showing them atrocities through the history channel, but on the otherside americans doesn't have enough guilt for what they've done, because it's not shown to them. Most American have actually no problem about having dropped nuclear bomb on japan, even if they targeted civilians, but when al-quaeda did the same, you called them coward?

    You can forgot the past, but it will always haunt you.

    Hopefully you understand my point.

    Posted 2 days, 1 hour after the fact
    Inspired by: ↑ Trent
    Inspired: ↓ David Barrett, ↓ Jog, ↓ Trent
  38. David Barrett:

    I'd just like to note that the German populace *did* know about the concentration camps, particularly those that lived nearby. Parents used to threaten to send their children there if they misbehaved.

    Now, I doubt these parents were being serious; but they knew.

    I've been to two concentration camps: Dachau in Germany and Auschwitz in Poland. I'm just repeating what the guide in Dachau told our tour group.

    They may not have known every single detail, but they knew enough.

    Posted 2 days, 6 hours after the fact
    Inspired by: ↑ Mr Ripley
    Inspired: ↓ Mr Ripley, ↓ Jog
  39. Mr Ripley:

    True, but then again, even the allies didn't try once to liberate them ( with bombing, targeted attack etc, just look at how much they tried to shut down heavy water production ), I wasn't there ( or born ) to make a judgement, I just use the past half century of apologies from the germans and their deep shame of it all has a sign that not all germans were suprematist nazis.

    I think it's a fair assessment that most of it was shrouded in secrecy to the vast majority of the population. But then again we'll never know for sure, I just prefer to think not all germans wanted to see Jewish tortured, or americans want to see iraqis dead. Guess I am one of those optimist kind. I see the point in war, like I see the point in a police force and laws, I just try to figure out when it should end, I am also concerned about atrocities made in the name of war by only a few and gets painted on the whole population.

    Namely I don't think germans are sadistic bastard, or that american are warmongering, just that they sadly elected wrong people that tricked them. Again, I think people should try to learn from past mistake.

    Posted 2 days, 7 hours after the fact
    Inspired by: ↑ David Barrett
  40. Jog:


    I am with you on this one. Sure they knew. Not from the very beginning, not every single detail, but THEY KNEW it. No doubt.

    But here I am back with my stupid comparison, you don't like:

    American voters DO KNOW that the Bush administration lied about the war. And still about 50% of them conder voting Bush again. They are aware of the fact, that something went extremly wrong, but hey, wasn't that bad, was it?

    Posted 2 days, 7 hours after the fact
    Inspired by: ↑ Mr Ripley, ↑ David Barrett
  41. Christian:

    Not to be pushy Jog but again 50% of the population does not support Bush. The population of the US is about 237 million, in 2000 50 million people voted for Bush, that's about 18%. Our country unfortunately is driven much more by apathy and ignorance then political idealism. In addition, thanks to our wonderful two party system, we are given a choice of W and Kerry both of whom support "staying the course" in Iraq. The political climate this year is such that a protest vote for a candidate that truly wants to change the direction of the country like Ralph Nader or Al Sharpton is virtually impossible.

    Posted 2 days, 13 hours after the fact
  42. Dan Herman:

    First of all I don't believe 50% of Americans support George Bush. Possibly 50% of the voting population. I for one will be trying my best to vote that man out of office.

    Secondly, there is no comparison between Iraq and WWII. Americans are not systematically killing 6 million people. Innocent civilians are dying in Iraq, but the intent is not there. They are not gathering people together and intentionally killing them. There is a HUGE difference there.

    I do believe that America should not be over there in Iraq and that many Americans are clueless as to the suffering of the Iraqi people, but the republicans here are running a campaign of fear. Literally stating that a vote for Kerry will bring more terrorism to us. Obviously, It's complete nonsense. Their fear campaign has turned the "soccer-mom" voter into the "security-mom" and all that money they're throwing into the campaign is working.

    Posted 2 days, 14 hours after the fact
    Inspired: ↓ David Barrett
  43. David Barrett:

    "Their fear campaign has turned the "soccer-mom" voter into the "security-mom" and all that money they're throwing into the campaign is working."

    Which is ironic, as voting for Bush makes it more likely that your children will be sent off to die in a war.

    Posted 2 days, 15 hours after the fact
    Inspired by: ↑ Dan Herman
  44. Trent:

    Mr. Ripley, I do understand your point and I want to commend and thank you for keeping this an intelligent discussion and not resorting to a flame war.

    The reason the exact count of soldiers deaths are known and civilian casualties are unknown is simple. The military knows exactly who is in every battalion, so they know exactly who gets wounded and who gets killed. With the civilian populous in Iraq, it's much more difficult. Different sources give different counts. Do you expect the military to pause operations during the war to do body counts? That's just not feasible. Does that mean civilian casualties aren't as important as soldier casualties? ABSOLUTELY NOT. Quite the contrary, as a matter of fact. It's just tough to count when you have contradicting numbers and can't do the count yourself. This all gets even more blurry since it's hard to tell the enemy from an innocent civilian. There are stories of "civilians" walking up to soldiers asking for help and then pulling out a gun. You also have to take into account all sources of civilian deaths (Roadside bombs, airstrikes, suicide bombs, etc). Even the website is giving a 2,000 count range.

    The US didn't invade Iraq for free newspapers. You know that. And by free, I meant the people write whatever they want, not what Saddam allowed. I was just trying to give an example of a positive that has come from all of this. I'm sure there are many more, we just don't hear about them.

    We should learn from the past, there's no doubt about that, but we need to make sure we're applying the right lesson to the right situation.

    Posted 2 days, 15 hours after the fact
    Inspired by: ↑ Mr Ripley
    Inspired: ↓ Mr Ripley
  45. Mr Ripley:

    Trent, of course I do understand keeping count of civilians casualty is difficult. It's easy if you find of civilians with a NATO round in is head, but if a civilians die of cholera because the water pumping station has been bombed, the line get really blurry. Either way, you'll never heard about either of them.

    The problem is I don't know why exactly Iraq was invaded, sure Saddam was bad, but did the Iraqi really had the desire to see him go? Sure people couldn't vote, but women can't vote in Saudi Arabia either. Sure he murdered alot of Kurds, but do iraqis want Kurds? Kurds still use stoning to punish women. I am not saying Saddam was an angel, but has far as a muslim leader he was pretty modern, no wonder al-qaeda never wanted to ally with him. I have a deep concern that iraq could possibly go back on rights it allowed to it's citizen, has you know Shiite are pretty radical, just look at Al-Sadr. Now what happens if the Shiite majority elect a radical against right for women leader? Will the US intervene? They are the majority afterall.

    Is it wise to take out a country leader if their is not even a civil war or some kind of movement to overthrow him?

    Everytime the USA tried to replace a country leader, the population always lost. Think about Iran, Honduras, Guatemala, Chile. Why would this time be better? God you put Pinochet in power! This guy put 250 000 people in concentration camp.

    I think the only time the USA made any success at driving off a political leader was with Australia in 1975, when you pressured the UK to remove the democratically elected Gough Whitlam because he pulled off of vietnam and denounced the atrocities of Hanoi which is now proved. It was successful because no civilians died that time.

    See even modern history is repeating itself.

    For other who think that germans knew about everything happening in concentration camp. Do you know what is happening in Guantanamo? If they were boiling them to death how would you know? And this 2004. Tricking people is really easy.

    Posted 3 days after the fact
    Inspired by: ↑ Trent
  46. Jim:

    surely the nazi'zm exposed thing is about the current wave of right wing fascism that appears to be sweeping europe.

    Posted 1 week, 1 day after the fact
    Inspired: ↓ Dunstan
  47. Dunstan:

    It is. I was joking :o)

    Posted 1 week, 1 day after the fact
    Inspired by: ↑ Jim
  48. Jim:

    which just go's to show not many people who replied to this post read the original.


    Posted 1 week, 1 day after the fact
  49. Ben:

    I don't get it

    Posted 1 week, 6 days after the fact

Jump up to the start of the post

Add your comment

I'm sorry, but comments can no longer be posted to this blog.