Why?! Why do so many morons worship the Third Reich?

HemlockGrey · Post by **HemlockGrey** » 2002-10-20 12:47pm

Oh and he happend to be a Creationist

WTF? Why does that matter? If he doesn't force his beliefs on the rest of the nation, why should you give a shit if he's a creationist or not?

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2002-10-20 12:49pm

Cyril wrote:
Oh and he happend to be a Creationist
WTF? Why does that matter? If he doesn't force his beliefs on the rest of the nation, why should you give a shit if he's a creationist or not?

Because it means he's a moron, just as bad as Bushie-boy. Which sort of negates some of the "Gore side is smarter" argument.

Illuminatus Primus · Post by **Illuminatus Primus** » 2002-10-20 12:49pm

Bean's hit it on the head. The last American Presidential election was total bullshit. All of it was moronic. I'm pro-Bush.......when Gore is the other person on the card.

Liberman's a fundie maniac who likes to pretend the Founding Fathers were also fundie idiots and would like to censure even more of television, and was apparently prompted to by "Married With Children."

HemlockGrey · Post by **HemlockGrey** » 2002-10-20 12:51pm

Because it means he's a moron, just as bad as Bushie-boy. Which sort of negates some of the "Gore side is smarter" argument.

And? What sort of Creationist is he? Is he a Young Earth/Seven Days creationist? Or does he simply believe in God? If we go by the latter, then I am by definetion a fundie moron.

And, if he's a fucking moron when it comes to science, so what? He can still be a good politician, and if he doesn't try to make us all believe that YECism is the One True Religion, who cares?

HemlockGrey · Post by **HemlockGrey** » 2002-10-20 12:52pm

Liberman's a fundie maniac

Ah, but he's a Jewish fundie maniac, and the Law of Political Correctness means you are a racist Nazi bigot right now.

Post by **Mr Bean** » 2002-10-20 01:12pm

Is he a Young Earth/Seven Days creationist?

Yes Young Earth, Adam and Eve lived with "Dragons" quote unquote(You know what big Reptillian millions of year old fokes I'm refering to)

He DEFINED Fundmentlistism

Cpt_Frank · Post by **Cpt_Frank** » 2002-10-20 01:13pm

And? What sort of Creationist is he? Is he a Young Earth/Seven Days creationist? Or does he simply believe in God? If we go by the latter, then I am by definetion a fundie moron.

please note that believing in god does not mean believing in/supporting creationism.

HemlockGrey · Post by **HemlockGrey** » 2002-10-20 01:31pm

Yes Young Earth, Adam and Eve lived with "Dragons" quote unquote(You know what big Reptillian millions of year old fokes I'm refering to)

He DEFINED Fundmentlistism

Wow, really? I didn't know that.

Not to be asinine or anything, but could you provide sources?

Post by **Steve** » 2002-10-20 02:23pm

Um... Mike.... Hitler wasn't elected.

He was appointed Chancellor by political maneuvering in the Reichstag by non-Nazi right-wingers who believed they could control him.

He, after all, lost the general Presidential election to Hindenburg in '32.

Not that the German people didn't let him lead them around by the nose once he got into power. And there is evidence that they generally used the system to achieve their own wants, and quickly jumped on the bandwagon (With some holdouts).

Post by **Mr Bean** » 2002-10-20 02:29pm

Not to be asinine or anything, but could you provide sources?

Nothing online off the top of my head, its to far back and he's been out of the news so long most of the major sites don't keep 2-3 year old stories, However Time I belive June 99's Time had a indepth on him

Post by **Steve** » 2002-10-20 02:50pm

MKSheppard wrote:
Steve wrote:Lee may have been a good tactician, but his approach, that of a Gentleman, was more costly in human life than Sherman's destruction of Southern property. Sherman identified the key weakness of the South and exploited it to it's maximum effect. Thank God for that.
You conviently forget about Kerosene Billy's army of "bummers" who
rampaged all over Georgia like a pack of drunken Red Army
soldiers in 1945....

Actually, I don't, and their conduct in Georgia was far more civilized than the Red Army's conduct of '45.

I'm actually quite happy that his bummers were so excellent at their jobs, and think of them as they are: noble avengers who brought the terror and horror of war to the doorsteps of the planters and matrons that had, for nearly four years, promoted the slaughter of thousands of Americans on faraway battle fields so that they could keep their obscene wealth and the one thing that kept their society going (and stagnant): slaves.

All hail Sherman and his glorious march with the Army of the West!

Iceberg · Post by **Iceberg** » 2002-10-20 03:02pm

I wouldn't go as far as Steve here, but the results speak for themselves:

Because of Sherman's March to the Sea, no American has since risen up in revolt against the will of the Nation, knowing that only death and destruction will ride in the wake of such a rebellion.

phongn · Post by **phongn** » 2002-10-20 06:52pm

I'm just going to step in a bit and defend Eisenhower. While (with the clarity of hindsight) he should have muzzled Montgomery and let Patton loose, supplying him with enough to assist in a rapid advance, it was untenable to the political climate.

Simply put, Eisenhower could not sack Monty without undue consequences - the UK would not have stood to have their 'hero' of North Africa sacked. In the political fight, I would argue that Churchill and FDR would have been forced to keep Monty in command.

Politics, as usual, got in the way of military expediency and cannot be ignored.

Post by **Steve** » 2002-10-20 10:45pm

phongn wrote:I'm just going to step in a bit and defend Eisenhower. While (with the clarity of hindsight) he should have muzzled Montgomery and let Patton loose, supplying him with enough to assist in a rapid advance, it was untenable to the political climate.

Simply put, Eisenhower could not sack Monty without undue consequences - the UK would not have stood to have their 'hero' of North Africa sacked. In the political fight, I would argue that Churchill and FDR would have been forced to keep Monty in command.

Politics, as usual, got in the way of military expediency and cannot be ignored.

Oh, don't sack him.... just don't be grossly biased in his favor.

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2002-10-20 11:19pm

"We must act with vindictive earnestness against the Sioux, even to their extermination, men, women and children."

Just a quote from the evil maniac who you seem to have made into a hero here. He also coined the phrase "final solution," when referring to the Indians, a phrase echoed by Hitler during the next century.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2002-10-20 11:24pm

Durran Korr wrote:"We must act with vindictive earnestness against the Sioux, even to their extermination, men, women and children."

Just a quote from the evil maniac who you seem to have made into a hero here. He also coined the phrase "final solution," when referring to the Indians, a phrase echoed by Hitler during the next century.

Hero worship of mass-murderers is nothing new in America; you still celebrate Genocidal Mass-Murderer Day (erm ... Columbus Day).

MKSheppard · Post by **MKSheppard** » 2002-10-20 11:51pm

Darth Wong wrote: Hero worship of mass-murderers is nothing new in America; you still celebrate Genocidal Mass-Murderer Day (erm ... Columbus Day).

I don't see any damn indians sailing across the fucking atlantic when the
prevailing view at the time was that you'd sail off the fucking edge of the
earth to your horrible doom....

It was Europeans alone who had the balls to challenge the prevailing view
of the world, while everyone else retreated into their own spheres of influence,
most notably the Chinese and Japanese....

Everyone else in the world was happy to retreat into pseudo-mysticism while
only Europeans were doing the AGE OF REASON, challenging the Christian
Church's view on things, and basically kicking ass and taking names....

How can you deny the Humanist legacy of the European Renaissance?

Howedar · Post by **Howedar** » 2002-10-21 01:00am

Darth Wong wrote:
Durran Korr wrote:"We must act with vindictive earnestness against the Sioux, even to their extermination, men, women and children."

Just a quote from the evil maniac who you seem to have made into a hero here. He also coined the phrase "final solution," when referring to the Indians, a phrase echoed by Hitler during the next century.
Hero worship of mass-murderers is nothing new in America; you still celebrate Genocidal Mass-Murderer Day (erm ... Columbus Day).

Never mind, of course, that Columbus did more than just introduce smallpox to the Americas. In addition, the accidental spreading of a disease is a bit of a stretch from "mass-murderer", don't you think?

Stuart Mackey · Post by **Stuart Mackey** » 2002-10-21 01:39am

Das Reich aside, would you like to pull your head out of slapper Patton's ass to concider things more objectivly? or is this just a troll for some personal amusement?

Post by **Edi** » 2002-10-21 07:58am

To get back on the topic of WW2 and the Third Reich, what do you think of its allies? I'd be particularly interested in how you people see Finland's part in the war. We allied with Germany, tied up huge Soviet forces, which enabled the Germans to wage war in the east far longer than they would have. We effectively secured them a lot of the Baltic Sea and bottled up the Russian Baltic Navy in Kronstadt (the parts of it that weren't sunk in minefields when they abandoned Tallinn).

It has to be said that alliance with Germany was the lesser of two evils (the other one being extermination by the Soviets or the Germans), because the Brits wouldn't have helped us against their Soviet allies unless we declared war on Germany, and all you have to do is look at the map to figure out what the answer to that equation would have been...

Edi

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2002-10-21 08:29am

MKSheppard wrote:
Darth Wong wrote: Hero worship of mass-murderers is nothing new in America; you still celebrate Genocidal Mass-Murderer Day (erm ... Columbus Day).
I don't see any damn indians sailing across the fucking atlantic when the
prevailing view at the time was that you'd sail off the fucking edge of the
earth to your horrible doom....

So it's OK to commit mass-murder if you're an explorer? How the fuck does that follow, Shep?

PS. And don't spew bullshit about their "humanist legacy". The Renaissance did not start until centuries after these fuckers made their trip.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2002-10-21 08:32am

Howedar wrote:
Darth Wong wrote:
Durran Korr wrote:"We must act with vindictive earnestness against the Sioux, even to their extermination, men, women and children."

Just a quote from the evil maniac who you seem to have made into a hero here. He also coined the phrase "final solution," when referring to the Indians, a phrase echoed by Hitler during the next century.
Hero worship of mass-murderers is nothing new in America; you still celebrate Genocidal Mass-Murderer Day (erm ... Columbus Day).
Never mind, of course, that Columbus did more than just introduce smallpox to the Americas. In addition, the accidental spreading of a disease is a bit of a stretch from "mass-murderer", don't you think?

Read your history books. Columbus massacred the natives the old-fashioned way; with knives and guns. At one point, his men rounded up pregnant women from local tribes, cut their bellies open, ripped out their unborn babies, and smashed their skulls in while the mothers bled to death, in order to show them who was boss. You really think all he did was introduce smallpox?

Post by **Mr Bean** » 2002-10-21 10:13am

It was Europeans alone who had the balls to challenge the prevailing view
of the world, while everyone else retreated into their own spheres of influence,
most notably the Chinese and Japanese....

How about the Good old Vikings? They sailed Accross, Found Greenland and Iceland(Simple but misleading names being a Viking Tradtion then Sailed West and Found Candia and named it "Newfoundland" which name stills sticks today and we have since found Viking Settements all up and down the Coast there even intruding as far as Maine

Post by **Steve** » 2002-10-21 11:39am

And yet, Sherman also supported aiding Native Americans in becoming yeomen and productive farmers. He believed that given the chance any of them could improve to what was then modern standards.

I'm not saying Sherman was perfect, neither was Patton (who at times could get too militaristic, such as his support for universal conscription in the US), but both men were exemplary commanders who imbued their men with moral imperative to destroy unjust societies while pursuing strategies that preserved life, and that is just what they did, not by brutal head-on assaults but by brilliant maneuver.

Their legacy is the South's inability to "rise again" and the destruction of the Third Reich in '45 instead of '46. Hell, if Patton had not been stopped a fifth time by Eisenhower, there's the possibility that Czechoslovakia would not have known over forty years of Communist dictatorship, and hundreds of Czech patriots would have been saved as Third Army troops joined in the liberation of Prague.

Post by **Steve** » 2002-10-21 11:44am

Darth Wong wrote:
Durran Korr wrote:"We must act with vindictive earnestness against the Sioux, even to their extermination, men, women and children."

Just a quote from the evil maniac who you seem to have made into a hero here. He also coined the phrase "final solution," when referring to the Indians, a phrase echoed by Hitler during the next century.
Hero worship of mass-murderers is nothing new in America; you still celebrate Genocidal Mass-Murderer Day (erm ... Columbus Day).

Columbus got good PR, like that damned poet who claimed he sailed despite being told the Earth "was flat". That kind of defiance to accepted knowledge, even if it was not true, appeals to people.

How about Francis Marion, the Swamp Fox of the Revolutionary War? Hailed as a hero, although he was known to rape his own female slaves and murder any NA he came across. Again, good historical PR.

It's a shame, sometimes, but when a society so widely accepts something like Columbus being a noble explorer, it becomes ingrained, and there's just too much momentum in favor of it to get society to change.