Unconditional surender - price to high ?

Okay, I see thread has gone two pager so let's start. But I would revert back for a moment

Forgot to mention. Why do you think Germany had criminals and France and Britain did not ? Germany and GB were at ods with each order for quite some time before the war broke out and it was only question when it will break out over dispute of colonies etc. Same thing as was the case between France, Spain and GB for past two centuries. And Germans in WW1 did not commit crimes out of proportion of their Ally and Russian counterparts. So why call them criminals ? Was Napoleon a criminal ? How about queen Victoria ?

Allies, more specifically USA did have detention camps for Japanese nationals. Not to mention USSR gulags where more people died than in Nazi camps. We can start google duel if you want but million here or there was not the point. MY point was that Nazis were and still are prosecuted while bomber "Haris" and such a likes (more importantly heads of GB and USA ) were not. Not only that they are heroes who brought peace and democracy to the world. And let here be no doubt that they are responsible for people who died in Bombing raids on Germany and Japan as well as deaths attributed to nuclear weapons only to mention some . So they killed millions of civilians ON PURPOSE to save on cost side of things and to spare lives of their soldiers. So usual perception is that Nazis were criminals (which they mostly were) but on the other side we had saints.

Arhh, no. Wrong interpretation of history on your part comrade. It was humiliation of Versailles provisions (which brought impossible war reparations and ceding western Prussia to Poland) what has caused Nazis to gain power in Germany.

Aha. And what are the conditions necessary for USA to enter a war ie. did Stalin behave differently than Hitler ?

And you still interpret it as it was addressed specifically to USA.

Am I seeing Nazis at work here or am I going blind ? You verified what I just claimed. GB and USA did not make their position much easier by eliminating Hitler out of equation. And this was foreseen by Churchill before WW2 ended.

Hmm, you have few points I'll give you that. But what happened to a principle that was war "against aggressive/militaristic nations" in the name of "democracy and peace" that you can hear all day long in the media ? Given what you said you can throw it into toilet when somebody mentions it again on this forum. Glad we settled this out.

I do because you for example BRNDIRT1 here says that Germans were the criminals while from your and above answers it is evident that everybody used the same means and policies and Hitler and Germans just ran out of luck.

Hey, I'll take that as an insult. Hitler and Himmler can burn in hell I am just surprised how mass media (mostly owned by one particular nation along with banking sector which caused your Great Depression-reloaded) can manipulate people's minds for so long.

Oh, and you present a chart ? Well, this chart presumes that Axis are responsible for Chinese deaths as well ? Or not ? I really can't tell...
Here is better link
File:World War II Casualties.svg - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
If you take out of equation Indonesia, India and China on one hand and combine Germany, Japan, Italy, Hungary and Romania than you come to a number comparable to that of USSR. Bet you didn't see it that way yet ha ?
And nice link with with comparisons of Japanese cities destroyed:
Japanese Cities
I'll try to find a link for comparison with German cities for your leisure.
Additionally you can't compare loss of German state of the art doctor/engineer to Russiam/Indian/Chinese peasants. It simply isn't realistic.

Not to say it wasn't but it is huge number nevertheless.

Jimmy, Jimmy do what you got to do. I answered you dillema above.

Ahh, thanks for elaborating that one for me.

My point I have addressed somewhere above which related to one tyrant except two.

I am sorry but I really fail to see your point. Mine is pretty clear and that is territorial conquest.

Now, now we shan't call name shall we ? USA aided UK for it's economic benefit and it represents indirect war provocation. If somebody was shipping Al-qaida or Talibans wouldn't USA consider it as a declaration of war ?

Not at all see chart above.

Do enlighten me, please ?

Sorry and at what point are we to dismiss plain geography facts ?

I believe we have digested unconditional surrender by now but policy of declaring of war and pointing out criminals is a bit unclear.

Not saying they would but let's face it every country would renounce Verssailes treaty.

Unfortunately true.

No ,no my dear fellow. France and GB declared war on Germany ! And USA jumped in to save GB ass which brought itself into trouble.

If you say so. But don't buy Audi/Mercedes/BMW again.

Ahh, Mr. Churchill very good point. Why don't you start with British invasion and occupation of world or the fact British invented concentration camps. You know from Australia to USA ?

This is distinction why I call Allied leaders criminals. When deciding to destroy Axis civilians to minimize their own military casualties they, in moral categories, sided with Hitler.

Hitler did the right thing by renouncing Versailles treaty and re-integrate west Prussia. All else was crazy. Period.

As I said in my book it was re-integration of west Prussia (where Polish authorities, mind you, committed considerable number of atrocities against Germans). Peralh Harbour is another ball game although Japan didn't have a choice because it was starved of oil by USA. Japan really didn't want war with USA but it was that or say goodbye to it's empire.

 

Big difference between a detention camp and a death camp.

Versaille wouldn't have been a humiliation if the surrender terms had been clear.

Quite clearly yes.

 

Yes

What you think the Axis powers weren't responsible for the deaths of their own citizens? They started the war. It was on their heads.

That was clear .... not.

You didn't include enough info for me to tell what you were talking about.

You are making up terms. Depending on what is being shippes such items may be contraband and certainly one could issue protest. Of course the shipping of material is not nearly as direct a provocation is attacking ships and supplying intel directly to a combatant.

They weren't criminals because they played by the rules. The Axis powers in a number of cases didn't.

Japan didn't have to attack China that's what started the conflict with the US. Just as Germany attacking Poland started the war in Europe.

 

There was a hole in the Allied armor and the Germans exploited it, in a weird way I guess because of the U-Boats we are sort of better off due to various increases in that field, most notably, knowing where they are. Unless your the Canadian Government of course.

 

About Bush sr:the costs of the war were heavy,thus the need to raise taxes,that would cost him the elections :remember what happened when he raised taxes :Clinton won .
About the reason for the second Gulf War ublic opinion wanted blood (=a culprit) and victory and Bush jr gave them both (probably Bush was also convinced that Sadam was behind 11-09:Saddam did all to convince the world that he was behind 11-09 ).
The fact is that the electors would not be satisfied with the hunt of the head of Al-Kaida (I can't remember his name :memory)and today,the US have still not captured him .
Another question:why was Saddam chosen as the culprit and not the ayatollahs ? Probably he was the weakest of both .
On WW II:the Soviets used political warfare :German generals asking the Germans to desert or surrender (if my memory does not fail:Bund Deutscher offiziere),why did the West not use same methods ?

 

Alright guys lets move on away from the Saddam discussion, and back to ww2.

 

What exactly justifies this cherry picking?

Woah. And you're telling me you aren't a nazi apologist, whilst spouting their old genocidal ubermensch nonsense? Well, excuse me if I think these mere subhumans have just as much right to live. What moral abyss do you come from?

The Axis had plenty of choices. They chose to cause the deaths of millions, often singling out the innocent specifically for their savagery, and they would have caused the deaths of many, many millions more if they were not stopped. They were punished for their crimes, but weighed against the enormity of the monstrous suffering they caused, what the Allies dealt with them was light, and relatively precisely targetted on the military than the civilians.

 

As we've been asked to get back to WWII I'll just note that most of what I snipped was opinion and not fact and some indeed appearst to be counter factual.

That's call propaganda and I believe the West used it as well.

 

I don't believe the West used it.
Paulus,von Seydlitz and others were asking the Germans to desert and to revolt .
Why was there not a German or Austrian (puppet ) government in exile ?
When the allies entered Germany,they found immediately enough Germand willing to collaborate(in Achen,they found someone to act as burgomaster;later he was shot by a SS commando),thus it would not be difficult to find a German general asking on the radio the Germans to desert .

 

Oh, you mean direct appeals by captured generals?

Well, I guess the only one captured by the western allies roughly equivalent to Paulus was von Rundsedt - but that was already very late in the war, and didn't really make much of a difference.

In general though, western efforts to get individual german units to surrender were actually more effective than the soviet ones. The main decider was probably that the war in the west was rather more gentlemany, so the US and the UK had good reputations for the treatment of POWs.

The Nazi government was the legitimate government of Germany and Austria. They won their power through more or less legal and proper, even democratic channels. No foreign puppet government can make a rival claim and have any real credibility.

 

This "discussion" is absolutely moronic. The OP created the thread under the title "was unconditional surrender unneccessary?" and after someone responsded the seemingly innocuous question, immediately made more posts to argue the moral superiority of Nazi Germany over the Western Allies, though those posts in fact had nothing to do with the original header. This is mere revisionist baiting. Anyone who wishes to equate genocidal wars of aggression to strategic bombing and American detention camps to Auschwitz is a Nazi apologist and I suggest all saner heads to pull out of this thread immediately.

 

I disagree. I think ridcule is a better answer to such postings than silence.

 

So if bunch of Chinese dies in civil war Axis are to blame ? And how about all those dead and burned in Vietnam, wasn't it USA who supported and than waged war on Ho Si Min ? And Taliban... and Sadam ? ****... soon I'll cover entire globe if I continue like this.

They most certainly are but the truth is not straight forward as it is usually portrayed. For example Nuremberg accusation of "crime against peace" is most ridiculous. It is simply a method that cements state of the world in which Britain and USA ruled the world or to say it otherwise control most of resources. And to disguise these idea under "crime against peace" is most amusing to me. "crime against peace" actually means "don't touch my Empire" and attempt to sell it as justice and fairness is idiotic to say the least.

If you didn't get it by now I rest my case.

Essentially, we were talking about Britain declaring war on Germany for occupying half of Poland but did not declare war on Russia for occupying other half (among plethora of other territory from Finland, Romania and Baltic). So Hitler was occupator but Stalin was not although Bolshevik ideology was even more extreme as it didn't recognize private property.

1. You are making me laugh about a protest thing
2. There would be no sunken ships if they didn't transport weapons and other war material.
3. I bet you didn't like comparison with Al-qaida or Talibans it shows bottomless reservoir of hipocracy doesn't it ?

I don't defend atrocities that Axis did but where Geneva convention mentions that cities can be leveled to the ground and than LWD comes along and says it was by the rules. Really now...

See answer to second quote in this post.

Try again. You don't know much about economics do you ? War was more of a message to others that to Sadam saying oil will ALWAYS be quoted and traded in US dolars which Sadam was first to quote in euros. And to enlighten you value of currency depends on amount of gods traded in that currency, so if oil for example is not traded in dolars value of dolar and power of USA and it's FED that prints dolars goes down. Cappish ?

People usually say USSR lost most people (and it was aggressive as it gets just ask the Finns) but forgot that these countries combined had comparable amount of civilians casualties as well. USSR was by the way a combination of states as well.

Nobody is questioning the right of everyone to live. People usually measure loss in terms of lives, I simply added investments in the equation. It takes a lot of effort to educate somebody to produce Mercedes as opposed to somebody who works in rice fields without being literate to start with. And you can't always buy competence with money it is more question of culture and mentality. In terms of human capital Axis lost far more.

I think I covered these topics so I won't waste time again. You can call me nazi apologist all day long but historical fact remains that Britain for example invaded several times more countries than Germany. That's just for your info. And as I said I don't defend nor advocate what Nazis did.

Well not quite, Hitler burned the Reichstag and banned all other parties so...

No confusion there, I am surprised how USA always gets the bill for Britain's wars.

Are gulags revisionist baiting or are they Allied effort for peace ? How about Katyin forest - let's ask the Poles shall we ?
40% of Germany was ethnically cleansed after WW2 and that is a fact. If you didn't know it I suggest you improve your education system.
You see you are actually a criminal apologist. I don't defend Hitler nor even try to say he was nice guy. He killed lots of people and that is a fact. I simply point out that Allies killed lots of innocent civilians as well which is usually sidelined in public and escapes the focus of CNN and such a likes. It is not even condemned. Moreover Allied victory is usually glorified as greatest thing in history which it wasn't for at least two reasons in my signature.

 

This post is closed, it has become too much of a Hitler apologist style for my tastes. As in "Hitler only did what eveybody else did", forgetting that nothing done by others was in anywhere near the same industrial efficiency of death by design. I'm done.

 

thread closed upon request which was gladly granted: due to trolling.

 

I apologize slipdigit, but I have to respond to this guy.

The Germans and Japanese STARTED THE WAR. What part of that don't you understand?And the allies had nothing comparable to the Holocaust, the T4 program, Unit 731, etc.The US did not declare whole swaths of people "untermensche" and make the destruction of said people one of the tenets of their government.

Yes, the US has a sorry history of human rights. But so does EVERY country in the world. Cruelty is trait we all share.

Your condemnation of Vietnam is particularly odd as the NVA was a brutal, inhumane regime as was Saddam's. Facts that for some reason anti-Americans always forget to mention in their rants against the US.

I won't apologize for acts done in war because war is inhumane. It is literally mass murder.It is also pointless as these acts occurred 70 years ago and the victims are long dead.

Nothing in history is simple and to a certain extent you are correct in the whitewashing of the war has created a warped perception of the conflict. The allies did kill alot of people and many as a result of strategically questionable decisions. But that doesn't erase the fact that the US, Britain, France, Russia, were all content to be at peace while Germany and Japan were lusting for war.

Everything that happens after the 1st of September 1939 and the 7th of December 1941 can be laid at the feet of Nazi Germany and the Empire of Japan. Without the aggression of those states there would be no Hamburg, no atomic bombs dropped, no post war mass suffering of the German people.

No one held a gun to Der Fuhrer's and maded him invade Poland. No one forced the military junta of Japan to wage an war of aggression upon China.They did so on their own. They should be held historically accountable for that.

 

An unfortunate point of view. None the less, using your logic, you cant possibly compare the loss of a Slavic state of the art doctor/engineer, who also happened to be a homosexual jew to a simple German factory worker...

 

While those nations did start World War 2, the matter is a bit more complex than that and politically can be traced back decades or even centuries in the case of Japan. I think the most notable events are post World War 1 Europe and the Japanese attitude towards the "American Invasion" in the 1800s.

Also, for Japan the war started in the 30s and ended in August, 1945.