I would fight under German flag since I'm a nationalsocialist myself. Sweden's government does not, -and did not during WW2- represent my political beliefs, so because of that reason I would not fight for my homeland.

There's not much more to it, but feel free to ask more questions if you have any. Note that I will not respond if I think it may break the forum rules, though; some things simply can't be put in a non-offensive manner.

/Kommando

Such as? What things would be offensve? Are some of your views offensive to others? It takes alot to "Offend" some of us LOL. I think myself and others here would like to know. Im not attacking you but would like to learn more. I have only had the opportunity to speak with some Skinheads. Not to anyone who would admit to being a Nazi.Would you commit the atrocities and war crimes that the Nazis and other Fascists were known to have commited and some tried and convicted of? Would you have fought against the Westen Allies or your own countrymen?. Or just the Soviet "Hordes"? Do you agree with the Nazis starting the war and the Millions of deaths that occurred because of it? Do you agree with the Racial policies of the Nazi Party?

__________________
For the first time I have seen "History" at close quarters,and I know that its actual process is very different from what is presented to Posterity. - WWI General Max Hoffman.

I'm the "Confederate with a pipe"!! LOL

Kommando

I too would be interested to read your reply to JCF's posting No.527

Ron

__________________
During the period October 1942 to January 1947 my wartime "Cook's Tour" took me to the following places:
North Africa, Sicily, Italy, Austria, Egypt & Germany.
My units were the: 49th Light Ack Ack Rgt.RA and
The 4th Queen's Own Hussars.

I as well am curious to find out your perspective of National Socialism. What specifically are your political beliefs?

__________________

American by birth, TEXAN by the grace of GOD!

I too am aboard with the above 3... please clarify.

__________________
The war against Russia will be such that it cannot be conducted in a knightly fashion. This struggle is one of ideologies and racial differences and will have to be conducted with unprecedented, unmerciful and unrelenting harshness. -Adolf Hitler

To quote Rhett Butler, "Frankly my dear, I don't give a damn."

A cannon-cocker somewhere with Patton's 3rd Army. Each shell I lob, 40lbs more of Amatol to break the Fascist beast and bring Liberty a step closer.

__________________

I know that the term ''Kommando'' is a term used regularly on racist national socialist forums. So with out judging you with no evidence I ask you if you are connected to something like that. Along with the questions the others already asked.

who knows easy to say maybe ,but i would go to guerrilla warfare were ever wanted or needed there nothing better than moving on your own

Perhaps this is a bad idea, but alright, I will come with a response and take my chances. I simply can't resist the temptation of a good debate.

I'm glad to hear that and I hope that's the case. To answer the question, the racial beliefs within Nationalsocialism are very controversial to say the least.

I didn't get that impression either, since you have always been very polite from what I have read.

Yes, I would have. If I had captured a group of prisoners for instance, I would have ordered their execution or executed them if ordered to, if it would increase my side's chances of winning. It is an unfortunate necessity in total war; either you destroy the enemy ruthlessly, or the enemy will come and destroy you, your friends and your family.

Of course, I have not been in that situation, so I can't come with a definate answer, but that is the proper way to act according to me.

As for Fascists, I suppose you're referring to the Italian and Spanish Fascists primarily? From what I have heard and read about WW2 they are not known to have commited any signicifiant acts of brutality. But feel free to enlighten me. I appreciate new knowledge.

I would have fought against all of them if it became necessary. While it would have been preferable to have a peace with the Western Allies, to allow the conquest and assimiliation of the rest of Europe, I'm still against democracy.

Yes. I think it was a good and necessary gamble. Had Germany defeated Soviet Russia, it is possible we would have had a strong unified Europe under Germany today.

Most of it, yes. I believe in selective breeding for instance. However, I do not feel any hatred towards other races, even though I think whites should not breed with them. They can of course not help that they were born to said race and should therefore not be hated for it, but at the same time, they should not breed with whites since that's non-beneficial. I think means such as segration and laws should be used to prevent interracial breeding.

Feel free to come with more questions now while we are at it.

/Kommando

Hmm... I noticed that I have received a flame, so I assume I will be banned after my recent reply. I'm now a bit busy, so I will return later with a response if I'm not banned by then.

/Kommando

Flames have nothing to do with being banned, only that someone (you'll have to consult the User CP to find out who) took exception to something you posted.

__________________
Best Regards,
JW

It is an odd one, taken to the th degree in the last couple of pages.

In regards to an earlier post. If there were no democracy, this board & 99.9% of the internet would cease to exist. That would pale in comparison to the other rights/freedoms we would be stripped of.

Ah, alright. I thought it was a sort of moderator infraction.

I want a totalitarian state, ruled by one able leader. Things should be further right than left, incl. economy. A healthy living should also be encouraged and -to a degree- enforced. Steps should be taken against interracial breeding, as I said in my previous post already. To summon it up quickly, it should be like NS Germany.

A bit brief, but I can't think of anything more to add at this time.

/Kommando

Twas not me. I believe in live and let live. So I respect, even though disagree/dislike, what you believe in. No debate here since we are talking about personal beliefs. I just want to understand to what degree of National Socialism you were referring to.

__________________

American by birth, TEXAN by the grace of GOD!

If it were a moderator infraction, you would see this little fellow---->


To include the persecution and state-sponsored murder of "undesirables?"

__________________
Best Regards,
JW

Order is not a bad thing but when a single individual has complete authority, it seems like they always end up doing more harm than good. Also, the masses who fit into the new order go overboard and end up doing evil to those who don't fit. Also, as history has shown, those nations under authoritarian rule end up being behind in technology, economically and socially struggling. Look at the middle eastern countries along with the former Soviet Union. Again, they started out with a noble idea but it morphed into something else with no benefit to the masses, only to the one in charge.

On the surface, national socialism my look attractive but look at the larger picture (as Jeff has pointed out) and you may see something else.

Cheers.

__________________

American by birth, TEXAN by the grace of GOD!

The Soviet Union degenerated due to its communism -mainly the economic side of it- rather than its authoritarian rule. But of course, they were intertwined, because the leaders within the S.U. were staunch communists, and therefore made sure that the communism was not abandoned.

As for the Middle East, it started falling behind Europe back in the age of monarchs. For that reason I don't think you can use them as an example.

/Kommando

I ask again,

To include the persecution and state-sponsored murder of "undesirables?"

__________________
Best Regards,
JW