 |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
Kirnwaffen
|
 |
Tryin' hard to chill in the city of Dis
Jul 2000
time: 22:26
|
|
I believe that the German position is far more easily attributed to historical factors and the current political climate than any hidden agenda.
In addition to the utter destruction wrought upon their cities from both land and air, I believe that the Germans have never really separated WWII from the holocaust, something that they have been conditioned to (rightfully) abhor on a level that I don't think most foreigners would understand. While some would argue that this should lead to a willingness to depose leaders like Saddam Hussein, I would argue that the Germans are caught in a bind here. While they apall such dictators, they don't want to be responsible for what they see as the natural consequences of war, and while the consequences of leaving such a man in power may seem far worse to us, the German desire to not be responsible for that kind of suffering overpowers any other feelings they may have.
In addition, the heavy hand that Washington has exhibited in it's handling of Iraq and other issues has created an opportunity for Schroeder that he would be a (political) fool not to seize. Being accused of breaking earlier campaign promises on the domestic side, Schroeder had only one possible out in the last election: foreign policy. The behavior of the United States under the current administration is perceived by many Germans, whether they realize it or not, as Nazi-like. The German opposition to the war in Iraq is caused as much by a desire to derail what they see as a power on track to repeat some of the errors that they once committed. Hence, Schroeder now walks a line between offending a major trading party and satisfying the populace with low key opposition to US policy.
The two elements above, once combined, provide, I think, a reasonable explanation of the German position.
On another note, I would disagree that Nazi attrocities are considered more horrific because of Anglo-American myth. I would argue that the specificity of the Nazi attrocities, the cruelty, and the meticulous record keeping are what truely separate the Nazis from the Soviets, with emphasis on the record keeping.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Wycoff
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Kirnwaffen
I would argue that the specificity of the Nazi attrocities, the cruelty, and the meticulous record keeping are what truely separate the Nazis from the Soviets, with emphasis on the record keeping. |
That's a possibility, but the Soviets have the Nazis beat in sheer numbers. The low estimate of Soviet peoples put to death under Stalin's reign is 25 million. Many scholars place the estimate far higher. The Nazi estimate is far fewer (betwenn 5 and 10 million). Nazi brutality is inexcusable, and we are constanly reminded of the terror of the Holocaust. However, how often are we told about the terror of the Gulag? How many movies are based on Soviet terror? Movies such as Enemy at the Gate glorify the Soviets. I think that the German people shoulder an unfair burden when it comes to mass murder. The Nazis were guilty, but so were the Soviets. Why aren't the Russians walking around with their heads down? I think that the fact that they were our allies in the war is the reason that they are not treated more harshly.
Remember, many Nazis were appalled by the Soviet atrocities they discovered in Poland. Many Poles welcomed the Nazis as liberators. Some even say that Hitler's "Final Solution" was in part encouraged by the previous actions of Stalin.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
ravagon
|
|
Australia
Sep 1999
time: 13:26
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wycoff
That's a possibility, but the Soviets have the Nazis beat in sheer numbers. The low estimate of Soviet peoples put to death under Stalin's reign is 25 million. Many scholars place the estimate far higher. |
I think the larger estimates put it at around 40 million. This, however was over the period of Stalins reign - much longer than the period over which Soviets were killed during the war.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Kirnwaffen
|
|
Tryin' hard to chill in the city of Dis
Jul 2000
time: 22:26
|
|
While I have no doubt that the Soviets beat the Nazis hands down in numbers, my main premise is that the Nazi records show us exactly when, where, how, and how many. The Nazis provided clear, detailed documentation of every step of the process and, in many cases, their rationalizations for mass murder. To see that apparently sane human beings are capable of such crimes boggles the mind. This, I think, is the reason the Nazi case is so much more compelling. Stalin's victims, for the most part, simply disappeared, and the documents his regime kept provide little evidence of their fate. Because of this lack of documentation, questions can be raised about the motives of those carrying out Stalin's orders (Were they under threat?, Were they mislead?, etc.), wheras we know that the Nazis, down to the lowest camp guard, believed firmly in the 'Final Solution'.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Wycoff
|
|
Still, that's saying that the Soviet regime murdered 40,000,000 of its own people in a span of 20 years. Doesn't anyone else think that this is a Holocaust? Why aren't we told about this nearly as often as the Nazi holocaust? Why are the Germans saddled with seemingly sole responsibility for the crime of large scale extermination of people? Surely the Russian/ Soviet peoples should also feel ashamed of themselves.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Wycoff
|
|
Not Stalin's anti-Semtism, but rather the evidence of his systematic extermination of entire groups of people. There is some evidence that this influenced Hitler's later actions, just as documents show that Hitler was studying Stalin's five-year plans.
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:26.
Apolyton Time is 00:26. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
24-03-2003 10:24
given the low percentage of French Immigrants this is certainly true. 
They did last time because of their "constitution" which prevented deployment of forces outside the Nato region of interest. Ergo they became the bankers so to speak.
|