Churchill war criminal, says German historian

[Chris 62]

German Industry bank rolled Hitler.

War, you make ME sick with your "Germany is innocent" crap.

Germany started a world war and manged to kill millions.

Too F*CKING bad it got bombed.

Your an idiot to appologize for those creeps.

[Tripledoc]

It's a simple question - who bankrolled Hitler?
You don't have to explode.
You are the idiot for apologizing for Dulles and the other financiers of the 30s.
This is not an apology for Hitler. International finance was on the supply side - Hitler on the demand side of the issue.

[Traianvs]

well wasn't it Johnson that said: "War is a necessary evil, but it is still an evil"


So in a way winston did some nasty things... we always see the germans on TV like they were the vicious merciless killers, but in the end the normal population was just the same as all the other pops in britain etc...


Obviously their leaders were a little less innocent, but well, they had a good propaganda system, a bit comparable to that of the United States at the moment, i hear most americans prefer a good nice war in iraq? => shows that the US have good propaganda... normally people don't want a war=> bodybags coming back home isn't cool

[Chris 62]

Originally posted by Tripledoc
It's a simple question - who bankrolled Hitler?

Asked and answered.

You don't have to explode.

?

You are the idiot for apologizing for Dulles and the other financiers of the 30s.

You talking to me?
The real culprits for WWII are Hitler, Tojo, and the allied apeasement governments, in that order.

This is not an apology for Hitler. International finance was on the supply side - Hitler on the demand side of the issue.

An ambigous statement.

If your trying to make a point, it isn't clear.

[DRoseDARs]

Good to see politics are taking a playgroundish turn in the EU. Now they're displaying the high-quality professionalism we've come to expect from our OWN politicians here in the United States...

[Tripledoc]

I just find it strange that the Anglo-Americans would first banroll Hitler and his industrialist cronies - not moving an inch to help the social democrats when they were in power.
Then later when the firebombing starts they begin to target the workers quarters - where there was real oppostion to Hitler - into burning rubble.

How do you explain that from a moral - nay political - viewpoint.

[Wernazuma III]

Originally posted by Chris 62

War, you make ME sick with your "Germany is innocent" crap.

Germany started a world war and manged to kill millions.

Too F*CKING bad it got bombed.

Your an idiot to appologize for those creeps.

Learn to read before posting nonsense like accusing me of thinking that Germany was innocent. Your continuing stupidities give you the honor to be #1 on my ignore list.
Fez is at least sometimes hillarious funny.

[Chris 62]

I consider you a moron War, so who gives a rat's behind about your ignore list?

Your attempting to apply modern morality to 1940s events, only an idiot would even attempt it.

I just find it strange that the Anglo-Americans would first banroll Hitler and his industrialist cronies - not moving an inch to help the social democrats when they were in power.
Then later when the firebombing starts they begin to target the workers quarters - where there was real oppostion to Hitler - into burning rubble.

How do you explain that from a moral - nay political - viewpoint.

Back to the real discussion...

Hitler's politics were extremly popular not just in Germany.
He had MANY admirers in the USA, including the US ambassador to England, Joseph Kennedy, and the famous avator Charles Lindberg (Lucky lindy was a BIG time racist, some of his recorded speaches would make a clansmen proud, he's on the record for wanting to live in a "Jew free nation").

As for Strategic bombing, Harris subscribed to the Italian airial theorist Dohet's idea that "The bomber will always get through", and that nations could be bombed into submission.

This idea had a large appeal to Churchill, it would require NO large ground army with appalling casualties as in WWI, in fact, no invasion at all was the goal, it was the US that insisted that a cross-channell invasion was the main allied goal.
It also had a added revenge factor, as Britain had been heavily bombed by Germany before any serious attepmt was made by Bomber Command (even in 1941, a British bomber was lucky to have a bomb land withen 25 MILES of the target point).
The US favored precision bombing in daylight, the British preferred night area bombing, another reason for this was British bombers could not survive by daylight (Britain's at war start heavy bomber was the Witley, not an effective type), and since Britian's tiny field army was engaged in Africa, the middle and far east, this was a way to strike back at Germany.

Bombing would not be effective untill 1944, when the correct target was selected, German transportation.

[Ned]

To the Brits, you have several times said you were taught that area bombing of German civilians was "justified."

What was the justification?

[Chris 62]

Ned, the USAAC did the SAME THING, actually worse to Japan.

[Inverse Icarus]

it's stupid to take the moral high ground in a war. the side that is willing to do whatever it takes to win, no matter how horrific, is most likely going to win. when you take the high road, you just fall down further.

after ww2, america quasi-adopted this moral high ground stuff, like in Somalia where our troops couldn't fire first at enemies. horrible.

in vietnam, the veitnamese did whatever it took to not only win strategic points on the battlefield, but also to keep the local populus believing in the cause, and hating the americans. for instance, the Americans went out of their way to give veitnamese children shots to protect from some diseases, and the veitnamese chopped off their arms and went on some propaganda campagin that america was trying to kill them.

it was horrible. and they won.

[Bugs ****ing Bunny]

Christ. If they read up on what Churchill did to the Kurds then they'd probably soil themselves in horror....

[Chris 62]

They also are praised loud and often by the Left Uber.

That post is precisly what I think about the matter.

[Bugs ****ing Bunny]

Originally posted by Ned
To the Brits, you have several times said you were taught that area bombing of German civilians was "justified."

What was the justification?

They looked a bit foreign. It's a justification that served the English well over the preceding 1000 years, so why bother thinking up a new one?

[Chris 62]

Originally posted by Lazarus and the Gimp
Christ. If they read up on what Churchill did to the Kurds then they'd probably soil themselves in horror....

I was just reading about that last week Laz.

Quite a notion, control colonies by indescriminte bombing, but they later did give slight notice.