Roman Empire

[unmerged(1402)]

Wouldnt you like to start a scenario in Rome (province) and build up the glorius empire, all over again? There should be one thats for sure.

Any one know what is the obriviation for Rome so i can input it in the scenario generator? I Can't seem to find it.

 

[unmerged(372)]

Does not exist. Rome became a Holy Christian city and the capital of the Papal states right after the fall of the Empire. It was linked with the 'Holy Roman Empire', also known as Germany. Historically, only wishful thinkers (most Byzantine emperors) and crazy morons (Mussolini) tried to recreate a Roman Empire. Pick an unused tag, or use the current Papal States. Just remember that Italy is not the Romam Empire. By the early middle ages, Rome the Capital of the World was kaput forever.

In fact, you could be creative and ask yourself: historically, if someone really wanted to make a new Pax Romana, which state would be capable of trying to do such a thing? What made Rome rise in the first place?

 

[unmerged(1658)]

driedcow

I'm a little offended that you are so harsh on Mussolini...

He did a lot for Italy. His architectural revival, and his ability to instill pride in Italy (only a country from 1870s on really) was amazing. He drained swamps, built bridges, modernized Italian Science, brought the arts back from a lull, built new cities, reclaimed parts of the old Roman empire, and really created modern Italy. He did have his faults, but most of his faults were in one way or another related to his unwanted affiliation with Hitler.

In game terms, I don't think a Roman Empire is reasonable. The Papal states were a political force. Their military, while powerful at points, was mainly used in defence rather than offence (though not always the case). For a good chunk of the period the Pope lived in Avignon France. Rome was really too chaotic and unruly to do anything with and it was so crime filled that not much got done.

So, the inclusion of the game of a single 'Italian Boot' empire would just be ridiculous. It didn't exist even past the 1860s when Garribaldi and Mazzini attempted to unify the pennisula under 1 flag. The nature of Italian Life from the period was at best City State politics. Because the pennisula was such a great place for traders to stop, there was no need to unify. Places like Venice, Naples, Rome, etc. would have actually lost money in the deal. Although the greatest city of the time was probably Firenze.

Truly the game represents this in a decent fashion. I like it, but please, don't bash Mussolini, he did a lot.

 

[unmerged(372)]

As for Mussolini, yeah, he did some good, but also a lot of bad. He had a choice whether or not to ally with Hitler and he did. There was a reason why the Italian people put him to the gallows. Most of the big leaders did good and bad, and maybe it is wrong to just call Mussolini a moron, but his insane dreams for a new Roman Empire gravely hurt Italy.

 

[unmerged(1658)]

Mussolini's involvement with Hitler is silly considering a few things

1. Hitler was a chump with no original ideas (he was an intellectual whore, so to speak)

2. Hitler was taken under Mussolini's wing originally, not the other way around

3. Mussolini was afraid, my opinion, that Hitler would come for Italy next because he who controls italy controls the med sea.

4. Mussolini never agreed or made any claims to like Hitler after they 'allied'

5. Mussolini's accomplishments for Italian Civilization are unmatched by anyone after Mussolini in Italy

on the other hand

1. Ethiopia was weak because Mussolini wasn't a skilled warrior...in fact...he was a pacifist until WWI when he saw he could make a name for himself

2. The invasion of whole balkan region and greece was just plain dumb. That was his downfall. I have family friends who were in Mussolini's army during WWII and they all said that was the real turning point for them.


So, yeah he was a little slow, but come on...Hitler was jerk and basically tricked him. The way I see it is a lot like Dr. Faustus with Hitler as Mephistopholes and Mussolini as Faustus. So, yeah, he got what was coming to him, but Hitler offered something unimaginable to Mussolini. I think that at a different time Mussolini would have succeeded in annexing most of the Med. and then stopping. He was strange like that. I don't think he ever wanted world domination or anything like that.

You are right about him in some ways.

Keith

 

[unmerged(528)]

Well, he was ultra-nationalist, putting the state ahead of everything (especially individuals). He did persecute political enemies, contempted democracy, seized power through a coup and generally encouraged political violence. He wasn´t that nice a person. However fascism did not carry the same kind of bigotry that nazism builds on, and it did reform Italy somewhat economically (although the attempted shift toward a corporatist/syndicalist structuring of society largely failed).

 

[Savant]

Il Duce

I'm a little offended that you are so harsh on Mussolini...

He did a lot for Italy.

My mother's family lived in Italy during Mussolini's 'tenure'. Despite good examples of his miscreant ways, my mother still looks upon thsi time fondly. I am sure it has more to do with her childhood and adolescence than any good Mussolini brought to the nation.

At one time in his tenure Mussolini had public demonstrates of public 'fealty' to the fascist state. This included for example, the married women and new brides donating their 'fede' (wedding bands) to the state to be melted down for war cash. My grandmother purposely had a bronze 'fede' made and turned that into the state at one of these glorius public gatherings and kept her gold band with the engraving of devotion from her husband. For me, I take pride in that and in my grandmother's action. I despise Mussolini.

My father was born in the United States in 1918. His family returned to Italy in the mid 20's. He developed some skill in welding and served as an apprentice. After a while, he became a very skilled welder and was working for a private company that built the ski lifts on Mount Rosa (the Swiss border). He was part of an enginerring team and the leader of a welding corp. Mussolini then 'nationalized' all engineering companies and essentially inducted my father (bc of his engineering skills) into the Italian army.

My father tried so many times to petition out of and leave the country but Italy was now at war (1940). His only recourse was to ski across the Alps into Switzerland and smuggle himself to Marseilles (Vichy) and off to North Africa where he boarded a ship to America. There, he joined the US Army. He was in the Corp of Engineers - demolition squad. I am proud of that too.

So, no excuses for Mussolini please. He cost me an aunt (my mother's sister through bombing), an uncle (my father's oldest brother as he served the Italian Army by being sunk on a troop ship by a British submarine in the N. Africa campaign). And, my favorite uncle was a survivor of Stalingrad and the steppes of Russia (and all the misery that ensued). Another uncle was a partisan who was beaten and imprisoned. Tell me if Mussolini did some good for my family?

 

[Griffon]

I'm going to submit a very un-informed post, so please correct me:

wasn't there a movement called the brown shirts that went around Italy making sure that people were following Mussolini?

Weren't they kids being coopted into a movement very similar to the Nazi youth?

In any event, I think Mussolini was a man of his time nothing more nothing less (Hitler, Stalin, Franco, Mussolini, Imperial Japan, etc...).

 

[unmerged(530)]

Mussolini was an evil fascist-imperialist pig.

He invaded Greece and Ethiopia out of hate for Orthodoxy. He ordered the execution of Orthodox clery in both nations, he even killed the Patriarch of Ethiopia, and desecrated churches.

He used poison gas and flamethrowers (banned weapons) on tribals armed with sharp sticks.

How did he get Albania anyway?

Sadly, he had Hitler to bail him out, or Greece would have utterly destroyed the rest of his armies, and put an end to his imperialism.

He was also incredibaly stupid. He ordered the dempbilisation of the army the day before he attacked Greece. His troops paid for his Imperialism.

He was as evil as any of the fascists.

 

[unmerged(1680)]

Mussolini

Well, three things.

First of, the idea of Hitler bailing him out. Mussolini depended heavily on the germans in a military way. When Germany attacked France from north, Italy tried the same in the south. As far as i know the frencch forces even gained a few inches of italian soil. Italy was just safed by Hitler, forcing the Vichy regime to make peace with Italy. Second time the italian army tried their luck against the balkan (Greece especialy). And here you find a point, where Hitler and Mussolini have been on different sides. Hitler was a very bad tactician. But even he did know that the italian forces had no chance in Greece. Well, Mussolini attacked anyway, got beaten, and german forces had to be send into Greece.

Second thing: the great deeds of those fascist leaders. Some old men in Germany still today tell that Hitler did so much for germany. in 1929 we had 6 million unemployed, the economy was broken etc. pp. Hitler organized remilitarization (thus curving the industry up), installed public investements (the famous Autobahn was started in the third reich, and is still the same in some parts of Poland), and most importantly, forced women out of labour. Yeah, this last point is very important. In WWI when most men went into the war the german industry relayed heavily on women. During the 20s the women in german had nearly as much rights (and jobs) as the men. Well, by forcing women out of labour Hitler was able to decrease unemployement to 0% (as he didn't count women in, their job was to care for the new arian kids).
All those talk about the great deeds of the dictators is just rubbish. Hitler and Mussolini HAD to increase the industrial output. WWII was an industrial war. No tanks without industry. And if you look at the magnificent job that Stalin did: Ever heard about Magnitigorks? Its a huge industry complex stomped out of the swamps in just 10 years. Thousands of fanatic Stalin-followers and political prisoners did there. Yes those guys achieved quit a lot. But is their work worth the blood that it was paid with?

Third point, someone named severall 'bad guys' of that time. Don't forget the english, american, french, swedish, swiss gouvernment. All of those gouvernments did know VERY early (before WWII) what happend in Germany.

In the german-swiss border region there was a small village, with just a few jewish inhabitants. One night the police officer of that village got a message that the SS would 'cleanse' that village the next day, and that he should prepare everything. He and his man woke up all jewish inhabitants, and brought them to the swiss border. Men, women, kids. They told the swiss border guards what was going on, and asked for asyl. The swiss gouvernment was informed and neglected asyl. Not one of this villages jews survived the death camps. Same is true for Sweden, and especially for England. England even called Hitler a friend in 1934 (he was an enemy of the communists, so he was considered a friend). So pls include those people in your list as well. I think it was a time where people on all sides had lost their humanity. Just call someone THE ENEMY, and you can do nearly everything to him, cause enemies aren't like we are, so they aren't humans, thats the way people like to think.

My family suffered average during that war. One grand-uncle, beeing a strict nazi, died in Stalingrad. His father comitted 'suizide' while in the same room with two russian soldiers. Nice euphemism. Another grand-uncle was hanged by the SS for having a tcheck girlfriend. At least two of the women in my family got raped by the victors.
No nation that participated in this war came out with clean hands.

 

[BiB]

I find there to be a big line between knowing about someone else doing something and actually doing it urself.

And didn't the ones in the know end up fighting the ones doing it ?



Man of his time ? There were quite a few men unlike that lot. And I'm quite happy for that.

So what if he did some good things ?
Trains arrived on time in Nazi-Germany, so to say.

Praising that lot ? My arse.

 

[unmerged(1680)]

Well, they not just did know about what happend in Germany. The english, american, swedish and swiss gouvernment had opportunities to help the jewish people in Germany. The didn't do so. Most people in Germany know that you become guilty by letting other people do bad things. Did you ever see the movie 'schindlers List' ? In the end Schindler states: 'I could have done so much more.' He didn't do more, he didn't resist the nazi regime more. German people get blamed since 56 years that they didn't do more (if you read trough better history books you'll find out that there was a resistance, but the SS was to effective). Just slowly some countries understand that they didn't do enough either.
A few years ago there was a broad discussion in Sweden, if the swedish gouvernment behaved correctly in WWII. As far as I know the consensus was: we could have done more.

And for England, France and especially America. Well, they did end up fighting the nazis. But America joined the war very late, mostly for two reasons: they considered every enemy of the communists as a friend (thus Hitler was the best friend of the american industrials), and there was a strong antisemitic movement in nearly every nation.

Btw: it was very easy for the SS to cleanse the Netherlands. When they arrived they just asked in the next police station for lists with the jewish inhabitants. And they got them. The dutch gouvernment had already prepared such lists. More info? The pope supported Hitlers war against the jews, calling them 'murderers of Christ'. At the same time german and polish catholic and protestant priests died in the death camp cause they resisted.
Both WW have been political extremely difficult, with monsters and heroes at both sides.

 

[BiB]

Just loads more monsters on German side. War brings out the worst in a lot of people. It's just that some Germans outperformed everyone else on that count. It's as simple as that. Nothing u say can change that fact. At all. I don't see any need for an effort to downplay the atrocities performed then.

Every nation has its rotten apples. Hardly an excuse for downplaying letting about the rottest apple ever lead a whole country into what happened.

If all those others knew all so well what was going on, the Germans knew for xure. And if there was one nation that could stop Hitler, it was Germany itself. Didn't see that happening though. Instead a streamlined policy of eradicating a whole race was adopted. The ones in the knew that u blame so much were the ones who put a stop to it in the end.

Being guilty of something is actually doing it. Something the Germans did. Not the Briish, Americans, ...

Xure, some countries could have done more, looking back now but well that's quite easier said than done. If ur a 5 foot kid and u see a 6 foot kid beating up on another 5 foot kid in the playground then ur also in the know but realistically speaking, can u really help ?

Swizerland in the aforementioned example not helping the jews isn't nice but it ain't exactly killing of 6 million.

A strong antisemitic feeling in most nations. Fact is that in only one country it led to what we now know as the Holocaust.

 

[Guest]

To get back to Mussolini, the use of combat gaz over civil population of Ethiopa suffices alone to qualify him of war criminal.

And the replies about French atrocities in colonization will have to cope with the small difference between official politics and abuss committed by subordonnates.

Equaling the real sufferings German had and the Jew genocide has too a name: revisionism.

 

[unmerged(1680)]

I dont try to downplay what nazi germany did. And as you might have read, I called the suffering of my family average. Its nothing compared to what Germany did to the jews. So please don't call me a revisionist. Actually I'm situated at the left side of the political spectrum. I just try to be realistic. Its very easy to use a scapegoat. The scapegoat for the nazis where the jews. The scapegoat for the whole world after WWII are the germans.

One thing is for sure: no other nation would have been able to organize such an industrialized genozide at that time. The russian tried, but have never been so effective. But that has nothing to do with the ethics of the germans (actually if you wanna study theology, philosophy or ethics you should learn german, as many important books are written by germans). It has a lot to do with culture. Do you remember that the protestants in EU get an economic bonus? Well, this protestant culture of hard work and perfectionism is deeply rooted in the german culture, and the result is a sentence like: 'It's just that some Germans outperformed everyone else on that count.' Germany at that time outperformed most nations in every aspect. Its this culture of doing their best, that allowed Germany to recover from WWI and WWII quickly. But it also allowed germans to do their best in killing millions of people. The japanese have a very similar culture in this way. Every coin has two sides.

About the common knowledge: I was born and raised in east Germany. For the west german gouvernment it was common knowledge what happend inside the east german prisons. Are you going to say that I did know about that as well? I'm sorry, I lived just 10 mins from the huggest prison in east-Berlin, still didn't know anything about it. So I can just believe my grandparents, when they tell me that they didn't know about the death camps. Sure there have been rumours. But most people inside of germany had just rumours, the allied had facts. My grandma lived just 40 km from a prison. In April 1945 her whole family was forced to walk there and look. Noone of them had ever guessed that it was a death camp. Some german antifascists managed during the Olympiad in Berlin 1936 to smuggle pictures of the death camps to England. Did England react at least a bit? Nope.

'Being guilty of something is actually doing it. Something the Germans did. Not the British, Americans, ...'
So if you see someone raping or killing a third person, aren't you guilty if you just stand aside? In Germany if you don't aid someone in distress you gonna face a trial, and might as well go into jail for doing nothing when you should have helped. You blame the germans to be guilty. 90% of the germans didn't know about the atrocities, but you call them guilty. But the british gouvernment DID know what happend. And they DIDN'T act. In my eyes they are even more guilty as those germans that did know and didn't act. Cause the british gouvernment had the power to do something.

Look more closely at what some germans tried to do. There have been severall attempts to assasinate Hitler. In the Stauffenberg attempt even some people participated that have been pacifists all their life, having a lot of problems with the concept of taking a life for the good of all others.
Bonnhöfer, Lichtenberg and severall other priests went into death camps for preaching against the nazis. In Ravensbrück, Sachsenhausen and Buchenwald, many of the imprisoned where there for political reasons, having resisted the nazi regime.

Don't make it yourself too easy. Its not just black and white, most of the time its a muddy gray. When I was a bit younger, I viewed it like you: all nazis are pigs, and its a shame to be a german. But if you look closer at it, you'll find a lot of normal persons that just missed a lot of information, or young people, that try to revolt against the system and much more. A christian saying goes: I hate the sin, but I love the sinner. Maybe if you look trough that eye at ALL participants you might be able to see it the way I do.

 

[Guest]

Originally posted by Viktor Saariati
I dont try to downplay what nazi germany did. And as you might have read, I called the suffering of my family average. Its nothing compared to what Germany did to the jews. So please don't call me a revisionist. Actually I'm situated at the left side of the political spectrum. I just try to be realistic. Its very easy to use a scapegoat. The scapegoat for the nazis where the jews. The scapegoat for the whole world after WWII are the germans.

One thing is for sure: no other nation would have been able to organize such an industrialized genozide at that time. The russian tried, but have never been so effective. But that has nothing to do with the ethics of the germans (actually if you wanna study theology, philosophy or ethics you should learn german, as many important books are written by germans). It has a lot to do with culture. Do you remember that the protestants in EU get an economic bonus? Well, this protestant culture of hard work and perfectionism is deeply rooted in the german culture, and the result is a sentence like: 'It's just that some Germans outperformed everyone else on that count.' Germany at that time outperformed most nations in every aspect. Its this culture of doing their best, that allowed Germany to recover from WWI and WWII quickly. But it also allowed germans to do their best in killing millions of people. The japanese have a very similar culture in this way. Every coin has two sides.

About the common knowledge: I was born and raised in east Germany. For the west german gouvernment it was common knowledge what happend inside the east german prisons. Are you going to say that I did know about that as well? I'm sorry, I lived just 10 mins from the huggest prison in east-Berlin, still didn't know anything about it. So I can just believe my grandparents, when they tell me that they didn't know about the death camps. Sure there have been rumours. But most people inside of germany had just rumours, the allied had facts. My grandma lived just 40 km from a prison. In April 1945 her whole family was forced to walk there and look. Noone of them had ever guessed that it was a death camp. Some german antifascists managed during the Olympiad in Berlin 1936 to smuggle pictures of the death camps to England. Did England react at least a bit? Nope.

'Being guilty of something is actually doing it. Something the Germans did. Not the British, Americans, ...'
So if you see someone raping or killing a third person, aren't you guilty if you just stand aside? In Germany if you don't aid someone in distress you gonna face a trial, and might as well go into jail for doing nothing when you should have helped. You blame the germans to be guilty. 90% of the germans didn't know about the atrocities, but you call them guilty. But the british gouvernment DID know what happend. And they DIDN'T act. In my eyes they are even more guilty as those germans that did know and didn't act. Cause the british gouvernment had the power to do something.

Look more closely at what some germans tried to do. There have been severall attempts to assasinate Hitler. In the Stauffenberg attempt even some people participated that have been pacifists all their life, having a lot of problems with the concept of taking a life for the good of all others.
Bonnhöfer, Lichtenberg and severall other priests went into death camps for preaching against the nazis. In Ravensbrück, Sachsenhausen and Buchenwald, many of the imprisoned where there for political reasons, having resisted the nazi regime.

Don't make it yourself too easy. Its not just black and white, most of the time its a muddy gray. When I was a bit younger, I viewed it like you: all nazis are pigs, and its a shame to be a german. But if you look closer at it, you'll find a lot of normal persons that just missed a lot of information, or young people, that try to revolt against the system and much more. A christian saying goes: I hate the sin, but I love the sinner. Maybe if you look trough that eye at ALL participants you might be able to see it the way I do.

You missed the whole point or I didn't explain it clealy

I hate the collecive guiltiness idea. I don't see in any German a descendant of a nazi party member. The Scholl name isn't unknown to me.

The german sufferings were real. It's a good discussion subject, in any case but in a thread about fascism, Mussolini behavior; it's simply a question of context and to some extent of mere dignity... What nazi and fascist regims did can't be in any matter diminished by supposing, voluntary or not, any nations did bad things. As in penal laws, there are degrees.

 

[BiB]

I very well know most is grey. Just when sommink springs out like what the nzis did u try to cover it with the other grey.

Comparing the nazis to the jews in their scapegoats role. WTF ? Scapegoat, my arse, the nazis DID actually kill them all.

No other nation ? I wouldn't say the UK for example based on capabilities to set up sommink psysically woudl have failed. The thought never crossed their mind though. Unlike soem others.

Germans inderdeed still achieved many things and despite that they STILL did what they did. That is to me one of the most astonishing parts, that sommink like that could ever even happen!! But all their other achievements mean shit all compared to that. Saying sommink like xure we did that that thing but we did many good things, once again is plain ridiculous. I don't see what the Protestant work ethic has to do with starting to kill of a race.

I don't buy the fact that Germans es nicht haben gewust. 6 million people are bei,g totally discriminated against in ur country, rounded up and brought away never to be seen again.

Even if the allies had info (death camps in 36 ?), was that info reliable (deemed quite unbelievable I'd think) and even then I do not buy at all Germans didn't know. Germans smuggled the info out of Germany in the first place u say. So they knew. England gets some info (of which quality) and u expect them to do what ? If there's a country, as u put earlier a very strong one, declaring war straight away right away isn't really the right way IMO. They at least did the right thing in the end and I'd suspect most British soldiers to be quite astonished to see the camps.
That is, IF they knew.

When u see someone getting raped, u don't help by jumping right in and getting urself killed. Neither do u help that person in need.

Some Germans. Most Germans however were quite Hitler favoured (nice voting totals for example). The fact they wanted to blow him up doesn't even mean they disagreed with his policies. Most people in other countries opposed Hitler instantly. Germany got him to lead the country.

I'm not saying all Germans were bad or that all Allies were good but the fact is that Germany got Hitler in power and let him stay there while the allies had quite different leaders and fought Hitler.

Btw all nazis are pigs. Nazis is the term for the people who enacted the death camps, right ? IMO that are pigs. The lot. IF u feel people who helped death camps aren't pigs, u are seriously sick.

The way u see it is one that is trying to minimize what Germany did. Apparently others not acting soon enough on so called superior info is worse than actually doing it so.

Bollox. The nazis were responsible for the holocaust. No one else. Nothing else doesn't even come close.

Grey ? The Holocaust was about as black as history ever came.

 

[BiB]

Originally posted by laurent Favre


I hate the collecive guiltiness idea. I don't see in any German a descendant of a nazi party member. The Scholl name isn't unknown to me.

The german sufferings were real. It's a good discussion subject, in any case but in a thread about fascism, Mussolini behavior; it's simply a question of context and to some extent of mere dignity... What nazi and fascist regims did can't be in any matter diminished by supposing, voluntary or not, any nations did bad things. As in penal laws, there are degrees.

I don't see a nazi in anyone (they don't even have to be German for all I care) whatsoever. Unless they start spouting the stuff u do. Then I get very suspicious.

And talking about collective guilt, he's trying to put that one on the whole world and is minimizing the role by nazi Germany, who after all did it and no one else.

 

[unmerged(1680)]

Sorry if I wans't able to explain my thoughts more clearly:

1. the nazis are responsible for the holocaust.

2. the holocaust was one of the worst campaigns in whole history, all similar attempts have been smaller by magnitudes, still the holocaust wasn't the first atempt to kill all of Gods chosen people.

3. a strong minority of the german people voted for Hitler as chancellor. The NSDAP made him chancellor together with some conservative parties. A minority of mighty individuals allowed him later to become president as well. Those two jobs where never meant to be unified (unlike the USA we do have two 'heads of state'), but instead have been installed in 1918 as a security meassure. But enough germans have been stupid enough to believe in Hitlers lies.

4. there is a difference between nazis and germans. Only problem is, that most people don't understand that difference.

Thats the one side of the coin. If you want, call it deep black, and I do fully agree with you in that. This side is discussed since 50 years, and is known to every german. Most Germans admit the guilt that hangs over germany for that, and try to pay it off (just look at our sometimes insane relation with Israel, supporting them even when they commit atrocities themselves).

The other side is what other countries did, or didn't. And this discussion started just a few years ago in Sweden, Switzerland and the Benelux. France, England and America never even considered yet that they did do something wrong. This side you might call all shades of grey.

In Germany we face at the moment the problem that many young people are feed up listening to sentences like: 'stupid nazi pig'. If I go abroard, I speak mostly english or swedish. So I can understand what some people say about germans. Can you imagine how I feel if a english kid, born 40 years after the war calls a german tourist nazi? Without any reason? And me knowing at the same time, that his grandfather might have bombed civil targets in germany?

There is no chance that my generation will deny the guilt of our grandparents, cause there is nearly no guilt weighting so heavily. But its also time, that the other nations come to term with what they did. Otherwise the next Reich might be situated outside of Germany. If I should speculate where the next true fascist regime will come from, I'd bet my money on the USA.

I'm grown up in a district of Berlin, that was two thirds dominated by stupy wannabe nazis. When I was younger I was happy that some of my friends cleaned the third of the district I was living in from that rubbish. It was more easy to live that way. But did that change anything? Nope. the stupid nazi wannabes have grown up to stupid nazi brutes. If you wanna change their view, you have to explain them what fascism means. And to explain it to them, you must be honest. Not just honest about what the nazis did. Yes, what the nazis did was cruel. But if someone is a murderer, that still doesn't allow you to steal from him. And you still have the duty to do your best to bring him to a trial, but without comitting atrocities yourself. If you steal from a murderer, both of you became guilty. His guilt is much more heavy, but for your own sake you have to admit your own guilt. Not to make his sin smaller. But telling: his sin is greater wont safe you from your punishment. Telling the people of the world: 'nazism is something typical german, and we are always the good guys' wont save your country from nazism. And thats what counts: avoiding that such a thing happens again.

 

[BiB]

1 Good.

2 Nor the last, sadly. Just was the worst ever.

3 Didn't his party get like 33% ? I find that a lot. And he stayed in power.

4 Some people are stupid that way. But I still don't wanna hear things partly moving the guilt from the nazis, which IMO u tried by saying other countries were just as guilty.

Collaboration in otehr countries is a very tough issue. I never claimed all others to be rosy fine. Thouh in no way I feel it can be compared to what happened in nazi Germany. Not by a longshot. And it was by far not institutionalised.

Even if for example Britain did sommink wrong (very plausible in war situations but then again 'normal' for war situations),it woudl in no way weigh up against any of the nazi atrocities. Does that make it right ? No. But that doesn't make anything the nazis did less worse and anything supposedly done by anyone else doesn't even compare.

Is it wrong though to steal a bread if ur family is starving ? as the old adagio says ? Isn't stopping the Holocaust worth quite an effort by almost any mean ?

I'd feel it is alright to steal from a murderer if it stops him from murdering for example.

'nazism is something typical german, and we are always the good guys' This obviously is bollox but what u mentioned in no ways comes close to what the nazi did. As far as those things go, they are at the lonely top. OBviously other countries can go wrong too but so far only nazi Germany fecked up bigtime.

'avoiding that such a thing happens again.' Yes. Don't think some of ur earlier statements helped that though.