Iraqis Forgive Americans

[QueenAnnesLace]

Tell me if I'm way off base here...but is someone implying that the U.S.A. or soldiers from the U.S.A are the only ones torturing anyone? Maybe in recent months but in history period? They have and are in the process of discipling the ones involved in recent doings. There is torture happening all over the world, in war situations and others. The U.S.A. is NOT the only one to ever be involved in tortures.

It's as if some people would have the U.S. stay out of things until it suits them. As in when they NEED the help. Which eventually always tends to happen. So why not step in before a lot of innocent people get hurt or killed? If things were left alone by us in the current conditions, it would have just been more to deal with later. I say nip it in the bud before it grows thorns.

[jerseydevil]

Originally posted by Ragnarok
Yes, I'm a pacifist, however WWII was a direct result of the Treaty of Versailles which was made at the end of WWI. It punished Germany and stripped away alot of land from Germany and Russia. That is why Hitler invaded areas that was once German soil. His excuse was there was German people living under a different flag.

That was only his excuse - not the reason. It's just like Al Qaeda using multiple excuses to justify their actions. Even if Hitler didn't attack other countries - Europe still handed Czechoslovakia over to him as a way of appeasing him. I didn't know that had been part of Germany. Then what about the concentration camps - would it have been perfectly okay to just let those go - just as long as he didn't attack any other country?

And second of, if people weren't so ignorant and read Hitler's book Mein Kampf, I think they wouldn't have been suprised by the Blitzkreig. After Hitler started his invasion did people start reading his book, which contained his plans for Europe. And I don't know what would have been the best way to have handled the Axis Powers. Hitler hand to be stopped so the war was inevtiable. However, calling the Axis Powers "war criminals" is stupid in my opinion because both sides were killing human beings.

Churchill repeatedly tried telling Britain and Europe what a thread Germany was and that action should be taken. Instead - Europe chose appeasement until it was too late. Your assessment that there was no one there who was speaking out against Germany and Hitler is just plain wrong. The problem is that it was falling on deaf ears.

As for both sides killing human beings - the Allies were not putting millions of people - men, women and children - into gas chambers - that's the difference.

[jerseydevil]

By the way - it's really sad to find out what so many Europeans on Entmoot think of America's role in World War II during this week which is the 60th anniversary of D-Day. I wonder - could that operation have succeeded without us? HELL NO! Some appreciation we get for all of our soldiers who died in World War I and World War II on EUROPEAN soil fighting a EUROPEAN war.

[Valandil]

Originally posted by jerseydevil
By the way - it's really sad to find out what so many Europeans on Entmoot think of America's role in World War II during this week which is the 60th anniversary of D-Day. I wonder - could that operation have succeeded without us? HELL NO! Some appreciation we get for all of our soldiers who died in World War I and World War II on EUROPEAN soil fighting a EUROPEAN war.

Well... HALF of it was European, and maybe HALF of it largely had the stage set for it by the Treaty of Versailles (which I agree was a major cause of Hitler's rise to power... not certain, but I think the US opposed it). The Japanese were just basically expanding though... and they hadn't been affected by the Treaty of Versailles.

As for internment of Japanese-Americans, yes - that was a bit of paranoid over-reaction, but their was no intent to really be cruel to them... it stemmed from fear. Pearl Harbor was well outside the Japanese sphere of influence, and we thought it was also well outside their range of attack. When they attacked as they did - with that kind of sudden-ness and effectiveness, Americans at the time truly feared they'd be showing up to invade the coasts of California in a few weeks. We were afraid they'd get a lot of help from Japanese immigrants.

In retrospect, there's no way Japan could have mounted any effective assault on our mainland... but like I say, people were doing a 'knee-jerk' at the time. Pearl Harbor was a big wake-up call - and we got up swinging.

Oh - and JD, I think Ragnarok is an American, not European. Not to start trouble for you Ragnarok - many young people in our country are not sympathetic to the US... but I do ask you to keep an open mind about us. As a nation, I truly think we've always tried to do what is best... though I'm sure we've gotten it wrong a few times in making the attempt.

[QueenAnnesLace]

Originally posted by jerseydevil
By the way - it's really sad to find out what so many Europeans on Entmoot think of America's role in World War II during this week which is the 60th anniversary of D-Day. I wonder - could that operation have succeeded without us? HELL NO! Some appreciation we get for all of our soldiers who died in World War I and World War II on EUROPEAN soil fighting a EUROPEAN war.

Oh come now JD. We were awarded with a nice pat on the back, and a good ol' "see you when we need you again". They don't want us there until the bad guys are in thier backyards. It's all about appeasing and wishful thinking. You knew that, right?

[jerseydevil]

Originally posted by Valandil
Well... HALF of it was European, and maybe HALF of it largely had the stage set for it by the Treaty of Versailles (which I agree was a major cause of Hitler's rise to power... not certain, but I think the US opposed it). The Japanese were just basically expanding though... and they hadn't been affected by the Treaty of Versailles.

Yes the US did not agree with the treaty and tried to get it changed, Europe refused and chose to use it as punishment against all of Germany - which did have a large impact on Hitler coming to power.

Also - no one seems to have mentioned Italy being part of the Axis.

Oh - and JD, I think Ragnarok is an American, not European. Not to start trouble for you Ragnarok - many young people in our country are not sympathetic to the US... but I do ask you to keep an open mind about us. As a nation, I truly think we've always tried to do what is best... though I'm sure we've gotten it wrong a few times in making the attempt.

I know he's american - he's from PA. I don't see where you got the impression that I thought he was from Europe. My comment about being open minded was to Radagast who is British not Ragnarok who is from PA.

[jerseydevil]

Originally posted by QueenAnnesLace
Oh come now JD. We were awarded with a nice pat on the back, and a good ol' "see you when we need you again". They don't want us there until the bad guys are in thier backyards. It's all about appeasing and wishful thinking. You knew that, right?

yeah - I know. That happened in Vietnam though with the French. Remember - Vietnam was a French colony and and we went in to help them. The French bailed on us though. Then Europe begged us to come into Bosnia after Clinton tried to get them to deal with it.

Of course I know Europe loves to appease - as I have said many times. They have the attitude - you ignore it and it'll eventually go away. Why take action, why not just deal with it once it completely blows up in our face? That seems to be the European way. Well - at least some of their governments do see the need to change the middle east and work with us on Iraq - even if the people don't. Seems sort of funny - what Fenir and Radagast are saying about what the US should have done during World War II - by getting militarily involved with out public support - seems to be the same thing they are now bitching about their own countries doing.

[Ragnarok]

Originally posted by jerseydevil
That was only his excuse - not the reason. It's just like Al Qaeda using multiple excuses to justify their actions. Even if Hitler didn't attack other countries - Europe still handed Czechoslovakia over to him as a way of appeasing him. I didn't know that had been part of Germany. Then what about the concentration camps - would it have been perfectly okay to just let those go - just as long as he didn't attack any other country?

I didn't say ALL of the land he invaded once belonged to Germany. And, as I have said before I don't think the Concentration camps were right, even if Hitler didn't attack any other country.

Churchill repeatedly tried telling Britain and Europe what a thread Germany was and that action should be taken. Instead - Europe chose appeasement until it was too late. Your assessment that there was no one there who was speaking out against Germany and Hitler is just plain wrong. The problem is that it was falling on deaf ears.[/B]

Once again with the accusations... I didn't say no one spoke out against Hitler, I was reffering to Stalin for example who was warned that Hitler's next move was to invade Russia.. but he ignored it and on top of that if he had read Hitler's book he would have known.

As for both sides killing human beings - the Allies were not putting millions of people - men, women and children - into gas chambers - that's the difference. [/B]

I understand that, however, killing people on both sides and then labeling the one side as war criminals is a bit ironic. And yes, I agree that Hitler needed to be stopped.

[Valandil]

Originally posted by Ragnarok

Once again with the accusations... I didn't say no one spoke out against Hitler, I was reffering to Stalin for example who was warned that Hitler's next move was to invade Russia.. but he ignored it and on top of that if he had read Hitler's book he would have known.

Actually, Stalin DID move quickly to create a 'buffer zone' for Russia. He saw through the 'non-aggression' pact with Germany. He knew it was only a delay of the inevitable. That's why he took the eastern part of Poland when Germany invaded from the west - as well as gobbling up the Baltic states and Finland.

The Russian army was no match for the German forces. I think Stalin knew that the only way to win was to stretch the battle out for miles and miles... and wait for one of those winters like Napoleon got. It worked.

[jerseydevil]

Originally posted by Ragnarok
I didn't say ALL of the land he invaded once belonged to Germany. And, as I have said before I don't think the Concentration camps were right, even if Hitler didn't attack any other country.

Well you seem to think that we were wrong for fighting Germany.

Once again with the accusations... I didn't say no one spoke out against Hitler, I was reffering to Stalin for example who was warned that Hitler's next move was to invade Russia.. but he ignored it and on top of that if he had read Hitler's book he would have known.

Where in your post did you specify Stalin - you said

..if people weren't so ignorant and read Hitler's book Mein Kampf, I think they wouldn't have been suprised by the Blitzkreig. After Hitler started his invasion did people start reading his book, which contained his plans for Europe. And I don't know what would have been the best way to have handled the Axis Powers. Hitler hand to be stopped so the war was inevtiable. However, calling the Axis Powers "war criminals" is stupid in my opinion because both sides were killing human beings.

So tell - me where does it mention Stalin or Russia in there?

I understand that, however, killing people on both sides and then labeling the one side as war criminals is a bit ironic. And yes, I agree that Hitler needed to be stopped.

NOT EVERYONE was determined war criminals on the Axis side - only the people who manned the concentration camps and so forth. So I feel your opinion is wrong - especially since the one side not everyone was charged with war crimes - it only depended on their role in the war.

[Ragnarok]

Originally posted by jerseydevil
Well you seem to think that we were wrong for fighting Germany.

Where in your post did you specify Stalin - you said


So tell - me where does it mention Stalin or Russia in there?


NOT EVERYONE was determined war criminals on the Axis side - only the people who manned the concentration camps and so forth. So I feel your opinion is wrong - especially since the one side not everyone was charged with war crimes - it only depended on their role in the war.

Quit it with the false accusations. I said several times in my posts that Hitler needed to be stopped, thats why I stated fully comprehend my posts before making these types of accusations.

I didn't include Stalin in that post, I used it as an example after you accused me of saying that no one was speaking out against Hitler, which I never said.

It is my opinion that killing people on both sides and labeling one side as a war crimminal for killing is ironic. Its my opinion and quite frankly you aren't going to change it.

[jerseydevil]

Originally posted by Ragnarok
Quit it with the false accusations. I said several times in my posts that Hitler needed to be stopped, thats why I stated fully comprehend my posts before making these types of accusations.

I'm not making false accusations - I'm going by your posts and how you come across. You are declaring the allies as war criminals. You then say you don't think that there are war criminals. Which is it?

I didn't include Stalin in that post, I used it as an example after you accused me of saying that no one was speaking out against Hitler, which I never said.

Well you did say that no one was doing anything or speaking out.

It is my opinion that killing people on both sides and labeling one side as a war crimminal for killing is ironic. Its my opinion and quite frankly you aren't going to change it.

The thing is NOT everyone was labeled a war criminal on the other side - only the people in the top positions or those manning the concentration camps. So you should stop misrepresenting the facts there. Should Churchill and Roosevelt been tried for war crimes side by side with hitler's officers?

[BeardofPants]

Originally posted by jerseydevil
By the way - it's really sad to find out what so many Europeans on Entmoot think of America's role in World War II during this week which is the 60th anniversary of D-Day. I wonder - could that operation have succeeded without us? HELL NO! Some appreciation we get for all of our soldiers who died in World War I and World War II on EUROPEAN soil fighting a EUROPEAN war.

Two points: Firstly, we here located in the pacific are eternally greatful to the US for keeping the Japs from invading. Had the US not kept a strong force in Europe, New Zealand, Australia, and other related pacific nations would undoubtedly have been invaded. So, thanks to the US troops who saved our bacon. Secondly, it was not just a European war. There is evidence that Germany was working to invade the US through Mexico. Either way, it would have become a major US problem as well, which is why the US joined in the WW.

[jerseydevil]

Originally posted by BeardofPants
Two points: Firstly, we here located in the pacific are eternally greatful to the US for keeping the Japs from invading. Had the US not kept a strong force in Europe, New Zealand, Australia, and other related pacific nations would undoubtedly have been invaded. So, thanks to the US troops who saved our bacon.

You are welcome.

Secondly, it was not just a European war. There is evidence that Germany was working to invade the US through Mexico. Either way, it would have become a major US problem as well, which is why the US joined in the WW.

It was a European War in the fact that Europe had years to deal with Germany before things go to the level it did in 1939 and 1941. Germany could not have easily have come through Mexico. Germany had subs off the coast of New Jersey.

[Ragnarok]

Originally posted by jerseydevil
I'm not making false accusations - I'm going by your posts and how you come across. You are declaring the allies as war criminals. You then say you don't think that there are war criminals. Which is it?

As I've said before I don't believe there is such a thing as a war criminal, and if people are going to label someone or a group of people as one THEN I think all who participated and conducted wars should be labeled as well. WHich is what I stated in my original post.

I wasn't misrepresenting the facts, I said only those who were charged as war criminals were confined to the Axis Powers, meaning none of the allied powers were charged with crimes. I never said everyone who belonged to the axis power was charged as a war criminals.

[jerseydevil]

Originally posted by Ragnarok
As I've said before I don't believe there is such a thing as a war criminal, and if people are going to label someone or a group of people as one THEN I think all who participated and conducted wars should be labeled as well. WHich is what I stated in my original post.

I wasn't misrepresenting the facts, I said only those who were charged as war criminals were confined to the Axis Powers, meaning none of the allied powers were charged with crimes. I never said everyone who belonged to the axis power was charged as a war criminals.

Of course the allied powers weren't tried for war crimes - war crimes were invented BECAUSE of the atrocities of world war II that GERMANY had perpetrated. Before that there were no war crimes. it was because of the outright slaughter of millions of people - not in the act of battle - but in the act of setting up concentration camps and gassing men. women and children that Germany was brought before a criminal court. The Japanese were NOT brought before a war crimes tribunal. So it was not the act of war that the Germans were really charged with - it was the wholesale slughter of millions of innocent people and the act of genocide.

So know - the allies should NOT have been brought before a war crimes tribunal - because they did not commit the crimes that the German's had. I can not believe you can possibly compare the allies fighting Hitler - to the what Hitler was doing.

As for your comments about the war crimes and this is what you have been saying all along - fine. It's not what you started out saying - you have narrowed down your opinions as I have continued to post - so fine. I still disagree with your corrent opinion on war crimes.

[Radagast]

I think, Jerseydevil, that you should amend your statement to 'war crimes of Germany's scale did not exist before WWII' because it is foolish and narrow minded in the extreme to say that they did not exist before 1939.

[Ragnarok]

Originally posted by jerseydevil
As for your comments about the war crimes and this is what you have been saying all along - fine. It's not what you started out saying - you have narrowed down your opinions as I have continued to post - so fine. I still disagree with your corrent opinion on war crimes.

Like I've said before when both sides are killing human beings, how can you consider one side guilty and the other not? But then again, you would also have to believe that killing a human being is wrong. This is all I'm saying on the matter cause this is getting no where.

[Sister Golden Hair]

It sounds like you're saying that war is a crime in itself, but I don't think it is viewed that way. War is unfortunate but often necessary to accomplish a greater good and establish security. What I would define as a war crime, would be the malitious intentional slaughtering of inocent civilians. There are always inocent perople that die in war, because that is part of war, but to hunt down or intentionally target innocent people is criminal.

[Ragnarok]

Originally posted by Sister Golden Hair
It sounds like you're saying that war is a crime in itself, but I don't think it is viewed that way. War is unfortunate but often necessary to accomplish a greater good and establish security. What I would define as a war crime, would be the malitious intentional slaughtering of inocent civilians. There are always inocent perople that die in war, because that is part of war, but to hunt down or intentionally target innocent people is criminal.

Yes, you are right, unfortunately war isn't viewed as a crime. I'm a very idealistic person, so I can see why alot of people disagree with what I've said. I would just like to say that I do like my country, America. Even though I don't like George Bush, I have respect for our soldiers who are fighting for their beliefs. However, I have different beliefs/views and I would like them to respected as well.