More mud on the already tarnished reputation of Israels Army

[Chancellor Kremlin]

Given middle east politics, that is not a far-fetched scenario, especially in a 50-100 year time frame.

I hope people are not still discussing this topic in 50 years' time.

I bet thats what they said 50 years ago too

It may be solved before that, but I would give another 50 odd years for there to be a drastic change in world order/politics for that problem to be solved.

Israel itself was only really created at the end of a world order and the beggining of a new one.

 

[jero cvmi]

Go read some Nazi primary sources to gain a better grasp.

Meh, i got my basic info like, in highschool.
Looks like you haven't got passed that stage.

let's see what teh classics have to say.

On vital space:

[W]ithout consideration of "traditions" and prejudices, it [Germany] must find the courage to gather our people and their strength for an advance along the road that will lead this people from its present restricted living space [Lebensbraum] to new land and soil, and hence also free it from the danger of vanishing from the earth or of serving others as a slave nation.

apart from your neonazi instructors leaflets, read the prototype once in a while will you?

Also:

"It would not be impossible to prove, with sufficient repetition and psychological understanding of the people concerned, that a square is in fact a circle. They are mere words and words can be moulded until they clothe ideas in disguise"

Hollywood movies

Hollywood movies

Hollywood movies

Hollywood

Looks like you boneheads have a long road to walk before you catch up to your idols' standards.

Because you haven't answered: Have you ever set foot on Europe? Have you talked to anyone who has seen Wehrmacht in first person?

Because I know i have. Like fedaykin, elder members of my family were antifascist guerillas in the WW2. Their oppinion matches my view: Nazis were racist morons fighting thousand miles abroad for some abstract "ideal" covering up for germany's need to expand. Und Ze Fuhrer of course.
And eventually got their asses handed to them.

I'm sure Wooz and others on this forum have similar second hand info. All you have is your instructors' cock, so quit with the hollywood bullshit already.

Because, like i said before: The internet is an international thing.
Does it make _any_fucking_sense_ to whine about internationalism all over an international medium?

If the nazis had won WW2, the internet would be only in german and would consist entirely of work camp databases.
And ghey pr0n.

Conclusion:

YOU NAZI SCUM KNOW SHIT AND HAD BETTER SHUT THE FUCK UP.

or continue getting humiliated by subhumans overseas. your call.

back on topic:

Latuff is so awesome for saying so much in 800X426 pixels:

 

[Dragula]

Because you haven't answered: Have you ever set foot on Europe? Have you talked to anyone who has seen Wehrmacht in first person?

Because I know i have. Like fedaykin, elder members of my family were antifascist guerillas in the WW2. Their oppinion matches my view: Nazis were racist morons fighting thousand miles abroad for some abstract "ideal" covering up for germany's need to expand.

Hello there I'm from Europe. I have heard both sides of the story, people fighting for Finland in the winter war, volunteers for Germany and leftist going to Spain to fight Franco. So please, try not to mix in your opinions when trying to be objective, it reeks as bad as when the other people are doing it.

 

[the_cpl]

selfcensored post

 

[The Guardian]

Meh, i got my basic info like, in highschool.
Looks like you haven't got passed that stage.

Judging from the horrid spelling mistakes and childish ad hominems, I would have guessed otherwise.
[quote="Mein Campf"][W]ithout consideration of "traditions" and prejudices, it [Germany] must find the courage to gather our people and their strength for an advance along the road that will lead this people from its present restricted living space [Lebensbraum] to new land and soil, and hence also free it from the danger of vanishing from the earth or of serving others as a slave nation.[/quote]
Britain, France, and the US had colonies innumerable. The USSR did also (although these were considered "republics").

Hitler's main idea here was African colonies, more importantly, African colonies that the Reich had lost after the criminal Treaty of Versailles.

This of course was before Hitler's geopolitical view evolved, and the need for a Greater German Reich was more apparent.

apart from your neonazi instructors leaflets, read the prototype once in a while will you?

Rubbish. Germany never used the "Big Lie" - every other nation did, however.

Judging by your adolescent and emotional tone, I'm guessing it worked wonders.

Does it make _any_fucking_sense_ to whine about internationalism all over an international medium?

That's like stating that because speaking is social, it's idiotic to argue against socialism by using speech.

Doctrines and "-isms" are very different from their stem. How was that high-school English class, by the way?

Because you haven't answered: Have you ever set foot on Europe? Have you talked to anyone who has seen Wehrmacht in first person?

Oh, those were questions?

 

[Bal-Sagoth]

Finland in the winter war

 

[Chancellor Kremlin]

To be fair that doesnt say much about Finland as it does about the USSR.

It was like 'Throwing meat into the grinder' was their overal strategy. To win by sheer numbers.

 

[Bal-Sagoth]

To be fair that doesnt say much about Finland as it does about the USSR.

It was like 'Throwing meat into the grinder' was their overal strategy. To win by sheer numbers.

Respect!

 

[the_cpl]

To be fair that doesnt say much about Finland as it does about the USSR.

It was like 'Throwing meat into the grinder' was their overal strategy. To win by sheer numbers.

Respect!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simo_Häyhä

"Häyhä killed over 540 Soviet soldiers."

 

[Crni Vuk]

Better than a multicultural meltdown and failure "Jugoslawia" became near 50 or so years later.

With the Ustaša at least your people were safe from Bolshevik scum and capitalist world financiers which has led us down this dark path.

You look back coldly on fascist Croatia today, because it's easy and convenient to be cool. But the truth is, your nation would be a lot better if it were fascist today, and despite losing Zadar and Split, your nation would also be a lot larger and united.

Thats enough ... seriously. I am a former Yugoslavian, Serbian. What you talk here about without ANY knowledge at all about history, culture or the nations you mention is very insulting now! I hope you get some kind of warning. I have no clue where you are from, but stop insulting others or their nations.

I'd say Switzerland's army was moral, until they fought in the Bosnia.

Peace keeping missions, ew.

I'd also say the Wehrmacht was moral, at least compared to Allied "armies" (criminals).

But like I said, internationalism has destroyed the idea of the moral army.

How far are you known with the "history" of either the Wehrmacht or pre industrial militarism in general. Like Prussian, Austrian history, Holy Roman Empire, French, Brittish and Spanish colonialism?

We should of course forget the "nazi-everywhere" hooey of course. That have been 12 years of europe which is a pretty short time (even if it did probably some of the heaviest damage).

If anything moral in certain armies at least is today higher then ever. Prticularly in the times before 45 people did not even raised any questions about military in general or their practices. A single individual or life was not much worth. Either civilan or military personal. Only with the changing times, weapons and of course the money a soldier costs things changed slightly over time. It still is a shady issue, but a lot more nations today at least try to minimize colateral damage or take care about civilians and its for most western armies not usual to kill POWs. In past it was pretty common to kill them, if they have not been anything worth. Particularly times like the industrial revolution made here a big change and "soldiers" have been seen more then ever as nothing more like resources and have been spend of course like such, which can be seen very cleary in the first World War where all nations together wasted the life of young men like children water or candy.

The Wehrmacht, in particular, was it a worse army then those of its neigbours ? Talking about a pre-nazi timeframe of course. No it definetly was not. But it also was not a better one. And neither was it much different with the Red Army, or the Army from the Russian Tzar.

I think one can definetly say that today, things are for sure better then "befor" 45. Maybe we dont have a army with moral today, but we are definetly closer to it then ever before.

...
And yes, I specifically meant the Heer were a moral army, relative to every Allied army. History is written by the victors.

*WRONG*, not everything is always written by the victors. It may have been the situation 50-60 years in the past where everyone had the mentality to either forget or make the Germans pay (in some way) for the war.

But most "very reliable" literature about the Wehrmacht, before and during the war is today written by, what surprise, Germans. Modern historians that are not biased by nationalism, heroism or the imagination to make evil monsters out of "German" soldiers but more tryint just to show in details the situation as accurate as possible. Most of the sources today are in the so called "Bundesarchieve" accessible for everyone. Documents, front line mails, orders, everything can be seen and read. The usual soldier was probably not worse then most others. But the organisation in commonly is a different story, and most historians, the better ones make here a difference.

So the lesser of two evils doesn't apply to the German Reich? I think the millions of Germans who were genocided, and the hundreds of thousands of NS sympathizers who were butchered, along with thousands of neutral intellectuals, teachers and doctors who were killed or suppressed, would disagree.

Are you one of those people that support the idea Hitler just forestall with his war on the Sovietunion a attack from Stalin? Letz assume for a moment even this "theory" could be true (since that is what it is a "theory"), wasnt it Hitler that for more then 4 years propagate a "war on the sovietunion and communism" ?

Isnt it kinda strange that most experienced troops have been placed in the east by the Russians, closer to Japan as that was the front they expected.

There is evidence that the Soviet leadership in the miliatary DID definetly prepared their military and economy for a war, even against Germany. BUT it was nto planed to happen before Brittain was beaten, at least not before 43. Most Soviet Planes were planed not to be ready before 42. Actualy there was not even enough fuel for most of them ready before early 42.

But to say it that way, could anyone hold Soviet war preperations against them (Not talking about a plan to attack!) considering Hitlers propaganda? I mean did you ever cared to read "Mein Kampf" ? Or the general propaganda of the Naziparty, before and after 1933? "Conquering new ground in the east" "whiping out communism for once and all" well I have no clue how a "Russian" could missunderstand that ...

 

[The Guardian]

Thats enough ... seriously. I am a former Yugoslavian, Serbian. What you talk here about without ANY knowledge at all about history, culture or the nations you mention is very insulting now! I hope you get some kind of warning. I have no clue where you are from, but stop insulting others or their nations.

No insult intended. My attack is mainly against Bolsheviks in your nation, or international financiers. I hold the Serbs in utmost regard!

My point is simple though, every "multicultural" nation is doomed to implode or fail, either from an invasion on the outside, like "SPQR", or utter implosion from the inside, like Jugoslawia.

How far are you known with the "history" of either the Wehrmacht or pre industrial militarism in general.

I know that the Wehrmacht didn't exist until 1935, making any discussion on pre-industrial armies superfluous.

*WRONG*, not everything is always written by the victors. It may have been the situation 50-60 years in the past where everyone had the mentality to either forget or make the Germans pay (in some way) for the war.

Of course not all history is written by the victors. Kurt Vonnegut wrote some good stuff like Schlachthaus 5. What I meant is best described by this timeless Napoleon quote:

"What is history but a widely accepted fable?"

But most "very reliable" literature about the Wehrmacht, before and during the war is today written by, what surprise, Germans.

Information about the Wehrmacht written by German soldiers and historians before and during the war are top-notch.

Are you one of those people that support the idea Hitler just forestall with his war on the Sovietunion a attack from Stalin?

Yes I am. Why in the hell do people find it so hard to conceive that Stalin needed only 2 weeks more time before he was ready to take not only the Reich and Polish territories, but all of Europe to bring on another Dark Age?

Sure, he was building up, but that doesn't mean that he didn't have plans to "push the boarders of Socialism" into Europe, which Suvorov has firmly revealed in his excellent opus Ice Breaker.

 

[Ratty Sr.]

Thats enough ... seriously. I am a former Yugoslavian, Serbian. What you talk here about without ANY knowledge at all about history, culture or the nations you mention is very insulting now! I hope you get some kind of warning.

I wouldn't be surprised if one was forthcoming. The Guardian can't be unacquainted with the fact that these boards are populated by a great number of Slavs, many of whom are part of the site administration. With that in mind his outlandish statements and open expounding of Nazi sentiments can easily be construed as deliberate provocation.

Britain, France, and the US had colonies innumerable. The USSR did also (although these were considered "republics").

Hitler's main idea here was African colonies, more importantly, African colonies that the Reich had lost after the criminal Treaty of Versailles.

Untrue. In Mein Kampf Hitler already rejects the idea of acquiring Lebensraum in Africa and openly advocates aggressive expansion at the expense of Slavic nations in Eastern Europe. I don't know why anyone bothers disputing that, as it's hardly a novel or surprising proposition. Germans had been attempting to conquer territory from their eastern neighbors since the establishment of the first German Empire in 10th century, all the way until the WWI Treaty of Brest-Litovsk in 1918. The only new idea Hitler proposed was rejection of the policy of colonial expansion that had been practiced by the second Reich.

Sure, he was building up, but that doesn't mean that he didn't have plans to "push the boarders of Socialism" into Europe, which Suvorov has firmly revealed in his excellent opus Ice Breaker.

Heh, why am I not surprised that a neo-Nazi bases his arguments on a book that is about as credible and well-researched as a Tom Clancy novel?

 

[Chancellor Kremlin]

I wish you bitches woul stick to the fucking point. Heres an idea. Open your own thread and you can call each other nazis and and debate the pros and cons of the Wehmarcht and the Red Army all you want.

This is about ISRAEL. Mild off topicness is tolerated but this is just downright ridiculous.

 

[Bal-Sagoth]

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1072811.html

"We're going to war," he told his soldiers. "We're not doing routine security work or anything like that. I want aggressiveness - if there's someone suspicious on the upper floor of a house, we'll shell it. If we have suspicions about a house, we'll take it down."

"There will be no hesitation," the commander continued. "If it's us or them, it'll be them. If someone approaches us unarmed, shoot in the air. If he keeps going, that man is dead. Nobody will deliberate - let the mistakes be over their lives, not ours."

That commander just said exactly what I was thinking/trying to say a few months ago when people on this forum were discussing methods used in the Iraq/Afghanistan war.


I will have to wait until more info is known for sure on the exact crimes that were committed before I make any official comments about my feelings towards how Israel conducted its self during the operation.

It is true I may be pretty hard line with some of the practices that I think should be allowed in war but even then there are things that does not sit well with me.
Civilian executions, rape, torture without reason, looting,etc.

Hopefully a real investigation will be done to determine the extent of what went on during the operation.

 

[Roflcore]

How can anybody call the Wehrmacht moral? How can any school system fail so completely?!

makes me sad

 

[Blakut]

Yes I am. Why in the hell do people find it so hard to conceive that Stalin needed only 2 weeks more time before he was ready to take not only the Reich and Polish territories, but all of Europe to bring on another Dark Age?

If Stalin would've been ready in two weeks to take on the whole of Europe, then the German attack would've been repelled. How many more tanks can you build in two weeks?

My country was allied with the Germans and we did so to win back the territories the Soviets took from us. Unfortunately Hitler thought that giving Transylvania to the Hungarians was a good thing.

Anyway, in '45 Antonescu was betrayed by the king and executed by the Soviets. The soviets took over the country and ordered the remaining army (forced it, actually) to join forces and fight against the germans. That's when my country entered the dark age of communism. In the 50 years that followed the communists managed to convince the population that betraying the Germans was a good thing.

 

[Zaij]

Oh, yeah, totally, living under a totalitarian puppet regime that cedes national territory to rival states and subjects its people to autogenocide does wonders for a nation's collective happiness. Truly, it was the closest we had ever come to utopia.

This is perhaps the greatest thing I've read on NMA this year.

 

[SuAside]

Respect!

respect, sure, but you also have to remember that the Reds pretty much exterminated their own general staff and then sent a bunch of noobies to war.

recipe for disaster...

not to say that finnish resistance was not praiseworthy, but still. the Ruskies made it possible for the Fins to be able resist to such an extent.

 

[Ratty Sr.]

I wish you bitches woul stick to the fucking point. Heres an idea. Open your own thread and you can call each other nazis and and debate the pros and cons of the Wehmarcht and the Red Army all you want.

This is about ISRAEL. Mild off topicness is tolerated but this is just downright ridiculous.

Fine, want my thoughts on the conduct of IDF in the Gaza conflict? Here you go.

In my opinion, Israeli troops conducted the operation professionally and showed remarkable restraint. The number of dead civilians may seem deceptively high until you consider that the operation in question was a full-scale invasion of one of the most densely populated urban areas in the world, one that also happens to be held by a paramilitary terrorist organization known for its complete disregard of civilian lives. Yes, Hamas does employ human shields and use civilian structures such as schools and hospitals as bases. No, that isn't just IDF propaganda. If it had been *any other military* conducting an operation like the one in Gaza - Syrian, Egyptian, Pakistani, Russian, or hell, Croatian or Serbian - the result would have been a *bloodbath*, with hundreds of thousands of dead civilians and nothing but smoldering ruins remaining afterwards. 1,300 dead civilians is fucking *surgical precision* compared to typical death toll in similar situations. One look into the history books is all the proof you need. 1945, fall of Berlin: half a million dead, tens of thousands of women raped, the city turned to ash. 1971, Dhaka, Operation Searchlight and the ensuing war: tens of thousands dead, including pretty much every educated person living in the city. 1982, Hama: upwards of 40,000 dead, an ancient city turned to dust with artillery and tanks. 2000, Grozny: 20,000 civilians remaining out of a population of half a million, the city itself razed to the ground. That's how these operations normally turn out. That's how urban warfare is conducted. And 1,300 dead suddenly isn't such a scary number.

 

[Crni Vuk]

Thats enough ... seriously. I am a former Yugoslavian, Serbian. What you talk here about without ANY knowledge at all about history, culture or the nations you mention is very insulting now! I hope you get some kind of warning. I have no clue where you are from, but stop insulting others or their nations.

No insult intended. My attack is mainly against Bolsheviks in your nation, or international financiers. I hold the Serbs in utmost regard!

My point is simple though, every "multicultural" nation is doomed to implode or fail, either from an invasion on the outside, like "SPQR", or utter implosion from the inside, like Jugoslawia.

Thast cause you are not familiar with Yugoslavian or Slavic history in general and the culture in the Balkan area and I suggest you seriously to drop that topic cause almost anything you say is insulting. I am not a serbian nationalist.

The region on the Balkan is a area with many culture influences. It has been for the last 2000 years. And it will probably stay that way in the future. This is neither a good nor is it a bad thing. Its part of the nations identity. It has its reason why many called it a Broder-War and I could tell you things about it that you would not even imagine in your dreams

Again as long you are not familiar with the Balkan and its history your oppinion regarding it have no value. Particularly not when you start to insult people, I have relatives not only in serbia but in croatia and macedonia as well. And I do sense what you say as very insulting. Exactly such kind of behaviour, to hold one side higher then the other was it which have caused such complications and issues on the Balkan and still does! Extremes do not help a region with multilateral influences in any way.

I know that the Wehrmacht didn't exist until 1935, making any discussion on pre-industrial armies superfluous.

Its not "superfluous. The name was changed from the Reichswehr to the Wehrmacht. Those who did service in that time have been assumed. So there was interplay. If you would really read informations from former Wehrmacht/Reichswehr members you would realise that at least after 41 the Wehrmacht definetly loost its "clean" appearance, which it did already before it never was a clean army as neither have been other ones. Does it mean every indidvidual was a criminal? Definetly not, and thats what most people here say. But the German military was part of a propagandistic and political machinery.

If you do not want to believe it, thats your thing. But if you do not care to see the informations in a unbiased manner then any kind of discussion is ridiculous. No one dissputes errors from other armies. No one can seriously come up with a oppinion that declares one side to the victor with holy ambitions and the loosers as great evil.

But to place crimes against each other is the flimsy try to relativize, namely to minimize one party's guilt by finding excuses for its behavior. I may be wrong but I dont think history is worknig that way. It does not give justice to the situation. Or the single incidents. People mention the German crimes and others the Soviet behaviour after the occupation with what effect? About Bolschewiks or Fascists on the fronts?

Many German historians today see the time and the effects of the War which also caused a lot of damage for Germany from the Allied forces in a way that could be described with "They [Germans] sow the wind and reap the whirlwind". Germany was a source of very agressive politics, inside and outside of its borders. It was clear that such a situation would lead at one point to a war. I am just happy that the Nazis started the first shot and not really others or it would have gave them even more excuse for their politics.