And I say again, it's not racist. Islam is a belief system. It's like saying you're racist because you don't like nazis.
And I say it again, any self respected Democracy, has religous freedom written in it's constitution, and that for a reason. We have been over this already a couple of times. You don't like it? Go and chose a nation that doesn't have it. Like Somalia. It also has almost no laws that you have to follow either. You're dream state isn't it? You can finally open a business and not bother with any government. At all.
To be more serious, National Socialism for starters, is a political ideology where as Islam is a religion. Do we really have to go over the difference here?
One of the big problem is, when you start to talk about Muslims you can not talk about
the Muslim, like an entity, just as how you can not talk about
the Christian. Even you have to agree that Catholicism is not exchangeable with Baptists or Jehovas Wittness. And what surprise, the Islamic world shows the same kind of diversity. Religion as a whole, is a dangerous system and not meant to govern or rule ANY state. Not in medieval times, and not today. It doesn't matter if we talk about Islam, Christianity or even Buddhism. All those know about relligious wars and fanatism, and all religiouns can be exploited. Homosexuals have it barelly better in Russia, Hungary or Poland and the situation for the situation for the Romani people in Hungary is pretty dire in particular. If we talk about fundamentalism as part of Islam, than we have to talk about it as a part of Christianity, Judaism, Buddhism and Hinduism as well. Fundamental beliefs are a part of EVERY religion.
Just ask your self this (which I doubt you will):
http://aattp.org/here-are-8-christian-terrorist-organizations-that-equal-isis/
So this is it?
Nope. There are hundreds more. I mentioned a few of them in the article — the Covenant, the Sword, and the Arm of the Lord, the Oklahoma Constitution Militia, and the Provisional IRA are just a few who didn’t get entries but deserve noting anyway. By now it should be apparent to anyone watching that Christian Terrorism is a thing, it exists, and it’s just as bad and widespread as Islamic Terrorism. The only difference between Christian Terrorism and Islamic terrorism is that Christian Terrorism never makes the evening news.
Infact, Islamic terrorism, kills even MORE Muslims than it does Christians. And more Muslims are in war with each other, than with any European nation or the US. They again, kill each other, a lot more. Just as we did, 70 years ago. People forget way to easily that just 2 generations ago, you could find the US in war with Britain, Canada, or Germany with France, or the whole world against Germany in WW2 ...
And the midle east, has the exact same diversity. With the Osmanic Empire, Muslims fought constantly each other. Iran and Iraq in partiuclar have a very bloody history. 12 years of war, and the western nations supplied them with the necessary weapons even. And we have not even talked about all the conflicts between Jews and Christians or Jews and Muslims.
But you go, and concentrate on the evening news as your whole source.
Not nearly as much. It was almost exclusive to Europe (Italy and Spain, before the war started and puppet regimes started popping up)
Aaaaaaaaand parts of South-America, Africa and Asia. But you're right, only Europe. Central Europe of course.
But since we are talking about Dictatorships in general, it doesn't really matter what kills you, as even you agreed to that much. Choosing the lesser evil? Don't chose anything of it. A Dictatorship is a dictatorship. IF you think that Communism is not about an elite rulling over the masses, just like in Fascism, then you're dellusional.
If you can't dethrone the most powerful country in the world, how can global domination be in your plans?
As for Germany having plans to take the US - source?
The leadership was definetly aware about the issues you just named. What ever if you want to read conquering and domination in to that or not, is up to you. But there can be no doubt, that they saw their expansionism getting them at one point or another in conflict with the US and ultimately confronted with the problem, how to hit them.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amerika_Bomber
The Amerika-Bomber project was an initiative of the German Reichsluftfahrtministerium to obtain a long-range strategic bomber for the Luftwaffe that would be capable of striking the contiguous United States from Germany, a distance of about 5,800 km (3,600 mi). The concept was raised as early as 1938, but advanced, cogent plans for such a long-range strategic bomber design did not begin to appear in Reichsmarschall Hermann Göring's offices until early 1942. Various proposals were put forward, including using it to deliver an atomic bomb (which Germany ultimately never developed), but they were all eventually abandoned as too expensive, and potentially consuming far too much of Germany's rapidly diminishing aviation production capacity after 1942.
And this, was by far not the only, just the more realistic, project they came up with before and during the war.
If you have actual fucking historians sharing your opinion, you shouldn't have trouble coming up with actual evidence and arguments to support your childish claims.
Even your own previous post cites actual historians whose opinions support my arguments.
Done.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi_foreign_policy_debate
The argument most historians have over Nazi Germany's expansive goals seems to be over whether Nazi Germany wanted to rule Europe or, the world, either way it's close enough to global domination.
The guy is simply crazy, there is not much you can do about it. He has only a very rudementary understanding of history and how historical events unfold. For example, he even tried to somewhat justify the anti-semitsm of the 1920s and I am not even sure if he sees a conection between it and the Hollocaust of WW2. Just remember, no matter what we say, we probably can't reach him.
Anyway. Obviously, when we are talking about German fascism, National Socialism and the expansionism, we step in a very complex and very large field. It is a part of history with it's own research for a reason. In General, the German Reich and the period is seperated in different chapters, like before 1933, between 1933-36, the years before the war and the war itself, which is also divided in to sperate chaters, like early, mid and late war. One thing, that becomes very clear though, the more ground Germany lost politically and in teritory (particularly later in the war), it became more and more radical, with the ideology and the opression. The last victims, of the Nazi-Party, was in that sense, their own population. Just saying something like,
the war is lost, could have got you killed in 1945, what ever if you have been a member of the Nazi-Party or not. And in the end, Hitler had no qualms to get even rid of his most loyal supporters, days before the end of the war.
There is no doubt however, that Hitler and his Party, explained their politics and ideology right from the begining, when they assumed power. But Hitler also understood very well, that he had to play different roles. It is in that sense als interesting to see how he acted and spoke different, depending on the crowd he had in front of him. Since Hitler was a man of average intelligence and without any special technical skills, this, was probably his one and only exceptional trait as person, understanding how to adress a certain group. He would have made a decent actor I guess. This tactic however, didn't work always though.
So while world domination was inded, not a goal implied directly by their manifests, there was no doubt, that if they followed all of their goals, it would have lead to a world war, either with Britain, France or even the US. Or at least a war in Europe. Hence why so few people actually beliefed Hitlers more radical concepts, as they indedd thought, that only a lunatic would follow those. And it was not rare in the 1920s and 30s that many political groups shouted a lot of crazy ideas. What ever if Hitler and his closest companions actually REALLY followed every ideal, is a very controversially debated point in history. There are several quotes by Hitler and Goebels for example, which explain in their words, how stupid the population is as a whole and how easy they can be manipulated.
