Who is really to blame for the Holocaust?

[Bradylama]

Wasn't Rommel going to be executed for conspiring to assasinate Hitler in a bomb plot?

Also, whether or not Rommel was the best the Germans had on hand is still debateable. But he sure as Hell knew a lot more than Hitler. Especially when it came to the Normandy landings.

 

[victor]

Half the German army knew more than Hitler about the Normandy landings. He was asleep, ffs.

 

[Bradylama]

Sadly (for them) Rommel didn't know anything either, as he was visiting with his wife for her birthday. A woman, I believe, he cheated on.

 

[Sander]

I think it's absurd that anti-Zionism just happened to sprout out of the same areas that where most fervent in anti-Semetism and that saying the Jews lied about the number of people killed is any diffirent then saying that the holocaust did'nt happen at all. It's all shades of anti-Semetism.

Oh come on, CCR, you know as well as I do that I'm no anti-semite and I'm not claiming that the holocaust didn't happen. I am claiming that Jewish casualties are probably not as high as the Jews originally thought, this doesn't mean that they were lying about it, though.

Sander, I didn’t say that only a million had been killed.

Sovz, I didn't say you were.

There's a point there, I admit it. However, it's really, really old Rascism that goes all the way back to when they where in the deserts of modern Iraq.

It's also reflexive. Zionism was bourne out of anti-semetism, not the other way around. Thus one feeds the other. It's like the NOI, ironically.

Of course, that doesn't make it any better.

I'd say that it's civilization's fault. That's right, CIVILIZATION!!! If it weren't for civilization there wouldn't be any discontent violent anarchists who feel the need to shoot at archdukes, thus starting a whole chain of events which led to the holocaust. And we all know who started civilization, right? THE SUMERIANS! If it weren't for those damn sumerians, the holocaust never would've happened. If only we could go back in time and nuke mesopotamia, the world would be 6 million jews richer.

Don't you go blaiming Sid Meier!

Of course it's the goddamn Americans fault that the Holocaust happened. If they hadn't interfered in WWI, the Germans wouldn't have lost the war (probably would have stalemated), Hitler would never have risen to power, and 6 million Jews wouldn't have perished. Americans should've kept their fucking noses out of European affairs.

That isn't true. See, Hitler fed off of the discontent over the Treaty of Versailles. However, the treaty of Versailles was neither endorsed or signed by the USA, making the USA the one country that isn't to blame.

 

[Sovz]

Don't you go blaiming Sid Meier!

best statement I’ve heard in a while

 

[ratburger]

That isn't true. See, Hitler fed off of the discontent over the Treaty of Versailles. However, the treaty of Versailles was neither endorsed or signed by the USA, making the USA the one country that isn't to blame.

The Treaty of Versailles was a result of the Germans losing the war, and the reason why that happened was because of the millions of American troops that arrived in Europe. It's not as if the French or British were getting any closer to German soil by themselves. Without American interference, both sides would eventually have grown tired of the war and signed a peace treaty without either side being the clear victor.

 

[Sander]

The Treaty of Versailles was a result of the Germans losing the war,

yes, but the content of the treaty wasn't. What pissed the Germans off was the outrageous content of the treaty, not it being there. In other words: you're blaming the USA for causing WW2 because France and England Russia had created an exploitative treaty. And that is quite simply completely idiotic.

and the reason why that happened was because of the millions of American troops that arrived in Europe. It's not as if the French or British were getting any closer to German soil by themselves. Without American interference, both sides would eventually have grown tired of the war and signed a peace treaty without either side being the clear victor.

Right, and how, oh mighty seer, do you know that that would've happened? Maybe the Germans would've won, maybe the allies would've won, maybe the slaughter would've continued for months upon months.

Basically what you are doing is blaming the USA for creating a peace where there was no peace. Hmm....

 

[Shevek]

Lots of people can be 'blamed' for WW2. Yes, the Treaty of Versailles was the "politics of hatred." Then again, if congress would have listened to Wilson, the US would have gotten into the League of Nations and overturned alot of the treaty's overly punitive aspects. Similarly, if Russia wouldnt have advised the German Communists to take such a hardline against Socialist Democrats they might have been able to form a unified front against the Nazis and stop Hitler's rise. Appeasing Hitler was pretty boneheaded too - and everyone did that. The US even gave him money.

At the end of the day, though, the fault for the Holocaust lies with Hitler and the German people. Despite claims to the contrary, modern evidence suggest most Germans knew about the Holocaust and were not all the unwilling accomplises some claim to be. First, a bit of history. After Napoleon brought nationalism to Germany, it became colored with its own German character. Chiefly, the notion of the 'volkgeist' of the German people being superior to that of others and the Bismarkian ideals for a Weimar republic which would last a 1000 years were concepts that also played into the hands of Nazism. In other words, Hitler's rhetoric did not arise in a vaccum - it had ties to prevalent German attitudes. While absent of foreign action or inaction Nazism might not have risen, it should be stated that Hitler's actions were his own and the willingness of Germans to play along was their own choice. These people have a responsibility for their history and playing hot potato with the blame isnt responsible.

 

[Dan]

Actualy, Hebrew and Arabic are pretty close.

 

[Gwydion]

Actualy, Hebrew and Arabic are pretty close.

Oh, come on. You don't really expect us to believe that a jew would know anything about Hebrew, do you?

 

[Dan]

Actualy, Hebrew and Arabic are pretty close.

Oh, come on. You don't really expect us to believe that a jew would know anything about Hebrew, do you?

Well, normally not, but I cross trained.

 

[Montez]

Despite claims to the contrary, modern evidence suggest most Germans knew about the Holocaust and were not all the unwilling accomplises some claim to be.

This just seems like common sense, too. After all the anti-semitic rhetoric and repression of jews, no one notices or thinks twice when all their jewish neighbors start dissapearing? Even for the germans that didn't know any jewish people personally the slow and steady decline of people wearing a star of david had to be conspicuous. I can accept that a lot of people didn't know exactly what happened to them, but it seems undeniable that most everyone knew that something bad was going on.

 

[Sander]

That's part of the problem, though. If you didn't want to know, you didn't have to know. The government gave lots of nice excuses why the Jews weren't there (they were being transported to the Eastern lands, for instance), and Jewish families also received mailcards from their relatives, completely forged, from The Black Forest. A lot of Jews themselves didn't know of the holocaust while it was going on.
Annoyingly, a lot of Germans turned a blind eye, so to speak, they chose not to think about it or know about it.

Interestingly enough, though, a lot of Germans feel, or at least used to feel, a certain amount of guilt at the part of the German people in WW2. This has caused a really hard line against any form of nazism, and often attempts to make it up by, for instance, starting Jewish cultural societies.

 

[Sovz]

Well, more and more of Germans tend to see themselves as victims of WW2.
More or less due to a trend of German historians claiming that basically they too were victims. If you take a look on the number of population died during WW2, you’ll see that the Germans stand proudly second, after the Soviet Union. They do have a point on that, who bombed Köln to the ground?

Interestingly enough, though, a lot of Germans feel, or at least used to feel, a certain amount of guilt at the part of the German people in WW2. This has caused a really hard line against any form of nazism, and often attempts to make it up by, for instance, starting Jewish cultural societies.

What is also interesting, is this type of thinking becoming extinct due to the Israeli conduct of things in the occupied territories, and due to the excessive use of the holocaust as an excuse by the Jews.

 

[Wooz]

Considering that in the entire world maybe less then 0.1% of the population considers themselves "anarchists", you're simply not big enough to make that kind of impact.

Kid.
You know how many people took over Moscow in 1917? Huh? No? Around 60.

Talk about impact.

 

[Zoe]

Kid.
You know how many people took over Moscow in 1917? Huh? No? Around 60.

Talk about impact.

Makes one think, eh?
So many movies used that idea - on how muh impact one single person can have on the world ( see LOTR, The butterfly effect and so many others)

 

[John Uskglass]

Considering that in the entire world maybe less then 0.1% of the population considers themselves "anarchists", you're simply not big enough to make that kind of impact.

Kid.
You know how many people took over Moscow in 1917? Huh? No? Around 60.

Talk about impact.

In the middle of the largest war the world had ever seen, in the middle of a country that had already gone through a revolution and was ready to blow.

America controls 90% of the projectible power in the world, we're the most powerful nation in history, there's no world war on the horizon and there are none of the same economic conditions.

You=strawman.

 

[ratburger]

The Treaty of Versailles was a result of the Germans losing the war,

yes, but the content of the treaty wasn't. What pissed the Germans off was the outrageous content of the treaty, not it being there. In other words: you're blaming the USA for causing WW2 because France and England Russia had created an exploitative treaty. And that is quite simply completely idiotic.

...
Right, and how, oh mighty seer, do you know that that would've happened? Maybe the Germans would've won, maybe the allies would've won, maybe the slaughter would've continued for months upon months.

Basically what you are doing is blaming the USA for creating a peace where there was no peace. Hmm....

But was the peace worth it, if in hindsight you know that it would end up spawning Hitler? The French and British couldn't have gotten Germany to sign such a harsh treaty without the complete victory made possible by American troops. Without American intervention, there were only two real possibilities: a stalemate (the most likely) or a German victory. In late May 1918, several British ministers called for preparations for an evacuation of British troops from France because they believed French troops were on the verge of cracking, what with Germany within 40 miles of Paris. True, Ludendorff's offensive eventually ran out of steam, but it's not as if the French and the British were on the cusp of victory without America's aid. If the combatants had grown tired of the war and sought peace, well that still would not have produced a Treaty of Versailles for either side.

The worst possible outcome was a German loss, for we know that produced Hitler. Yes, Wilson couldn't have known that, but why did he choose to become embroiled in the war when many Americans, especially in Congress, vociferously opposed getting involved? The U.S. had long been isolationist, why not continue that policy? A German victory would have resulted in reparations against France, maybe some annexations of French territory, and Germany getting some Belgian ports, much to Britain's annoyance. Even if France had suffered terribly and decided to seek revenge a few decades later, I don't think there is much doubt that they would have gotten their asses kicked by Germany.

Despite claims to the contrary, modern evidence suggest most Germans knew about the Holocaust and were not all the unwilling accomplises some claim to be.

This just seems like common sense, too. After all the anti-semitic rhetoric and repression of jews, no one notices or thinks twice when all their jewish neighbors start dissapearing? Even for the germans that didn't know any jewish people personally the slow and steady decline of people wearing a star of david had to be conspicuous. I can accept that a lot of people didn't know exactly what happened to them, but it seems undeniable that most everyone knew that something bad was going on.

I agree that most Germans were aware that the Jews weren't being well-treated, but I think the average German had more important things on their mind, what with their own deprivations and the Allied bombing. Just because the Jews were being taken away doesn't mean Germans were going to assume they were being executed; probably just being taken away to work in a factory. The number of people directly involved in the killing was quite small. The Einsatzgruppen who killed about a million Jews and other undesirables in Poland and Russia only consisted of a few thousand men. True, quite a few regular German soldiers would have seen the result of their work, but Germany was a totalitarian state, with strong censorship, propaganda, and the Gestapo. The extent to which information about the mass murder of Jews spread to the average German citizen is very difficult to discern without actually living through the time period.

It's important to remember that many people in the West, particularly in America, initially dismissed the horror stories coming out of Germany, because the same thing had happened during the First World War. Overzealous reporters then had greatly exaggerated their claims of German atrocities in Belgium and France, and after the war it was found that in all but a few cases they were false. A citizen of Germany would have taken any taken any rumor about the killing of millions of Jews with a grain of salt, since there were hundreds of rumors floating around during the war.

 

[Dan]

And even if you believed the rumors, what can one do? Go against the Nazi regime?
An avrage german might have heard rumors, but he wouldn't go about getting killed for rumors alone.

 

[Sander]

<snip>

Yet you are again dead wrong. The USA did not go into the war from a humanitarian incentive or anything else. It went into WW1 because of the clumsy attempts of the Germans to have the Mexicans attack them. Their sovereignity had been threatened by Germany so they basically had to help. So by your logic "they're to blame because something way back they did partially caused this" the Americans aren't to blame, but the Germans are for drawing in the Americans.

In the middle of the largest war the world had ever seen, in the middle of a country that had already gone through a revolution and was ready to blow.

That doesn't change a thing about the fact that 60 people took over the power in one of the largest countries in the world. Yes, there were other circumstances, so what? Does that mean that only those specific circumstances can cause such a thing, and that such circumstances will never happen agaiN? Hah!

America controls 90% of the projectible power in the world, we're the most powerful nation in history, there's no world war on the horizon and there are none of the same economic conditions.

You=strawman.

AHa. Right, so what if the terrorists get together, throw a couple of more plains at you (which is possible) and kill a lot of Americans. What if this leads to huge economic problems, which is very likely. What if this leads to the president being impeached: revolution.
Right, so where, exactly, are those conditions completly impossible?