[quote]Gkhan wrote:
Nominal Prospect wrote:
You’re defending the war criminals Clinton and Wesley Clark and what they did in Serbia?
Republicans were vehemently opposed to the '99 air campaign in Kosovo.
why are the Americans called war criminals and Russia gets a free pass to do whatever it wants?
You rip on Bush’s international policy, though it’s not much different than the Russians’. Why do you defend their actions if you think we have done wrong? Their doing the exact same thing.
[/quote]
Simple, because the American justification was going to war was 100% BS, and they acted as the aggressors.
[quote]Gkhan wrote:
Kosovo question: Bosnia and Kosovo were 2 different places, right?
Ok, during WWII the Nazis had extermination camps set up in Poland. Were their forces any less evil because there were no such camps in France?[/quote]
What “extermination” camps? And no, because the Nazi’s were never evil to begin with.
[quote]Gkhan wrote:
I personally think stopping the Serbs was wrong for reasons already mentioned, but how can anyone say our reasoning for doing so was wrong? Should we have let the Serbs continue their aggression? [/quote]
As opposed to supporting the Albanians in carrying out their aggression against the Serbs?
They were detainment camps. A number of them had swimming pools and concert halls. The deaths which occured there were mainly the result of typhus and other epidemics.
The claimed number of deaths stood at 4 million after the war and has been silently revised downwards ever since. It’s now below 1 million, which is still too high.
Very much like the “ethnic cleansing” figures used by the US in it’s press campaign against Serbia and Slobodan Milosevic.
After the war, everything was downgraded with very little attention from the press.
[quote]Nominal Prospect wrote:
They were detainment camps. A number of them had swimming pools and concert halls. The deaths which occured there were mainly the result of typhus and other epidemics.
The claimed number of deaths stood at 4 million after the war and has been silently revised downwards ever since. It’s now below 1 million, which is still too high.
[/quote]
Only in your deluded mind has the accepted number moved down to below a million.
[quote]
The camp commandant, Rudolf Hö�?, testified at the Nuremberg Trials that up to 3 million people had died at Auschwitz. The Auschwitz-Birkenau State Museum has revised this figure to 1.1 million[/quote]
Victims and death toll
Victims Killed Source
Jews 6.8 million [27]
Soviet POWs 2�??3 million [28]
Ethnic Poles 1.8-2 million [29][30]
Roma 220,000�??500,000 [31]
Disabled 200,000�??250,000 [32]
Freemasons 80,000�??200,000 [33]
Gay men 5,000�??15,000 [34]
Jehovah’s
Witnesses 2,500�??5,000 [35]
The exact number of people killed during the Holocaust is not known, and so estimates and ranges of this figure are given instead. The groups of people that are defined to be victims of the Holocaust has a large impact on the number of victims. If Jews are considered to be the sole victims of the Holocaust, then the number of victims is estimated to be around 6.0 million.
If the three million Soviet POWs, 150,000 disabled and mentally ill people, 130,000 to 285,000 Roma and Sinti, 5-15,000 homosexuals, political prisoners and religious dissenters are included as victims of the Holocaust, then the death toll is estimated to be around nine million people. Including the deaths of two million ethnic Poles as victims of the Holocaust brings the number of victims to around 11 million. The broadest definition of the Holocaust would also include Soviet civilian victims, raising the death toll to 17 million people
It’s very bad taste to argue that. What difference does it make whether it’s one or four millions anyway? A lot of people died because of Nazism, period!
It’s very bad taste to argue that. What difference does it make whether it’s one or four millions anyway? A lot of people died because of Nazism, period![/quote]
You know why. Because it is presented as a singular, watershed event in the history of mankind. Supposedly unprecedented and without parallel.
This story has had massive ramifications on everything that has happened in the world, post-WWII. It’s extremely important to know what really happened if current decisions are going to be based on our understanding of past events. He who controls the past, controls the present and the future.
Everyone relies on a historical worldview for interpreting current events. This worldview is instilled within most people when they’re too young to be able to tell the difference between truth and propaganda. So, there’s a serious potential for passing off lies and indoctrinating entire generations. The bigger the lie, the less likely people are to question it.
Numerous anecdotes about the Holocaust have already been revised or discredited since end of the War. Ever hear about Jews being made into soap or lampshades? Nuremburg was a total farce.
[quote]Neuromancer wrote:
Victims and death toll
Victims Killed Source
Jews 6.8 million [27]
Soviet POWs 2�??3 million [28]
Ethnic Poles 1.8-2 million [29][30]
Roma 220,000�??500,000 [31]
Disabled 200,000�??250,000 [32]
Freemasons 80,000�??200,000 [33]
Gay men 5,000�??15,000 [34]
Jehovah’s
Witnesses 2,500�??5,000 [35]
The exact number of people killed during the Holocaust is not known, and so estimates and ranges of this figure are given instead. The groups of people that are defined to be victims of the Holocaust has a large impact on the number of victims. If Jews are considered to be the sole victims of the Holocaust, then the number of victims is estimated to be around 6.0 million.
If the three million Soviet POWs, 150,000 disabled and mentally ill people, 130,000 to 285,000 Roma and Sinti, 5-15,000 homosexuals, political prisoners and religious dissenters are included as victims of the Holocaust, then the death toll is estimated to be around nine million people. Including the deaths of two million ethnic Poles as victims of the Holocaust brings the number of victims to around 11 million. The broadest definition of the Holocaust would also include Soviet civilian victims, raising the death toll to 17 million people
[quote]Nominal Prospect wrote:
You know why. Because it is presented as a singular, watershed event in the history of mankind. Supposedly unprecedented and without parallel.
This story has had massive ramifications on everything that has happened in the world, post-WWII. [/quote]
How so?
[quote]It’s extremely important to know what really happened if current decisions are going to be based on our understanding of past events. He who controls the past, controls the present and the future.
Everyone relies on a historical worldview for interpreting current events. This worldview is instilled within most people when they’re too young to be able to tell the difference between truth and propaganda. So, there’s a serious potential for passing off lies and indoctrinating entire generations. The bigger the lie, the less likely people are to question it.[/quote]
I’ll ask again: How does it matter if it was one or four millions?
You remind me of the idiots who argue that the figures in the Lancet study on Iraq are bloated.
[quote]lixy wrote:
Nominal Prospect wrote:
You know why. Because it is presented as a singular, watershed event in the history of mankind. Supposedly unprecedented and without parallel.
This story has had massive ramifications on everything that has happened in the world, post-WWII.
How so? [/quote]
No other factor has been more instrumental in contributing to the decline of the nation-state and the spread of globalism, at least from a public relations standpoint.
[quote]lixy wrote:
I’ll ask again: How does it matter if it was one or four millions?[/quote]
It matters because if it was one million instead of four, then two things become apparent:
Generations of people have been deliberately misled
&
The Holocaust no longer represents a watershed event in the history of mankind
If the Holocaust death tolls prove to have been grossly exaggerated, then a significant portion of the neocon worldview will be instantly discredited in the eyes of the masses. I needn’t tell you how significant that would be. For all neocons, history began in 1938, and “Munich” is their rallying cry. This mode of thinking has infected American political circles on both sides.
Also, people would cease their reverence of the most powerful and wealthy minority group in western society. This, too, would have effects.
[quote]Nominal Prospect wrote:
This story has had massive ramifications on everything that has happened in the world, post-WWII.
How so?
No other factor has been more instrumental in contributing to the decline of the nation-state and the spread of globalism, at least from a public relations standpoint. [/quote]
I don’t see where you’re coming from. Nation-states are alive and well. Globalism isn’t necessarily a bad thing either.
And seeing how you’re American, you probably need to be reminded that your country is two centuries old here.
[quote]lixy wrote:
I’ll ask again: How does it matter if it was one or four millions?
It matters because if it was one million instead of four, then two things become apparent:
Generations of people have been deliberately misled
&
The Holocaust no longer represents a watershed event in the history of mankind [/quote]
Say people were indeed misled. What does it matter? Do you think Israel’s legitimacy to set shop in Palestine is proportional to the number of Jews killed by Germans?
The meticulousness and discipline the Nazis put into exterminating people would still make the Holocaust stand out.
The neocon worldview is discredited in the eyes of the masses. And no, it won’t be changing a thing as far as US foreign policy is concerned.
Wealth and power buys reverence, regardless of everything else.
