International News
See other International News Articles
Title: What the heck happened to Germany’s military?
Source:
HotAir
URL Source: https://hotair.com/archives/2018/02 ... ck-happened-germanys-military/
Published: Feb 27, 2018
Author: Jazz Shaw
Post Date: 2018-02-27 18:24:25 by Tooconservative
Keywords: None
Views: 8818
Comments: 114
One of the more controversial platform items in Donald Trump’s foreign policy stance on the campaign trail had been an insistence that our Europen allies start investing more in their own military forces and carrying a bit more of the defense load. One country in particular was called out on this and that was Germany. Many in the media scoffed at the idea and even termed it insulting to our German allies. But how real was the need for improvement? Recently it’s been revealed that Germany’s military isn’t just behind the curve on investment and improvements. It’s practically dysfunctional. German Newspaper Die Welt reported on the dismal state of the Bundeswehr (the unified armed forces of Germany and their civil administration) last week and the numbers are staggering. (Translated from German – may be imprecise.) In the Panzerhaubitze 2000 it is already close again: In the inventory of the Bundeswehr, there is this artillery gun 121 times. But only 75 are available, 42 operational (56 percent). Even more dramatic looks at the army aviators. The total stock of the NH90 transport helicopter is 58. In 2017, 37 of these were available on average, while only 13 were available (35 percent). Four of them are in action in Mali – which incidentally means that hardly any staff is available for training at home. Failure to withdraw the NH90 from Mali in the middle of the year will stall the ability for years to come. So the Germans have 95 operable tanks at any given time and less than 200 working Armored Personnel Carriers. Their Air Force is in serious trouble. They have roughly forty operable fighter jets, a good portion of which are already committed to operations around Turkey and Syria. And then there’s the Navy. Shall we talk about the German submarine force? It’s going to be a short discussion. Coming into this winter they had one (!) operable submarine. Sadly, that one grounded on the rocks a few months ago so their total fleet of subs currently stands at… zero. How did things get to this point? A recent interview with the German Defense Minister included some choice quotes. One of them was the explanation that Germany hasn’t paid as much attention to the military because “we are surrounded by friends.” The alternate and somewhat more dismal explanation is, “because we just don’t care.” Germany’s Parliamentary Armed Forces Commissioner, Hans-Peter Bartels, gave a blistering interview to DW this month, citing numerous shortcomings, and they go beyond a lack of heavy machinery. He said that the Army lacked sufficient protective vests, winter clothing and tents to be able to take part in a major NATO training mission. The soldiers are “under stress” and lacking discipline or leadership in too many cases because the German Army has 21,000 vacant officer posts. So will that be changing? Hey… Germany has politics just like we do. Spending two percent of their GDP on the military is a big ask and will require a lot of votes. Don’t hold your breath. And in the meantime, if something serious flares up in that region you may be waiting a while for the German cavalry to arrive. Poster Comment: All of the NATO forces have declined severely. Britain and Germany were two key allies who greatly shrunk their military. And America under 0bama neglected the military badly in fundamental ways. The military was hollowed out. Trump was right to lower the boom on Germany's Merkel. Despite her backtalk, she's left the German military in a shambles. America really has no western European allies to speak of. Thus, the total stock of Leopard 2 main battle tanks is 244th In 2017, an average of 176 were available, the remainder was in the repair or was stored in depots. Of these 176 tanks, 105 were actually ready for use, which makes a quota of on average 60 percent – and yet nothing is said about the extent to which maintenance and spare parts supply are actually sustainable…
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: Tooconservative (#0)
A couple of minor things called "World War 1" and "World War 2". Not only bled them out,but eliminated membership as something to be proud of. In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
This is military neglect on a scale we've never seen before. This isn't even a half-hearted effort. Even if America was always the heavy lifter in NATO, we could at least rely on some help from Britain and Germany. Now we don't even have them. What use is NATO now, exactly, if this is the quality of our so-called military allies, to use the term loosely? It's embarrassing. You recall that the NATO forces in the EU tried to knock off Ghaddafi. They couldn't even manage that on their own. They exhausted themselves, ran out of parts for their jets and missiles and whined until 0bama decided to stop leading from behind and he sent in our military to finish off Ghaddafi. And dug the grave of Libya as a nation. Ghaddafi was bad enough but what has followed is a disaster for everyone. Much like Saddam Hussein and Iraq. We haven't helped those people at all, they are worse off. So are the Syrians.
The same thing that's happened to Germany. Europe has fallen to Islam and to shiria. Merkel has sold out Germany to islamic invasion. London is now the world's leader in acid attacks on non islamic women in accordance with sharia law under an islamic mayor. America is attempting to catch up with the fad. Obama and Hillary aided the Jihadist conquest of north Africa by aiding Arab spring with "no fly zones" using the American military to defeat anti jihadist forces. America is scheduled to be the next to be conquered under cultural diversity and the philosophy of the meek shall inherit the earth.
They will do ok in the north and on the left coast,but are likely to hit a speed bump when they move south. In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
This kind of neglect began before that. I think that 0bama and Congress implementing the defense sequester on spending told NATO that we were cutting our defense spending. So they followed suit by virtually shutting down their military. Our military is weak. And our allies are hollow. If we go to war, we really are entirely alone now.
America is scheduled to be the next to be conquered under cultural diversity and the philosophy of the meek shall inherit the earth. America will never surrender to "cultural diversity and the philosophy of the meek shall inherit the earth." And I doubt Europe has or will either. We've not even started to really fight the Islamic shiria culture. -- Sure, -- we've been fighting their fanatics, but the real fight against a fascistic religion --- with millions of so far non-fanatical followers, - We can hope will never happen. Such a religious war would make WWII look like a picnic.. We have to win them over to sanity, by using capitalism. Our capitalistic system is enormously appealing to most people, regardless of religion. We can win without war...
Not with the large number of mosques we're building over here and the number of invaders to fill them.
Peace. Long peace is what happened to Germany's military. Militaries are expensive, and given nuclear arsenals, the Germans knew very well that its army is essentially superfluous as an actual fighting force. It's a way to channel and train young people and give them some civic attachment, but in the days of the Cold War, the Soviets weren't really coming - or if they did, it was the end of the world. And post-Cold-War Russia is much weaker than the USSR, and much less threatening. The Germans face no real military threats, but they DO face budgetary threats to their economic prosperity. So they have coldly and rationally decided to let their military wilt down to a token force, because they need the euros that would be spent on it for other meaningful things, and they know that the Germany army is just for show anyway. Nobody is going to invade Germany with an army. Who could? Only Russia, and that would end in a nuclear holocaust anyway, so why spend money, year after year, on a theatrical demonstration (which is all the German Army really is. Given history, they don't deploy it anywhere (and don't WANT to - that's the key - if they HAVE it, they get pressured by their cost-conscious allies to use it, so they'd rather not have it at all. Practical good sense is what happened to the German Army. They don't need it. There's no threat. So they go through the motions and spend as little as possible. The money they'd waste on useless armed forces they put, instead, into their economic and social development, and that bears profitable fruit for them. That's what happened to the European armies in general. We have a world empire. They don't. The main exception to this is France, which still has an empire, and an army and a navy and air force to deploy to guard it. The UK tries to do the same, but its navy is really shrunken.
Now THAT is the REAL invasion of Germany and the rest of Europe, and the Army doesn't help against THAT. Ideas have to be fought with ideas.
Not with the large number of mosques we're building over here and the number of invaders to fill them.--- rlk Now THAT is the REAL invasion of Germany and the rest of Europe, and the Army doesn't help against THAT. Ideas have to be fought with ideas. The only way to protect our Republic from religious fanatics, meeting in mosques, '-- may be with undercover methods, --- and with an FBI that can't even deal with fanatical schoolboys,--- we's in trouble...
Now THAT is the REAL invasion of Germany and the rest of Europe, and the Army doesn't help against THAT. Ideas have to be fought with ideas. Ideas require brains. The people in Europe and the U. S. are followers, not thinkers. They only follow people who talk the loudest and most consistently. It's a universal constant among people. The hyenas win every time.
What world power do we have to go to war against these days? Especially since we are not allow to wipe out Islam. Our real threats are from idiotic asshat American leftists and their Muslim lust bunnies. Do you see us declaring war on either? In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
We have to win them over to sanity, by using capitalism. ROFLMAO! Good one! In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
And you were doing SOOOO good right up to then! The Frogs are only capable of beating themselves,and chances are that would end up in a draw. In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
I had no idea that Islam was armed with ideas. Do tell more. Especially to the relatives of people put to death or chased out of their country of birth by Islamic loons. In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
The Frogs are only capable of beating themselves,and chances are that would end up in a draw. Yes, yes, all sorts of prejudice against the French, blah, blah. It's not based in present-day military fact. Truth is, the French have the most effective, deployable military forces in Europe, and they are routinely deployed all over the world. No other European power outside of Russia does anything like that. The UK does still have possessions here or there, but British forces don't, for example, keep the government's stable in half of Africa. The French do. Old prejudices are fun, but objectively, France is, in fact, the most militarily capable and widely deployed European power, with Britain next. They're the only independent military force that deploys in any strength for their own missions also. Other European countries, the "Coalition of the Willing", are still in Afghanistan alongside of the Americans. But the French - just them - are all over Africa, keeping the stability of their former colonies, keeping the oil flowing and the trade working. Places like Sudan, Zimbabwe, Uganda, Nigeria with its endless strife: these are former British colonies. The British are really gone. They do not have forces deployed all over Africa, and they don't have the forces TO deploy all over Africa. But the French are routinely deployed all over Africa, and have been since the 1960s. They have the forces to do it, and their forces are more experienced operationally, as a whole, than any other Western European country's precisely BECAUSE they always have operational forces in a few dozen countries. The Soviets called the French "the Cubans of the West" for a reason, and those reasons have not changed: France is still holding her own empire in her orbit, and she's doing it by providing them something that is otherwise in short supply in Africa: peace and stability. French African states have poverty, but they do not lapse into civil war every ten years like the rest of it, because the French keep the peace. This is immensely valuable to the people of those countries. And it works out for the French because the French get the oil concessions and other raw materials, mining and agricultural contracts. So sure, make fun of the French. They lost to the Germans in 1940. They lost in Vietnam. They left Algeria. Ha ha. Can't fight their way out of a paper bag. Hah hah. Truth is, in terms of real world military footprint, the only European country besides Russia that really has one outside of the home soil now is France. And it's a substantial footprint. France is the number four arms exporter in the world (after the Superpowers). So, have fun with the stereotypes, but come away with some more knowledge.
Islam is a belief system, an idea. It's tied to a culture, and those folks cling to it quite tenaciously. Their numbers are blooming in Europe, which has largely lost its own native religion, so Islam is expanding into a vacuum.
WW II didn't start with a war on a lone power. The three Axis powers went to war, in stages. So you could have a WW III. China gets the Norks to nuke some American targets, even in the States, possibly including Japan. We wipe out the Norks but not before their army levels Seoul. In the meantime, Iran (having consolidated its realm with Iraq, Syria, Lebanon) threatens Israel and the Saudis and the Gulf oil states. And Russia takes advantage by grabbing Georgia and Ukraine, threatens to grab some (worthless) NATO countries. And Turkey decides now is the time for some neo-Ottoman conquest and grabs the oil at Kirkuk and the northern half of Syria. Then China goes after Taiwan, the South China Sea, Vietnam, maybe more, sinking half our Pacific fleet in the process. You could have a pretty credible world war. And our NATO allies would be sitting on their asses, totally helpless. Israel and Australia and Egypt and the Japs and the South Koreans and the Saudis and a handful of other smaller powers would stick with us but our formal allies in NATO would be worthless and helpless. Just like they are now. Just like they were on September 1, 1939 when Hitler took Poland.
I've read this elsewhere. France does still have its old colonial empire and it keeps them more engaged. If France is our strongest NATO ally, we really are screwed.
Of course France is our strongest NATO ally - it has the largest nuclear arsenal. Nobody can invade France anymore. That's the problem with World War III scenarios. Russia and the US have nuclear arsenals capable of exterminating their enemy several times over, and neither will take a loss. The Chinese can't win if the US, or Russia, goes nuclear. The Russians could invade Europe as far as the Americans, or the British, or the French, let them come, and then no farther. Any of those three countries has sufficient nuclear weaponry to destroy Russia as a meaningful entity. Nuclear weaponry has the odd effect of making military spending all about spending, cash, dollars, power and posturing, because the major combattants (Russia, the US, France, the UK) CAN'T go to war with each other. China's arsenal is small enough and vulnerable enough to be stricken or knocked down, and it's possible that the French or British arsenals could be neutralized. But the US or Russian arsenals? Can't be neutralized in any meaningful sense, and have the firepower to simply take out every single city in each other's nations, and all of the ports and fleets and factories. So, who's going to invade? The Russians are passive-aggressive. They've never started anything major against the West ever, and if they didn't back then, now with nuclear weapons, they won't. War with Russia is a fantasy unless WE invade THEM. And we're never going to do that either, not ever. God. Invade RUSSIA? Who even wants it? We'd know we were lining up for Armageddon, and we'd either die in the snow like everybody else who ever tried it OR, if we were actually going to win, they'd simply wipe our country from the face of the earth and we'd lose. We can't win. They can't win. And we've both always been mature enough to know that. Other countries - the Japans and Germanys, and probably the Frances and Britains of the past - were NOT mature enough not to know that. But the Russians and the Americans have been throughout the nuclear age. Who does that leave? China? They are doing the big conventional force thing, for the same reason we do it: it's visible, it's tangible, it employs a lot of people, it looks big and bad and makes people happy. It generates a lot of production and tech, which leads to arms sales and money. There's domestic political power to be had in parades and big armies. But actually going to WAR with the US? We would exterminate the Chinese race from the face of the earth, with nuclear weapons, and they don't have anything like the capacity to hit back in any meaningful way. We might lose a few cities - we might not - but they would be gone. And then we'd all suffer in the nuclear winter. Russia is the only country that REALLY matters, when you get down to the fundamental truth. Military spending is about jobs and politics. It isn't about actually defending ourselves from the Russians, or them from us. Truth is: we can't. It's impossible. If we really go to war, we're ALL dead. Every one of us. The United States would be annhilated by the Russians, and vice versa - not one city would be left, and the rural populations would have mass dieoffs from the radiation and the disease. There would be no energy, no transport, no anything - the Sahara Desert times two. The people in charge on both sides have known that since 1970, when their arsenal matched ours. We can't fight, and we know it, so we haven't. Conventional war? Not unless one side or the other is willing to be utterly humiliated before the entire world and do nothing. We were so willing in Vietnam, and they were so willing in Afghanistan. Truth is, neither country could win in either place, because the populations were too large to fight, and our economies were not strong enough to send World War II sized armies to go and occupy all of it. So we lost and they lost. But any DIRECT assault on the other's homeland, with the actual possibility of conquering the other at home? Automatic nuclear war of extinction. What the Germans did in Russia in 1941-1945 cannot ever be done to Russia again, or to America. Pointedly, what the Germans did to France in 1940 can never be done again either. France doesn't have enough nuclear weapons to completely annhilate the Russians or the Americans or the Chinese, but they have enough to take out the top 100 cities and inflict 200 million deaths - effectively ending the country. Nobody can invade France, or Britain, unless they can disarm the nuclear forces. The Pakistani and North Korean nuclear threat probably CAN be taken out, by force or espionage. The Israeli force is a very interesting question in and of itself. But no combination of surprise or politics can take out the US or Russian arsenal. And therefore we will always have peace and there will be no war. So all of this military spending is REALLY about employment, political favoritism, spreading around cash and contracts, and having a force sufficient to go beat up the Yusufzahies (or whomever) when our, or the Russians', pride is tweaked. Military spending should be understood in that light: a big military is an absorber of the unemployed, a discipliner of the lower elements, a brake on crime, available forces for various executive actions, and a great place to generate profits for industry. It's not REALLY about national survival in war anymore: nuclear weapons guarantee that for the USA.
You mean just like WE were in 1939. WE didn't declare war on Hitler for invading anybody. The British Empire did, and the French Empire did. WE didn't. We sat back and let them be creamed. We only came in against Hitler because HE declared war on US! If he hadn't done that, we would have focused our war on Japan. FDR would have looked for a provocation, but the United States did not declare war on Germany on December 8, 1941. If Hitler had not declared war on us on December 11, 1941, we would not have been at war with Germany until a later date, and maybe never.
Yeah,and they have a union that can vote to not deploy. And correct me if I'm wrong,but aren't French soldiers given a written guarantee that they will never have to fight out of France if they don't volunteer? After all,that's why the FFL exists. In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
Ok. You're wrong.
Isn't that the Dutch? And maybe the Danes too? Or is that just a guarantee that they get to be at home on weekends? I recall a stir about that some years back, they were planning war games and someone thought their union would keep them home for the weekends. There was a great deal of harumphing about at the Pentagon as I recall.
The French Foreign Legion? It's still a well-known popular song in the EU. Little girls, 8-12, sing it in the Eurovision song contests and such.
Ok. You're wrong. Since when? Tell me,why do YOU think the FFL was formed? In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
Yes. Only the officers are French citizens. In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
The Foreign Legion is the modern-day descendent of the Regiments of ancient Royal France called the "Volontiers Entrangers". By the time of Louis XIV France was the center around which Europe turned. France was the largest country, the French economy, the strongest and most luxurious. The French Army was the largest and most professionally organized as well, and France was essentially permanently at war, pressing the Northwestern border relentlessly to the Rhine, intervening endlessly in Flanders. True ethnic nationalism had not yet been born, but France was the place to be, and for the militarily interested, the sort of men looking to become mercenaries, to make their way forward to glory, service to the French King in the Frontier Regiments was the way to get trained, get paid, get plunder and experience, and seek glory. Louis, for his part, was more than happy to augment his forces with foreigners willing to serve, and the Foreign Volunteers Regiments fought with distinction throughout the period. The French Foreign Legion of today is simply the modern descendant of a French military tradition that dates back 400 years. It is not that France desperately needs soldiers. It's that France wanted, and still wants, a powerful army, and recognizes that motivated men from any country, if organized and disciplined by a proven military method, can be harnessed up to serve the French state well. Also, the notion of birthright nationalism is a bit different in France. The French have a view of themselves as being a culture by choice - a "way". The French say "Est anglais qui peut - est francais qui veut." - He who is English, is English because he CAN be (i.e.: he was born there), but he who is French, is French because he CHOOSES to be - anybody can choose to be French: adopt the culture, speak the language, serve Louis (later the State), and you're in. That's why the French "foreign legion" was founded. It was a vehicle to harness up a great number of able-bodied foreign military men and put them to good use in the service of the French state. In the age of the Republic, it was particularly useful to take the trained forces of defeated foes who were very effective military men but whose state was shattered, and give them a path forward in the military in the service of La Republique. After World War II there was a lot of German spoken in the Foreign Legion, for there were so many trained combat veterans in Germany facing a bleak future whose military skills were of great use to France. That's why the French Foreign Legion exists. It's why the Foreign Legion's ancestors, the Volontiers Etrangers, existed for centuries. It has been a very effective expedient, which is why Frederick the Great copied it so well.
HELL NO !!!!! Germans had great military in WWII. Who are the psychos that want to rebuild it? The same ones who talk about "Polish concentration camps"?
But...but...What about the Communists Soviet Gulags and their own Death Camps?? Were they Holiday Inns??
The same "psychos" who would rather Germany NOT become a Caliphate state and retain its own unique national identity. The past is past. Let the grudge go.
My initiation with the French Foreign Legion was when Laurel and Hardy joined them (or was that the Three Stooges?)
No, they weren't nice places. But the fundamental difference between Nazi Germany and the USSR is that Nazi Germany attacked the West and Soviet Russia stuck to itself until Germany attacked it, then the USSR and the West both fought Germany and Japan to bring them down. Then they stopped fighting. The difference between war and cold war is the difference between lightning and the lightning bug. Stalin killed a lot of his own people. Hitler burnt down London. Huge difference. We and the Soviets manage to sit next to each other with nuclear weapons for 42 years without going to war. It's not really possible to imagine the same scenario sitting next to Hitler.
NEITHER was a good guy, Vic. In any context. Stalin starved, executed or imprisoned at least 30 million of his own people. The Soviets took a piece of Poland. And before that swallowed up smaller sovereign states to consolidate their "Soviet Union." ...Then the USSR and the West both fought Germany and Japan to bring them down. PURELY a self-defensive measure against Germany. One was going to attack the other in any case. (Commies vs Nazis had already been festering.) The Soviets did NOT "fight" Japan during WWII; They were political opportunists who were awarded Japanese territory in exchange for a cosmetic "Declaration of War." We and the Soviets manage to sit next to each other with nuclear weapons for 42 years without going to war. It's not really possible to imagine the same scenario sitting next to Hitler. On this point we agree. But ONLY because America held all the winning cards against the Soviets.
ROFLMAO! What kind of alternative history books have you been reading? The FFL was created because the French Army got tired of all the wars and decided to not fight outside the borders of France. They would fight if attacked,but were not going to attack anyone else. So the French formed the FOREIGN LEGION to FIGHT IN FOREIGN COUNTRIES to protect French interests. It was not only a way for foreigners,many of whom were foreign criminals seeking French citizenship to keep from being arrested,as well as French criminals could enlist,serve an enlistment,and then leave with a fresh start thanks to a spanking new French citizenship. In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
Of course they were,comrade! They were noting more than trade schools to teach the unskilled how to earn a living while living in luxurious accommodations in the countryside so they could benefit from all the fresh air! You just GOTTA keep up with modern history! In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
Have you tried to explain that to the Finns,the Ukrainians,the Balts, and the Poles? In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
Yes,and they did it with the help of their fellow SOCIALIST ALLIES,NAZI GERMANY. Stalin and his goomba Hitler had an agreement to divide the country before the invasion ever began. In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
The kind that convey what happened in the past.
That's not the West.
But, but, but. What about prices of wheat 10 years ago?
Will you go to fight on the Eastern Front again? Or your children?
You are lying! Stalin killed 300 million people. But it has nothing to do with the topic you try so desperately to derail.
You certainly can explain this to them. Because you visited them on vacation.
That's not the West. In that case I guess they don't count,huh? BTW,they are to the west of people to their east. In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
You certainly can explain this to them. Because you visited them on vacation. I sure can. I would tell them that is one example of how free people can dress if they want because there is no commissar insisting they put on a uniform. In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
Oh yes! Please go there again, and tell them [brainwashed Finns,the Ukrainians,the Balts, and the Poles]. They are still convinced that Havaiian shirt and colorful loose short pants ARE the uniform.
They didn't count enough to us for America to get involved in a war for their defense. Nor did England, France, Norway, Denmark, Holland, Belgium, Luxembourg, Greece, Austria, Czechoslovakia, Greece or any of the other places that Germany invaded from 1938-1942. Nor did they count after Pearl Harbor. The Japanese attacked us on December 7, 1941. We declared war on Japan on December 8, the next day. We didn't declare war on Germany even after Pearl Harbor. Hitler declared war on us, three days later, and commenced torpedoing our ships up and down the coast. THEN we came into the European war - once we were dragged into it by the Germans. So you are correct - all of those people don't count - to Americans. Even after Pearl Harbor Europe didn't count enough for us to declare war on the Third Reich. We were dragged into that war by the Germans. If they never declared war on us, we would have crushed Japan in a couple of years and left Europe to its fate. You can't have it both ways (though you can try). Being sanctimonious about the invasion of nations in the East by Russia, as though THAT deserves a maximal American effort to stop, when America did not of its own volition do anything to stop Germany overrunning the ENTIRETY of Europe. We NEVER decided to go help Europe. The Germans dragged us into the war and we had to fight. We were not the good guys riding to the aid of the beleaguered West and East. We were the last guy on the block who hadn't been beaten up by the Nazis, they attacked us, and we won. It's good for everybody that we did, but we most certainly did not do it to protect the rights of ANY of the countries in Europe that were overrun and attacked. We only did it because Hitler declared war and the Germans started torpedoing our ships right off our coast. We stopped that and crushed Germany, and in the process of crushing Germany we ended up liberating part of Europe. We didn't go over there because the Germans attacked their neighbors, though. So your initial proposition is correct: nobody in Europe counted to us. It was not our affair. It SHOULD have been our affair, when Germany overran Denmark, Holland, Belgium, Luxembourg and France, and then firebombed London. That SHOULD have been the signal for us to get off our asses like the Canadians did. But it wasn't. We didn't care about East OR West. They didn't count to us. We entered the European war only because we ourselves were attacked. Why, then, suddenly care about the Baltic States? Because we WANT a war with Russia, for some reason? Why Russia and not Nazi Germany? Doesn't make sense. Or rather, it DOES make sense: having won an empire and become hegemon of half the world, some -such as Patton - wanted to extend our conquests and conquer the whole thing. But to declare war on Russia in 1946 and attack? We would have been no better than Hitler, and we would have had no better luck either, unless we used atomic bombs. On what pretext could we have done that? That Russia was in occupation of the Baltic States? Seriously? We could justify incineration of millions of civilians in Russia because of a sudden burst of self- righteousness over some Eastern European territories that HAD BEEN Russian for hundreds of years, and had only enjoyed a shaky independence for 20 years, between the world wars. THAT would be justification for an American-perpetrated genocide? No. It would have merely been a pretext. And Americans wanted nothing of it. Patton did, but the nation did not.
I know one thing. I do not want the revival of German army! I do not want any f***ing German troops around !!! To fight on Eastern Front again they would have to go through Poland again. And if you are so clever, Pete, go preach your doctrine to the Latvians, Western Ukrainians, Croats and Bosnian Muslims. They will love it. I am not sure about Romanians and Hungarians. And please stay away from Greeks and Serbs, for your own good, buddy.
Oh yes! Please go there again, and tell them [brainwashed Finns,the Ukrainians,the Balts, and the Poles]. They are still convinced that Havaiian shirt and colorful loose short pants ARE the uniform. Calling you an idiot is bragging on you,comrade. In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
They obviously don't count with you,either. You can't have it both ways (though you can try). Being sanctimonious about the invasion of nations in the East by Russia, as though THAT deserves a maximal American effort to stop,.... Remind me where I EVER claimed European invasions of each other was any of America's business. Seems to ME that EUROPEANS should have gotten on their high horses and banded together to join forces to stop Germany first,and then Russia. OOOOPS! That's right,the pussy Frogs have union rules against their soldiers fighting outside of France! My bad. Sorry. It SHOULD have been our affair, when Germany overran Denmark, Holland, Belgium, Luxembourg and France, and then firebombed London. That SHOULD have been the signal for us to get off our asses like the Canadians did. True dat. IF the Fabalous Fiery French had gotten off their asses and made ANY effort at all to do anything buy cower behind their Maginot Line to stop the Germans,MAYBE the US could have justified HELPING the Europeans defend themselves against the Nazi's,instead of having to step in at the last moment to save their worthless asses for them? We entered the European war only because we ourselves were attacked. "We",WHO Frenchman? In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
Why fight them,comrade? You know the Poles can't take care of themselves,and need a strong dictator like Stalin to do their thinking for them. In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
I served in the US military just like you did, comrade. "We" means us Americans. World War II is a long time ago, and the Cold War turned out quite well, so there isn't a whole lot of point getting riled over things that happened so long ago. I'm just not gonna get cranky about World War II. It turned out as well for us as it did probably BECAUSE we stayed out of it until the rest of the combatants had broken themselves economically and bled themselves badly. We came into the fight a giant on a battlefield of broken toys. That worked to our benefit. No, the French military unions don't vote on whether or not to go to war. As here, the French President decides whether to deploy forces or not, and if he sends them, they go. As here, if the public doesn't agree, they can remove the President or weaken his party at the ballot box in the next election.
That is YOUR opinion,not mine. I think it is the height of foolishness to ignore the lessons of the past. The times might change,but human nature remains the same. It turned out as well for us as it did probably BECAUSE we stayed out of it until the rest of the combatants had broken themselves economically and bled themselves badly. It mostly turned out well for us because we were out of range of attacks by the Japanese and the Germans,and none of our factories were bombed to rubble. We also made a BUNDLE selling war supplies to Europe both during and after the war. In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
I have a strong feeling that you would prefer Adolf Hitler. Perhaps he is your hero,Parteigenosse?
At times, I do wonder if your hero is Joseph Stalin.
You mean Comrade Stalin's Goomba? In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
You can stop wondering. He is a good little comrade,who dreams of a return to communism for Poland. In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
I've never been to Poland, but I was under the impression that the vast majority got very sick of Soviets (Russians) during the cold war, and were grateful to the US for helping free themselves of them. I guess there are still some "old school" types though.
I am curious, how exactly US helped? Many Poles tend to think that they did it themselves with help from Pope and Gorbachev. Others disagree and add Reagan to the mix. What is your view, and how did you form it?
Do you prefer Third Reich?
First of off, Reagan forced Gorbachev's hand. Gorbachev wasn't that respected in Russia. He ran again and got 1% of the vote. Russia hated him. Pope John Paul was the last Pope I respected a lot. He was very against Communism. Do you agree with him? You are really making it sound like Stalin is your hero
It is getting tedious. You will not understand, but I will tell one thing. I prefer Stalin over Hitler. Half of my family was killed by Germans. In Socialist Poland the surviving part of my family went to university (for free), did useful and respectable work. We had normal life. We were not Commies. You have no clue, and if you could you would nuke the whole world in your pride and prejudice.
I don't prefer either of them. They were both evil tyrants. If you want to count murders, I think Stalin might outrank Hitler. You will not understand, but I will tell one thing. I prefer Stalin over Hitler. Half of my family was killed by Germans. In Socialist Poland the surviving part of my family went to university (for free), did useful and respectable work. We had normal life. We were not Commies. I understand that people tend to judge things by their own experiences.
And you judge by what? By Hollywood movies or by hired guns in media or by books?
It's human nature.
I guess there are still some "old school" types though. I met some Poles who were in the US Army 10th SFG at Bad Tolz in the early 60's who were TDY to Bragg for special training,and to say their hatred for communists and communism was intense was an understatement. APole was probably a member of a family that was an apparatchik. Maybe his parents were professors or minor functionaries,and because of that they had special privileges including access to special stores the typical Pole didn't have. That sort of thing makes their children grow up to believe that communism works because they see their parents and themselves getting special treatment. It never once occurs to them that is how normal people all over the world live every day. In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
Do you prefer Third Reich? The only difference I have ever been able to spot between the two was the Germans seemed to have a higher standard of living and as a nation were independent. The Poles were nothing but serfs to Moscow,and expendable. In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
WHAT "Socialist Poland"? I never heard of such a place. I HAVE heard of COMMUNIST Poland,and apparatchiks,though. Sound like anyone you know,Comrade? In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
I heard and read about such stores same way as you did. But I never saw one. And anyone with good grades was able to get to the university. For free. Perhaps your family were German Nazis who hid in America after Ruskies took them to the woodshed. This would explain the chip on your shoulder. Special training to do what? I rest my case.
The only difference I have ever been able to spot between the two was the Germans seemed to You were there? You must be over 90 now. Oh, I forgot, you saw them in the movies.
You take your "views" from what you were and are being told. By your officers, by buddies, by radio show hosts, etc. I won't argue with that.
Special training to do what? I rest my case. You have no case,but you ARE a head case. In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
You have no case,but you ARE a head case. Hmm I looked it up, a lot of information is in the open. So you met "some Poles" and you see those guys as the standard of what Polish attitudes and beliefs are or should be. You have a narrow and insular perspective. From Wikipedia: "10th Group began training with unconventional warfare groups from friendly countries in the 1960s, beginning with NATO allies. The group has also trained various components of the militaries of several Middle Eastern countries, including Lebanon, Jordan, Yemen, Iran, as well as Kurdish tribesmen." "It was originally planned that half of the members of the Special Forces would be native Europeans. Many of the initial members of the 10th SFG(A) were Lodge Act recruits, who were strenuously anti-Communist." From http://www.allgerman.com/landkries-BadTolz-Wolfratshausen.htm Bad Tölz is a town in Bavaria, Germany, and administrative center of the district of Bad Tölz-Wolfratshausen. Bad Tölz sits on the Isar River, 670 metres above sea level. It occupies 30.8 square kilometres. In 1937 a SS-Junkerschule (SS Officer Candidate School) was established at Bad Tölz which operated until the end of World War II in 1945. As well, a subcamp of the Dachau concentration camp was located in the town. It provided labour for the SS-Junkerschule and the Zentralbauleitung (Central Administration Building). The former SS-Junkerschule was the base of the U.S. Army's 1st Battalion, 10th Special Forces Group until 1991. https://jeffersonal.issuu.com/madelena2/docs/ganser...s.../71 "General McClure established a Psychological Warfare Centre in Fort Bragg and in the summer of 1952 the first Special Forces unit, somewhat misleadingly called the 10th Special Forces Group, started its training under Colonel Aaron Bank. The 10th Special Forces Group was organised according to the OSS experience during the Second World War, and directly inherited the latter's mission to carry out, like the British SAS, sabotage missions and to recruit, equip and train guerrillas" "After the Gladio scandal broke in 1990 it was revealed that Gladiators had been trained at the camp of the 10th Special Forces Group at Bad Tolz in Germany and that European Gladiators from numerous countries had received special training from the US Green Berets, allegedly also in Fort Bragg in the USA." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Gladio "Swiss historian Daniele Ganser in his 2005 book, NATO's Secret Armies: Operation Gladio and Terrorism in Western Europe, accused Gladio of trying to influence policies through the means of "false flag" operations and a "strategy of tension". Ganser alleges that on various occasions, stay-behind movements became linked to right-wing terrorism, crime and attempted coups d'état. In NATO's Secret Armies Ganser states that Gladio units closely cooperated with NATO and the CIA and that Gladio in Italy was responsible for terrorist attacks against its own civilian population." "In the Archer episode "Lo Scandalo", the character Malory Archer mentions having been involved in Operation Gladio when younger. It is described by Lana Kane as "a crypto-fascist shitshow, starring Allen Dulles and a bunch of former Nazis." https://ipfs.io/ipfs/QmXoypizjW3WknFiJnKLwHCnL72vedxjQkDDP1mXWo6uco/wiki/History_of_the_United_States_Army_Special_Forces.html "Since their establishment in 1952, Special Forces soldiers have operated in Vietnam, El Salvador, Panama, Haiti, Somalia, Bosnia, Kosovo, Afghanistan, Iraq, the Philippines, and, in an FID role, Operation Enduring Freedom - Horn of Africa, which was transferred to Africa Command in 2008. Special Forces were formed in 1952, initially under the U.S. Army Psychological Warfare Division headed by then Brigadier General Robert A. McClure. Special Operations Command was formed by the U.S. Army Psychological Warfare Center which was activated in May 1952. The initial 10th Special Forces Group was formed in June 1952, and was commanded by Colonel Aaron Bank. The first Executive Officer was LTC William C. Martin, Jr. The 10th SFG's formation coincided with the establishment of the Psychological Warfare School, which is now known as the John F. Kennedy Special Warfare Center and School."
If "Socialist Poland" was such a paradise, what was that whole Solidarity thing about?
Why are you trying to tell me about Special Forces? I was a career SF NCO. My only comment on what you wrote about some of the 10ths operations is that they were written by leftwing shitheads with an agenda. You will never read about the operations from the people that conducted them because they were classified operations. Which means anyone can make any sort of wild claims they want to make,and nobody can refute them without violating their oath. In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
Maybe you are right. I can't figure out where this is guy is coming from. He loves Pope John Paul (who detested Communism) but yet loves Communism.
You can't see the similarities between Catholicism and Communism? Seriously? Why do you think so many Priests are Communists that support and work with so many "Liberation Fronts"? If you can't see it it's just because you don't want to see it. In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
I am not Catholic and mostly have no use for it except that they believe in Christ. However, it has always been clear that Pope John was deeply anti-Communist and did help in the cold war effort.
I don't question your expertise, I just Googled what you said and shared what I found.
Here you go again. Commies under every bed?
My apologies. I shouldn't have done that. In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
Not in MY house. In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
Who financed / instigated the German Military Industrial complex? https://www.youtube.com/results? search_query=Bush+Hitlers+Banker
The centrally controlled/banked collectivist model is self- evident in the communist/Jesuit reductions of Paraguay: Today, the Jesuits teach Marxist principles in their colleges.
I am not going to try and defend Catholicism in general. My only point was that Pope John Paul was quite opposed to Communism.
Evidently catholicism isn't quite as universal in Catholicism as some Sun- parrots clad in vestigial Roman/Egyptian plumage would like folks to believe.
Grandpappy Bush was a sleazy carpetbagger and political opportunist but he never had the money or power to bankroll Hitler in any meaningful way. He was a rampant profiteer, as many others were. Grampa Bush was also likely involved in the Business Plot against FDR, a low-grade Know-Nothing cabal who got outed before they got anything done. That was all according to General Smedley Butler who was, like Father Coughlin or Charles Lindburgh, a big self-promoter with a big mouth. Not exactly your most taciturn general.
https://www.google.com/search? q=brown+brothers+harriman+Nazis Bony Birds of a feather, perch together.
Bush is a Nazi Jesuits were teaching Indians methods of Western civilization - agriculture, literacy, Christian religion and more. They secured Indian lands from confiscation and saved Indians from extermination. As a result Paraguay is the main country where local Indian language dominates.
He was a rampant profiteer, as many others were. The truth is always stranger than fiction, isn't it? (If believed.) Interesting background on Grandpappy-Bush. My understanding on a deeper probe of him similarly indicts him as a kindred spirit of Joe Kennedy. Between these two evil families, they have really screwed America. Toss in LBJ, then Bubba and 0bama's respective additional 16 years (more bad/absentee male role models), it's no wonder the USA has been swirling down the crapper. Morals start at the top. Pretty discouraging that these low-quality mercs/whoring opportunist families (Bush/Kennedy) managed to bankroll their respective sons sufficiently to make them Presidential Sock-Puppets.
THE Martin Bormann?? Btw Hondo -- as mentioned before, that "dRumpf" reference only serves to detract from your posts while making you appear like a HuffPo/DU sheep. Even when you appears to make decent points.
Good research...
https://www.youtube.com/results? search_query=Bush+Hitlers+Banker True,the Harriman Bank was ONE of the international banks that financed the initial build up of the Nazi military,but they weren't the only one. These people were lending money to King George and Napoleon to go to war in earlier days. They will lend money to anyone who they think can pay back the principle and the interest. Morality isn't even a word in their dictionaries. In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
I'm not trying to be a smart-ass,but haven't they always? Stalin was a divinity student,studying for the priesthood when he dropped out to become a communist. In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
Two dogs fighting over the same bone. In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
No,but Prescott Bush Sr WAS smart enough to marry into the Harriman family. That's how he became the manager of such an important account. He pled guilty to trading with the enemy in time of war,was slapped on the hand,and the Harriman Bank paid his fine for him. For punishment,they bought him the US Senate seat in Ct in 1954. And to think that MOST people would consider trading with the enemy in time of war would be treason and earn you a date with the hangman,Prescott got a seat in the US Senate. His son,Prescott Jr is the one that opened the Chinese-American Chamber of Commerce in Peking while his nephew was President,and he set up the deals to import Chinese junk into America. Something that had been illegal before his nephew became President. This was when Hitlery had a seat on the board of Wal-Mart and Bubba was the AG on Arkansas,IIRC. Now you know how Bubba and the Bushes became such good friends. In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
Sure kinda looks that way to me.
Jesuits were pacifying the sheeple and "teaching" them just enough to be obedient slaves - without empowering them to actually be able to run the farm themselves. Furthermore, they indoctrinated anybody within their purview with the BULLSHYTE that the people needed their priestly parasitic ilk for confession and absolution. And they still do.
An exaggeration intended to COVER UP what happened to the Indians thousand miles to the north.
My favorite question when the Brown Berret Mechista's start getting all fired up: https://www.google.com/search? q=Cannibalism+Chaco+Canyon Hint: Evidently not Christopher Columbus.
Ate or not, something else exterminated Indians. Cities: Rural:
They were exterminating each other long before the gringos showed up and made the process more efficient.
That is why Jesuits were superior morally to Gringos and Indians.
Where was their moral superiority when they were indoctrinating Marx, or Pol Pot, or Fidel Castro?
OK, you won, I give up. Cannibals and Gringos were superior morally to the Jesuits. Happy now?
Fidel Castro - Jesuit Schoolboy
You must be a Protestant from a Protestant country, who does not know that: in Catholic countries most of the good schools were run by the Jesuits.
What a Jesuit M.B.A. really means:
Some graduates of Jesuit schools: William F. Buckley, Jr. Pat Buchanan Donald Trump Gordon Getty Clarence Thomas Antonin Scalia Salma Hayek Tom Clancy William Casey Joe McCarthy ==== foreign: David Hume Rene Descartes Charles de Gaulle Giambattista Vico Arthur Conan Doyle Moliere James Joyce Martin Heidegger Federico Garcia Lorca Alfred Hitchcock Luis Bunuel Gabriel Garcia Marquez Antoine de Saint-Exupery
LOL. That's like ignoring the Nazis because not everybody Germany produced was a Nazi. The Jesuits are state-establishing, dominion assuming - parasites. Comrade Frankie, and the ideology that produced him, are what they are.
You are not thinking logically. You reason, that if Pol-Pot went to Jesuit school, than Jesuits are responsible for his crimes. As well you can say that if Pol-Pot brushed his teeth in the morning, then brushing of teeth was cause of his crime. I wonder if you trolling or just a little slow on the uptake.
FAIL.
What the heck happened to Germany’s military?
#2. To: sneakypete (#1)
#3. To: Tooconservative (#0)
(Edited)
What the heck happened to Germany’s military?
#4. To: rlk (#3)
America is scheduled to be the next to be conquered under cultural diversity and the philosophy of the meek shall inherit the earth.
#5. To: rlk, sneakypete (#3)
Merkel has sold out Germany to islamic invasion.
#6. To: rlk (#3)
Europe has fallen to Islam and to shiria.
#7. To: tpaine (#6)
(Edited)
We've not even started to really fight the Islamic shiria culture.
#8. To: Tooconservative (#0)
#9. To: rlk (#7)
mosques
#10. To: Vicomte13, rlk (#9)
We've not even started to really fight the Islamic shiria culture.
#11. To: Vicomte13 (#9)
mosques
#12. To: Tooconservative (#5)
(Edited)
If we go to war, we really are entirely alone now.
#13. To: tpaine (#6)
We've not even started to really fight the Islamic shiria culture. -- Sure, -- we've been fighting their fanatics, but the real fight against a fascistic religion --- with millions of so far non-fanatical followers, - We can hope will never happen. Such a religious war would make WWII look like a picnic..
#14. To: Vicomte13 (#8)
The main exception to this is France, which still has an empire, and an army and a navy and air force to deploy to guard it.
#15. To: Vicomte13 (#9)
Ideas have to be fought with ideas.
#16. To: sneakypete (#14)
(Edited)
And you were doing SOOOO good right up to then!
#17. To: sneakypete (#15)
Do tell more. Especially to the relatives of people put to death or chased out of their country of birth by Islamic loons.
#18. To: sneakypete (#12)
What world power do we have to go to war against these days?
#19. To: Vicomte13, sneakypete (#16)
(Edited)
Truth is, the French have the most effective, deployable military forces in Europe, and they are routinely deployed all over the world.
#20. To: Tooconservative (#19)
If France is our strongest NATO ally, we really are screwed.
#21. To: Tooconservative (#18)
ust like they were on September 1, 1939 when Hitler took Poland.
#22. To: Vicomte13 (#16)
(Edited)
It's not based in present-day military fact. Truth is, the French have the most effective, deployable military forces in Europe,
#23. To: sneakypete (#22)
And correct me if I'm wrong,but aren't French soldiers given a written guarantee that they will never have to fight out of France if they don't volunteer? After all,that's why the FFL exists.
#24. To: sneakypete, Vicomte13 (#22)
Yeah,and they have a union that can vote to not deploy.
#25. To: sneakypete (#22)
(Edited)
After all,that's why the FFL exists.
#26. To: Vicomte13 (#23)
And correct me if I'm wrong,but aren't French soldiers given a written guarantee that they will never have to fight out of France if they don't volunteer? After all,that's why the FFL exists.
#27. To: Tooconservative (#25)
The French Foreign Legion?
#28. To: sneakypete (#26)
ell me,why do YOU think the FFL was formed?
#29. To: Tooconservative, no gnu taxes, VxH, Vicomte13, sneakypete, Deckard (#0)
But how real was the need for improvement? Recently it’s been revealed that Germany’s military isn’t just behind the curve on investment and improvements. It’s practically dysfunctional.
#30. To: A Pole (#29)
Germans had great military in WWII. Who are the psychos that want to rebuild it? The same ones who talk about "Polish concentration camps"?
#31. To: A Pole (#29)
Who are the psychos that want to rebuild it?
#32. To: Vicomte13 (#28)
#33. To: Liberator (#30)
But...but...What about the Communists Soviet Gulags and their own Death Camps?? Were they Holiday Inns??
#34. To: Vicomte13, a pole (#33)
(Edited)
But the fundamental difference between Nazi Germany and the USSR is that Nazi Germany attacked the West and Soviet Russia stuck to itself...
#35. To: Vicomte13 (#28)
That's why the French "foreign legion" was founded. It was a vehicle to harness up a great number of able-bodied foreign military men and put them to good use in the service of the French state.
#36. To: Liberator, APole (#30)
But...but...What about the Communists Soviet Gulags and their own Death Camps?? Were they Holiday Inns??
#37. To: Vicomte13 (#33)
No, they weren't nice places. But the fundamental difference between Nazi Germany and the USSR is that Nazi Germany attacked the West and Soviet Russia stuck to itself until Germany attacked it
#38. To: Liberator (#34)
The Soviets took a piece of Poland.
#39. To: sneakypete (#35)
ROFLMAO! What kind of alternative history books have you been reading?
#40. To: sneakypete (#37)
Have you tried to explain that to the Finns,the Ukrainians,the Balts, and the Poles?
#41. To: Liberator (#30)
But...but...What about the Communists Soviet Gulags and their own Death Camps?? Were they Holiday Inns??
#42. To: Liberator (#31)
The past is past. Let the grudge go.
#43. To: Liberator (#34)
Stalin starved, executed or imprisoned at least 30 million of his own people.
#44. To: sneakypete (#37)
Have you tried to explain that to the Finns,the Ukrainians,the Balts, and the Poles?
#45. To: Vicomte13 (#40)
Have you tried to explain that to the Finns,the Ukrainians,the Balts, and the Poles?
#46. To: A Pole (#44)
Have you tried to explain that to the Finns,the Ukrainians,the Balts, and the Poles?
#47. To: sneakypete (#46)
I would tell them that is one example of how free people can dress if they want because there is no commissar insisting they put on a uniform.
#48. To: sneakypete (#45)
(Edited)
In that case I guess they don't count,huh?
#49. To: Vicomte13, sneakypete (#48)
Being sanctimonious about the invasion of nations in the East by Russia, as though THAT deserves a maximal American effort to stop, when America did not of its own volition do anything to stop Germany overrunning the ENTIRETY of Europe. We NEVER decided to go help Europe. The Germans dragged us into the war and we had to fight.
#50. To: A Pole (#47)
I would tell them that is one example of how free people can dress if they want because there is no commissar insisting they put on a uniform.
#51. To: Vicomte13 (#48)
So you are correct - all of those people don't count - to Americans.
#52. To: A Pole (#49)
I know one thing. I do not want the revival of German army! I do not want any f***ing German troops around !!! To fight on Eastern Front again they would have to go through Poland again.
#53. To: sneakypete (#51)
"We",WHO Frenchman?
#54. To: Vicomte13 (#53)
World War II is a long time ago, and the Cold War turned out quite well, so there isn't a whole lot of point getting riled over things that happened so long ago.
#55. To: sneakypete (#52)
need a strong dictator like Stalin to do their thinking for them.
#56. To: A Pole (#55)
I have a strong feeling that you would prefer Adolf Hitler.
#57. To: A Pole (#55)
I have a strong feeling that you would prefer Adolf Hitler.
#58. To: no gnu taxes (#56)
At times, I do wonder if your hero is Joseph Stalin.
#59. To: sneakypete (#58)
#60. To: no gnu taxes (#59)
I've never been to Poland, but I was under the impression that the vast majority got very sick of Soviets (Russians) during the cold war, and were grateful to the US for helping free themselves of them.
#61. To: sneakypete (#58)
return to communism for Poland.
#62. To: A Pole (#60)
#63. To: no gnu taxes (#62)
You are really making it sound like Stalin is your hero
#64. To: A Pole (#63)
I prefer Stalin over Hitler
#65. To: no gnu taxes (#64)
I understand that people tend to judge things by their own experiences.
#66. To: A Pole (#65)
I understand that people tend to judge things by their own experiences.
#67. To: no gnu taxes (#59)
I've never been to Poland, but I was under the impression that the vast majority got very sick of Soviets (Russians) during the cold war, and were grateful to the US for helping free themselves of them.
#68. To: A Pole (#61)
return to communism for Poland.
#69. To: A Pole (#63)
In Socialist Poland the surviving part of my family went to university (for free), did useful and respectable work. We had normal life. We were not Commies.
#70. To: sneakypete (#67)
(Edited)
Maybe his parents were professors or minor functionaries,and because of that they had special privileges including access to special stores the typical Pole didn't have. That sort of thing makes their children grow up to believe that communism works because they see their parents and themselves getting special treatment.
APole was probably a member of a family that was an apparatchik.
I met some Poles who were in the US Army 10th SFG at Bad Tolz in the early 60's who were TDY to Bragg for special training,and to say their hatred for communists and communism was intense was an understatement.
#71. To: sneakypete (#68)
(Edited)
Do you prefer Third Reich?
#72. To: sneakypete (#69)
(Edited)
WHAT "Socialist Poland"? I never heard of such a place.
#73. To: A Pole (#70)
I met some Poles who were in the US Army 10th SFG at Bad Tolz in the early 60's who were TDY to Bragg for special training,and to say their hatred for communists and communism was intense was an understatement.
#74. To: sneakypete, Vicomte13, Tooconservative, Deckard (#73)
I met some Poles who were in the US Army 10th SFG at Bad Tolz in the early 60's who were TDY to Bragg for special training,and to say their hatred for communists and communism was intense was an understatement.
#75. To: A Pole (#63)
#76. To: A Pole (#74)
#77. To: sneakypete (#67)
APole was probably a member of a family that was an apparatchik. Maybe his parents were professors or minor functionaries,and because of that they had special privileges including access to special stores the typical Pole didn't have. That sort of thing makes their children grow up to believe that communism works because they see their parents and themselves getting special treatment. It never once occurs to them that is how normal people all over the world live every day.
#78. To: no gnu taxes (#77)
He loves Pope John Paul (who detested Communism) but yet loves Communism.
#79. To: sneakypete (#78)
#80. To: sneakypete (#76)
Why are you trying to tell me about Special Forces? I was a career SF NCO.
#81. To: sneakypete (#78)
You can't see the similarities between Catholicism and Communism?
#82. To: A Pole (#80)
I don't question your expertise, I just Googled what you said and shared what I found.
#83. To: A Pole (#81)
Here you go again. Commies under every bed?
#84. To: A Pole, Tooconservative, no gnu taxes, sneakypete, Deckard (#29)
Germans had great military in WWII.
#85. To: sneakypete, no gnu taxes (#78)
You can't see the similarities between Catholicism and Communism?
https://www.google.com/search? q=paraguay+reductions+beautiful+marxism
#86. To: VxH (#85)
#87. To: no gnu taxes (#86)
Pope John Paul was quite opposed to Communism.
#88. To: VxH, Deckard, Liberator, hondo68 (#84)
Who financed / instigated the German Military Industrial complex?
#89. To: Tooconservative (#88)
he never had the money or power to bankroll Hitler in any meaningful way.
#90. To: Tooconservative, Nazi dRumpf, Bush (#88)
#91. To: VxH (#85)
The centrally controlled/banked collectivist model is self- evident in the communist/Jesuit reductions of Paragua
#92. To: Tooconservative, VxH, Deckard, hondo68 (#88)
Grandpappy Bush was a sleazy carpetbagger and political opportunist but he never had the money or power to bankroll Hitler in any meaningful way.
#93. To: hondo68 (#90)
#94. To: VxH (#89)
#95. To: VxH (#84)
Who financed / instigated the German Military Industrial complex?
#96. To: VxH (#85)
Today, the Jesuits teach Marxist principles in their colleges.
#97. To: no gnu taxes (#86)
I am not going to try and defend Catholicism in general. My only point was that Pope John Paul was quite opposed to Communism.
#98. To: Tooconservative (#88)
Grandpappy Bush was a sleazy carpetbagger and political opportunist but he never had the money or power to bankroll Hitler in any meaningful way.
#99. To: sneakypete (#96)
I'm not trying to be a smart-ass,but haven't they always?
#100. To: A Pole (#91)
(Edited)
Jesuits were teaching Indians methods of Western civilization
#101. To: VxH (#100)
Jesuits were pacifying the sheeple and "teaching" them just enough to be obedient slaves - without empowering them to actually be able to run the farm themselves.
#102. To: A Pole (#101)
what happened to the Indians thousand miles to the north.
Who ate the Anasazi?
#103. To: VxH (#102)
Who ate the Anasazi?
#104. To: A Pole (#103)
something else exterminated Indians.
#105. To: VxH (#104)
They were exterminating each other long before the gringos showed up and made the process more efficient.
#106. To: A Pole (#105)
#107. To: VxH (#106)
Where was their moral superiority when they were indoctrinating Marx, or Pol Pot, or Fidel Castro?
#108. To: A Pole (#107)
Pol Pot - Jesuit Schoolboy
Karl Marx - Jesuit Schoolboy
Etc...
#109. To: VxH (#108)
Fidel Castro - Jesuit Schoolboy Pol Pot - Jesuit Schoolboy Karl Marx - Jesuit Schoolboy Etc...
#110. To: A Pole (#109)
#111. To: VxH (#110)
#112. To: A Pole (#111)
(Edited)
#113. To: VxH, Vicomte13, Tooconservative, sneakypete (#112)
That's like ignoring the Nazis because not everybody Germany produced was a Nazi
#114. To: A Pole (#113)
You are not thinking logically.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]