Sgt Joch Posted March 1, 2013 Share Posted March 1, 2013 And you forgot third evil - British/US Empire. I thought the third evil was Tojo..or was it Mussolini..or Franco..Mao?..Chiang Kai Shek..Kim il Sung..Antonescu..Petain..Salazar..Vargas..Ho Chi Minh.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baron Jacquinot Posted March 2, 2013 Share Posted March 2, 2013 Ok two problems with that Baron. First, the US and British are two seperate entities, you cannot claim they are one and the same, even as Allies. Second, in what possible way could you claim either the British or US were anywhere near as 'evil' as the Nazi's or Soviets? Genocide? Shtraf battalions? Commissar order? Human land mine clearance? The Holocaust? Katyn Forest? The very worst you could say about the US during the period is the deportation of it's Asian American citizens in the country. Thats light years away from what the Nazi's and Soviets were doing. Seriously man, do you just believe everything you're told if someone is wearing an armband or something? And who give money to Hitler and Communists? Who? Maybe Santa Claus? Who yield up Europe to Hitler? This war was needed only to British/Us Anglo-Saxon Empire, like now they need start WW3 to save dollar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sburke Posted March 2, 2013 Share Posted March 2, 2013 Who yield up Europe to Hitler? I believe considering they got half of Poland, Soviet Russia gets to raise it's hand here as well. and counting down to the ban.......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sublime Posted March 2, 2013 Share Posted March 2, 2013 Really? We started WW3? when? And baron the Brits did everything they could to appease the Nazis, not fight them. The US tried everything it could until it was ATTACKED and then Germany DECLARED WAR on it. Pretty hard to 'need' a war, when you're attacked. Seriously, where did you learn your history? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baron Jacquinot Posted March 2, 2013 Share Posted March 2, 2013 I just want to say, that's all sides was evil, who sponsored this war and who start this war, and who divide Poland with Nazis. Do you really think that some of this guys(Churchill, Roosevelt, Stalin, Hitler) was angel? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baron Jacquinot Posted March 2, 2013 Share Posted March 2, 2013 "And baron the Brits did everything they could to appease the Nazis, not fight them" - exactly, they unleashed hands of Hitler. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LukeFF Posted March 2, 2013 Share Posted March 2, 2013 Here we go again... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baron Jacquinot Posted March 2, 2013 Share Posted March 2, 2013 Here we go again... No, we just try to understand point of view from all sides(Europe, Anglo-Saxon, Russia), I think it can avert new war. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sgt Joch Posted March 2, 2013 Share Posted March 2, 2013 "And baron the Brits did everything they could to appease the Nazis, not fight them" - exactly, they unleashed hands of Hitler. actually its the Russians who did everything they could to appease the Nazis. The Russians allied themselves with Hitler in 1939. The Russians carved up Poland with Hitler and murdered 30,000 Polish officers at Katyn. The Russians gave Hitler every supply he needed to conquer Europe. Stalin even ordered his own troops not to fire on the Germans on the morning of June 22 hoping he could still appease Hitler. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sublime Posted March 2, 2013 Share Posted March 2, 2013 Yeah first of all for once I have to agree with Baron. We're just discussing this. It gets heated at times but I don't mind baron really, he doesnt make me foam at the mouth like Steiner does. Anyways no, I don't think any of those leaders Baron was an angel, but I definitely would say Stalin and Hitler would be in the 9th circle of hell while Roosevelt and Churchill would be in limbo (to put it in Catholic terms) The Brits did try to appease the Nazis, to avert the war. So how do you defend your assertion the West wanted the war? And Joch is right as well - the Soviets did MORE than anyone to appease the Nazis. Hell, the Nazis wouldn't have invaded Poland with the USSR agreeing to divide it in half. Honestly, if the world really was fair everyone should have declared war on the USSR AND Germany. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rocky Balboa Posted March 2, 2013 Share Posted March 2, 2013 See this is what happens when BF doesn't give us new toys to play with, we start making our own. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baron Jacquinot Posted March 2, 2013 Share Posted March 2, 2013 actually its the Russians who did everything they could to appease the Nazis. The Russians allied themselves with Hitler in 1939. The Russians carved up Poland with Hitler and murdered 30,000 Polish officers at Katyn. The Russians gave Hitler every supply he needed to conquer Europe. Stalin even ordered his own troops not to fire on the Germans on the morning of June 22 hoping he could still appease Hitler. I think Stalin and West Allies want, that Hitler attack first on other side and after that just shot both tired "dogs". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baron Jacquinot Posted March 2, 2013 Share Posted March 2, 2013 Anyways no, I don't think any of those leaders Baron was an angel, but I definitely would say Stalin and Hitler would be in the 9th circle of hell while Roosevelt and Churchill would be in limbo (to put it in Catholic terms) And what you think about nuclear bombardment of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, bombardment of Dresden and plans to nuclear bombing of USSR? Roosevelt and Churchill would be in limbo? For me Anglo-Saxons looks more dangerous than any continental Europe nation, especial now when we can just switch off gas to West Europe)))), they looks our potential ally. I know some German repatriates from Soviet Union, they say if Russian-Nato war begins they will be on Russian side))), but better if that never happens, better to fight with Islamites together. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sburke Posted March 2, 2013 Share Posted March 2, 2013 Yeah first of all for once I have to agree with Baron. We're just discussing this. It gets heated at times but I don't mind baron really, he doesnt make me foam at the mouth like Steiner does. Maybe you need a refresher then on how "understanding" BJ can be. http://www.battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?t=108266&page=13 His compassion for his fellow human beings and desire to understand them leaves a little bit to be desired. Give em time, he'll be beating the drum again.... hell he already is but not quite as blatantly yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baron Jacquinot Posted March 2, 2013 Share Posted March 2, 2013 Maybe you need a refresher then on how "understanding" BJ can be. http://www.battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?t=108266&page=13 His compassion for his fellow human beings and desire to understand them leaves a little bit to be desired. Give em time, he'll be beating the drum again.... hell he already is but not quite as blatantly yet. No, like all Russians I'm a peaceful man, when unarmed))) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sublime Posted March 2, 2013 Share Posted March 2, 2013 Baron I'd explain Hiroshima and Nagasaki the same way I explained everything else. The Japanese would have used it on us - they used chemical and bio weapons in China. They attacked us first, with a surprise attack by the way. Moreover - the nukes probably saved lives, I have no idea how many Japanese were figured to die in Olympic (invasion of Japan) but US casualties were expected to be around 1 million. I'll also remind you that the nukes were actually intended for Germany, so there goes any argument about racism on the US part. And Germany was the first country in Europe to do terror bombing so they have no real moral ground to stand on. They just didn;t do it as well as us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sgt Joch Posted March 2, 2013 Share Posted March 2, 2013 Im am no longer sure where this thread is going, although that is not unusual. There may be a question as to whether Hiroshima and Nagasaki were warranted. Everyone is always feeling guilty about the 200,000 or so japanese civilians who died. Oddly enough, no one ever talks about the estimated 20,000,000 or so chinese civilians who died during Japanese invasion of China. Unlike Germany, Japan has never really apologised for its actions in WW2. If you watch a movie like "Flowers of wars", you will see the extent to which the Chinese still have a lot of resentment towards the Japanese. As to the Russians, in preparation for CMSF2, I have been reading FM 100-2-1 which deals with the tactics of the Soviet Army. It was published by the U.S.Army in 1984. One thing that comes though very clearly in the document is the great respect the U.S.Army has for the capabilities of the Russian Army.There is a difference between propaganda and what professionals really think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sublime Posted March 2, 2013 Share Posted March 2, 2013 Absolutely. My father was a career Air Force officer and he had a high level of respect for his potential opponents. Hiroshima and Nagasaki are thrown around even though most people don't realize our conventional bombing was killing more civilians anyways. And you.re right the Japanese haven't apologized - there was a big flap recently because their school txt books said that they were 'invited into Korea' and thats why they had troops there. I think the difference is partially we defeated Germany first, and rubbed their noses in it. When Japan collapsed it was obvious Russia was an enemy and we were already 'fighting' the next war - so we went easier on them. I mean jesus we let them keep the Emperor... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
c3k Posted March 2, 2013 Share Posted March 2, 2013 MacArthur? Interesting to compare modern day Hiroshima to modern day Detroit. There are worse things than nuclear bombs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LukeFF Posted March 3, 2013 Share Posted March 3, 2013 And what you think about...bombardment of Dresden Valid military target. Don't believe the propaganda Goebbels spewed after this attack. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sequoia Posted March 3, 2013 Author Share Posted March 3, 2013 Mods, can we lock this thread please as there's nothing more forthcoming about the Ost Battalions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baron Jacquinot Posted March 3, 2013 Share Posted March 3, 2013 MacArthur? Interesting to compare modern day Hiroshima to modern day Detroit. There are worse things than nuclear bombs. Yes, looks like US Empire go to collapse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sgt Joch Posted March 3, 2013 Share Posted March 3, 2013 Oddly enough, it turns out the number of civilians who died at Dresden is about the same as the number of Polish officers murdered at Katyn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baron Jacquinot Posted March 3, 2013 Share Posted March 3, 2013 Guys, looks like you don't want to recognize any war crimes of Anglo-Saxons, this very very sad and forces us to prepared for a new war, especially given the events in Detroit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baron Jacquinot Posted March 3, 2013 Share Posted March 3, 2013 Mods, can we lock this thread please as there's nothing more forthcoming about the Ost Battalions. I think we need some politic area on this forum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts