Jump to content

BTS, how many chances do Nazi worshipers get?


Recommended Posts

Guest Germanboy

Hmm, it seems the intellectually challenged are slowly leaving. Good, soon sanity and reason will return. I wonder if they put something into the water supply during the last weekend...

------------------

Andreas

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 60
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Guest Germanboy

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by mfred:

The people accusing PIEPER, are acting in the same manner they are objecting too.

So, what you accuse PIEPER off, tells us more about you than PIEPER.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Excuse me, but I have yet to see somebody else post comments such as his on this board.

Your feeble attempts at reverse psychology are noted, have a nice day.

------------------

Andreas

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wasnt going to get involved in this again,however the comments of mfred have done it for me

Originally posted by mfred:

The people accusing PIEPER, are acting in the same manner they are objecting too.

So, what you accuse PIEPER off, tells us more about you than PIEPER.

------------------------------------------

excuse me so im in the same league as someone who goes on about gassing people, puts up pics of a woman and child being shot,pictures of a death camp!!!!!!!!!.

Without being over the top i see your a austrailian are you his father? get real

cobber.

.............................................

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gavin,

I've been quiet, sort of, to see how people reacted to this Peiper character. I took offense to his name the first time I saw it, as it glofified, in my opinion, a man that was directly resposnible for the death of one of my uncles in the Bulge.

I totally see your point. I find many of the names here offensive when used not as a learning tool, but as a "cool" screen name, for reasons that are known only to me and God.

But, most of the people behind those "offensive" names are good people. They have an interest in some facet of that history, and choose that screen name. In their world, it is not offensive, however, in your's and mine, it may represent something that brings back horrible memories and images (like the picture Peiper posted).

I for one am saddend that he would post those pics in that context. We should learn from history, not use it to offend people.

However, I am glad I don't have to look at that name anymore, and the IMAGES it brings up to me.

Thank you for listening.

Respectfully,

------------------

Doc

God Bless Chesty Puller, Wherever He Is!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey Basil, let's get a few things straight. One, I know more O/T then I do about WWII, so yes the majority of my contributions will be O/T. Two, I'm a wild and crazy guy, so I liketo joke around and have fun, as I think all of my posts have been. Trolling is not going on a board and making a big joke (As my 'soon to be locked down...' thread was, as well as my 'I blame JP on Peng' etc) and its also not a discussion of a different war.

Those times that I was out of line (When I asked about a problem I had with portraits and thought I knew more than I did regarding the .bmps, or when I caused Fionn to receive all that hate mail for my joke) I immediately apologized and took responsibility for what I did. A troll is someone who picks fights and tries to get attention. I try to have a good, inclusive time and enjoy debates.

As to your Civil War thoughts, Sherman was by far a more modern general than Sheridan, as Sheridan may have destroyed the Shenendoah, etc., but Sherman kept a HUGE army alive behind enemy lines, marched them to the sea, razed three major cities and, what I consider the greatest achievement, marched through the Chatahachie swamps toward Charlston at a pace of 10 miles a day in the rainy season. To do that with an army his size, so far out of supply, is simply amazing.

As to Longstreet, well most northerners love him, he's a very safe choice. Longstreet, though he may have made a good commanding general, we'll never know, showed his flaws in regard to risky fighting and using his men to the fullest to support attacks led by other generals. A better choice would be Jackson, the best choice would be Forrest (Hailed North and South as one of the two true geniuses of the war) and the cool choice would be Van Dorn, who did so much with so little.

------------------

Did someone compare this to the Ealing comedies? I've shot people for less.

-David Edelstein

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmm, it seems the intellectually challenged are slowly leaving. Good, soon sanity and reason will return. I wonder if they put something into the water supply during the last weekend...

------------------

Andreas

Germanboy, don't you mean "somefink into the water supply"? smile.gif Can anybody understand what this guy is trying to say? His posting style never did get any better.

[This message has been edited by cartman316 (edited 09-04-2000).]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Elijah: Uh er ups I meant Sherman not Sheridan I was damn tired by the end of that endless post and it was a 2 pint'er smile.gif And I didnt really mean to make it sound like I didn't like yah, just some of your comments were a bit over the top for my tastes. Jackson was great, but his personal quirks (which ended up getting him killed when they really needed him alive) raise a ? Forrest was a good commander, didnt really think about him...

Hehe sheridan what was I thinking at 4 in the morning smile.gif

------------------

As the victors define history, so does the majority define sanity...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Germanboy

Roight BasilD and Elijah, much as I enjoy your little tiff about long-dead and best forgotten military men, can you do it in another OT thread, please. No need to get this eyesore back to the top all the time.

Thanks.

------------------

Andreas

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Big Time Software

OK folks, this one gets locked up for obvious reasons. Things to keep in mind here...

Someone who expresses some sort of admiration for the Waffen SS is not automatically a "Nazi lover" or whatever you want to call it.

Someone that makes an off color remark in is also not automatically a "Nazi lover".

However, when the two are combined... there is a strong case in favor of such a conclusion. We put out a warning and were waiting to see if there was further evidence to conclude that JP is what he has been accused of.

There are still two possibilities to explain JP:

1. That he is a Nazi sympathizer. We can all guess the qualities that go into such a person as this.

2. That he is an incredibly immature, irresponsible, and rather despicable person who has a high level of insensitivity to the world around him.

Both are totally UNWELCOMED here on this BBS. Since no matter which case above is correct, banning him was the right thing to do. It is also interesting to note that the personality type necessary for #2 is a prerequisite for #1.

I also want to clear up three more issues...

1. The Waffen SS site that JP posted is just fine. It even has a fairly strongly worded disclaimer about Nazism. Links to sites like this are not objectionable.

2. Anybody that feels they have strong reason to despise the Waffen SS should make it a point to either read a lot about them or admit that their feelings could possibly be misplaced or in error. The Waffen SS is a complicated subject and anybody that thinks they have some sort of simple understanding of the organization has a lot more to learn about it.

3. Dr. Brain, I particularly request that you read up on WWII atrocities and wider range of views of the Malmedy incident. The real Peiper took responsibility for his men's conduct, even though he was not there and did not order (in any way shape or form) the slaughter. This is a fact which is not disputed by any historian I know of. What actually happened there is still open for debate, but there is a strong case to make that (at the very least) the US side of the story was fabricated (based on some facts, of course) for propaganda purposes. There is even a strong case that it was the US soldiers themselves that brought it upon themselves by trying to escape (this is hotly debated, and please... don't do any more of it here!). It is also probably that the US most shot and killed more unarmed Germans in the Bulge than the Allied soldiers shot by Germans. At least the Germans had no written orders to kill would be POWs, while the US in fact did after Malmedy. This is documented fact, I am very sorry to say. In any case, routine killings of POWs was a fact of life on the WWII battlefields for all nations, and there is plenty of documentation to back this up.

In conclusion....

The world around us is VERY complex and spits in the face of anybody that has a Black and White viewpoint. The road to a truly critical and learned mind comes with the admission that this is reality. The more someone sticks to a B&W point of view, the less credibility they have. So try and keep an open mind about the world around you, and you will find doors to open that you never knew existed before.

Steve

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...