Would the killing of Hitler have changed the War

[Urko]

Xwormwood:

Germany, France and Russia refuse, they have got their reasons and we don't know exactly them, but they have got. I don't think that they should say "Yes" to a war that won't be repeated in all the countries you metioned so the "Elimination of criminal governments reason" is not the true reason. Thinking about that they don't have why to join to that war so they aren't doing any bad thing refusing their agreement to an illegal war.

[Urko]

I was writing my last post when JerseyJohn wrote his, there's the same anti-americanism from the Europeans that anti-europeism from the Americans and it's very light.

I'm not speaking about the war, I'm speaking about the critizices of those Europeans countries.

[ April 05, 2003, 04:04 PM: Message edited by: Urko ]

[Urko]

I was writing my last post when JerseyJohn wrote his, there's the same anti-americanism from the Europeans that anti-europeism from the Americans and it's very light.

I'm not speaking about the war, I'm speaking about the critizices of those Europeans countries.

[JerseyJohn]

Urko

We've just had eclipsing posts, mine is the last entry on page one.

Let me put it this way; nobody really cares whether those countries want to be part of the solution. They can attend to their own business and not join in. It isn't a with me or against me situation.

The only thing the US objects to is their hostility toward the United States. If they aren't part of the solution they DON'T want to make themselves part of the problem. That won't be tolerated. An economic or diplomatic war against the United States will not only backfire on them now, but will hurt them for generations to come.

It's a bad situation. Needlessly stoking fires will only make it worse.

---*

Just read your last entry (even read it's encore ).

Agreed, I hope the mutual antagonisms are quick to end. There's really no reason for it and it's unproductive. If Europe wants to unite I hope it does so. The whole world needs to move sanely into the future with everyone looking out for everyone else.

Maybe we've finally reached the Brotherhood of Man Age of Civilization, or at least it's beginning.

[ April 05, 2003, 04:11 PM: Message edited by: JerseyJohn ]

[Urko]

There's no any economic or diplomatic war against U.S. They only don't want that the U.S. acts out of the U.N. and they, as part of the Security of the U.N. (excepting Germany) should defend its diplomatic power.

Their hostility isn't with the United Estates, is with the war. I have seen insults (not from you) in this ladder to those countries, and I don't like them beacuse the most are untrue, for that I'm trying to say the there is not any kind of war against the U.S.

[Urko]

Now, I have read your second part of your last advice, I'm going to finish crazy :mad:

[JerseyJohn]

Urko

Agreed.

The United States and the UK should not be acting outside of the United Nations. I feel the action is justified this time, but next time or the time after that it might well degenerate into self-serving aggression. It becomes hard for a nation to distinguish between the justified and unjustified use of force when it is only consulting it's own priorities.

That's why it's vital that these issues be patched up, and soon.

It's also wrong that the Western Nations have been trapped into mutual antagonisms.

These bad feelings have run rampant on the Forums, especially in the General Area. Before long that will die down. Thankfully it's only words commenting on perceived events.

[JerseyJohn]

Originally posted by Urko:

Now, I have read your second part of your last advice, I'm going to finish crazy :mad:

Welcome to the club.

[Urko]

JerseyJohn:

Agreed

All these problems (nationalisms, wars, anti-nationalisms) only will be fixed when the world will obtain its maximun cultural developtment and will join in an alone country (and when this forum converts in a chat)

[Urko]

Mmm, and this forum was about what could happen if Hitler was murdered...

[ April 05, 2003, 04:32 PM: Message edited by: Urko ]

[JerseyJohn]

Urko,

This type of thread never stays on topic very long, this one did it longer than most. Asice from which the original question has pretty much been dealt with to everyone's satisfaction.

And we haven't gone that far off topic, nobody's picked up on my phobia concerning killer earthbound asteroids, comets, and other things that go bump in the night!

It's my contention that if Hitler had been murdered early enough people like Werner von Braun would have been free to do pure research and, who knows, maybe we'd have more info today about those nasty galactic intruders to go with our ICBMs and various other oddities of modern technology.

Werner von Braun, head of Germany's Rocket Program and after the War a Yankee Doodle Dandy. Though often made out to have been a party man, Braun was actually arrested by the Gestapo at one point for saying what he really wanted to do was get to the moon instead of bombing London.

America's original rocketry pioneer, Robert Goddard; von Braun was a great admirer of his research.

An artist's conception of a large asteroid entering the Earth's atmosphere. If such an object had struck Europe during the Second World War it might well have killed Adolf Hitler along with a lot of other mammals.

[ April 06, 2003, 10:35 AM: Message edited by: JerseyJohn ]

[Urko]

JerseyJohn:

I know a plan that America shoulded do:

1) Make the greatest rocket in the world

2) Launch it to the moon so when it impacts the moon is on Europe

3) I falls on Germany, Germany is heavily damaged so they surrender and allies win the war

There is only one problem, the rest of the planet was going to be in a nuclear winter and exploding but... wasn't the war won?

[JerseyJohn]

Urko

A fine scenario offering a varitey of extinctions for all living things with the added bonus of not having any more of those annoying high and low tides! And probably no more oceans either.

Definitely no more corny songs about the moon.

Nuclear winter would be the least of anyone's problems -- unstable earthly rotation, ice ages every few months.

But in reality we have the opposite problem, it turns out the moon has been moving a half inch farther from the earth with each passing year. Somebody better think of something and fast.

See how we've finally gotten back on topic. Like I said, these things have a way of straightening themselves out.

[ April 06, 2003, 10:37 AM: Message edited by: JerseyJohn ]

[ThorKhan]

JerseyJohn

Once again your posts are very interesting to read, even more after your first one on that USA-and-the-world-topic. You seem to have a well reflected opinion on that (as I expected of you after reading many of your posts on other topics ) and I agree with you.

But if you were a politician and your posts were a speech, a TV-report in the News would tend to focus on your first statements rather than your following explanations. But statements like that invoke Anti-Americanism all over the world, just because one couldn't hear the full speech. Today's media go too much after sensations, with a tendency to neglect well balanced information. As a result you only see (on TV) people demonstrating against the USA, burning flags and the like. Or Bush said "crusade" in the Iraq context and you could read this in all Newspapers over the world for weeks. And politicians all over the world are asked by reporters what they think of that crusade-statement. Those answers tend be negative towards America and so on. So I think the impression that America and Europe had increasingly unfriendly relations is also caused by the media.

But there are no real differences between the people in America and Europe except one: Europe doesn't feel as threatend by Sept. 11th as the USA do. That is the main reason why Europe is against that war, not some sort of Anti-Americanism. Rude statements by Bush and Rumpsfeld didn't help to convince the Europeans but gave the impression that they expected their "vasalls" to follow. Basically most Europeans simply don't think that this war is necessary, but that has nothing to do with Anti-Americanism though it may easily be perceived as such.

Even though I don't approve this war as it came to be, I think that a diplomatically more skilled American President could have convinced the UN to officially "allow" this war and thus avoided hostile reactions towards the US by the people in the other Middle Eastern states. The Kosovo-war also wasn't approved by the UN and still there weren't nearly as much hardcore-pacifists as today - because some wars are simply necessary and others are not.

If in the long run this war is the starting point for a solution of the problems of the region it will be justified by history. But right now I think it is too early to say it was justified or not because the long term results might be just about anything from a free and democratic (if not in the Western sense) Middle East to a Middle East in chaos with increased terrorist activity. Time will tell...

[jon_j_rambo]

I'll tell you why Europe is against the war:

Europe hates Israel.

This matches the topic of this thread

[ April 06, 2003, 11:56 AM: Message edited by: jon_j_rambo ]

[JerseyJohn]

ThorKhan

Thanks for the Good Word and Likewise.

Agreed about the media distorts issues to the point where they're no longer recognizable. Even Albert Einstein complained about, he once said something like, "After they write down what I said, I'm no longer the one who said it!"

The ironic thing about international terrorism is I first became really concerned with it in 1972 when the the Olympics in Germany were hit and the Israeli wrestling team was murdered, the terrorists themselves being being killed in the process. At the time and for many years afterwards the United States was immune from such activities. Americans were killed by terrorists, but only in other countries. What used to baffle me was how Europe Nations could allow themselves to be victimized without going after the countries that harbor, train, equip and finance these deluded individuals.

It still baffles me. They hit the United States hardest to date, but that could change at any time. A zealot can go down any street, in any country with a suitcase containing a small nuclear device and suddenly 9/11 would be dwarfed by the new body count.

The pathetic thing is the overwhelming majority of these people are representing causes that are just. The deprived and downtrodden not only of the Middle East but also of Africa, Asia and South America have very good reasons to point fingers, not just at the United States, but also at virtually every country of Europe. So these are not the problems of one particular society, but of many societies.

The only solution is for the haves to pull the have nots out of their quagmire. Care packages aren't going to do it, nor is selective placement of dictators to keep those people under heel. The only solution is to raise each country and each society up a parity not just with it's neighbors but with the rest of the world. These things can not be done from outside, they have to be achieved from within.

And it can't be done from within where the country is ruled by shammans and warlords and dictatorial gangsters. If the United Nations really represents anything it ought to represent the whole of mankind. The human populations, not just the governments that control them.

The current world is a mess. The United States helped design it, as did the former Soviet Union and Great Britain, France, Germany, Japan etc. depending upon how far back we wish to point a finger. Too many old lies are being constantly perpetuated. They have to stop, there needs to be a clearing of the table, countries have to start dealing honestly with one another.

I'm not sure that what is being done in Iraq today will turn out well. Hussein couldn't be allowed to continue controling an important nation. America's mistake was to put so much emphasis on the inspectors and production of weapons of mass production. That was a symptom, Hussein and the Baath Party were the sickness. That was the way it should have been adressed from the start. The death knell of his regime should have been his doling out of rewards to the families of suicide bombers. That should have been the final offense of a regime with a long criminal history and every indication of an even more criminal future.

If the United States seemed pushy and overbearing in it's approach that's regrettable. It was done in a clumsy manner. By their nature most Americans aren't bullies and neither are most Europeans. Unfortunately both societies have helped establish governments worldwide that have no problem in bullying for them to keep commerce flowing.

No one is guiltless. Not long ago the United States looked with favor upon Saddam Hussein as it's surrogate bully against the rogue nation of Iran, formerly one of our bastions against the Soviet Empire turned suddenly and vehemently anti-American after years of suffering under an American puppet who tyranized his people with United States backing and protection. We had Shahs of one sort or another protecting our interests all over the world. Incredibly the very nation that most often spoke of freedom and equality did it's best to finance tyrany and brutality. And, inevitably it's come back to haunt us. The guilty parties have long departed, dead national icons, heroes of a war and quiet villains of the peace.

So the age of false innocence has vanished and a new age is dawning. The United States is doing what it feels has to be done. Through a minor miracle we might end up with a good government in Iraq and if that comes to pass things will begin changing for the better all over the Middle East and after that all over the world. More likely we won'g get a minor miracle; we'll get the usual bunch of special interest lackies followed in time by either another dictator or some lunatic fringe shammon. In the final analysis, though, even the worst case scenario is better than a future that included Hussein weilding power and his brand of international psychosis.

The world is in a lot of trouble. I think humankind currently has many paths leading to worse futures and a precious few leading to something better.

Honest communication between nations is only the first step in the right direction. And we're still a long way from getting there.

[ April 06, 2003, 01:13 PM: Message edited by: JerseyJohn ]

[JerseyJohn]

General Rambo

Israel was hated even before it was created.

The fact that England set things up with intention of having it fall within a year is well known. That was the work of the same government that divided India in Hindu and Muslim nations knowing it would force mass migrations, immediate warfare and hundreds of thousands of deaths. What their reasons were in either case is still a mystery to me. We're still suffering from the absurd decisions made in that era of dishonest stupidity.

Israel started out with a lot of innocence and idealism. That's been chipped away by having to fight for it's existence from the moment of it's inception.

I think the real problem was in not turning what used to be Palestine into a UN protectorate from the start with United Nations based in Jerusalem. It should have been a free nation with open religious tolerance for all faiths and a refuge for those who had just suffered under the Holocaust. But it should not have been a religious state.

There was no Jewish/Muslim problem when Israel was conceived. The two factions were set against each other afterwards and by outside interests. Patching things up now between the Palestinians and Israelis will be a Herculean task, and it can't be done on the basis of might is right. Nor can it be done by one hatred being more intense than the other. I don't know how it will be done, but if it isn't, there's every indication that Palestine and Israel will serve as the ultimate flashpoint.

[ April 06, 2003, 12:42 PM: Message edited by: JerseyJohn ]

[jon_j_rambo]

I agree, the world has issues. Looks like it needs a Savior.

[JerseyJohn]

Amen to that brother.

[Urko]

This arrives to a classical question "To create a world just, democratic and without violence isn't necesary injustice, dictatorship and violence?

The humans are bad for nature, never learn the lessons and corrupt, all that is not possible...

Rambo: I think Europe has more reasons to be against war excepting Israel.

[ April 06, 2003, 01:23 PM: Message edited by: Urko ]

[jon_j_rambo]

Urko --- Sure, there are more reasons, but it is one of the reasons.

[Urko]

I don't see the relation between Iraq and Israel in this. This only will affect to Israel in feeling more sure but not in more things. A possible relation is that Israel fights vs. Musliman world and Iraq is part of that, but this time there is no cross between Iraq and Israel.

[JerseyJohn]

In the 91 Gulf War Iraq fired missles at Tel Aviv even though Israel was not part of the Coalition. This was a direct attempt to force retaliation from Israel with the idea of breaking up the coalition and starting a Jihad; while he was doing this, Hussein was also burning the Kuwaiti oil fields.

Prior to that, Hussein hired the world's most skilled artillery designer, I believe his name was James Ball, an American, to design and build a giant cannon against a mountainside capable of firing projectiles, presumably nulear, from Iraq into central Israel.

More recently, before this war, Hussein was directily financing Palestinian suicide bombers.

Are those relations?

[ April 06, 2003, 01:47 PM: Message edited by: JerseyJohn ]

[Urko]

Yes, they're. I didn't know them. Thanks.

[jon_j_rambo]

Sure, there is no great correlation between Iraq & Israel at this exact moment. There may not be a great correlation between Iraq & 9/11.

You know what? America doesn't give a rat's ass. We can thump our bible & drop bombs too. Screw the U.N.

We can be Nationalist, Capitalist, & Isolationists!

Waving Old Glory,

Rambo

[ April 06, 2003, 01:50 PM: Message edited by: jon_j_rambo ]