Question for all regarding how we fought Nazism in WWII

Catholic Crusader

Kyrie Eleison
Banned
Question: Was the United States evil and bloodthirsty when we fire-bombed German cities into ruble in order to eradicate the evil of the Nazis? Was not Nazism evil enough that fie-bombings and nukes were warranted? Or were Roosevelt and Truman bloodthirsty extremists?
 

Catholic Crusader

Kyrie Eleison
Banned
Let me add: Were the Nazis any more ruthless than ISIS? Oh, they were more efficient to be sure, and had better resources, but we see every sort of unthinkable crime against humanity in the Islamic State. Is it not fair to say then that the same all-out full war that it took to defeat The Third Reich & Imperial Japan is acceptable to defeat the sheer unthinkable evil of the Islamic State?
 

kiwimacahau

Well-known member
Deliberately targetting civilian population centres during a time of war is a war crime. Yes, both Roosevelt and Truman were war criminals and the Waffen SS would have eaten Daesh as a snack. How do you wage all out war on an essentially guerilla organisation? I seem to remember America trying that in Vietnam and getting their ***** handed to them.
 

chair

Well-known member
Let me add: Were the Nazis any more ruthless than ISIS? Oh, they were more efficient to be sure, and had better resources, but we see every sort of unthinkable crime against humanity in the Islamic State. Is it not fair to say then that the same all-out full war that it took to defeat The Third Reich & Imperial Japan is acceptable to defeat the sheer unthinkable evil of the Islamic State?

ISIS are two bit players compared to the Nazis. If it wasn't for their videos they wouldn't have gotten as much press as they have.

I take it you are talking of all out war, including bombing civilian populations. Who exactly are the targets? Syrians? Iraqis? All Muslims?
 

annabenedetti

like marbles on glass
Question: Was the United States evil and bloodthirsty when we fire-bombed German cities into ruble in order to eradicate the evil of the Nazis? Was not Nazism evil enough that fie-bombings and nukes were warranted? Or were Roosevelt and Truman bloodthirsty extremists?


From the CCC:

2314 "Every act of war directed to the indiscriminate destruction of whole cities or vast areas with their inhabitants is a crime against God and man, which merits firm and unequivocal condemnation."110 A danger of modern warfare is that it provides the opportunity to those who possess modern scientific weapons especially atomic, biological, or chemical weapons - to commit such crimes.
 

jgarden

BANNED
Banned
Question: Was the United States evil and bloodthirsty when we fire-bombed German cities into ruble in order to eradicate the evil of the Nazis? Was not Nazism evil enough that fie-bombings and nukes were warranted? Or were Roosevelt and Truman bloodthirsty extremists?
1. America didn't enter WW2 "in order to eradicate the evil of the Nazis" - it was forced to declare war on Japan after Pearl Harbor followed by Hitler's ill-advised call for war against the US in support of his ally.
It is questionable as to whether America would have declared war on Germany had Hitler done the smart thing by keeping his mouth shut!

2. As for the bombing German cities, the Nazis introduced the idea during the Spanish Civil War, followed by Poland and the destruction of Rotterdam. Early in the war they bombed London and many of the cities in southern England, not to mention those in the USSR (Stalingrad).

3. For some mysterious reason, Germany never took the next logical step by developing a heavy bomber as the military counterpart to the American B-17 and the British Lancaster - which could carry sufficient bomb loads that virtually destroyed whole cities in a single night (Cologne, Hamburg).

4. That being said, the Americans were more interested in the strategic bombing of factories and transportation hubs while the British, under the direction of "Bomber Harris," targeted the German cities as "payback" for the British ones.

5. The turning point came with the bombing of Dresden, where an estimated 40 000 civilians were killed in a city that had no military significance and was filled with German refugees fleeing the Russians!
 
Last edited:

serpentdove

BANNED
Banned
Question: Was the United States evil and bloodthirsty when we fire-bombed German cities into ruble in order to eradicate the evil of the Nazis? Was not Nazism evil enough that fie-bombings and nukes were warranted? Or were Roosevelt and Truman bloodthirsty extremists?

Your pope (a supporter of Hitler) was the bloodthirsty extremist. :eek:linger:
 

serpentdove

BANNED
Banned
Unfortunately, we're talking to people who think Bush was a war criminal.

Bush is
14cb6a3adcf1bbbb81847de852c5913d.gif
a war criminal. The US
stripper.gif
wages war for the Great Whore, Rome (Re 17:5).
lips.gif
She's going to pay dearly.

Because of the continual prostitution of the prostitute,
the attractive mistress of sorcery,
who betrays nations by her prostitution
and clans by her witchcraft (Na 3:4).

Also see:

Legal action to hold Tony Blair accountable
 
Last edited:

Catholic Crusader

Kyrie Eleison
Banned
.....Yes, both Roosevelt and Truman were war criminals....
There you go folks. A healthy dose of STUPID.

Unfortunately, we're talking to people who think Bush was a war criminal.
You gotta' love'em. :)

ISIS are two bit players compared to the Nazis.......
If the thousands of people who have been raped, murdered and beheaded by ISIS could read your post I doubt they would care for you very much. Barbaric torture and murder is barbaric torture and murder is. Besides, they seem to be operating internationally quite well.

Your pope (a supporter of Hitler) was the bloodthirsty extremist.
You're a moron.
 

jeffblue101

New member
Question: Was the United States evil and bloodthirsty when we fire-bombed German cities into ruble in order to eradicate the evil of the Nazis? Was not Nazism evil enough that fie-bombings and nukes were warranted? Or were Roosevelt and Truman bloodthirsty extremists?

the main difference between ISIS and NAZIS is strength of force, and the level of willing support among the local population.
 
Last edited:

jeffblue101

New member
Deliberately targetting civilian population centres during a time of war is a war crime. Yes, both Roosevelt and Truman were war criminals and the Waffen SS would have eaten Daesh as a snack. How do you wage all out war on an essentially guerilla organisation? I seem to remember America trying that in Vietnam and getting their ***** handed to them.
so full of nonsense and untruths.
modern technology has allowed a level of civilian support and organization that the entire population is part of the war machine. what won WW2 for the US was the its industrial capacity to manufacture weapons of war. Yes, modern wars require the bombing of civilian infrastructure to cripple the enemy's "war machine" into surrender. If we went by your logic of a "moral war" in which only soldiers could get killed the number of causalities and length of the war would be significantly higher. I can't imagine the horrors our soldiers would have faced if Germany or japan could still manufacture weapons at 100% throughout the whole war.

lastly, we lost the Vietnam war b/c we could not wage total war (invade northern Vietnam) without risking WW3 or some larger conflict with China or Russia. we won every every battle by landslide in Vietnam despite their guerrilla tactics.
 

jgarden

BANNED
Banned
The targeting of civilian populations in WW2 was designed to break their will of the people and shorten the war.

There is no conclusive proof that all that death and destruction resulted in the desire result - in fact it could be argued that it only hardened civilian resolve!
 

jeffblue101

New member
The targeting of civilian populations in WW2 was designed to break their will of the people and shorten the war.

There is no conclusive proof that all that death and destruction resulted in the desire result - in fact it could be argued that it only hardened civilian resolve!
I think you are a bit confused WW2 cities were bombed and destroyed b/c they manufactured supplies and weapons. Also japan and Germany completely refused to surrender until the majority of their cities were destroyed.
 

Catholic Crusader

Kyrie Eleison
Banned
the main difference between ISIS and NAZIS is strength of force, and the level of willing support among the local population.

To us, maybe, but to the thousands they have raped and beheaded? Do they care? Besides, they are worldwide all the same, and frankly they caused more death in America than the Nazis did.

Heck, the Nazis kept our POW's in POW camps that met the Geneva Convention. Could you see ISIS doing that? In many ways ISIS is more barbaric than the Nazis were.
 

Crucible

BANNED
Banned
Question: Was the United States evil and bloodthirsty when we fire-bombed German cities into ruble in order to eradicate the evil of the Nazis? Was not Nazism evil enough that fie-bombings and nukes were warranted? Or were Roosevelt and Truman bloodthirsty extremists?

America didn't care about the 'evil' in Germany, until they were attacked.
Sorry to intrude on you all's extreme sense of moral patriotism, but America has never really done jack until it somehow hurt them.

We did what we had to do to stop our lives from being taken. If we cared about Japanese civilians, we would have taken the risk of continuing on warring instead of eradicating entire cities of people.

We sure as Hell wouldn't have done it to one our own cities :rolleyes:
 

jeffblue101

New member
To us, maybe, but to the thousands they have raped and beheaded? Do they care? Besides, they are worldwide all the same, and frankly they caused more death in America than the Nazis did.
nah the Nazi's simply could not launch a domestic attack on the US, if they could they would have done so. they did kill a lot lot American civilians in German u boat attacks.

Heck, the Nazis kept our POW's in POW camps that met the Geneva Convention. Could you see ISIS doing that? In many ways ISIS is more barbaric than the Nazis were.
the nazi's were very brutal to their POW's especially the Soviet POW's. they starved, beat and killed POW's of all nationalities. Thinking about it now, I really don't see a difference in the level of brutality bewteen ISIS or Nazis both have done horrible things to innocent people's just on a different scale.
 

jeffblue101

New member
America didn't care about the 'evil' in Germany, until they were attacked.
Sorry to intrude on you all's extreme sense of moral patriotism, but America has never really done jack until it somehow hurt them.

We did what we had to do to stop our lives from being taken. If we cared about Japanese civilians, we would have taken the risk of continuing on warring instead of eradicating entire cities of people.

We sure as Hell wouldn't have done it to one our own cities :rolleyes:

in fairness we simply didn't know that Hitler had extermination camps until we started invading Germany.

lastly, you make it sound so easy, if we did not use the Nukes a lot more brainwashed Japanese soldiers and civilians would have died in order to fight off an American invasion of mainland Japan.
 

musterion

Well-known member
Were the Nazis any more ruthless than ISIS?

No, but the comparison really isn't valid.

Anyone remotely interested in this subject needs to study 4GW, Fourth Generation Warfare. It's always been around in some forms (guerilla fighting among them) but we've been in a 4GW environment, on a large scale, pretty much since Vietnam and definitely since the first WTC bombing in the early '90s.

The problem for the West is that the old rules that many people still think govern warfare no longer apply and haven't applied for a long time. They really started to dissolve with "total war." But the modern enemy (many of them) do not subscribe to ANY historically understood command and control structure, but instead are autonomous, anonymous individuals or small cells widely dispersed and united around an idea...for example, a global caliphate. This strategy can be good, depending on one's perspective (the Colonists can be said to have engaged in 4GW by shooting from behind trees at British rank and file soldiers), but it is very dangerous to have to face. It is precisely why civilians are now ruthlessly targeted.

It is also why Western governments who actually want to fight them have so much difficulty doing so: with rare exceptions no Western military is geared mentally or structurally to respond effectively to such an amorphous, decentralized threat, especially when its adherents are willing to die for the cause.

Some say 4GW does not exist or that the threat is overstated. They are dead wrong. Recent events both in Europe and the U.S. prove it.

Fourth-generation wars are lengthy -- measured in decades rather than months or years. . . Strategically, 4GW attempts to directly change the minds of enemy policy makers. This change is not to be achieved through the traditional method of superiority on the battlefield. The first- through third-generation of destroying the enemy’s armed forces and his capacity to regenerate them is not how 4GW enemies will attack . . . Both the epic, decisive Napoleonic battle and the wide-ranging, high-speed maneuver campaign [German blitzkreig] is irrelevant to them. Their victories are accomplished through the superior use of all available networks to directly defeat the will of the enemy leadership, to convince them their war aims are either unachievable or too costly. These networks will be employed to carry specific messages to our policy makers and to those who can influence the policy makers. -- COL Thomas X. Hammes, USMC, The Sling and the Stone, p. 208

The main way they do this today is by targeting civilians. That works VERY well in democratic societies. It also does not help that we have so many leftists in positions of power, leftists who want to weaken the West into failure by any means necessary in order to replace it. In their minds, Mohammedans are only one means to that end...hence the destruction of borders and importing them en masse. The global Left is riding a ravenous tiger, stupidly, but they'll learn that too late.

http://sipseystreetirregulars.blogspot.com/2013/04/tyrants-beware-4th-generation-warfare.html
 
Last edited:
Top