The blurry line between religious and crazy

Holocaust
1941-1945 4.5-17 millionHolodomor Holodomor - Wikipedia
1932-1933 2.4-7.5 million ( more efficient and seen before. )

See my response to MFFJM2.I have no argument with you. In fact agree with you.

Hi Ringo,
I think it is normal to be horrified, saddened, dismayed, and all the other variations of emotion the holocaust can instill.But to me.Grandizing Natzi genocidal efficiency is repugnant.
It is like something Natzi fanboys would do.

Hi Nosy Ned,
the fact that "we" can not comprehend "their" heinous acts does not mean "we" dismiss the fact that they can appear normal, kind, etc. The fact that "we" draw a distinction between US and Them (Natzis) is because we were the good guys and they where the bad guys. Period. Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.It is true given the right circumstances otherwise "normal" people can resort to atrocious behavior.
The Stanford prision experiment forexample.
Stanford prison experiment - Wikipediaor Abu Ghraib
Abu Ghraib torture and prisoner abuse - WikipediaIt seems humans are predisposed and have a propesity to do great evil. But I do not mistake this as demonizing the Natzis.
No I detest them because of what they did and what they stood for .Edited by 1.61803, : spelling

Moral relatism. heh, I knew that was coming!I know I have a undeveloped, simplistic view of the evils that was the Third Reich. Every SS Death camp officer thought he was doing his duty. Only following orders.
When the Nurmberg trials began those assholes could hardly look at what they did. They knew that shit was wrong. They knew and they did it anyway. Because they were in power and no one could stop them. Well guess what? The Allied powers did.
Hoorah! If you do not think there was a right and a wrong side during WWII good guys and bad guys, please take a tour of Dachau and get back to me.

Tell that to the people who where freed from concentration camps. There is great evil in war but also moments of great good.
Tell that to the families who lost sons and daughters who volunteered to fight for nothing more than the concept of doing good.
D-Day invasion of Normandy anniversary is 06 June.
The beaches ran red with blood. Brave men, good men died on a scale unimaginable. Please remember folks it was not self serving, but selfless sacrifice to do ones duty and to protect your brothers.
I know, I know...propagandized. But can't help it.

I never said that horrible decisions, horrible outcomes and losses did not occur at the hands of the good guys.
Dresden would not of occurred if the bad guys did not start a war. Edited by 1.61803, : grammer

What good things did the Natzi do?
And did it out weigh the evil shit they perpetuated? Perhaps if one is a Natzi apologist. Granted history is written by the victors, however it was not so lost to history that the world has forgotten.
Argue all the moral relativism you want Ringo, it does not and will never change the fact that Germany was on the wrong side of history during WWII. Even the Germans know that, at least the ones that arent Natzi apologist or Hitler fans.

Hi Ringo. I was going to let you have the last word. Natzis fixed German economy is another myth perpetuated by Natzi propaganda. That staggering recovery was attributed to new laws instituted by the Natzis. ie women not being included in out of work workforce figures, Jews losing citizenship and not included in figures, Manditory conscriptions in the Army. etc...
And what ever recovery was made was completley erased by the absolute destruction of the Reich taking the German people with it. As a matter of fact Hitler said the German people did not deserve to survive and wanted to destroy them for failing him.The Good guys ruined Germany's economy after WWI because they wanted them to pay for the war they thought they were responsible for along with the Austria/Hungry. You would think they'd would of learned a lesson the first time.The side show started because some people think the Natzis where effcient. But in the scheme of things they were feckless fuck ups. btw, my wife is from Halle Germany and I have lived there twice. I love the German people and think very highly of them.

Hi Modulous, as usual you make level and fair points. None of which escape me.
I am not so naive to think that good guys vs bad guys was the end all of WWII. I know there where examples of good and bad being done on both sides.
My main point from which I would hope you and others understood was the Natzis and their policies were especially heinous. They wanted to base their Country and eventually the world on racial purity. They wanted to exterminate a complete culture of people. They invaded and desimated their neighboring countries. They started the war. If that is not "bad" what is?
Your right the world leaders would of probably stood by and watched if Hitler kept it within his borders.
North Korea comes to mind.
Was there a good guys verses bad guys during WWII?
In my mind there was.

Hello Modulous, There is in Germany to this day a ongoing debate/argument on the extent the Wehrmacht had in perpetuating the holocaust. Many Germans would rather see the hands of their grandfathers and great grandfathers be clean.
Here is a link to a very controversial exhibit that toured Germany showing docmentation of the Wehrmacht participating in genocide. Wehrmacht exhibition - Wikipedia
Not harden SS, but ordinary German soldiers participating and being complicit.
As the last of the WWII participants and victims die so will the last witnesses.
We can never forget, we can never budge one inch no matter how comforting or popular the idea is of a clean wehrmacht. They were soldiers yes, they had orders, yes. They where manipulated, propagandized yes. But they participated and allowed the holocaust to happen. von Stauffenberg actually tried to do something about it. He and his movement and anyone in Europe who fought against the Natzis where imo heros.
So yeah we agree on that. Where we differ is I withold my salute.
I was a soldier so I can not fault another for doing his duty. However the US Army teaches us that there is such a thing as a unlawful order,
The military oath taken at the time of induction reads:I,____________, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to the regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me GodThe Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) 809.ART.90 (20), makes it clear that military personnel need to obey the lawful command of his superior officer, 891.ART.91 (2), the lawful order of a warrant officer, 892.ART.92 (1) the lawful general order, 892.ART.92 (2) lawful order. In each case, military personnel have an obligation and a duty to only obey Lawful orders and indeed have an obligation to disobey Unlawful orders, including orders by the president that do not comply with the UCMJ. The moral and legal obligation is to the U.S. Constitution and not to those who would issue unlawful orders, especially if those orders are in direct violation of the Constitution and the UCMJ.

Hi Modulous, Again this is case by case and I know you know this. I am not talking about the soldier on the front lines fighting. I am talking about the soldiers who are responsible for war crimes against unarmed jews. Rounding them up and shooting them, hanging them, chopping their heads off, gassing them, starving them.
Let me guess you think that because humans are predisposed under certain circumstances to conduct themselve in such a way that I should have some pity on those murderers? Sorry I am not able to do so. But there are heros and villians. The villians would be they guys in black and grey conducting genocide. The pungent waft of coke and burnt human remains was permeating the surrounding countryside. Did the Towns folk really not get a taste of this subtle flavor? Do we generations later retract our contempt and condemnation and replace it with understanding and pity that they surccumbed to the overwhelming need to annilate their own people. You know better than that. Edited by 1.61803, : spelling

grammer nazi.

Yes guys, every side has it's story. Every side thinks their side is the justified one. I get it.I too saw the Eagle. I too can see how the story can be told from one point of view making the other side out to be "the bad guys.I just do not see any German narrative doing that. There simply is no way the holocaust can be spun.I see the rational for not using lables, however this is one instance that is imo the exception to the rule.I agree with much you all say, but I still think the German Reich was the bad guys. They did bad things and had bad policies for bad reasons. We have the luxury of time and comfort to look back on and reason about it. I doubt any of you would feel the same way if you where a Jewish person living in Germany in the early forties.Edited by 1.61803, : added person

Hello again Modulous. Oaths are important to some people.
I took a oath when I joined the Army. I took a oath when I got married. Will I break my word? Will taking a oath keep me from breaking my word? Or am I just a stand up guy who would do the right thing regardless? I dont know. I personally do not need a oath to keep me from doing evil or even from doing what I believe is right. I am a good guy. I believe so. A army can not function if folks do what they want and not follow orders. I am not justifying the German soldiers actions. I know it is easy to say, what one would do in a given circumstance, but I honestly tell you now that if my superior officer told me to shoot or hang innocent non combatants I would have to face the consequences of my insubordination and be punished. I realize your point Modulous.
Do you realize mine? Is anyone justified to reduce the German Military and the Natzis as "the bad guys" in WWII? Or are we now to intellectually evolved for such lables. I am indeed a cold war relic.