Full response to the WWII thread.
Submitted by rshaw1984 on Sat, 02/18/2012 - 09:54Long time lurker, first time poster. I had to reply to this. It's long, please bear with me.
Listen, this is going WAY off base folks. You really expect to win over people by telling them this crap? I'm all for non-interventionism, these nation building wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are ridiculous, bombing Libya, attempting to involve us in Syria, and this facade with Iran, criminal. But really, WWII?
Look, this article and some posters say there isn't proof Hitler wanted to invade the US, true, he wanted to try and stop us from helping the UK, but that is just a guess, just like saying, "UK and France could have had peace with Germany any time," is also Just a guess. You are assuming that Hitler would not have attacked them once he was ready to anyway. You are Guessing that once he finished with Russia he would stop. He might not have.
The fact of the matter is you had a genocidal bastard creating a damn empire with no idea where he would stop. Russia would likely have lost to the two front war against Germany and Japan. If France and the UK hadn't gotten involved, then the Axis could very well have conquered all of Asia and Africa, and then probably would have taken out France and the UK just to finish Europe. Stopping that possible outcome, in my opinion, was most definitely necessary for our own protection. We would not have been able to stand against the resulting Empires. We are safe from invasion today, like Dr. Paul has said. But only because we stopped that possibility.
So yes, non-interventionism is great, lets do it, lets get our people back home and get out of other countries. Lets stop policing the world of these relatively nonthreatening to us events. Lets stop nation building. But I do want to know that if Anyone tries the same thing Hitler was trying we have, and will continue to have, the means to put a stop to it.
And another thing, these comments are getting very near the totally anti-american side of things. We are not going to get people on our side by outright bashing America and Everything we as a country has ever done. Hell, I'm a huge supporter of Dr. Paul, a daily reader of this site, and these comments are causing Me to question coming here. Yes my scenario of massive Axis empires is a guess, but so to are your "It wasn't necessary" ideas. If you ever want a peaceful revolution, stop insulting what most Americans consider a resounding victory, and in their and my eyes, the single greatest defense of Liberty and Freedom in history.
Soviet type Communism got a lot out of WWII yes, but eventually it failed, and it no longer exists as a major power in this world. The Chinese have moved well off of that type of Communism, and are getting closer and closer to a more Free Market type system every year because they realize that Communism is flawed.They are far from Freedom and Liberty, but they are almost just as far from Soviet Communism. I'm not defending China btw, they are still very bad to the majority of their people, and are not even close to humane.
The real problem with WWII was that after it was over we the people allowed things to continue in a bad direction. Dr. Paul is leading us in the fight to turn off of this road, and has the best ideas I have seen so far to accomplish that mission. Let's not sabotage his and our own agenda by needlessly attacking the past, putting down things that we can only Guess about, and turning away truly patriotic Americans (remember that just because they don't support us doesn't mean they don't love and support this country just as much as well all do, we to were once asleep) with such ugly attacks. Let us instead focus on the goal, inform about our current troubles and how to fix them, let the interventionists know that our military plans will still be able to protect Freedom and Liberty in this world without these stupid wars that just make the MIC wealthier. That even though we have the military to do it, trade will do just as much to help Freedom and Liberty. That is how we win, that is how we save these United States.
Sorry this went so long, and thank you for reading it all.
Robert Shaw
I simply saw it as a different conclusion drawn
and although I didn't fully agree with the article I still found it very thought-provoking. Perhaps some (many) would be insulted or at least turned off,but is this not a forum to engage others with varying opinions? Maybe I'm wrong but I liked the article overall and was a bit amused at what I assume the author's religion seems to be.
Thanx,
Jason
You can't get clean in a dirty bathtub.
IMHO
General Patton was right. At the end of the war, he wrote to his wife about what he had witnessed and what had been done to the Germans. That's why he was killed over there.
"If this mischievous financial policy [greenbacks], which has its origin in North America, should become endurated down to a fixture, then that government will furnish its own money without cost. It will pay off its debts and be without debts. It will hav
all the truth has to come out...
we probably won't like it...
has this much truth EVER come out?
no...
all the truth has to come out...don't fight it
Dr. Paul forces the truth out.
quit cherry picking what is popular and what is not...none of this truth is popular to everyone
however, its all truth or will be vetted as untrue
i want it ALL...i want it now...i want to know now
Ron Paul
2012
we can't go forward without looking back
its 'cos I owe ya, my young friend...
Rockin' the FREE world in Tennessee since 1957!
All these wars have been dirty ...
... and none of them have been fought entirely for the motivations and reasons with have been taught through mythical history written to keep people in the dark.
However:
I agree with the poster.
Anyone who makes a big deal of publicly questioning WWII at this point - and using that to justify non-interventionism is NOT doing us any favors.
It will turn people off.
The blowback from people that are conditioned to accept it as a clear-cut case of Good vs Evil with no grey area will not be worth it.
Think. There are much, much clearer, simpler, and historically examples that are infinitely easier to use
Like?
Iraq. Vietnam. Korea.
These are obvious and simple.
WWII is not.
Its way too easy to make yourself look like a fool - and by extension, all Ron Paul supporters and hurt the campaign.
Please don't go down that trail
its not turning people off...
you are turning people off
if you are not offended you aren't American
we don't want a sugar coated campaign, we want shock and awe...you want sugar coated?
see you in 2016 (yeah, right)
Ron Paul
2012
the time is now
its 'cos I owe ya, my young friend...
Rockin' the FREE world in Tennessee since 1957!
You know what?
"Anyone who makes a big deal of publicly questioning WWII at this point - and using that to justify non-interventionism is NOT doing us any favors."
In January 2007 after Ron Paul announced his candidacy he spoke against the war in Iraq on TV. I knew him already and mentally supported him. But when I heard him talking against the war, I thought: what a stupid move, he just blow his chances.
Dont you think I was wrong? Look at us 5 yrs later. The movement grew up manyfolds and still grownig. Only because this old man doesn't calculate when he can state the truth.
Big deal or not. We sholud always tell the truth even, if its unpleasnt and brakes someone beliefs.
everything ties together...
doesn't it, mirekChicago?
great post!
until you see that you walk in the dark
things look differently with the light on, don't they
have we EVER had the light on before?
no
to those who are negative, trust me, grandma can take it or she never would have voted anyway
ROLL ON NOW!
we are running out of time and we have no time to bicker here...get to work or get out of the way
mirekC, these detractors think i'm hurting their chances to convince anyone about Ron Paul?
they are wrong...we got here by "ending the fed" and "bringing the troops home"...this thread is a byproduct of that movement...those guys shouting it down proves just how effective it is
yes, its very effective and you can't stop an idea whose time has come
ROLL ON RON PAUL!
its 'cos I owe ya, my young friend...
Rockin' the FREE world in Tennessee since 1957!
Its about good judgement
"he spoke against the war in Iraq on TV."
Exactly.
Iraq.
Not WWII.
Understand why.
Truth is the truth. Thruth
Truth is the truth. Truth influenced by political calculation is not the thruth anylonger.
Understand why.
While some of you disagree with the poster here is the truth
The 65 or 75 year old retiree is not going to 1. Be open to hearing and believing these different beliefs and 2. It is nothing in line with what people the masses care about. They care about jobs and the economy. Everyone has a limit in how much they can listen and retain and if you have too much it's all a mush and you forget stuff. My point is everything needs to be easy to swallow and remember.
We heard the same fears about Iraq that we hear about Iran.
Do you believe that you can trust Romney or santorum? Well you know Ron Paul is trustworthy.
Do you think we are heading towards a precipice with our spending and govt meddling? Ron paul has been warning for years about this and has a plan to fix this.
Again it's not that the other opinion or belief is wrong necessarily but rather in the scheme of getting supporters it does not do the job and may in fact push some away.
We need the senior vote and must address this demographic accordingly.
Most people cannot deal with
Most people cannot deal with the truth even if they are confronted with it. It's easier to believe in and live a lie.
Such a good thing we murdered millions in Vietnam to "stop" the spread of communism while they hung people out of their windows in China and nixon went to kiss mao's ring. But why take responsibility when we can bullshit ourselves and point blame somewhere else. It's so much easier that way!
The world is my country, all mankind are my brethren, and to do good things is my religion. Thomas Paine Godfather of the American Revolution)
we always did that, didn't we, MrTudo?
...we are trying to change the world but we are up against it!
its us against the power...
we've got the numbers they have everything else...do we win...in the end?
its 'cos I owe ya, my young friend...
Rockin' the FREE world in Tennessee since 1957!
"most people"...
voted for obama...
they'll do it again if you give them the chance!
Ron Paul
2012
its 'cos I owe ya, my young friend...
Rockin' the FREE world in Tennessee since 1957!
Read this
And it is getting even better as I research WWI and this families support of Germany during that war also.
http://www.dailypaul.com/211035/the-not-so-talked-about-fami...
"They used to come get you and lock you up because you were insane, Now they come get you and lock you up because you are sane"
Do you want to know the truth
of things or not? That is what it boils down to. Once you learn about the Fed, how the elites bankrolled the Bolsheviks, Wall St. involvment in bankrolling Hitler, the atrocities of our commie "ally" FDRs "Uncle Joe" Stalin you have to start to get a glimmer that things are not as we have been taught to think they are. It is increasingly obvious that history has been "directed", as they say at the Daily Bell, for a very long time. When I was a kid an Eastern European immigrant I worked with tried to explain this to me but I thought he was "nuts". The reality is we have no way of knowing what is going on across the globe and cannot trust the media. So the best course is non-interventionism and state nullification of Federal tyranny.
I suggest
a documentary called "World War II: Behind Closed Doors." It is available at Netflix and on amazon. Not the whole story, but an interesting take on the backroom dealings between Stalin and both sides.
http://www.amazon.com/World-War-II-Behind-Closed/dp/B001TKK3...
The USSR won WWII. No doubt about it. My ancestors are from Lvov, which is featured in the above-mentioned documentary.
One only needs to look at a
One only needs to look at a few things to understand parts of WWII that are true yet not known to a majority of the public:
- the amount of russians that fought and died over what period of time against what number of germans
- the amount of americans that fought and died over what period of time in Europe against what number of germans
- who was financing hitler before and after his turn against international elites/banking?
- who was financing the russian revolution?
- why was hitler more adament in fighting russians than western-europeans?
- last but most important: Qui bono?
- what was Patton talking about just before he died?
- what nation was first to reach the Czech capital of prague?
Thank you for your comment and true story, but it can be more close to a reality that exists as well, but is not yet known by you. Look these things up and than see if you can come to the same answer in your excellent post. Good luck on your search, I hope it is as fun and interesting as it was for me.
Dutch Ron Paul blog: http://www.paulitiek.nl | Paul Campaign Google Maps: share the victories with your Friends! http://g.co/maps/rcw2y
And if you
"don't know history you are doomed to repeat it". On a side note, a sibling of mine who thought my homeschooling my kids was fringe and responded to my arguments with "but MY schools are good because of all the taxes I pay" is re-thinking things. A teacher friend has told him that there is a plan to dispense with teaching history in the govschools. He has now said that I was right about the "schools". Since the "hsitory" they teach is lies and ommissions no great loss, really.
"Since the "hsitory" they
"Since the "hsitory" they teach is lies and ommissions no great loss, really." lol, so true.
"The repetition of history is proof of man's ignorance, because those who create the future are those who change history."
The portion of homeschoolers here is largely brought down to fervent religious areas and even there it is not fully deemed 'normal' as far as I know. Those who, on other grounds than religious, try to homeschool are often fervently opposed by multiple government agencies such as child services, bureau of education etc. Only if one would never register his or her child in school than the choice is still free. Once you do that it becomes very difficult to change to homeschooling.
Dutch Ron Paul blog: http://www.paulitiek.nl | Paul Campaign Google Maps: share the victories with your Friends! http://g.co/maps/rcw2y
"Let us instead focus on the
"Let us instead focus on the goal, inform about our current troubles and how to fix them, let the interventionists know that our military plans will still be able to protect Freedom and Liberty in this world without these stupid wars that just make the MIC wealthier."
You can not have it both ways. You either have a principled position on the matter, or you don't. You either agree with the facts of history, or you make assumptions about what might have happened if we didn't get involved, to justify getting involved. In such a case, how can you be upset by people speculating what could have happened if we didn't get involved? The difference is that the former first destroys lives, families, fortunes, and nations, before making assumptions about what "might have been," while the latter tries to suggest "what might be" while maintaining a firm position that other nations should handle their own affairs.
I find it ironic that you can't see how your position on WWII isn't akin to the position of proponents of the War on Iraq. How is it different? They claim liberty, you claim liberty. You *suggest* and *implore* that we should defend liberty and freedom in the *world* ... I ask you why should we pay for someone elses' liberty? Let the principles of self determination guide the life of others. If you believe that "America should defend and protect liberty around the world," you are no better than those interventionists, because you have no solid foundation in core principle. Your "exceptions" to the rule are just as valid or invalid as their "exceptions" to the rule. Your objection to Syria is equal to anyone elses' objection to WWII, or even someone elses' support of Iraq or Afgahnistan. Do you not see that if you suggest that our role in this world is to defend liberty, EVERYONE is justified in their belief of using OUR lives and OUR money to advance THEIR idea of defending liberty. So as it would, all that is necessary is to gain political clout, and you can advance whatever agenda of "liberty" you'd like, no matter how "interventionist" it may be.
No, let us learn to stick to core values and principles. I would not suggest you punch another man in the face solely because he raised his hand; nor would the law! Let's understand that preemptive military action is not the right course for our nation, or the men and women of this fine military force we command. For if we allow conflict to be advanced or discontinued at the whim of a so-called "Commander in Chief," we doom ourselves to perpetual war. Instead, let's act when we are being attacked by an aggressor. There should be no debate about WWII, as their was a declaration of war against us. So, we rightfully engaged our declared enemy! But had we not been attacked, or had their not been a declaration of war against us, there should be no argument to the contrary! We should not argue that intervening on the basis of "liberty" is justified, because it is not!
Wars in Europe - Anglo-Germanic competition
The friction has been there since medieval times.
WW1 did not have to happen. The harsh treatment of the Treaties of Versallies (Germany) and Treaties of Trianon (Austro-Hungary) set up WW2. Reparations were draconian. It was economic revenge.
The creation of the Federal Reserve and the 16th amendment allowed Wilson (Anglo) to join WW1, FDR- WW2, Truman- Korea....
Wilson was very instrumental in the carving up and re-assembling of Europe.
When the Germans revolted under great stress in the 1930's they chose a radical to lead them. We were also squeezing the Japanese in the Pacific by cutting them off from oil supplies. Yes, they became radicalized.
WW2 did NOT have to happen. In fact, our policies made it predictable. (who set it up, benefited, another conversation).
Apply those lessons today: We push and push and pressure and encircle Iran. The Iranians wanted to bury the hatchet after the Iraq invasion, they saw it positively, Saddam was their enemy. They reached out to us, it is documented. We flat out rejected them. Not even rejected them, we just did not answer.
If we continue the Iraninan people will choose radical positions while under threat and possibly lash-out.
Sound familiar... It is too late to turn the clock back on the 20th century. Lets not allow it again. a war with Iran DOES NOT have to happen, it is not inevitable.
"One resists the invasion of armies; one does not resist the invasion of ideas" Victor Hugo
"If we continue the Iraninan
"If we continue the Iraninan people will choose radical positions while under threat and possibly lash-out."
Yes, we're already way beyond that. That's what happened in 1979, Islamic Revolution. The regime's only real claim to power is to protect Iranians from real and imagined invaders. Once Iran is no longer under threat from outside, the regime will start to crumble in months. They already had big unrests after the last so called elections.
Freedom Broadcasting Network - independent grassroots network
www.fbn.tv
Unintended consequence
It is being sold to the US public that the pressure is necessary because it will lead the "good people" of Iran to oust their "bad" regime. Remember, you have to make it simple & repeat.
The opposite is true - The Iranian public will back their own government against an outside aggressor no matter how flawed it may be. At the same time they accept even fewer freedoms (martial law most likely) in exchange for security/protection.
We are already creating extreme pain for the average Iranian. Our sanctions and attacks on the Rial, Iran's currency, have devalued the Rial by 50%. Is that "winning hearts and minds"?
"One resists the invasion of armies; one does not resist the invasion of ideas" Victor Hugo
Yeah, that's what I said ;)
Yeah, that's what I said ;)
The revolution of 1979 may have been an unintended consequence. It's still a consequence that was entirely predictable.
If you deny peoples' democratic rights all they have left is religion and hate.
Freedom Broadcasting Network - independent grassroots network
www.fbn.tv
welcome
i suppose to the casual reader your point is more than valid.
that being said, to the long time DPer, revisiting history is a necessary part of understanding the mess that is today's world. i remember when my image of honest abe was shattered. first denial. then anger. then accepting the three side theory, side A, side B, the Truth. we only get one side pounded into our noggins, so i personally enjoy the articles such as the one you are responding to.
"The two weakest arguments for any issue on the House floor are moral and constitutional"
Ron Paul
Germany could capture...but could it hold?
The fact is that Germany could not hold all of Europe especially Russia. Japan could not hold all of China and Russia and Asia. They were going to burn out one way or another. America entered the conflict late and really just picked up the pieces from Russia grinding down Germany's forces.
I too use to think we had to enter that war...now I realize that it too was a sham. Roosevelt lied when he promised to keep our boys from going to foreign wars. He wanted that war and he got it...just like every other president.
(Side note, If Roosevelt was younger and in better health if he would have remained president for life.)
I was born in Poland.
And I know WWII history from Poles perspective and I agree with original tread. It will be shocking for many Americans, but I will say it anyway. WWII in Europe was won by Soviet Union. (Even, though, I recognize the fact that Soviets were equally responsible for the start of that horrible event).
I don want to dwell in it to much, just to give you one fact.
Soviets had Berlin surrounded and forced to capitulate at the time Allies were still 60 km from Berlin. On top of the fact that eastern front were fought by Germans with much more involvement and much harder. For the simple reason: Germans knew that after atrocities they committed in Estern Europe they will not have any mercy when captured. The western front was moving much faster, because allies were treated captured forces civilized. And western front was initiated after Germans started losing to Soviets anyway.
Sorry, you guys have to start to live with it.
History is the propaganda of winners.
Thank you
For stating the truth of the matter.
western allies treating
western allies treating germans civilized? Look into the history of the POW camps for german soldiers right after WWII and see under what civilized conditions they were held. But indeed, you are right, it was still better than being captured by russians ;)
Dutch Ron Paul blog: http://www.paulitiek.nl | Paul Campaign Google Maps: share the victories with your Friends! http://g.co/maps/rcw2y
see? side B
thanks for chiming in.
"The two weakest arguments for any issue on the House floor are moral and constitutional"
Ron Paul