I have watched many a documentery about World War II, and I thought, "Really, what do people think of this war? 'End' of the Nazis? Hitler's reign of terror being over? A horrible, horrible war with many casualties?" What do you, the forum goers, think of WWII (if necessary, move this to Politics)?
Germany should have quit while they were ahead when they took over Poland. End of.
It was only after the invasion of Poland that WW2 officially began, as Britain declared war after they refused to withdraw.
In my opinion, WW2 was necessary. Not pleasant, but as diplomacy failed, it was necessary to stop both Germany and the Japan - both had an expansionist outlook. Although, dropping Little Boy on Hiroshima is a decision I am unable to endorse. The total of all deaths caused by that rose to over the three million mark. Horrendous.
In addition, the war as fostered a very anti-German (much less so, in my opinion, for Japan) sentiment across the world. This has largely faded, now, in my opinion.
The was was the fault of the WWI Allies, and some brains could have avoided WWII completely. At the end of WWI, the Allied leaders selfishly, and, in my view, foolishly, blamed the entire war on Germany, then punished them accordingly. This was a shortsighted move that solved some PR issues in the short run, but left Germany with resentment. Even worse, we left German soil as fast as possible to appease the people, not realizing the deep resentment the Germans would have. Metaphorically, we kicked Germany in the soft spot, gave them the finger, then shoved them in the mud. After this, we said "That taught them a lesson!" and turned around.
Quote from: Steelfist on July 11, 2010, 10:36:26 AMAlthough, dropping Little Boy on Hiroshima is a decision I am unable to endorse. The total of all deaths caused by that rose to over the three million mark. Horrendous.
Everyone who knows anything about WWII history knows that the atomic bombs ended WWII early therefore saving lives on both sides. If America was forced to invade Japan, then every man, women, and child would have fought in the defence of the Empieror. The Japanese's inability to surrender would force Americas to do an almost genocidal campaign in Japan. It would also cause the loss of millions of Ally soldiers. Plus, if we didn't end the war before the Soviets came to help, then Japan would be split in half like Germany and Korea. Read the alternative (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Downfall#Estimated_casualties).
Quote from: Steelfist on July 11, 2010, 10:36:26 AMIn addition, the war as fostered a very anti-German (much less so, in my opinion, for Japan) sentiment across the world. This has largely faded, now, in my opinion.
Anti-German and anti-japanese thoughts ended very quickly in the west because West Germany and Japan became our allies against the Soviets.
Quote from: im2smart4u on July 11, 2010, 05:30:34 PM
Quote from: Steelfist on July 11, 2010, 10:36:26 AMAlthough, dropping Little Boy on Hiroshima is a decision I am unable to endorse. The total of all deaths caused by that rose to over the three million mark. Horrendous.
Everyone who knows anything about WWII history knows that the atomic bombs ended WWII early therefore saving lives on both sides. If America was forced to invade Japan, then every man, women, and child would have fought in the defence of the Empieror. The Japanese's inability to surrender would force Americas to do an almost genocidal campaign in Japan. It would also cause the loss of millions of Ally soldiers. Plus, if we didn't end the war before the Soviets came to help, then Japan would be split in half like Germany and Korea. Read the alternative (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Downfall#Estimated_casualties).
There were other options. Some sites suggested announcement of the bomb to the Japenese, then using it if they refused surrender. Also, IMHO the Japenese's policy of defending to the last breath has been exxagerated. Every "man, woman, and child" is a ridiculus exxageration.
My thoughts are is WWII started because of WWI. The treaty of versailles which is the allies fault. They never invited the other countries which is the other powers. They pinned it all on Germany and making them pay millions upon billions of dollars also limited their army to 50,000 with no navy or airforce. Making the great depression even more worse in Germany which Adolf Hitler used to gain his power as Chancellor then creating mass propaganda on you know what. The using blitzcrige to take their foes out including their superior Luftwaffe. Taking out Europe and parts of Northern Africa. Then hammering England exhausting the Royal Airforce (RAF) then U.S. Troops came in took out the grip Germany had on Africa and protecting the Parlament and the Tower of London. Then hammered at Germany on west front while Russia took care of the Eastern front. Stupidly of Germany they betrayed Russia because Hitler hates communist too. Also the heavy water in the fyords in Scandanavia area. I know it's somewhere there and the (RAF) took it out just in time. Germany could have probably made the atom bomb but due to Hitler Albert Einsitne and another smart man ran away to the U.S. and helped develop the atom bomb later used on Japan. On a conquest to rule all of Asia. Mistakenly attacking Pearl Harbor and then leaflets was bombed on Japan. These leaflets tell them that a new super weapon is about to be used on them. Then 2 stopes on Nagasaki and Heroshima. Another 3 was about to be droped on Tokyo and other two major cities. Ending WWII
Apparently, because of WWII, we moved up about 10 years in technology. If WWII hadn't happened, there'd be no Telepath rpg!
There would- just in 2020.
Is it true that the atomic bomb was dropped because of a communication mistranslation or is that just an urban legend?
Quote from: Bromtaghon on July 13, 2010, 09:26:45 PM
There would- just in 2020.
Is it true that the atomic bomb was dropped because of a communication mistranslation or is that just an urban legend?
Urban legend, but the other three I mentioned earlier its true but because it was foggy.
Quote from: MikeW781 on July 11, 2010, 07:03:09 PM
There were other options. Some sites suggested announcement of the bomb to the Japenese, then using it if they refused surrender. Also, IMHO the Japenese's policy of defending to the last breath has been exxagerated. Every "man, woman, and child" is a ridiculus exxageration.
Japan was warned of "prompt and utter destruction (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Potsdam_Declaration)", yet they still didn't surrender unconditionally.
QuoteThe Japanese code of bushido—"the way of the warrior"—was deeply ingrained. The concept of Yamato-damashii equipped each soldier with a strict code: never be captured, never break down, and never surrender. Surrender was dishonorable. Each soldier was trained to fight to the death and was expected to die before suffering dishonor. Defeated Japanese leaders preferred to take their own lives in the painful samurai ritual of seppuku (called hara kiri in the West). Warriors who surrendered were not deemed worthy of regard or respect."
-Air Force account (http://www.afa.org/media/enolagay/03-001.asp) wouldn't call it an exageration
The Japanese soldiers wouldn't surrender when defending the Philippines, so what make you think they would surrender while defending the homeland. In order to defend Japan, the soldiers were willing to fly their plains into ships.
Quote from: PinkPanzer on July 12, 2010, 01:09:00 AM
My thoughts are is WWII started because of WWI. The treaty of versailles which is the allies fault. They never invited the other countries which is the other powers. They pinned it all on Germany and making them pay millions upon billions of dollars also limited their army to 50,000 with no navy or airforce. Making the great depression even more worse in Germany which Adolf Hitler used to gain his power as Chancellor then creating mass propaganda on you know what. The using blitzcrige to take their foes out including their superior Luftwaffe. Taking out Europe and parts of Northern Africa. Then hammering England exhausting the Royal Airforce (RAF) then U.S. Troops came in took out the grip Germany had on Africa and protecting the Parlament and the Tower of London. Then hammered at Germany on west front while Russia took care of the Eastern front. Stupidly of Germany they betrayed Russia because Hitler hates communist too. Also the heavy water in the fyords in Scandanavia area. I know it's somewhere there and the (RAF) took it out just in time. Germany could have probably made the atom bomb but due to Hitler Albert Einsitne and another smart man ran away to the U.S. and helped develop the atom bomb later used on Japan. On a conquest to rule all of Asia. Mistakenly attacking Pearl Harbor and then leaflets was bombed on Japan. These leaflets tell them that a new super weapon is about to be used on them. Then 2 stopes on Nagasaki and Heroshima. Another 3 was about to be droped on Tokyo and other two major cities. Ending WWII
You are right about multiple things, but many things I disagree with. I do agree that the German people elected Hitler because he preached "Change" when the economy is bad (even American has elected a unfit leader when the economy is bad), but Germany has to take responsibilty for starting both WWI and WWII. Albert Einstein did not work on the Manhattan Project. He wrote a letter to President Franklin D. Roosevelt which led to the Manhattan Project and his published theories were the fondation of the atomic bomb, but Einstein was not a major part of the Manhattan Project. I don't know where you go the idea about dropping more atomic bombs. The USA had only producted two bombs during WWII and the US bluffed about having more. Plus Tokyo wasn't a target, because it was already destroyed (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firebombing_of_Tokyo#B-29_raids) worst then Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
Quote from: im2smart4u on July 14, 2010, 01:44:58 PM
Quote from: MikeW781 on July 11, 2010, 07:03:09 PM
There were other options. Some sites suggested announcement of the bomb to the Japenese, then using it if they refused surrender. Also, IMHO the Japenese's policy of defending to the last breath has been exxagerated. Every "man, woman, and child" is a ridiculus exxageration.
Japan was warned of "prompt and utter destruction (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Potsdam_Declaration)", yet they still didn't surrender unconditionally.
QuoteThe Japanese code of bushido—"the way of the warrior"—was deeply ingrained. The concept of Yamato-damashii equipped each soldier with a strict code: never be captured, never break down, and never surrender. Surrender was dishonorable. Each soldier was trained to fight to the death and was expected to die before suffering dishonor. Defeated Japanese leaders preferred to take their own lives in the painful samurai ritual of seppuku (called hara kiri in the West). Warriors who surrendered were not deemed worthy of regard or respect."
-Air Force account (http://www.afa.org/media/enolagay/03-001.asp) wouldn't call it an exageration
The Japanese soldiers wouldn't surrender when defending the Philippines, so what make you think they would surrender while defending the homeland. In order to defend Japan, the soldiers were willing to fly their plains into ships.
Quote from: PinkPanzer on July 12, 2010, 01:09:00 AM
My thoughts are is WWII started because of WWI. The treaty of versailles which is the allies fault. They never invited the other countries which is the other powers. They pinned it all on Germany and making them pay millions upon billions of dollars also limited their army to 50,000 with no navy or airforce. Making the great depression even more worse in Germany which Adolf Hitler used to gain his power as Chancellor then creating mass propaganda on you know what. The using blitzcrige to take their foes out including their superior Luftwaffe. Taking out Europe and parts of Northern Africa. Then hammering England exhausting the Royal Airforce (RAF) then U.S. Troops came in took out the grip Germany had on Africa and protecting the Parlament and the Tower of London. Then hammered at Germany on west front while Russia took care of the Eastern front. Stupidly of Germany they betrayed Russia because Hitler hates communist too. Also the heavy water in the fyords in Scandanavia area. I know it's somewhere there and the (RAF) took it out just in time. Germany could have probably made the atom bomb but due to Hitler Albert Einsitne and another smart man ran away to the U.S. and helped develop the atom bomb later used on Japan. On a conquest to rule all of Asia. Mistakenly attacking Pearl Harbor and then leaflets was bombed on Japan. These leaflets tell them that a new super weapon is about to be used on them. Then 2 stopes on Nagasaki and Heroshima. Another 3 was about to be droped on Tokyo and other two major cities. Ending WWII
You are right about multiple things, but many things I disagree with. I do agree that the German people elected Hitler because he preached "Change" when the economy is bad (even American has elected a unfit leader when the economy is bad), but Germany has to take responsibilty for starting both WWI and WWII. Albert Einstein did not work on the Manhattan Project. He wrote a letter to President Franklin D. Roosevelt which led to the Manhattan Project and his published theories were the fondation of the atomic bomb, but Einstein was not a major part of the Manhattan Project. I don't know where you go the idea about dropping more atomic bombs. The USA had only producted two bombs during WWII and the US bluffed about having more. Plus Tokyo wasn't a target, because it was already destroyed (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firebombing_of_Tokyo#B-29_raids) worst then Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
WWI was because of Austria Hungary when the Duke was assassinated everyone was already allied and the assassination was the spark of the war. Yes Germany should have taken responsibility but it was quite unfair. Now if he never wrote that letter where would we be? As for the more bombs the fat man(plutonium) and little boy(uranium) was the only two dropped the U.S. had quite the stockpile so tis possible There was about the same amount killed and Tokyo was more wildly populated so it would make sense about the same amount died.
Quote from: PinkPanzer on July 14, 2010, 05:15:53 PMWWI was because of Austria Hungary when the Duke was assassinated everyone was already allied and the assassination was the spark of the war. Yes Germany should have taken responsibility but it was quite unfair. Now if he never wrote that letter where would we be? As for the more bombs the fat man(plutonium) and little boy(uranium) was the only two dropped the U.S. had quite the stockpile so tis possible There was about the same amount killed and Tokyo was more wildly populated so it would make sense about the same amount died.
France, England, and America would have stayed out of WWI if Germany didn't invade France through neutral countries. Do your research because there wasn't any stockpile of nuclear weapons untill WWII ended. A third atomic bomb was in the making when the bomb was dropped on Nagasaki. The USA couldn't drop a bomb they don't have. So you agree that Tokyo was already destroyed, yet you still claim that is would have been the third target? ::)
Quote from: im2smart4u on July 14, 2010, 01:44:58 PM
Quote from: MikeW781 on July 11, 2010, 07:03:09 PM
There were other options. Some sites suggested announcement of the bomb to the Japenese, then using it if they refused surrender. Also, IMHO the Japenese's policy of defending to the last breath has been exxagerated. Every "man, woman, and child" is a ridiculus exxageration.
Japan was warned of "prompt and utter destruction (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Potsdam_Declaration)", yet they still didn't surrender unconditionally
The Americans never said with what. The Japanese thought this was just talk, having never heard of the atomic bomb before. How pathetic would a goverment look if they quit a war they had already invested so much in just because we said we'd destroy them? If we had told them about the bomb, and showed it to them, they would have been able to save face and quit the war.
Quote from: MikeW781 on July 15, 2010, 07:14:18 AMThe Americans never said with what. The Japanese thought this was just talk, having never heard of the atomic bomb before. How pathetic would a goverment look if they quit a war they had already invested so much in just because we said we'd destroy them? If we had told them about the bomb, and showed it to them, they would have been able to save face and quit the war.
So you think is a better idea for the USA to tell the Japs that city destroying weapon that vastly more powerful then any weapon before it and when the Japs don't beileve their enemy, then the USA should do a visiable test that might still not convince them to surrender. If they still don't surrender, then the USA has lost a bomb that costs several millions(billions in today's money) and now they only have one more bomb to use. At the time, Truman made the right choice and to think otherwise would be naive.
I must agree with im2smart4u here, if we America showed Japan the atom bomb, they would try to make something better, common sense, that, and we've lost the bomb, that would probably cost us the war.
I understand, of course, why the bomb was dropped. Perfectly understandable decision, from Truman's point of view. However, total connected deaths rose to over three million. The estimation was that, during the invasion of Japan, around one million American soldiers would die (I will admit that this may be a underestimate, but that was the approximation), and the Japanese casualties would possibly have equalled or surpassed the three million. However, these would have been soldiers; the bombing's death toll were largely civilian. So, in agreeing with the bomb, you are equating the lives of one million American soldiers, with three million civilian Japanese. I believe that it should be treated as a war crime. Although, since the Allies were never tried for any of their war crimes, what difference would it make? The Axis were tried for their war crimes, though.
Huh, very, very good point about the civilian vs. military casualties, caused me to look at this another way altogether.
Quote from: Steelfist on July 15, 2010, 11:17:41 AM
Although, since the Allies were never tried for any of their war crimes, what difference would it make? The Axis were tried for their war crimes, though.
The winning side is never tried for war crimes, because the trials are conducted by the victor. Its a bad system, but the people who disagree with the victor just lost, so its how things work out.
Quote from: Steelfist on July 15, 2010, 11:17:41 AM
I believe that it should be treated as a war crime. Although, since the Allies were never tried for any of their war crimes, what difference would it make? The Axis were tried for their war crimes, though.
At the time before precision guided munitions, total war was common. Yes, the Axis were tried for war crimes, but thad doesn't mean the Axis were held to a higher standard. There were not any war crime trails for when the Germans bombed London (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Blitz). At that time, both the Allies and the Axes didn't consider air raids on civilain targets as war crimes.
It is unfair to compare the Japanese's human experimentation (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_war_atrocities#Human_experimentation_and_biological_warfare) and the Nazi's Holocaust (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Holocaust) to the USA who bombed two cities with the intention to reduce the lost of lives.
Quote from: im2smart4u on July 15, 2010, 04:52:57 PM
Quote from: Steelfist on July 15, 2010, 11:17:41 AM
I believe that it should be treated as a war crime. Although, since the Allies were never tried for any of their war crimes, what difference would it make? The Axis were tried for their war crimes, though.
At the time before precision guided munitions, total war was common. Yes, the Axis were tried for war crimes, but thad doesn't mean the Axis were held to a higher standard. There were not any war crime trails for when the Germans bombed London (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Blitz). At that time, both the Allies and the Axes didn't consider air raids on civilain targets as war crimes.
It is unfair to compare the Japanese's human experimentation (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_war_atrocities#Human_experimentation_and_biological_warfare) and the Nazi's Holocaust (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Holocaust) to the USA who bombed two cities with the intention to reduce the lost of lives.
Reduce lost of lives with cost of civilians or crimes against humanity I think its far to obvious. The U.S. prevented more lost lives and the Nazis and Japanese tortured humans to the point where its literally hell.
My favorite hero of the Holocaust
[spoiler]Bielski Brothers
The Bielski partisans was an organisation of Jewish partisans who rescued Jews from extermination and fought against the Nazi German occupiers and their collaborators in the vicinity of Nowogródek (Navahrudak) and Lida in German-occupied Poland (now western Belarus). They are named after the Bielskis, a family of Polish Jews who led the partisan movement.
Under their protection, 1,236 Jews survived the war, making it one of many remarkable rescue missions in the Holocaust. The group spent more than two years living in the forests and was initially organised by members of the Bielski family.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bielski_partisans
There is a book and I own it very good book.
(http://urbandebris.typepad.com/.a/6a00d8341c479753ef010536d6e285970b-800wi)[/spoiler]
Just to let you know how evil the Nazis where.
[spoiler]Mostly the Nazis especially the concentration camp Auswitch. The exact number of victims at Auschwitz is impossible to fix with certainty. Since the Nazis destroyed a number of records, immediate efforts to count the dead depended on the testimony of witnesses and the defendants on trial at Nuremberg. While under interrogation Rudolf Höss, commandant of Auschwitz concentration camp from 1940 to 1943, said that Adolf Eichmann told him that two and a half million Jews had been killed in gas chambers and about half a million had died "naturally". Later he wrote "I regard two and a half million far too high. Even Auschwitz had limits to its destructive possibilities".
Communist Polish and Soviet authorities maintained a figure "between 2.5 and 4 million" and the Auschwitz State Museum itself displayed a figure of 4 million killed, but "[f]ew (if any) historians ever believed the Museum's four million figure". Raul Hilberg's 1961 work The Destruction of the European Jews estimated the number killed at 1,000,000, and Gerald Reitlinger's 1968 book The Final Solution described the Soviet figures as "ridiculous", and estimated the number killed at "800,000 to 900,000". A larger study started later by Franciszek Piper used timetables of train arrivals combined with deportation records to calculate 960,000 Jewish deaths and 140,000-150,000 ethnic Polish victims, along with 23,000 Roma and Sinti (Gypsies), a figure that has met with significant agreement from other scholars.
After the collapse of the Communist government in 1989, the plaque at Auschwitz State Museum was removed and the official death toll given as 1.1 million. Holocaust deniers have attempted to use this change as propaganda, in the words of the Nizkor Project:
Deniers often use the 'Four Million Variant' as a stepping stone to leap from an apparent contradiction to the idea that the Holocaust was a hoax, again perpetrated by a conspiracy. They hope to discredit historians by making them seem inconsistent. If they can't keep their numbers straight, their reasoning goes, how can we say that their evidence for the Holocaust is credible? One must wonder which historians they speak of, as most have been remarkably consistent in their estimates of a million or so dead... Few (if any) historians ever believed the Museum's four million figure, having arrived at their own estimates independently. The museum's inflated figures were never part of the estimated five to six million Jews killed in the Holocaust, so there is no need to revise this figure. The prisoners' day began at 4:30 a.m. with "reveille" or roll call, with 30 minutes allowed for morning ablutions. After roll call, the Kommando, or work details, would walk to their place of work, five abreast, wearing striped camp fatigues, no underwear, and wooden shoes without socks, most of the time ill-fitting, which caused great pain. An orchestra often played as the workers marched through the gates. Kapos—prisoners who had been promoted to foremen—were responsible for the prisoners' behavior while they worked, as was an SS escort. The working day lasted 12 hours during the summer, and a little less in the winter. No rest periods were allowed. One prisoner would be assigned to the latrines to measure the time the workers took to empty their bladders and bowels.
After work, there was a mandatory evening roll call. If a prisoner was missing, the others had to remain standing in place until he was either found or the reason for his absence discovered, even if it took hours, regardless of the weather conditions. After roll call, there were individual and collective punishments, depending on what had happened during the day, and after these, the prisoners were allowed to retire to their blocks for the night to receive their bread rations and water. Curfew was two or three hours later, the prisoners sleeping in long rows of wooden bunks, lying in and on their clothes and shoes to prevent them from being stolen. [/spoiler]
Here are some photos.
[spoiler]Viewers digression is advised.[spoiler](http://www.archivocalasanz.com/wp-content/uploads/229-auswitchninos.png)
Children behind barb wires.
(http://lubna.unblog.fr/files/2008/01/haustwithfourcrmatoire.jpg)
Here is what usually happens when you die. You burn in a oven if you are partly alive somehow you will still suffer even if you are found alive SS troops just wont let you live.
(http://doarcuvinte.files.wordpress.com/2009/10/holocaust-2corpses.jpg)
Corpse being sent to the ovens that burns the corpse to ashes.
(http://sydwalker.info/blog/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/holocaust-corpses_belsen.gif)
Corpse piled up so much the ovens had no more room due to access corpse and is being bulldozed into a giant hole.
(http://www.israelnewsagency.com/holocaust00_1.jpg)
Filled hole of dead bodies.
(http://www.nizkor.org/ftp.cgi/places/ftp.py?places//ukraine/images/khmelnitski-proskurov-grave.jpg)
Its another brimming hole
(http://www.ushmm.org/lcmedia/photo/lc/image/48/48296.jpg)
The death march. This was usual in the Ghettos like the Warsaw Ghetto The death march was sometimes used to mass execute everyone at a far away place. When the liberation of the death camps (Concentration Camp) was in act they used the same tactics to kill them some marches where so long about half of the millions of people died.
[/spoiler]
Quote from: im2smart4u on July 15, 2010, 10:05:05 AM
Quote from: MikeW781 on July 15, 2010, 07:14:18 AMThe Americans never said with what. The Japanese thought this was just talk, having never heard of the atomic bomb before. How pathetic would a goverment look if they quit a war they had already invested so much in just because we said we'd destroy them? If we had told them about the bomb, and showed it to them, they would have been able to save face and quit the war.
So you think is a better idea for the USA to tell the Japs that city destroying weapon that vastly more powerful then any weapon before it and when the Japs don't beileve their enemy, then the USA should do a visiable test that might still not convince them to surrender. If they still don't surrender, then the USA has lost a bomb that costs several millions(billions in today's money) and now they only have one more bomb to use. At the time, Truman made the right choice and to think otherwise would be naive.
The U.S. makes 1quadrillion dollars annually and has a GDP of 14.3trillion dollars
Quote from: PinkPanzer on July 16, 2010, 02:27:58 AMThe U.S. makes 1quadrillion dollars annually and has a GDP of 14.3trillion dollars
Are these the numbers in the 1940s or today? The Great Depression wan't over, so the government doesn't need to waste tremendous amounts of money.
Today of course and yeah but its good to have a couple just in case.
The Nanking Massacre was by far the worst part of WWII in my opinion, the Japanese were so brutal and soulless towards the Chinese, that even some if not all the Nazis thought that what they were doing was horrid and even tried to stop it. They couldn't stop it, but they bought some time for many Chinese to escape Nanking and the Japanese.
The Holocaust is a bigger deal then what the Japanese and Soviets did for many reasons. The motives of Nazis were simply to kill Jewish people, while Japan's were killing with the goal of conquest and the Soviets wish to retain control of their empire. Also, the Holocaust was one of the most documented events in human history, so it is easier to inform people about it then the Nanking Massacre. Plus, it would be hypocritical for the Chinese to complain about crimes against humanity.
Quote from: im2smart4u on August 20, 2010, 10:59:25 AM
The Holocaust is a bigger deal then what the Japanese and Soviets did for many reasons. The motives of Nazis were simply to kill Jewish people, while Japan's were killing with the goal of conquest and the Soviets wish to retain control of their empire. Also, the Holocaust was one of the most documented events in human history, so it is easier to inform people about it then the Nanking Massacre. Plus, it would be hypocritical for the Chinese to complain about crimes against humanity.
Very valid, as always, but I just thought that the Nanking Massacre was one of the more atrocious acts that transpired during WWII. Innocent civillians were murdered, butchered, most of the time, and defiled (you should know what I mean by that), yes, the Holocaust was one of the most awful events in human history, I think the Nanking Massacre is worth bringing up, as it was just inhumane in the worst sense of the word in my opinion. You could look it up on Wikipedia, see what I mean (viewer discretion is not advised, rather, strictly ordered).
There has been many genocides in the world currently there is one in Darfur.
Quote from: PinkPanzer on August 20, 2010, 10:28:01 PM
There has been many genocides in the world currently there is one in Darfur.
Yes, but most genocides occur in third world countries. Germany was different, because it was the most technological advance country in the world.
Quote from: im2smart4u on August 20, 2010, 11:59:55 PM
Quote from: PinkPanzer on August 20, 2010, 10:28:01 PM
There has been many genocides in the world currently there is one in Darfur.
Yes, but most genocides occur in third world countries. Germany was different, because it was the most technological advance country in the world.
Yes and there gas chambers where the worst. Though it's just rat poison it does have cyanide.
A gas chamber is an apparatus for killing humans or animals with gas, consisting of a sealed chamber into which a poisonous or asphyxiant gas is introduced. The most commonly used poisonous agent is hydrogen cyanide; carbon dioxide and carbon monoxide have also been used. Gas chambers were used as a method of execution for condemned prisoners in the United States beginning in the 1920s. During the Holocaust, large-scale gas chambers designed for mass killing were used by Nazi Germany as part of their genocide program, and also by the Independent State of Croatia at the Jasenovac camp. The use of gas chambers has also been reported in North Korea.
Gas chambers have also been used for animal euthanasia, using carbon monoxide as the lethal agent. Sometimes a box filled with anaesthetic gas is used to anaesthetize small animals for surgery or euthanasia.
Eh, a sad topic, this is. Just to give you a glimpse of what it does feel like on a personal level, rather than abstract, I have been inside (naturally, non operational, and not in the too distant past) one of the gas chambers in Dachau. A dark place, to say the least. One of the more well known concentration camps.
Now, what's written below, is not a pleasant read, so please, if you're young or don't want to read unpleasant stuff, seriously, don't read on.
[spoiler]
Inside, the walls are wooden, and there are fake shower heads- so people don't get scared, y'see (they were told that they're taking a shower), and instead of water came a gas, once they were in. But that was in earleir versions, in later versions tey were less humane, and there are simple numerous holes in the white cieling, a bit like ventilation shafts. And there are a great many of them. People were also given towels, since they were supposed to "take a shower", so some, when the gas started to come out, they wrapped their heads in the towels, hoping that it will slow the gas down, and then maybe they'll live through it. Well, the towels did slow the gas down. But the camp operators well knew of this technique, so they kept it up for 10 minutes, so those with towels simply took much longer to die. The thing that got to me though, was there there were windows in the room! The walls were very thick, and the windows were located on the outer edge of the wall, but still, the windows could be opened, and there were handles, from what I remember. And the darn thing was, there were, naturally, bars on the inner side of the wall. And what really gets to you, is you could see that it is possible to open the window, and you even can fit your hand through the bars (I tried, and I'm sure camp inhabitants had much skinnier hands than I), but the window was just out of reach. Horrible really- you see an escape, and in your last moments you try and save yourself, but it's just beyond you, failing at the last instant. Terrible. Unpleasant. Sadistic. [/spoiler]
You don't really know, and can't possibly imagine how WWII is horrible, until you get a taste of it.
Quote from: KZ on August 30, 2010, 11:34:14 AM
Eh, a sad topic, this is. Just to give you a glimpse of what it does feel like on a personal level, rather than abstract, I have been inside (naturally, non operational, and not in the too distant past) one of the gas chambers in Dachau. A dark place, to say the least. One of the more well known concentration camps.
Now, what's written below, is not a pleasant read, so please, if you're young or don't want to read unpleasant stuff, seriously, don't read on.
[spoiler]
Inside, the walls are wooden, and there are fake shower heads- so people don't get scared, y'see (they were told that they're taking a shower), and instead of water came a gas, once they were in. But that was in earleir versions, in later versions tey were less humane, and there are simple numerous holes in the white cieling, a bit like ventilation shafts. And there are a great many of them. People were also given towels, since they were supposed to "take a shower", so some, when the gas started to come out, they wrapped their heads in the towels, hoping that it will slow the gas down, and then maybe they'll live through it. Well, the towels did slow the gas down. But the camp operators well knew of this technique, so they kept it up for 10 minutes, so those with towels simply took much longer to die. The thing that got to me though, was there there were windows in the room! The walls were very thick, and the windows were located on the outer edge of the wall, but still, the windows could be opened, and there were handles, from what I remember. And the darn thing was, there were, naturally, bars on the inner side of the wall. And what really gets to you, is you could see that it is possible to open the window, and you even can fit your hand through the bars (I tried, and I'm sure camp inhabitants had much skinnier hands than I), but the window was just out of reach. Horrible really- you see an escape, and in your last moments you try and save yourself, but it's just beyond you, failing at the last instant. Terrible. Unpleasant. Sadistic. [/spoiler]
That's just evil!! I feel really bad for those in the holocaust.
Indeed, but you can come close by hearing first-witness accounts, to be in the places they were, to see the archives and the material from those times. It also depends on how often its mentioned and how deeply rooted it is in the mentality of the people. Still better than abstract ponderings of the current generation.
Quote from: im2smart4u on July 15, 2010, 04:52:57 PM
It is unfair to compare the Japanese's human experimentation (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_war_atrocities#Human_experimentation_and_biological_warfare) and the Nazi's Holocaust (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Holocaust) to the USA who bombed two cities with the intention to reduce the lost of lives.
Yes, but, as it turns out, the Japanese killed far more Chinese during WWII than Nazis killed Jews.
His point was that the Nazis and Japanese were worse than US. Not that Japan was more or less inhumane than Germany
Quote from: MikeW781 on August 31, 2010, 07:06:20 PM
His point was that the Nazis and Japanese were worse than US. Not that Japan was more or less inhumane than Germany
Sorry, I thought he meant it was unfair to compare the Japanese's murder of the Chinese to the Holocaust. :(
Quote from: KZ on August 30, 2010, 11:34:14 AM
Eh, a sad topic, this is. Just to give you a glimpse of what it does feel like on a personal level, rather than abstract, I have been inside (naturally, non operational, and not in the too distant past) one of the gas chambers in Dachau. A dark place, to say the least. One of the more well known concentration camps.
Now, what's written below, is not a pleasant read, so please, if you're young or don't want to read unpleasant stuff, seriously, don't read on.
[spoiler]
Inside, the walls are wooden, and there are fake shower heads- so people don't get scared, y'see (they were told that they're taking a shower), and instead of water came a gas, once they were in. But that was in earleir versions, in later versions tey were less humane, and there are simple numerous holes in the white cieling, a bit like ventilation shafts. And there are a great many of them. People were also given towels, since they were supposed to "take a shower", so some, when the gas started to come out, they wrapped their heads in the towels, hoping that it will slow the gas down, and then maybe they'll live through it. Well, the towels did slow the gas down. But the camp operators well knew of this technique, so they kept it up for 10 minutes, so those with towels simply took much longer to die. The thing that got to me though, was there there were windows in the room! The walls were very thick, and the windows were located on the outer edge of the wall, but still, the windows could be opened, and there were handles, from what I remember. And the darn thing was, there were, naturally, bars on the inner side of the wall. And what really gets to you, is you could see that it is possible to open the window, and you even can fit your hand through the bars (I tried, and I'm sure camp inhabitants had much skinnier hands than I), but the window was just out of reach. Horrible really- you see an escape, and in your last moments you try and save yourself, but it's just beyond you, failing at the last instant. Terrible. Unpleasant. Sadistic. [/spoiler]
KZ this feels like i'm reading my holocaust book when I was in 6th grade. My teacher always taught this for the last quarter of the year. I read an amazing book called the Bielski Brothers. Though the first 20 pages are boring dew to over explanation of th the war but it makes sense with the brothers story. They smuggled 3,000 Jews in a forest. They joined the Russian Partisans to increase their odds for survival. Of course in their camps they had all sorts of things from Hospitals to Workshops to tailors. They fought some of the most incredible battles too. If you have seen the movie defiance its exactly the story.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WYZ2oYDSKHA is the trailer. Do not mind the fact that its rated R the trailer does not have any thing to get a R rating but the whole movie does.
Also http://www.usi.edu/music/SITES/MAD/GALLERY/tourgallery/Auschwitz.html has god pics of the most horrible camp in the Holocaust. If you where going there the first thing you would see is burning babies. Due to the fact that babies are useless to their war effort.