Indian Muslims

[DodgyAgent]

Originally Posted by TimberWolf

An awful lot more people probably died as a result of us declaring war on Germany than would otherwise have died. Even the Jews probably were worse off for it (I think we covered that here not so long ago). Why does no-one mention Russian, our allies, atrocities? (I missed the programmes that have been on TV recently, anyone see them?) Everyone seems to have been killing innocents on a big scale at that time, us included.

We should never have gone to war against Germany. We should have done a deal with Germany and remained neutral.

[Moscow Mule]

Originally Posted by DodgyAgent

We should never have gone to war against Germany. We should have done a deal with Germany and remained neutral.

And reneged on our promises/treaties? Doesn't sound very British.

I'm not sure I'd want to live in a Britain that had done that.

It would be like being Swiss.

[sasguru]

Originally Posted by DodgyAgent

We should never have gone to war against Germany. We should have done a deal with Germany and remained neutral.

A post worthy of the king troll, atwat himself

[DodgyAgent]

Originally Posted by sasguru

A post worthy of the king troll, atwat himself

I am sure that our friend Timberwolf agrees that there is no such thing as a "just war" and that if one side is a war aggressor, then if the other side retailaites they are therefore no better than the aggressor.

[TimberWolf]

Originally Posted by DodgyAgent

I am sure that our friend Timberwolf agrees that there is no such thing as a "just war" and that if one side is a war aggressor, then if the other side retailaites they are therefore no better than the aggressor.

I think as with many things (economics included) there is no solution, although there are many bad solutions. Was the mass carnage of the Second World War the best solution? Moral and ethical decisions come into this too. Is it better that hundreds of millions die to save a helpless minority, is it justifiable to take out "dodgy" (no pun intended) characters out with a snipers bullet before things kick off? Could we have been a bit sneaky (dastardly) and taken out the German elite in this way, without expending millions of lives? Etc.

[zeitghost]

Originally Posted by Moscow Mule

I think Stalin was just as bad as Hitler, and he was our buddy at the time...

You're having a larf, aren't you?

Stalin made Adolph look like a rank amateur.

[Moscow Mule]

I think as with many things (economics included) there is no solution, although there are many bad solutions. Was the mass carnage of the Second World War the best solution?
Not sure about that. What are the alternatives (given the technology at the time)?

Moral and ethical decisions come into this too. Is it better that hundreds of millions die to save a helpless minority,
The holocaust wasn't apparent until the end of the war. It's not correct to assume that Britain entered the war to save a helpless minority. It entered to prevent the spread of a foreign power across Europe.

is it justifiable to take out "dodgy" (no pun intended) characters out with a snipers bullet before things kick off?
Leads to unintended consequences.

If Hitler had been taken out, the situation could have brewed nicely for the next nasty little fascist. It's just that by the time the next one came along there would be basic rocket technology and nuclear weapons

[Bob Dalek]

Originally Posted by DodgyAgent

We should never have gone to war against Germany. We should have done a deal with Germany and remained neutral.

Genius! Oh! Hold on a moment... that's what Russia did... seem to remember that went a bit pear-shaped!

[Bob Dalek]

Originally Posted by DodgyAgent

I am sure that our friend Timberwolf agrees that there is no such thing as a "just war" and that if one side is a war aggressor, then if the other side retailaites they are therefore no better than the aggressor.

Utter piffle. You are a social worker from Brent and have a CND symbol tattooed on your Left titty.

[DodgyAgent]

Originally Posted by TimberWolf

I think as with many things (economics included) there is no solution, although there are many bad solutions. Was the mass carnage of the Second World War the best solution? Moral and ethical decisions come into this too. Is it better that hundreds of millions die to save a helpless minority, is it justifiable to take out "dodgy" (no pun intended) characters out with a snipers bullet before things kick off? Could we have been a bit sneaky (dastardly) and taken out the German elite in this way, without expending millions of lives? Etc.

You dont really have much of a clue do you? Why didnt they just get the leaders to sit down with a pack of cards and draw cards to see who would control Europe.