Mein Kampf

[janey]

Perfume by Patrick Suskind if I recall correctly ...

Ahhhh, those were the days of free love - the book was given to me by a gorgeous blond German aupair back at uni in 1989 - beautiful woman ... now I'm married to another German ex-au pair ...

1989! blimey, I'd only just gone to secondary school!

[Fungus]

1989! blimey, I'd only just gone to secondary school!

Isn't it past your bedtime young lady? Be off with you or I'll tell your parents ... And no reading underneath the bedsheets.

[xoggoth]

Indeed. Violence towards political opponents was a deliberate and calculated part of his movement from the earliest days.

As was propoganda. Makes one wonder what a modern Goebbels could acheive with all the resources of the modern media and modern psychological techniques of manipulation.

There is only one antidote and fortunately most on this site have a good grasp of it, as have many citizens in the US.

Whatever government tells you is a self-seeking lie.

Hang on to that principle, go forth and convert the multitudes.

[vetran]

Genius yes, Sane no.

Sun Tzu & Machiavelli were hardly people you would like to meet at a ladies sewing circle, but both had a mastery of politics and what motivated People.

Studying Hitler etc can be informative without being corrupting.

[Churchill]

Sun Tzu & Machiavelli were hardly people you would like to meet at a ladies sewing circle, but both had a mastery of politics and what motivated People.

Studying Hitler etc can be informative without being corrupting.

Sun Tzu? Bollocks, keep your troops busy and well fed, knife the other bastards before they knife you, that just about sums up his philosophy!

[The Lone Gunman]

Quote: "You are not totally thick then. "

Sounds like you are calling me thick. Do you remember what you have posted?

Matter of interpretation. I see that as crediting you with a modicum of intelligence which is more than you have done for me or the rest of this board.

Here's more abuse from you:

TLG: "Fungus you twat"

TLG: "Clearly no point continuing this discussion with you is there, you clearly cant read and are incapable of thinking."

I never said I wasnt abusive. It is something I do when others make assumptions without supporting their argument.

TLG: "You seem to have tunnel vision. Why dont you put your head back up your arse and let the rest of us enjoy an intelligent diecusion."

That does not qualify for intelligent discussion in my book. In fact it is pretty abusive. Your postings suggest a lack of knowledge on the subject.

I did what you do, I made an assumption about the level of language needed for you to understand the point. Clearly I was right.

Here is what I said about David Irving:

"This forum seems to be full of apprentice David Irvings. "

Now if you knew anything about David Irving, you would know that he accepts that the Nazis murdered millions, and agree that what he did was appalling. But he argues that Hitler was not central to "the final solution" and openly admires much about him.

And here is a quote from MailMan on this thread:

"Hitler would fit in well with the current English government. He had the ability, skill and will to make a very real difference but in the end fecked it up completely!"

That looks to me like he has some admiration for Hitler me old fruit.

Quite the inverse (tulip I am supporting postman prat) As I said, you dont read to well do you. It is not admiration for Hitler, it is contempt for Blair.
There is no denying that Hitler was skilled and able, he managed to pull a country out of depression and onwards to war against the world in certain knowledge that they would win. Couldnt do that if he was a total twat now could he?
BTW Irving has only just come round to the idea that millions of Jews were murdered, for years he denied it, that is why he is serving time in Austria.

And you say:

"It has always been my belief that had Hitler not been barking he could have united Europe before the end of the war had he chosen a peaceful route."

That also shows some admiration for Hitler though not of course for mass murder which I did not say. I do not expect anyone here to condone his murderous side.

That is not admiration, just something that I have considered many times.
Most of Europe was on its uppers, most people did not want another war. Most people didnt care about his scapegoats and nationalism has always been a good rallying cry in times of need. I would suggest some would happily have followed his example. Germany was a magnificent manufacturer and its war effort out performed the allies on many fronts, just imagine that energy put into peacetime production.

It is not uncommon to admire dictators for making the trains run on time, so to speak.

But, your statements are IMO misguided and show a fundamental lack of understanding of how Hitler achieved power and the nature of his politics. As I have already stated, but it seems that I must repeat myself, violence and racism were central to Hitler's politics. They were not a nasty add on, they were central to understanding him. From the very beginning he had his own private militia who would beat up and kill those who got in his way. And he would demonise certain groups such as Jews. He was never voted into power, but was given the role of dictator by senior German politicians due to economic circumstances.

Now you start making a decent argument. I may be misguided and you are entitled to your opinion (though I am not it seems), but I understand how and why Hitler came to power, I have studied him at great length. That did not stop him having a fanatical following. I am just suggesting that many others would have followed him for the benefits Germany was/could have been enjoying had he gone down the path of peace.

Central to his rise was the fact that Germany was on its knees, in large part due to unfair war reparations, and also due to the world recession. Hitler gave Germany back its sense of self respect by standing up to those countries that had tried to humiliate Germany after WW1.

That is central to my argument to!

So the idea that he could have united Europe were he not barking is misguided and ignores circumstances and his nature.

I disagree. If he had continued to industrialise Germany and delivered a Beetle apiece the German model would have looked very attractive. Many Austrians had a belief in him as had most of the Suddatenland. Italy was quite happy to join in, even the Brits were not doing anything to oppose him before he invaded.

So, before you have a little temper tantrum, maybe you should read what you and others post before you and then think a bit. Or a lot.

You might like to follow your own advice, a little effort in the thinking department and you might manage to catch up with the arguments of others.


HTH

[janey]

Isn't it past your bedtime young lady? Be off with you or I'll tell your parents ... And no reading underneath the bedsheets.

spoil sport!

[Fungus]

TLG says: "Matter of interpretation. "

No it's not. You insulted me. FFS at least take responsibility for your own posts rather than play the weazel.

TLG says: "Now you start making a decent argument."

Funny that. All I was doing was summarising my earlier posts. Which you would know if you had read them, which clearly you had not.

TLG says: "Many Austrians had a belief in him as had most of the Suddatenland. "

So, in support of your argument that Hitler could have united Europe, despite not even achieving a democratic mandate in Germany, you cite ... the Suddatenland. [Pause while I have a good guffaw] You obviously have deep insights. [Another pause and another guffaw.] I won't patronise you (as you say) by explaining why the "Suddatenland" is not the most convincing argument in support of your thesis. [Guffaw]. Parts of Western Poland also supported Hitler. Now I wonder why. Tough one that.

And you say that "Many Austrians had a belief in him". [Another guffaw.] Local boy done good eh?

Look mate, you're obviously a complete clown. Is your client Chipperfields Circus? I'd stick to scooping up the elephant tulipe if I were you.

[The Lone Gunman]

You started with the insults so I felt quite justified fighting back.
As I have said, you oviously cant read or think.
I think you are thick = I think you are thick.
You are not totally thick = you might have some inteligence somewhere.
You said I said you were thick. I didnt. You did.

I knew you couldnt follow an argument so was dismissive of you. Looks like I was right again. There is neither time nor space to explain the History of Hitler and his rise in Germany, so a coupleof examples should point you in the right direction. Do you think the gifting of German leadership shows his ability or his lack of it? What about the offer of peace in our time?
Belittleing me by stating your own ambitions as my place in life and by picking small points in my statements just shows your total lack of understanding the subject or ability to expand upon it.

Seems your only argument against my proposal (note it is a proposal) is that Hitler had a gang of thugs? I never disagreed with you, but as you have decided we are all Nazi sympathisers and holocaust deniers we have no valid opinion and obviously know nothing.

I have changed my mind on you being a twat.



You opinionated twat!

[xoggoth]

I have forgotten whose side I am usually on, can somebody remind me? I get people on here mixed up a lot.