Board index › Topical Discussion › Politics, Philosophy, and Religion

The Difference Between The Civil War and WWII

Page 2 of 7 [ 103 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 7  Next

Previous topic | Next topic

Almighty_CRJ
Blue Jay
Blue Jay

User avatar

Joined: 26 Nov 2006
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 82

23 Jan 2018, 3:27 pm

naturalplastic wrote:
kraftiekortie wrote:
The Second World War was about stemming the Nazi tide, first and foremost. And also about stemming Japanese expansionism. I believe the motivation might not have always been altruistic.

But who cares? We got rid of the Nazis, and we stemmed the Japanese tide.


This is the nub of it.

The allies fought to defend themselves from Axis aggression.

No body even ever claims that the Allied war effort was a response TO the Holocaust.

The Axis started the war first. And THEN (after conquering Europe) the Nazis set up the machinery of the holocaust (the system of camps, and etc) afterward. And most of the victims of the Holocaust were from the occupied countries, and not from within the borders of Germany itself anyway. Hitler wouldn't have even been able to commit the subsequent crime of the Holocaust if he had not first committed the crime of military aggression. The OP has the carriage before the horse. Not saying that most German Jews and German political prisoners weren't murdered by Hitler, I am saying that of the victims of the Holocaust only a tiny percent came from Germany itself.

One of the understated things about WWII being although the Holocaust was a very important part of the war - it also wasn't known for most of it. The British thought those were disease ridden labour camps for a long time. Never knew about the extermination policy.



VegetableMan
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 11 Jun 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,208
Location: Illinois

23 Jan 2018, 4:00 pm

Almighty_CRJ wrote:
naturalplastic wrote:
kraftiekortie wrote:
The Second World War was about stemming the Nazi tide, first and foremost. And also about stemming Japanese expansionism. I believe the motivation might not have always been altruistic.

But who cares? We got rid of the Nazis, and we stemmed the Japanese tide.


This is the nub of it.

The allies fought to defend themselves from Axis aggression.

No body even ever claims that the Allied war effort was a response TO the Holocaust.

The Axis started the war first. And THEN (after conquering Europe) the Nazis set up the machinery of the holocaust (the system of camps, and etc) afterward. And most of the victims of the Holocaust were from the occupied countries, and not from within the borders of Germany itself anyway. Hitler wouldn't have even been able to commit the subsequent crime of the Holocaust if he had not first committed the crime of military aggression. The OP has the carriage before the horse. Not saying that most German Jews and German political prisoners weren't murdered by Hitler, I am saying that of the victims of the Holocaust only a tiny percent came from Germany itself.

One of the understated things about WWII being although the Holocaust was a very important part of the war - it also wasn't known for most of it. The British thought those were disease ridden labour camps for a long time. Never knew about the extermination policy.


The Allied forces were aware of the extermination of the Jews two years before they overran the camps. There was certainly a great deal of anti-Semitic sentiments in Britain and the U.S., so I suspect that was largely responsible for their failure to make any efforts to help the Jewish people in Germany and the Nazi occupied territories.


_________________
What do you call a hot dog in a gangster suit?

Oscar Meyer Lansky


sly279
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Dec 2013
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 16,181
Location: US

24 Jan 2018, 12:44 am

Kraichgauer wrote:
TwinRuler wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
TwinRuler wrote:
For a while I wondered: what about Stalin's victims? After all, were it so wrong and evil of Hitler and his Nazis to exterminate off all the millions they did, why pray tell, was it not equally wrong for Stalin and his Commies to exterminate off all the millions they did? Pondering this, I developed a phobia.

Perhaps, just perhaps, others considered Stalin's victims to be of less value, simply because most of them were Goyim (non Jews). Looking back, I know that was a silly fear of mine.


While the Nazis had made it a specific policy to exterminate Europe's Jewish population, the fact is, Stalin and his henchmen had actually killed more Jews than Hitler and his followers.


Where did you learn that?


A history channel documentary on Stalin (when they still did real history), though I don't recall it's title.

My history teacher called it the hitler channel.



Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 48,613
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

24 Jan 2018, 12:59 am

sly279 wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
TwinRuler wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
TwinRuler wrote:
For a while I wondered: what about Stalin's victims? After all, were it so wrong and evil of Hitler and his Nazis to exterminate off all the millions they did, why pray tell, was it not equally wrong for Stalin and his Commies to exterminate off all the millions they did? Pondering this, I developed a phobia.

Perhaps, just perhaps, others considered Stalin's victims to be of less value, simply because most of them were Goyim (non Jews). Looking back, I know that was a silly fear of mine.


While the Nazis had made it a specific policy to exterminate Europe's Jewish population, the fact is, Stalin and his henchmen had actually killed more Jews than Hitler and his followers.


Where did you learn that?


A history channel documentary on Stalin (when they still did real history), though I don't recall it's title.

My history teacher called it the hitler channel.


Yes, they used to pay an inordinate amount of attention to Hitler, the Nazis, and WWII. But today, they seem more interested in impossible crap, such as ancient aliens building the pyramids, red neck swamp people, Ice Road Truckers, and such idiocy.


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


TwinRuler
Toucan
Toucan

User avatar

Joined: 21 Feb 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 262

24 Jan 2018, 8:28 am

Let us not watch the history channel anymore. What is most significant to me is that every single Belligerent, in The Second World War, had their very own system of Prison Camps. Let us not forget, let us never forget, that the U.S. and Britain-- those supposedly saintly, so saintly, countries-- had their very own.



Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 48,613
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

24 Jan 2018, 11:01 am

TwinRuler wrote:
Let us not watch the history channel anymore. What is most significant to me is that every single Belligerent, in The Second World War, had their very own system of Prison Camps. Let us not forget, let us never forget, that the U.S. and Britain-- those supposedly saintly, so saintly, countries-- had their very own.


Yes, but at least the American and British camps didn't have wholesale, industrialized scale murder taking place.


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


RainbowUnion
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 19 Jan 2018
Gender: Male
Posts: 899

24 Jan 2018, 4:35 pm

TwinRuler wrote:
For what is worth, I firmly believe that the North crushed The South, during the Civil War, in order to free Black Slaves from bondage; but, I seriously doubt that either Franklin Roosevelt or Joseph Stalin ever desired to either rescue or avenge Anne Frank and the rest of The Six Million Jews, perishing in The Holocaust. No, those two were too busy sending their very own Citizens to Prison Camps, within their own Lands. Was the thing to do, back in those days. Would even go so far as to advance the argument that Roosevelt and Stalin were anti-Semites, themselves.

Now, lest others accuse me of Axis Sympathies, let me point out: the entire Second World War, in my view, was merely one great, big land grab for Allies and Axis Powers alike. It was what Stalin termed an "Imperialist War", though Stalin was an Imperialist as much as any, including Hitler himself. Never understood the phrase "Good War", as applied to The Second World War. For there was nothing good about it at all!


IMO the main difference in the two wars is what happened after they ended. The Civil War caused no lasting changes in the social structure of the South. Blacks were still basically slaves and or second class well into the 1980s (biracial marriage was illegal in Mississippi as late as 1987, as in you could be arrested and sent to prison for being a black man who married a white woman). Share cropping replaced slavery and this lasted well into the 20th century. All the rich planters had to do to get their land back was swear an oath of loyalty to the Union. No punishments for aiding the rebellion. They clung onto segregation and Jim Crow as long as they could.

At WW2s end, the Nazis were made to pay for their crimes. It was ensured that Germany would never be a military power again.


_________________
"It must be understood, that neither by word nor deed had I given Fortunato cause to doubt my good-will. I continued as was my wont, to smile in his face, and he did not perceive that my smile was at the thought of his immolation."

Edgar Allan Poe, The Cask of Amontillado


RainbowUnion
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 19 Jan 2018
Gender: Male
Posts: 899

24 Jan 2018, 4:45 pm

TwinRuler wrote:
Let us not watch the history channel anymore. What is most significant to me is that every single Belligerent, in The Second World War, had their very own system of Prison Camps. Let us not forget, let us never forget, that the U.S. and Britain-- those supposedly saintly, so saintly, countries-- had their very own.


I don't watch the Pseudohistory channel because most of their programing is garbage these days, with Ancient Aliens topping the list. What does a show about lumberjacks or driving on icy Alaskan roads have to do with history?

Yes, the US did treat Japanese Americans in a shameful and BS way, but they and their descendants have been compensated for it, and it was NOT Nazi style death camps.


_________________
"It must be understood, that neither by word nor deed had I given Fortunato cause to doubt my good-will. I continued as was my wont, to smile in his face, and he did not perceive that my smile was at the thought of his immolation."

Edgar Allan Poe, The Cask of Amontillado


Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 48,613
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

24 Jan 2018, 6:01 pm

RainbowUnion wrote:
TwinRuler wrote:
For what is worth, I firmly believe that the North crushed The South, during the Civil War, in order to free Black Slaves from bondage; but, I seriously doubt that either Franklin Roosevelt or Joseph Stalin ever desired to either rescue or avenge Anne Frank and the rest of The Six Million Jews, perishing in The Holocaust. No, those two were too busy sending their very own Citizens to Prison Camps, within their own Lands. Was the thing to do, back in those days. Would even go so far as to advance the argument that Roosevelt and Stalin were anti-Semites, themselves.

Now, lest others accuse me of Axis Sympathies, let me point out: the entire Second World War, in my view, was merely one great, big land grab for Allies and Axis Powers alike. It was what Stalin termed an "Imperialist War", though Stalin was an Imperialist as much as any, including Hitler himself. Never understood the phrase "Good War", as applied to The Second World War. For there was nothing good about it at all!


IMO the main difference in the two wars is what happened after they ended. The Civil War caused no lasting changes in the social structure of the South. Blacks were still basically slaves and or second class well into the 1980s (biracial marriage was illegal in Mississippi as late as 1987, as in you could be arrested and sent to prison for being a black man who married a white woman). Share cropping replaced slavery and this lasted well into the 20th century. All the rich planters had to do to get their land back was swear an oath of loyalty to the Union. No punishments for aiding the rebellion. They clung onto segregation and Jim Crow as long as they could.

At WW2s end, the Nazis were made to pay for their crimes. It was ensured that Germany would never be a military power again.


Actually, interracial marriage became legal all over the country thanks to Loving V Virginia in the 1960's. But it is true, such marriages ended in prison sentences in states like Mississippi, up to that time.
Germany is actually a military power again, as we needed their participation on our side in the Cold War. But Germany today is a soundly democratic society, which is one of the most significant outcomes after WWII.


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


RainbowUnion
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 19 Jan 2018
Gender: Male
Posts: 899

24 Jan 2018, 7:05 pm

Kraichgauer wrote:
RainbowUnion wrote:
TwinRuler wrote:
For what is worth, I firmly believe that the North crushed The South, during the Civil War, in order to free Black Slaves from bondage; but, I seriously doubt that either Franklin Roosevelt or Joseph Stalin ever desired to either rescue or avenge Anne Frank and the rest of The Six Million Jews, perishing in The Holocaust. No, those two were too busy sending their very own Citizens to Prison Camps, within their own Lands. Was the thing to do, back in those days. Would even go so far as to advance the argument that Roosevelt and Stalin were anti-Semites, themselves.

Now, lest others accuse me of Axis Sympathies, let me point out: the entire Second World War, in my view, was merely one great, big land grab for Allies and Axis Powers alike. It was what Stalin termed an "Imperialist War", though Stalin was an Imperialist as much as any, including Hitler himself. Never understood the phrase "Good War", as applied to The Second World War. For there was nothing good about it at all!


IMO the main difference in the two wars is what happened after they ended. The Civil War caused no lasting changes in the social structure of the South. Blacks were still basically slaves and or second class well into the 1980s (biracial marriage was illegal in Mississippi as late as 1987, as in you could be arrested and sent to prison for being a black man who married a white woman). Share cropping replaced slavery and this lasted well into the 20th century. All the rich planters had to do to get their land back was swear an oath of loyalty to the Union. No punishments for aiding the rebellion. They clung onto segregation and Jim Crow as long as they could.

At WW2s end, the Nazis were made to pay for their crimes. It was ensured that Germany would never be a military power again.


Actually, interracial marriage became legal all over the country thanks to Loving V Virginia in the 1960's. But it is true, such marriages ended in prison sentences in states like Mississippi, up to that time.
Germany is actually a military power again, as we needed their participation on our side in the Cold War. But Germany today is a soundly democratic society, which is one of the most significant outcomes after WWII.


Looked it up, and you are correct, it was 1967. Before that, interracial marriage was illegal in all of the states of the old Confederacy, as well as all the quasi Southern states (Oklahoma, Missouri, West Virginia, and even Delaware).


_________________
"It must be understood, that neither by word nor deed had I given Fortunato cause to doubt my good-will. I continued as was my wont, to smile in his face, and he did not perceive that my smile was at the thought of his immolation."

Edgar Allan Poe, The Cask of Amontillado


Aristophanes
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 Apr 2014
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,603
Location: USA

24 Jan 2018, 7:23 pm

Kraichgauer wrote:
TwinRuler wrote:
Let us not watch the history channel anymore. What is most significant to me is that every single Belligerent, in The Second World War, had their very own system of Prison Camps. Let us not forget, let us never forget, that the U.S. and Britain-- those supposedly saintly, so saintly, countries-- had their very own.


Yes, but at least the American and British camps didn't have wholesale, industrialized scale murder taking place.


During WWII no, but 40 years earlier the British did indeed have 'wholesale, industrialized scale murder taking place'.

2nd Boer War concentration camps.

In fact, those same Boer concentration camps were what the Nazis modeled their own after.



TwinRuler
Toucan
Toucan

User avatar

Joined: 21 Feb 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 262

24 Jan 2018, 7:54 pm

Aristophanes wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
TwinRuler wrote:
Let us not watch the history channel anymore. What is most significant to me is that every single Belligerent, in The Second World War, had their very own system of Prison Camps. Let us not forget, let us never forget, that the U.S. and Britain-- those supposedly saintly, so saintly, countries-- had their very own.


Yes, but at least the American and British camps didn't have wholesale, industrialized scale murder taking place.


During WWII no, but 40 years earlier the British did indeed have 'wholesale, industrialized scale murder taking place'.

2nd Boer War concentration camps.

In fact, those same Boer concentration camps were what the Nazis modeled their own after.

They also modeled theirs after those of their Soviet enemies.



TwinRuler
Toucan
Toucan

User avatar

Joined: 21 Feb 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 262

24 Jan 2018, 7:57 pm

Kraichgauer wrote:
RainbowUnion wrote:
TwinRuler wrote:
For what is worth, I firmly believe that the North crushed The South, during the Civil War, in order to free Black Slaves from bondage; but, I seriously doubt that either Franklin Roosevelt or Joseph Stalin ever desired to either rescue or avenge Anne Frank and the rest of The Six Million Jews, perishing in The Holocaust. No, those two were too busy sending their very own Citizens to Prison Camps, within their own Lands. Was the thing to do, back in those days. Would even go so far as to advance the argument that Roosevelt and Stalin were anti-Semites, themselves.

Now, lest others accuse me of Axis Sympathies, let me point out: the entire Second World War, in my view, was merely one great, big land grab for Allies and Axis Powers alike. It was what Stalin termed an "Imperialist War", though Stalin was an Imperialist as much as any, including Hitler himself. Never understood the phrase "Good War", as applied to The Second World War. For there was nothing good about it at all!


IMO the main difference in the two wars is what happened after they ended. The Civil War caused no lasting changes in the social structure of the South. Blacks were still basically slaves and or second class well into the 1980s (biracial marriage was illegal in Mississippi as late as 1987, as in you could be arrested and sent to prison for being a black man who married a white woman). Share cropping replaced slavery and this lasted well into the 20th century. All the rich planters had to do to get their land back was swear an oath of loyalty to the Union. No punishments for aiding the rebellion. They clung onto segregation and Jim Crow as long as they could.

At WW2s end, the Nazis were made to pay for their crimes. It was ensured that Germany would never be a military power again.


Actually, interracial marriage became legal all over the country thanks to Loving V Virginia in the 1960's. But it is true, such marriages ended in prison sentences in states like Mississippi, up to that time.
Germany is actually a military power again, as we needed their participation on our side in the Cold War. But Germany today is a soundly democratic society, which is one of the most significant outcomes after WWII.

Well, another difference is this: for the most part, Southerners are allowed to take pride in their heritage; the Germans are not, anymore.



Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 48,613
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

24 Jan 2018, 9:07 pm

Aristophanes wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
TwinRuler wrote:
Let us not watch the history channel anymore. What is most significant to me is that every single Belligerent, in The Second World War, had their very own system of Prison Camps. Let us not forget, let us never forget, that the U.S. and Britain-- those supposedly saintly, so saintly, countries-- had their very own.


Yes, but at least the American and British camps didn't have wholesale, industrialized scale murder taking place.


During WWII no, but 40 years earlier the British did indeed have 'wholesale, industrialized scale murder taking place'.

2nd Boer War concentration camps.

In fact, those same Boer concentration camps were what the Nazis modeled their own after.


That is correct.


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 48,613
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

24 Jan 2018, 9:11 pm

TwinRuler wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
RainbowUnion wrote:
TwinRuler wrote:
For what is worth, I firmly believe that the North crushed The South, during the Civil War, in order to free Black Slaves from bondage; but, I seriously doubt that either Franklin Roosevelt or Joseph Stalin ever desired to either rescue or avenge Anne Frank and the rest of The Six Million Jews, perishing in The Holocaust. No, those two were too busy sending their very own Citizens to Prison Camps, within their own Lands. Was the thing to do, back in those days. Would even go so far as to advance the argument that Roosevelt and Stalin were anti-Semites, themselves.

Now, lest others accuse me of Axis Sympathies, let me point out: the entire Second World War, in my view, was merely one great, big land grab for Allies and Axis Powers alike. It was what Stalin termed an "Imperialist War", though Stalin was an Imperialist as much as any, including Hitler himself. Never understood the phrase "Good War", as applied to The Second World War. For there was nothing good about it at all!


IMO the main difference in the two wars is what happened after they ended. The Civil War caused no lasting changes in the social structure of the South. Blacks were still basically slaves and or second class well into the 1980s (biracial marriage was illegal in Mississippi as late as 1987, as in you could be arrested and sent to prison for being a black man who married a white woman). Share cropping replaced slavery and this lasted well into the 20th century. All the rich planters had to do to get their land back was swear an oath of loyalty to the Union. No punishments for aiding the rebellion. They clung onto segregation and Jim Crow as long as they could.

At WW2s end, the Nazis were made to pay for their crimes. It was ensured that Germany would never be a military power again.


Actually, interracial marriage became legal all over the country thanks to Loving V Virginia in the 1960's. But it is true, such marriages ended in prison sentences in states like Mississippi, up to that time.
Germany is actually a military power again, as we needed their participation on our side in the Cold War. But Germany today is a soundly democratic society, which is one of the most significant outcomes after WWII.

Well, another difference is this: for the most part, Southerners are allowed to take pride in their heritage; the Germans are not, anymore.


That's actually an attitude Germans have enforced among themselves, at least in regard to WWII. Those Germans, such as Klaus Von Stauffenberg, Admiral Wilhelm Cannaris, Field Marshal Erwin Rommel, and Pastor Dietrich Bonhoeffer who had been in on the Anti-Nazi resistance that had tried assassinating Hitler, are today regarded as heroes in Germany today. Yet Anti-Confederate guerrillas such as Newton Knight (who had in fact married a black woman in Mississippi when it was illegal) are considered traitors by some white southerners today.


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


TwinRuler
Toucan
Toucan

User avatar

Joined: 21 Feb 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 262

25 Jan 2018, 8:28 am

The South is still rather Racist to this day.