What WW2 actually was: a war between banking powers

[Revoltingest]

The Nazis and those who enabled them bear responsibility, not later generations.

There were multiple camps at Auschwitz built by different people for different purposes.

The main camps were SS, and some others were built for industrial corporations to exploit the slave labour.

It was not built by bankers who planned it for 20 years and had a crystal ball to predict all the things that needed to happen before the Nazis could build camps in Poland after trying multiple other “solutions” to their genocidal hate.

This is an interesting turn...
Usually, the lefties blame capitalism for all war.
They're getting really specific now, ie, bankers.
What next....bankers who sit in the 1st floor
SW office?

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

I give up.
Even if I brought hundreds of pieces of evidence, there is no point in debating with an interlocutor who would simply ignore them.

Have a nice evening

You brought exactly zero pieces of evidence.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

If this supposedly doesn't work, then how does one explain what Gandhi and his followers did to the Raj and eventually the British Empire?

Gandhi came after there was already rioting and violent uprising that was already pressuring the English to withdraw.

 

[Estro Felino]

I'm talking about how you tried to claim Russians aren't punished for condemning the war in a response to a post that proved otherwise.

Also, you're not truly against the war if you think Russia should be rewarded for it.

This thread is about WW2

 

[Augustus]

This is an interesting turn...
Usually, the lefties blame capitalism for all war.
They're getting really specific now, ie, bankers.
What next....bankers who sit in the 1st floor
SW office?

If it wasn’t for the religious/the capitalists/the elites/the oligarchs/the stupid masses fooled by the media/the foreigners/etc. there would be no more wars and everyone would be friends.

Just get rid of the bad apples and everything will be hunky dory.

 

[Estro Felino]

If it wasn’t for the religious/the capitalists/the elites/the oligarchs/the stupid masses fooled by the media/the foreigners/etc. there would be no more wars and everyone would be friends.

Just get rid of the bad apples and everything will be hunky dory.

Worldly justice is utopia.
There will never be worldly justice because the fittest will always victimize the weakest.

It still takes many millennia of evolution, darwinistically speaking.

At least we believers rely on God's justice which never fails.

 

[Augustus]

I showed with evidence that several American newspapers from 1915, 1918, 1919, 1920, 1921 and 1936 that someone was already planning the genocide of six million Jews.
It was something willed by certain powerful élites who spread the news in advance.

Do you want the complete list, so you can check on them yourself?

The Sun, June 6 1915
New York Times, October 18 1918
New York Times, September 8, 1919
New York Times, November 12, 1919
Atlanta Constitution February 23 1920
New York Times, May 7 1920
New York Times, July 20 1921
Montreal Gazette, December 29 1931
New York Times May 31 1936

The ones you posted did not say what you claim.

They plucked a random number out to thin air regarding the purported total population of Jews in a different country.

Random numbers once publicised get repeated uncritically in many fields. It’s easy enough to find such examples.

The idea that the Nazis later used this made up number as a target is inane given all the things that happened in between.

Omnipotent bankers are not real.

Auschwitz was primarily The SS.

 

[Debater Slayer]

This is an interesting turn...
Usually, the lefties blame capitalism for all war.
They're getting really specific now, ie, bankers.
What next....bankers who sit in the 1st floor
SW office?

Fascists (in a literal sense: supporters of Mussolini) are not "lefties," but I'm pretty sure you already knew that before posting the above.

 

[Augustus]

At least we believers rely on God's justice which never fails. What do atheists rely on? On nothing.

Most atheists here believe in some myth of melioristic progress which is just a Christian derivative.

A few of us just accept the tragic nature of human society and don’t expect miracles.

 

[Estro Felino]

The ones you posted did not say what you claim.

They plucked a random number out to thin air regarding the purported total population of Jews in a different country.

Random numbers once publicised get repeated uncritically in many fields. It’s easy enough to find such examples.

The idea that the Nazis later used this made up number as a target is inane given all the things that happened in between.

Omnipotent bankers are not real.

Auschwitz was primarily The SS.

It's as if Mr Y said: on this day X, Mr Z will be murdered with a gun.
On day X, Mr Z is found dead, with a bullet in his chest.
And Mr Y will say: I tried to guess, it's just a coincidence. I had nothing to do with this murder.

Honestly, and with all due respect, your honor and members of the jury, I am not handicapped.
I don't believe in such coincidences.

 

[Estro Felino]

Most atheists here believe in some myth of melioristic progress which is just a Christian derivative.

A few of us just accept the tragic nature of human society and don’t expect miracles.

Faith and Hope are theological virtues.
One should always expect miracles.

 

[Augustus]

Fascists (in a literal sense: supporters of Mussolini) are not "lefties," but I'm pretty sure you already knew that before posting the above.

Without wishing to open a can of worms, that’s not quite as clear cut as folk generally imagine.

I generally think that describing them as either right or left is more about modern politics than looking at the history in context though. They viewed themselves as a 3rd way, and that seems most informative to me (I know this is not incompatible with your point).

Musso started off as a socialist and the Italian fascists were more complex than the Nazis.

They weren’t liberal or conservative, but were certainly (small p) progressives.

 

[Augustus]

It's as if Mr Y said: on this day X, Mr Z will be murdered with a gun.
On day X, Mr Z is found dead, with a bullet in his chest.
And Mr Y will say: I tried to guess, it's just a coincidence. I had nothing to do with this murder.

Honestly, and with all due respect, your honor and members of the jury, I am not handicapped.
I don't believe in such coincidences.

It’s not at all like that. You don’t seem to have read the articles beyond the number. They were describing an ongoing situation in a different country in a different context and just repeated some made up number likely because they saw others do it.

Look at the claim Britain “stole” $45 trillion from India.

It’s total nonsense made up by an idiot, but I could easily find you a dozen articles that mention it.

Per your logic, It can’t be a coincidence that so many people found the same number though so it must be true.

 

[Debater Slayer]

Without wishing to open a can of worms, that’s not quite as clear cut as folk generally imagine.

I generally think that describing them as either right or left is more about modern politics than looking at the history in context though. They viewed themselves as a 3rd way, and that seems most informative to me (I know this is not incompatible with your point).

Musso started off as a socialist and the Italian fascists were more complex than the Nazis.

They weren’t liberal or conservative, but were certainly (small p) progressives.

I don't tend to use current terms to describe past political movements either; I was referring to current fascists who glorify Mussolini and, for example, support Giorgia Meloni on that specific basis.

I don't see anything left-wing about those except perhaps in a fiscal sense, and even then, they tend to be a continuation of the status quo in practice.

 

[Estro Felino]

It’s not at all like that. You don’t seem to have read the articles beyond the number. They were describing an ongoing situation in a different country in a different context and just repeated some made up number likely because they saw others do it.

Look at the claim Britain “stole” $45 trillion from India.

It’s total nonsense made up by an idiot, but I could easily find you a dozen articles that mention it.

Per your logic, It can’t be a coincidence that so many people found the same number though so it must be true.

You didn't read those articles, did you?

They all mention that six million Jews are in peril because they will be exterminated soon by means of persecution.
They predicted a genocide put into action with the same exact modalities in 1915-1919.
Hitler was still poor and insignificant.

Ergo. Someone else paid Hitler to do something they had already planned, at least 20 years before.
And six million is the number of the Jews who died in the Holocaust.
All historians agree that's the number.

 

[metis]

Gandhi came after there was already rioting and violent uprising that was already pressuring the English to withdraw.

...The final straw for the Brits was the Salt March, although the Brits did not concede right away but definitely felt the rath of other countries on their policies: The march was the most significant organised challenge to British authority since the Non-cooperation movement of 1920–22, and directly followed the Purna Swaraj declaration of sovereignty and self-rule by the Indian National Congress on 26 January 1930.[9] It gained worldwide attention which gave impetus to the Indian independence movement and started the nationwide Civil Disobedience movement which continued until 1934 in Gujarat. -- Salt March - Wikipedia

The rioting did not cause the Brits to leave as that had been going on for quite some time, and the Brits didn't want to give up because of economics and power linked to the Raj.

Again, non-cooperative non-violence is not a magic pill that always works, but my point is how many innocents, including children, are acceptable to be killed while the adults fight? Maybe give us a percent or a fraction?

How much freedom does a dead child have?

 

[Shadow Wolf]

...The final straw for the Brits was the Salt March, although the Brits did not concede right away but definitely felt the rath of other countries on their policies: The march was the most significant organised challenge to British authority since the Non-cooperation movement of 1920–22, and directly followed the Purna Swaraj declaration of sovereignty and self-rule by the Indian National Congress on 26 January 1930.[9] It gained worldwide attention which gave impetus to the Indian independence movement and started the nationwide Civil Disobedience movement which continued until 1934 in Gujarat. -- Salt March - Wikipedia

The rioting did not cause the Brits to leave as that had been going on for quite some time, and the Brits didn't want to give up because of economics and power linked to the Raj.

Again, non-cooperative non-violence is not a magic pill that always works, but my point is how many innocents, including children, are acceptable to be killed while the adults fight? Maybe give us a percent or a fraction?

How much freedom does a dead child have?

The English wouldn't have given up over someone taking a volunteer *** whooping. But they did sign the Rowletts Act a couple years before Gandhi's efforts, and that act itself was an extension of an act that was a response to violent uprisings that had been shaking and weakening English control over India for a few decades up to that point. When Gandhi came around it was already past the point of no return, but it works better for the bourgeoisie for us to think peaceful no cooperation is what got it done.

 

[Augustus]

They all mention that six million Jews are in peril because they will be exterminated soon by means of persecution.
They predicted a genocide put into action with the same exact modalities in 1915-1919.
Hitler was still poor and insignificant.

Ergo. Someone else paid Hitler to do something they had already planned, at least 20 years before.
And six million is the number of the Jews who died in the Holocaust.
All historians agree that's the number.

They mentioned an ongoing and well documented situation in the USSR alongside a guesstimate of the number of Jews in the USSR.

This has nothing to do with the final solution which wasn’t part of some impeccable decades long planning.

Pretty much all historians agree on that too.

 

[Augustus]

The English wouldn't have given up over someone taking a volunteer *** whooping. But they did sign the Rowletts Act a couple years before Gandhi's efforts, and that act itself was an extension of an act that was a response to violent uprisings that had been shaking and weakening English control over India for a few decades up to that point. When Gandhi came around it was already past the point of no return, but it works better for the bourgeoisie for us to think peaceful no cooperation is what got it done.

Peaceful non cooperation could have got it done at any point in the past 200+ years.

The British control was always entirely dependent on sufficient support from Indians from the days of the EIC takeover that was funded and fought for primarily by Indians.

Half of the British Empire was dependent on Indians choosing to fight for Britain rather than some other paymaster, let alone India itself.

 

[Revoltingest]

If it wasn’t for the religious/the capitalists/the elites/the oligarchs/the stupid masses fooled by the media/the foreigners/etc. there would be no more wars and everyone would be friends.

Just get rid of the bad apples and everything will be hunky dory.

The problem is apples, eh.