RE: virus: Re:Some of Juuko Isohaari's favorite writers and posts
« Reply #15 on: 2004-05-07 10:04:19 »
"Maybe I think we would be better off if America hadn't bombed the shit out of Germany and Europe? Certainly the economy would have been doing much better, now that I think about it. Millions of people would still be alive and we wouldn't have had to pay for all the shit Russians wanted. Yeah, WWII was most likely a disfavor that America did to Europe, from my personal economical point of view."
Jake, Rhino - are you sure you want to keep accusing me of delusion?
This bunk is your wish fulfilment fantasy Jei. You would have preferred the Nazis to have won the war. You could have had your dream - no pesky Israel because there would have been be no pesky Jews. You could all have a prosperous slave working for the Greater Reich, unless that is, the local commander thought the shape of your head betrayed genetic inferiority or Asiatic pollution via the Lapp gene stream, in which case you would be executed before you bred any more sub-humans.
Here is your homework Jei. Google the following:
Nazi Germany Marshall Plan Holocaust
A short course in European and Economic history might help you understand that wealth is not generated from buildings but by systems - systems like the Free Market democracy establish in Europe after its liberation from National Socialist planned economy hell.
Ever wonder why the most bombed country of them all - Germany - became one of the richest in Europe despite massive area bombing?
Maybe I think we would be better off if America hadn't bombed the shit out of Germany and Europe? Certainly the economy would have been doing much better, now that I think about it. Millions of people would still be alive and we wouldn't have had to pay for all the shit Russians wanted. Yeah, WWII was most likely a disfavor that America did to Europe, from my personal economical point of view.
Re:Some of Juuko Isohaari's favorite writers and posts
« Reply #16 on: 2004-05-07 12:23:57 »
[Jei] "Maybe I think we would be better off if America hadn't bombed the shit out of Germany and Europe? Certainly the economy would have been doing much better, now that I think about it. Millions of people would still be alive and we wouldn't have had to pay for all the shit Russians wanted. Yeah, WWII was most likely a disfavor that America did to Europe, from my personal economical point of view."
[Jonathan Davis] Jake, Rhino - are you sure you want to keep accusing me of delusion?
[rhinoceros] So far, I have neglected to do so in so many words Jonathan. Dunno about Jake
What Jei said was true, although I would not let the European leaders off the hook so easily. The most striking example was the wanton massacre in the German city of Dresden, just to pick one of the less controversial cases. Have you read Kurt Vonnegut's "Slaughterhouse-Five"?
Dresden was widely considered a city of little war-related industrial or strategic importance, though, after the fact, in his memoirs Winston Churchill described it as a "centre of communications of Germany's Eastern Front." Dresden itself was most noted as a cultural centre, with noted architecture in the Zwinger Palace, the Dresden State Opera House and its historic cathedral (the Frauenkirche) and other churches. It was also called "Elbflorenz", i.e. Florence of the Elbe, due to its stunning beauty.
<snip>
3,907 tons of bombs were dropped. Out of 28,410 houses in the inner city of Dresden, 24,866 were destroyed. An area of 15 square kilometers was totally destroyed, among that: 14,000 homes, 72 schools, 22 hospitals, 19 churches, 5 theaters, 50 bank and insurance companies, 31 department stores, 31 large hotels, and 62 administration buildings.
<snip>
The precise number of dead is difficult to ascertain and is not known. Estimates vary from 35,000 to more than 135,000 dead. Such estimates are made very difficult by the fact that the city was crowded at that time by many unregistered refugees and wounded soldiers. The foreign forced labourers may represent a large number of dead, since they were usually employed in the squads to fight fire storms. (In comparison, some 100,000 died in the bombing of Hiroshima, about 50,000 in the bombing of Nagasaki and 100,000 in the bombing of Tokyo and 200,000 were killed in Warsaw during the Warsaw uprising 1944.) <snip>
<snip> This directive led to the raid on Dresden and marked the erosion of one last moral restriction in the bombing war: the term 'evacuation from the east' did not refer to retreating troops but to the civilian refugees fleeing from the advancing Russians.
Although these refugees clearly did not contribute to the German war effort, they were considered legitimate targets simply because the chaos caused by attacks on them might obstruct German troop reinforcements to the Eastern Front. <snip>
> > [Jei] > "Maybe I think we would be better off if America hadn't bombed the shit > out of Germany and Europe? Certainly the economy would have been doing > much better, now that I think about it. Millions of people would still > be alive and we wouldn't have had to pay for all the shit Russians > wanted. Yeah, WWII was most likely a disfavor that America did to > Europe, from my personal economical point of view." > > [Jonathan Davis] > Jake, Rhino - are you sure you want to keep accusing me of delusion?
Well, that depends on your standards and definitions of course. If being anti-racist when it comes to Israeli policies on arabs means you're also an anti-semite, then so be it. I personally don't think so however. Anti-semitism is also mistakenly used to refer to people who object to jews only. Arabs are also semites, and as recent developments indicate, americans are quite racist and rabid anti-semites themselves. Jews are mostly of the same race as arabs, though they are often depicted as being white american. - One reason why the ethnic race-targetting bioweapons and bombs won't work to destroy the "arab dogs" as one jewish rabbi once complained to me. Also a lot of them have gone and gotten married to other races during the diaspora.
I personally think that Sharon has doing quite nicely recently getting the illegal settlements removed (or trying to), despite the targetted assassinations and bulldozings and apache-strikes and harrassing and threatening Arafat, etc.
Now, I'm not going to lick their ass any more than that. I still condemn the Vanunu imprisonment, the 200+ nukes, the bioweapons and chemical weapons that Israel has, and demand that they sign the same treaties to stop nuclear proliferation and become subject to snap-inspections as Iran and North Korea are being demanded.
Why is it that I haven't seen a single American demand this?
Are you Jake, Jonathan and Rhino, by any chance anti-semites who hate arabs and think they're dogs that should be incinerated, or perhaps I am still being delusional? We will see if you can give us a fair judgement of their situation and demand that Israel give up it's nukes. They have plenty of weapons to handle any threats without them. If not, we will have to count you in with the rest of the anti-semitist americans hunting and thirsting for arab blood.
> [rhinoceros] > So far, I have neglected to do so in so many words Jonathan. Dunno about Jake > > What Jei said was true, although I would not let the European leaders > off the hook so easily. The most striking example was the wanton > massacre in the German city of Dresden, just to pick one of the less > controversial cases. Have you read Kurt Vonnegut's > "Slaughterhouse-Five"?
Yeah, my country was on the side of the nazis. Either join, or be conquered. Not much of a choise, I'm told. And we were of course of the mighty nordic Aryan race variety (not really, but in name), with only a few jews here and there, so it wasn't that much of a political problem as elsewhere. Russia did bleed the local economy poor for decades after the war to repay their war costs and whatnot. - All part of the peace agreement. --- To unsubscribe from the Virus list go to <http://www.lucifer.com/cgi-bin/virus-l>
RE: virus: Re:Some of Juuko Isohaari's favorite writers and posts
« Reply #18 on: 2004-05-07 14:00:19 »
Hi Rhino,
I am very well acquainted with Slaughterhouse 5 and the story of Dresden. That and the brutal treatment that was meted out to German civilians at the end of the war has been an occasional theme on my blog.
Whilst I think the firebombings of Hamburg and Dresden were mistakes - even though recent research challenges the claim that they were innocent cities and of no value militarily (http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/0747570787/) - think it is absurd to claim they damaged Europe economically in the long term. US trade, rescue packages and aid dwarfed the damage wrought by bombers as did 50 years of expensive defence of the continent.
Europe owes a massive debt of gratitude to the US as well as thanks for the prosperity and security brought to the place after the war and to this day.
I mean, how well did Finland & other countries fare in the Soviet bloc as opposed to those in the US bloc even though they were untouched by Allied area bombing (Poland/Yugoslavia/Hungary/Albania/Czechoslovakia)?
[Jei] "Maybe I think we would be better off if America hadn't bombed the shit out of Germany and Europe? Certainly the economy would have been doing much better, now that I think about it. Millions of people would still be alive and we wouldn't have had to pay for all the shit Russians wanted. Yeah, WWII was most likely a disfavor that America did to Europe, from my personal economical point of view."
[Jonathan Davis] Jake, Rhino - are you sure you want to keep accusing me of delusion?
[rhinoceros] So far, I have neglected to do so in so many words Jonathan. Dunno about Jake
What Jei said was true, although I would not let the European leaders off the hook so easily. The most striking example was the wanton massacre in the German city of Dresden, just to pick one of the less controversial cases. Have you read Kurt Vonnegut's "Slaughterhouse-Five"?
Dresden was widely considered a city of little war-related industrial or strategic importance, though, after the fact, in his memoirs Winston Churchill described it as a "centre of communications of Germany's Eastern Front." Dresden itself was most noted as a cultural centre, with noted architecture in the Zwinger Palace, the Dresden State Opera House and its historic cathedral (the Frauenkirche) and other churches. It was also called "Elbflorenz", i.e. Florence of the Elbe, due to its stunning beauty.
<snip>
3,907 tons of bombs were dropped. Out of 28,410 houses in the inner city of Dresden, 24,866 were destroyed. An area of 15 square kilometers was totally destroyed, among that: 14,000 homes, 72 schools, 22 hospitals, 19 churches, 5 theaters, 50 bank and insurance companies, 31 department stores, 31 large hotels, and 62 administration buildings.
<snip>
The precise number of dead is difficult to ascertain and is not known. Estimates vary from 35,000 to more than 135,000 dead. Such estimates are made very difficult by the fact that the city was crowded at that time by many unregistered refugees and wounded soldiers. The foreign forced labourers may represent a large number of dead, since they were usually employed in the squads to fight fire storms. (In comparison, some 100,000 died in the bombing of Hiroshima, about 50,000 in the bombing of Nagasaki and 100,000 in the bombing of Tokyo and 200,000 were killed in Warsaw during the Warsaw uprising 1944.) <snip>
<snip> This directive led to the raid on Dresden and marked the erosion of one last moral restriction in the bombing war: the term 'evacuation from the east' did not refer to retreating troops but to the civilian refugees fleeing from the advancing Russians.
Although these refugees clearly did not contribute to the German war effort, they were considered legitimate targets simply because the chaos caused by attacks on them might obstruct German troop reinforcements to the Eastern Front. <snip>
> On Thu, 6 May 2004, Joe Dees wrote: > > There have been many bad actions and decisions in US history (the big > > one being Vietnam, which we never should've taken over from the French), > > but the Afghan and Iraqi campaigns are not, in my opinion, two of them. > > I have also already stated that I approved neither of Bush's reactionary > > domestic social policies nor his fiscal irresponsibility; this disproves > > and refutes your claim that I cannot conceive of anything bad about the > > US (by provision of counterfactual evidence). You, however, have never > > had anything whatsoever good to say about either the US or any of its > > (Joe) You neglected to mention a few things: The saving of Europe > thrice (WWI, WWII, Serbia) and soon to be again with Islamofascism The > saving of South Korea The collapse of the Soviet Union
Maybe I think we would be better off if America hadn't bombed the shit out of Germany and Europe? Certainly the economy would have been doing much better, now that I think about it. Millions of people would still be alive and we wouldn't have had to pay for all the shit Russians wanted. Yeah, WWII was most likely a disfavor that America did to Europe, from my personal economical point of view.
(Joe) Millions more, including many more Jews, Germans, Russians, Britons and Eastern Europeans, would be dead. In the absence of US support, Nazi Germany could have taken Britain or fortressed the French coast and then concentrated its war machine on the Eastern Front with Stalinist Russia, all the time continuing to implement its Final Solution to the Jewish Problem. A more favorable alternative, in your view?
Does listing all these "good things we did to you" make you feel better? Did I hurt your feelings of America by trying to show you the butt-ugly truth? How about you in turn amuse me and list all the good things that my country has done? Shall we then compete on whose dick is bigger, ha?
(Joe) We did them FOR you, at Europe's pleading, begging request, but of course there are bound to be ingrates.
Seriously, you have some kind of Jesus-fixation on your country that is keeping you away from viewing and looking at the truth objectively. You don't want to break that image of America the Beautiful, so you indulge yourself and live in a fantasy world like most Americans. I expect virians to do better than that. I used to think like you did, a long time ago when I was 15.
(Joe) It seems that you have an "America the Ugly" fixation. But the history of every nation is a mixed bag.
> I'm sure Arnold the Terminator will make a nice president for you some > day. He can't be any worse.. And he's originally Austrian, so that makes > him practically a European. > > (Joe) He cannot be a US president because he was born in Austria. Only > native-born US citizens can become US presidents - it's in our > constitution.
Bet you anything they'll change it just in time.
(Joe) Naaah!
> > leaders (at least that I've seen onlist), thus I countercharge you with > > being constitutionally unable to believe, accept or conceive of anything > > GOOD about America, and unable to accept the dead-body evidence of > > Syrian and Iranian infiltration and Baathist dead-enders. > > There's probably agents of every government on earth there. And > I wouldn't be surprised if you found a few martians as well. I > hear they're worried the rover will discover their oil next. > > (Joe) The US was getting that oil anyway, by buying it on the open > market. It ain't any cheaper now; it's just that the Iraqi people get > the money for it, instead of the Saddamite dictatorship and corrupt UN, > French and German officials. It was they who were willing to sacrifice
You sure know things. It was thanks to Iraq insisting US stay out of the Oil for Food programs, that the Americans didn't get a stake in cashing in on it. As for the corruption, it seems to have benefitted US at the time to let them take the dough. Now it's a handy PR-weapon to batter the UN. None the less, despicable, all the same.
(Joe) I do my research. The UN officials and the bought-by-Iraq countries were corrupt and venal, and eschewed the greater global good for the sake of narrow and self-serving economic interests. There is no anti-US spin that can be placed on this ethical and moral failure.
> the blood of murdered Iraqis for the sake of oil. (Joe) It's what > Syria's Assad and the Iranian mullahs are doing, all right; they fear > the model of a successful Iraqi democracy next door would inspire > further insurrection in their restless peoples, who are already holding > periodical por-democracy protests and riots. The ruling despots would > much rather that totalitarianism continue to dominate in Iraq rather > than have a democracy take hold there and spread seeds of hope > throughout the region.
Sponsoring "democracy" groups and whatnot opposition is usual US practice when they want legitimacy to criticize governments, but did it save the Democracy in Iran? No, what they got was the government US installed, which, again, they now want to overthrow, so they now sponsor the democracy groups in Iran. Osama Bin Laden and Taleban were trained to be terrorists by CIA, during the days of Soviet occupation. Even Saddam was America's man they *wanted* in power.
The lesson:
a) Americans are always doing what's good for other countries and their people because they know better than them what they want and need.
or
b) Americans are always doing what's best for themselves and their economy.
Which is right? Which is more likely? What motivates Americans? What motivated them to go to America in the first place? Greed!
A hard lesson taught to Haitis just this year when the US Marines came to fix their error in choosing the wrong government. Well, the French went in there to help them, so it's a tad more fashionable than the other cases.
(Joe) The US was, out of strategic necessity, involved in the same perfidies (supporting corrupt dictators, subverting popular governments) that the USSR was involved in during the Cold War. With the demise of the Soviet Union (after they experienced their own Vietnam in Afghanistan) and the democratization of Russia and Eastern Europe, such perfidies became unnecessary. The US has largly invilved itself in humanitarian and despot-toppling efforts since then. BTW: the French didn't ask for UN permission before they imposed their own solution in the Ivory Coast, did they? Hypocrites! And Aristide, following the example set by a long line of Haitian dictators, was subverting the electoral process. Greed and self-interest are not always the same, nor is self-interest necessarily opposed to the interests of others. It is in the US self-interest to promote democracy because democracies rarely war against each other, instead competing in the economic domain. This is also in the interest of democratized countries.
> > On Thu, 6 May 2004, Joe Dees wrote: > > > On Thu, 6 May 2004, Joe Dees wrote: > > > There have been many bad actions and decisions in US history (the big > > > one being Vietnam, which we never should've taken over from the French), > > > but the Afghan and Iraqi campaigns are not, in my opinion, two of them. > > > I have also already stated that I approved neither of Bush's reactionary > > > domestic social policies nor his fiscal irresponsibility; this disproves > > > and refutes your claim that I cannot conceive of anything bad about the > > > US (by provision of counterfactual evidence). You, however, have never > > > had anything whatsoever good to say about either the US or any of its > > > > (Joe) You neglected to mention a few things: The saving of Europe > > thrice (WWI, WWII, Serbia) and soon to be again with Islamofascism The > > saving of South Korea The collapse of the Soviet Union > > Maybe I think we would be better off if America hadn't bombed the shit > out of Germany and Europe? Certainly the economy would have been doing > much better, now that I think about it. Millions of people would still > be alive and we wouldn't have had to pay for all the shit Russians wanted. > Yeah, WWII was most likely a disfavor that America did to Europe, from my > personal economical point of view. > > (Joe) Millions more, including many more Jews, Germans, Russians, > Britons and Eastern Europeans, would be dead. In the absence of US > support, Nazi Germany could have taken Britain or fortressed the French > coast and then concentrated its war machine on the Eastern Front with > Stalinist Russia, all the time continuing to implement its Final > Solution to the Jewish Problem. A more favorable alternative, in your > view?
The jews died anyway. Nobody rescued them. They weren't a IMHO, really a concern for America, but a moral excuse.
Looking at it from my country's (and therefore my "heritage") economic point of view, yes. None of those issues really touched us. Russia wouldn't have been that much of a problem without the others giving trouble, and we wouldn't have had to pay them off.
It's like being a part of the US is right now is a great thing for you, if you end up getting the oil, but being a part of the losing Iraqi/ Haiti/Venezuelan/whatever side, well, that just sucks, especially economically. - And they don't all rise up and shine like germany did, even though you seem to attribute Germany's strong economy to the "american democracy" installed there. I however doubt that it had that much to do with it.
And is it really that surprising that being on the winning side of the war is better for you economically?
Not all the Jews in Germany died. Many were rescued from the concentration camps, and many more managed not to be shipped there before Germany fell.
Economically, not only Germany (via the Marshall Plan), but also Japan and South Korea have greatly benefitted from US economic and infrastructure-rebuilding initiatives.
No war losers in history have done so well as post-WWII Germany and Japan.
Re:Some of Juuko Isohaari's favorite writers and posts
« Reply #22 on: 2004-05-07 19:26:22 »
[Jei] Are you Jake, Jonathan and Rhino, by any chance anti-semites who hate arabs and think they're dogs that should be incinerated, or perhaps I am still being delusional?
[rhinoceros] You can't be delusional for asking a question, can you? You just don't pay attention.
Re:Some of Juuko Isohaari's favorite writers and posts
« Reply #23 on: 2004-05-07 20:47:10 »
[Jei] Why is it that I haven't seen a single American demand this?
Are you Jake, Jonathan and Rhino, by any chance anti-semites who hate arabs and think they're dogs that should be incinerated, or perhaps I am still being delusional?
[rhinoceros] Sorry, I missed the first line in my previous reply.
Jei, only one of the 3 persons you mentioned is an American. Who do you think he is?
Author
Logged
