For speculation

[thebomb]

I'm not religious, what-so-ever, but for those of you who believe in God (or A God), do you think if you killed one man who was black because you don't like blacks, or killed a Caucasian who just happened to be the CEO of a rival company, the punishment would be any different? A man, woman, child, person was killed. Their life ended. It doesn't matter if you starved them to death or shot them or beat them to death. They are still dead because of you.

I don't think you understood the distinction I made. Yes, I agree with you that there is no difference if a black man or a Caucasian man was killed - they are both murders. However, there IS a difference if a government institutionalizes and devotes itself to systematically wiping out an entire people. I would rank that a little more sinister than simply killing a man because you're afraid he is going to usurp your power.

EDIT: And yeah, I agree with you - if people want to wear the swastika on their forehead, they can knock themselves out I wouldn't care. It would make it easier to identify idiots though haha

[Bigpop]

I'm not religious, what-so-ever, but for those of you who believe in God (or A God), do you think if you killed one man who was black because you don't like blacks, or killed a Caucasian who just happened to be the CEO of a rival company, the punishment would be any different? A man, woman, child, person was killed. Their life ended. It doesn't matter if you starved them to death or shot them or beat them to death. They are still dead because of you.

I don't think you understood the distinction I made. Yes, I agree with you that there is no difference if a black man or a Caucasian man was killed - they are both murders. However, there IS a difference if a government institutionalizes and devotes itself to systematically wiping out an entire people. I would rank that a little more sinister than simply killing a man because you're afraid he is going to usurp your power.

I understand what you mean. I think we will just have to agree to disagree on that particular issue of the subject.

Ultimately, Hitler did what he did because he hated and feared the Jews. Stalin did what he did because he hated and feared anyone who stood in his way.

Hitler was afraid of Jews, Stalin afraid of being Usurped. I still don't think either side is less or more villainous than the other. I personally think both regimes are two of the single darkest most foul governments ever in place in human history. The blood on both of their hands is horrifying.

Hitler at least did us a favor and killed himself. 

[thebomb]

I understand what you mean. I think we will just have to agree to disagree on that particular issue of the subject.

Ultimately, Hitler did what he did because he hated and feared the Jews. Stalin did what he did because he hated and feared anyone who stood in his way.

Hitler was afraid of Jews, Stalin afraid of being Usurped. I still don't think either side is less or more villainous than the other. I personally think both regimes are two of the single darkest most foul governments ever in place in human history. The blood on both of their hands is horrifying.

Hitler at least did us a favor and killed himself.

So I assume you would rank American terror and murder in the same category as Nazi and Soviet crimes, yes?

[Bigpop]

I understand what you mean. I think we will just have to agree to disagree on that particular issue of the subject.

Ultimately, Hitler did what he did because he hated and feared the Jews. Stalin did what he did because he hated and feared anyone who stood in his way.

Hitler was afraid of Jews, Stalin afraid of being Usurped. I still don't think either side is less or more villainous than the other. I personally think both regimes are two of the single darkest most foul governments ever in place in human history. The blood on both of their hands is horrifying.

Hitler at least did us a favor and killed himself.

So I assume you would rank American terror and murder in the same category as Nazi and Soviet crimes, yes?

lol if your asking me if I think America is innocent of committing war crimes (regardless of if in WWII or any other war) then I would say no, most certainly NOT. We have soldiers who admit to killing German POWs in WWII and obviously in Iraq and such there has been tons of innocent casualties.

[thebomb]

I understand what you mean. I think we will just have to agree to disagree on that particular issue of the subject.

Ultimately, Hitler did what he did because he hated and feared the Jews. Stalin did what he did because he hated and feared anyone who stood in his way.

Hitler was afraid of Jews, Stalin afraid of being Usurped. I still don't think either side is less or more villainous than the other. I personally think both regimes are two of the single darkest most foul governments ever in place in human history. The blood on both of their hands is horrifying.

Hitler at least did us a favor and killed himself.

So I assume you would rank American terror and murder in the same category as Nazi and Soviet crimes, yes?

lol if your asking me if I think America is innocent of committing war crimes (regardless of if in WWII or any other war) then I would say no, most certainly NOT. We have soldiers who admit to killing German POWs in WWII and obviously in Iraq and such there has been tons of innocent casualties.

That's not what I asked but O.K.

[Bigpop]

Alright, then I misunderstood?

[thebomb]

Alright, then I misunderstood?

One would be a hypocrite if they were to lump the Soviet regime and the Nazis as "the most foul governments" but not the American or British governments. Do you agree?

[Bigpop]

Alright, then I misunderstood?

One would be a hypocrite if they were to lump the Soviet regime and the Nazis as "the most foul governments" but not the American or British governments. Do you agree?

I disagree.

While the U.S. Government may have issues of corruption, it is not nearly as bad as Stalinist Russia or Nazi Germany. In my mind the sheer volume of blatant murders by both of those governments is not even comparable to England, America, France, etc etc. A murder is a murder, all murder is wrong, but what they did is past murder in the sense that it was a crime against humanity. I don't think America has ever fought one of those  lol

But to say that English or American governments are innocent of wrong doing is obviously nuts as they have secrets as well.

[thebomb]

Alright, then I misunderstood?

One would be a hypocrite if they were to lump the Soviet regime and the Nazis as "the most foul governments" but not the American or British governments. Do you agree?

I disagree.

While the U.S. Government may have issues of corruption, it is not nearly as bad as Stalinist Russia or Nazi Germany. In my mind the sheer volume of blatant murders by both of those governments is not even comparable to England, America, France, etc etc. A murder is a murder, all murder is wrong, but what they did is past murder in the sense that it was a crime against humanity. I don't think America has ever fought one of those  lol

But to say that English or American governments are innocent of wrong doing is obviously nuts as they have secrets as well.

Your line of thought contradicts the thread starter's:

Ok so there is difference one is for political and other is for racism reason BUT!!! there is only one result = Death and you cant say one is smaller and one is bigger evil its only one evil = evil...

Therefore we have agreed all along. There IS a difference between the murders of governments since you acknowledge that America's crimes are "different" in nature.

[Bigpop]

One would be a hypocrite if they were to lump the Soviet regime and the Nazis as "the most foul governments" but not the American or British governments. Do you agree?


I disagree.

While the U.S. Government may have issues of corruption, it is not nearly as bad as Stalinist Russia or Nazi Germany. In my mind the sheer volume of blatant murders by both of those governments is not even comparable to England, America, France, etc etc. A murder is a murder, all murder is wrong, but what they did is past murder in the sense that it was a crime against humanity. I don't think America has ever fought one of those  lol

But to say that English or American governments are innocent of wrong doing is obviously nuts as they have secrets as well.


Your line of thought contradicts the thread starter's:

Ok so there is difference one is for political and other is for racism reason BUT!!! there is only one result = Death and you cant say one is smaller and one is bigger evil its only one evil = evil...


Therefore we have agreed all along. There IS a difference between the murders of governments since you acknowledge that America's crimes are "different" in nature.

Well, I would obviously never say that the U.S. Government is squeaky clean. But to say they are as bad as Russia or Germany during WWII is absurd.

That being said comparing Nazi Germany and Stalinist Russia isn't far off. Their reasons may have differed slightly but the overall opinion of many historians is that both did what they did because of fear. The debate of what fear is irrelevant (imo) if you agree with this line of thinking. Stalin also targeted Gypsies and other ethnics in the area, so it isn't like he was just killing men who were all caught trying to, for example, over throw him and take Russia over, then make peace with Nazi Germany.

Does that make any sense?

[thebomb]

Well, I would obviously never say that the U.S. Government is squeaky clean. But to say they are as bad as Russia or Germany during WWII is absurd.

Exactly. Just as it is absurd to say that we should ban the Soviet hammer and sickle because it was "just as bad" as the Nazi swastika.

That being said comparing Nazi Germany and Stalinist Russia isn't far off. Their reasons may have differed slightly but the overall opinion of many historians is that both did what they did because of fear. The debate of what fear is irrelevant (imo) if you agree with this line of thinking. Stalin also targeted Gypsies and other ethnics in the area, so it isn't like he was just killing men who were all caught trying to, for example, over throw him and take Russia over, then make peace with Nazi Germany.

I don't agree with your line of reasoning that just because these two regimes shared a common attribute, in this case fear of a group of people, that it immediately implies that they are comparable in their crimes. The US "feared" Saddam Hussein and his weapons of mass destruction - is the US lumped with Soviet Russia and Nazi Germany? Obviously not. It is therefore important and not irrelevant to discuss the reasons for the fear and its consequences.

The way in which each regime dealt with this fear is crucial, and in our specific case I would say pivotal in distinguishing the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany. For the Soviet Union it was the fear of the political dissident or anyone who would challenge Soviet rule. Whether they were Russian, Ukrainian, Tajik, or Chechen - it didn't matter. There was no systemic or permanent concentration of hate towards a group. In other words one would first have to become a dissident to become hated or killed (unless of course you were unlucky enough to be killed out of random chance due to Stalin's paranoia). In no way was a specific group in the Soviet Union identified, targeted, persecuted, and killed in the same way as was done by the Nazi regime.

In the case of Nazi Germany however, it did not matter if you were a dissident or not, if you were a Slav, Jew, Black, mentally ill, or homosexual - you felt the consequences immediately. This difference is crucial, and I believe instrumental, in distinguishing how each regime dealt with "fear". It is simply folly to lump the Soviet Union which committed crimes (ones being committed throughout history and even today) to those of a regime that "raised the bar" so to speak and institutionalized violence against specific ethnic groups.

[Bigpop]

Exactly. Just as it is absurd to say that we should ban the Soviet hammer and sickle because it was "just as bad" as the Nazi swastika.

Well, like I said I don't think any of them should be banned. Just my opinion though. I know not all the world works on freedom of speech like we do. 

I don't agree with your line of reasoning that just because these two regimes shared a common attribute, in this case fear of a group of people, that it immediately implies that they are comparable in their crimes. The US "feared" Saddam Hussein and his weapons of mass destruction - is the US lumped with Soviet Russia and Nazi Germany? Obviously not. It is therefore important and not irrelevant to discuss the reasons for the fear and its consequences.

The way in which each regime dealt with this fear is crucial, and in our specific case I would say pivotal in distinguishing the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany. For the Soviet Union it was the fear of the political dissident or anyone who would challenge Soviet rule. Whether they were Russian, Ukrainian, Tajik, or Chechen - it didn't matter. There was no systemic or permanent concentration of hate towards a group. In other words one would first have to become a dissident to become hated or killed (unless of course you were unlucky enough to be killed out of random chance due to Stalin's paranoia). In no way was a specific group in the Soviet Union identified, targeted, persecuted, and killed in the same way as was done by the Nazi regime.

In the case of Nazi Germany however, it did not matter if you were a dissident or not, if you were a Slav, Jew, Black, mentally ill, or homosexual - you felt the consequences immediately. This difference is crucial, and I believe instrumental, in distinguishing how each regime dealt with "fear". It is simply folly to lump the Soviet Union which committed crimes (ones being committed throughout history and even today) to those of a regime that "raised the bar" so to speak and institutionalized violence against specific ethnic groups.

I'm gonna crash for the night because I am tired but I don't want you to think I am dodging out. You made a coherent, thought out response and I will do the same in return so think of this as a "spot holder" lol I will revise tomorrow.

But the short of it is, Stalin ordered whole sale slaughter, so did Hitler. By many estimates Stalin actually killed MORE than Hitler. I'll reply in more detail tomorrow. Thanks for the great debate thus far though 

[GamblerSK]

i wasn't saying that the Americans and British are good and others are bad, maybe i just write it bad (still I'm learning English its not my nature language) the difference is that the symbols you write here don't represent government which is systematic killing innocent people regime of Nazis and Communists was killing innocent people like in "mass production" that was their goal they wanted to do it but what happends in Iraq or Afghanistan was a MISTAKE and not their PRIMARY OBJECTIVE just read well those big words and you get what i mean other thing is that American government is corrupted and very bad people sit there which see only their wealth and interests so if you want to be precise you may said to denied American flag because that represents those people but you know that newer hapends, but again don't try to compare regimes of Nazis and Communist with American politics sure their are murderers but not mass as those two so again i was meaning to denied sickle and hammer because their had blood on their hands of millions people more then Nazis but their symbol isn't denied but Nazis yes so i just remitted to this fact, can i have a question thebomb? where are you from?
Post Merge: February 07, 2010, 01:37:56 PMthe number of killed people cant be put to gather but its arround 100,000,000 killed by communists (USSR,China,Korea,Yugoslavia...) and more countires which was representing communist era do you see that number? nazi germany killed less then 10,000,000 people it think its a biiiig difference in numbers but not in the fact that communists were better because their was killing from political ideas and not genocide...

Intentional killing of large numbers of civilians, as a rule, for belonging to a particular social or ethnic group, occurred in the Soviet Union under Stalin, in the People's Republic of China under Mao, and in Cambodia  under the Khmer Rouge, and on a smaller scale in some other countries that declared adherence to a Communist doctrine. These killings, that took place mostly during civil wars, mass elimination of political opponents or counter-revolutionaries, mass terror campaigns, or land reforms may fit a definition of mass murder, democide, politicide, "classicide", "crimes against humanity", or loosely defined genocide.

So you may call it political killing but it had one word for that GENOCIDE

Source:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_killings_under_Communist_regimes

[thebomb]

I wasn't saying that the Americans and British are good and others are bad, maybe i just write it bad (still I'm learning English its not my nature language). The difference is that the symbols you write here don't represent government which is systematic killing innocent people regime of Nazis and Communists was killing innocent people like in "mass production".

That's right. The American bald eagle and the British union jack do not represent the killing of innocent people in the same was as the Soviet hammer and sickle and Nazi swastika. However if you are willing to make that distinction between American and British crimes, you must make a distinction between Soviet murders and Nazi murders.

That was their goal they wanted to do it but what happends in Iraq or Afghanistan was a MISTAKE and not their PRIMARY OBJECTIVE

It was a primary objective for American forces to kill Iraqis defending their country - for example in the second battle of Fallujah. So that certainly was not a "mistake". Was it a "mistake" or "primary objective" that the Wehrmacht crushed the Slovak uprising in Banská Bystrica?

the number of killed people cant be put to gather but its arround 100,000,000 killed by communists (USSR,China,Korea,Yugoslavia...) and more countires which was representing communist era do you see that number? nazi germany killed less then 10,000,000 people it think its a biiiig difference in numbers but not in the fact that communists were better because their was killing from political ideas and not genocide...

So you may call it political killing but it had one word for that GENOCIDE

Look, all I'm saying that is there is a difference between the motives of the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany when it came to killing people. The Nazis made a deliberate effort to wipe out a group of people (whether it was Jews, Slavs, or whoever) while the Soviets did not. That is a reason why the hammer and sickle does not get lumped into the same bin as the swastika - no matter how many more people it killed.

[HyperSniper999]

No country is innocent. America killed thousands of Native Americans and relocated the rest to reservations with poor living conditions.