Where would YOU serve in WW2?

Order is not a bad thing but when a single individual has complete authority, it seems like they always end up doing more harm than good. Also, the masses who fit into the new order go overboard and end up doing evil to those who don't fit. Also, as history has shown, those nations under authoritarian rule end up being behind in technology, economically and socially struggling. Look at the middle eastern countries along with the former Soviet Union. Again, they started out with a noble idea but it morphed into something else with no benefit to the masses, only to the one in charge.

On the surface, national socialism my look attractive but look at the larger picture (as Jeff has pointed out) and you may see something else.

Cheers.

 

The Soviet Union degenerated due to its communism -mainly the economic side of it- rather than its authoritarian rule. But of course, they were intertwined, because the leaders within the S.U. were staunch communists, and therefore made sure that the communism was not abandoned.

As for the Middle East, it started falling behind Europe back in the age of monarchs. For that reason I don't think you can use them as an example.

/Kommando

 

Sure I can. They follow the order according to their religion. They have strict guidelines to follow and the people are told how to live and how to die. The have stayed behind because they still are following the 'order' dictated to them. Same for Communism (just another form of socialism). The Politburo dictates how people are to live, where they are to work, who can become a member of the elite and who is undesirable. Sounds the same to what you are looking for:

And like Jeff has asked, what steps are to be taken against interracial breeding? What about those who don't live a 'healthy' living? I know, these are details but I do believe you are blinded by the glamourous results of Herr Doktor Goebbel's propaganda. So I take it you are saying that Nazism is totally different than Communism? The Nazis really didn't break Germany's economy and that they didn't resort to slave labor to make up for some of those losses. They were not staunch Nazis and therefore made sure that Nazism wasn't abandoned. There is no difference. The beginning of nazism in Germany looked good, enough that even the Jews were proud to be German but then the nazis needed a distraction so that the people did not see the weaknesses of their program and chose the Jews as their scapegoat. Just like the Communists. And the Muslims. And the Chetniks in the former Yugosloavia.

At this point we can agree to disagree. If National Socialism was so great, then where is this model nation? Where are these model people? As far as I am concerned, you have answered the original question as to why you would choose the Waffen SS to serve in lest we hijack this thread and get a visit from .......

 

I am going out on a limb here and i will declare my support for Kommando, and his right to say what he said, why? because someone asked him to exlpain himself, and he did. I too have Nazi sympathies, surprise, surprise. I have seen things that makes me wonder democracy has failed.

I have a giant portrait of Fuhrer Adolf Hitler on my living room wall and flanked by the Nazi Party Standard and War Ensign, i am proud of them. But having said that i am a proud Australian of German/Danish decent.

I was recently was asked to clarify a statement by Slipdigit on a "sanitised" comment, i will clarify this, this was not directed to the Russians themselves but to that brutal monster Stalin, before anyone jumps up and down, yes Fuhrer Adolf Hitler was no angel himself.

I can see the hypocracy, i don't care.

It is funny in some way, the hostile attitude of fellow forum users to anyone who sides with the Germans during WW2, it is like that the Soviets, British and Americans did not commit any war crimes during WW2, that all those who served in the respective forces were soldiers of virtue, they were incapable of such thing while the Germans were. But the deffinition of a war crime is that "winners don't commit war crimes, losers do".

v.R

 

This thread is gone to the

​

 

I would be in the 8th airforce. Flying in a B-17 bomber being there Engineer

 

A pilot for me. Preferably in a fighter.

 

Say, I'm 18 again in 1941, with my interest in aviation and ham radio, I'd probably would have been a radio operator or navigator on a USAAF B-17/B-24 or B-29 bombing the heck out of the Nazis and/or Japs.

 

I think I was referring to the Standard definition of the term which the Nazis fit quite well.


Fascism is a term used to describe authoritarian nationalist political ideologies or mass movements that are concerned with notions of cultural decline or decadence and seek to achieve a millenarian national rebirth by exalting the nation or race, and promoting cults of unity, strength and purity.Various scholars attribute different characteristics to fascism, but the following elements are usually seen as its integral parts: patriotism ,nationalism,statism, militarism,totalitarianism,anti-communism,economic planning (including corporatism and autarky), populism,collectivism,autocracy and anti-liberalism (i.e., opposition to political andeconomic liberalism).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism#Nazism

 

How about millions of prisoners, and then systematically starving them?

Or after failing to destroy the enemy ruthelessly, it is now the enemy which comes out for revenge and destroy's you and your family to prevent such an evil from ever rising again.

You see if the Allies or the Red Army used such logic, then perhaps there were would be no Germany today......

 

Can we get this thread back on topic please?

 

I would serve in Waffen SS or the Wehrmacht.

 

VMF-211 on Wake Island

 

Naval Aviation fighter pilot in the Pacific War, serving on the USS Enterprise CV-6

 

It is more important to feed the own army rather than a bunch of prisoners, that are infact enemies.

Russia did infact use such logic. Look at the German prisoners taken at Stalingrad; almost all of them died in Russian captivity. As for the Western Allies (I'm thinking of the U.S. and G.B. here), they were in a safe position during most of the war and did not need to use brutal means to win. The U.S. never even risked defeat during WW2.

/Kommando

 

I believe it is time you start a separate thread and continue your debate there. Thank you.

 

:feedtrolls-sign:

Troll (Internet) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia