I Refuse To Fly WW2 CoD German Aircraft. Why?

[Hood]

Ok I'll bite and I'll even do the old using quotes thingy too.

Originally Posted by 5./JG27.Farber

I included it purley for the people, who like you, like to jump on the "what my ancestors did in the war and why I am pround and right!" crowd who think war is glorious and rightous! The people that use the argument "my ancestors took part so I have a right to say what I think!". Well my ancestors took part and here is what I think!

I do believe you jumped first. What my grandparents did doesn't make what I think right nor does it affect what I think. Neither do I think that war is glorious and righteous. You really are jumping to conclusions.

Originally Posted by 5./JG27.Farber

Im sad for you. I think they would all agree wars a waste.

I think they'd agree wars are a waste but I also think they'd consider you to be a crazy loon and/or a right wing fanatic. That or someone who has been led so far up the wrong path they don't have the wits to see what's in front of them.

Originally Posted by 5./JG27.Farber

Why didnt you make any reasoning or point of the Polish officer corps massacre by the Soviets? Why dont you feel troubled by the betrayel of Poland by England and France? These things that lead to the war mean nothing for the glory of England? What about the war crimes of the British of Hamburg and Dresden?

Because they had nothing to do with Avro's post just nonsensical ramblings on your part. I'll deal with them if you want.

The Katyn massacre happened as did the Soviet purges, as did the Holocaust as did atrocities caused by my any armies of many other nations etc etc etc. Britain couldn't somehow reach into Poland to prevent a massacre that they knew nothing about, and once knowing the decision was probably that the pact with the USSR was more important. The extent of Soviet and German atrocities was not properly understood until the end (yes I know that reports were received about the concentration camps before the war's end).

Poland is a sad subject. I suppose that having lost 400,000 troops and an empire, that Britain could have taken on the Red Army with their 10,000,000+ troops, incredible production rates and easier logistics. Go and read about the Yalta conference and see what Churchill wanted for eastern Europe.

The bombing of Hamburg and Dresden by the RAF and USAAF was not a war crime. Morally wrong, possibly, though that is a question for greater philosophers than me. My personal opinion is that it was an honest and tragic mistake.

Originally Posted by 5./JG27.Farber

You say that the second world war was fought to preserve freedoms! Yet you deny me these freedoms! You sir are the evil. You have become what you hate!

Congratulations you can use the internet and read quotes.

I'm trying to work out how I deny you your freedoms and how exactly I am evil. What I really hate is having to eat vegetables or fish, and I'm not a vegetable or a fish. If I were I'd have difficulty typing don't you think?

You've confirmed my belief that you are a fool. It'd be better if you were just stupid, though maybe you're that too.

I'm going away now before you drag me down even further and beat me with your experience.

Hood

[Wolf_Rider]

Originally Posted by 5./JG27.Farber

You say that the second world war was fought to preserve freedoms! Yet you deny me these freedoms!

To follow on from what you are saying here (but not in response to you for what you are saying...

Freedom and freedom of speech, is people being able to move about freely, to associate, to choose their work, to write, to read, etc and the freedom to be able voice thoughts and feelings without fear - it does not mean one has the freedom to do or say whatever they please.

[von Brühl]

Originally Posted by Hood

As for "peace", what does that mean? ... or does it mean making the ultimate sacrifice to protect your country, its people and those that you are allied with?

Hitler did these things, remember, he only attacked those countries which were pre-war German/Austrio-Hungarian, until Germany was in turn attacked by France/England. He was restoring people and lands taken away by Versailles. Poland had been a country for less than 30 years, German for the previous 200. Checkoslavakia had not been a sovereign nation in I don't know how long, if ever. France and England were rightly concerned about their status in Europe if a strong Germany again rose.

The only real country with a legitimate invasion beef against Hitler would be the Soviet Union. The rest is just propaganda...

[=CfC= Father Ted]

Originally Posted by von Brühl

Hitler did these things, remember, he only attacked those countries which were pre-war German/Austrio-Hungarian, until Germany was in turn attacked by France/England. He was restoring people and lands taken away by Versailles. Poland had been a country for less than 30 years, German for the previous 200. Checkoslavakia had not been a sovereign nation in I don't know how long, if ever. France and England were rightly concerned about their status in Europe if a strong Germany again rose.

The only real country with a legitimate invasion beef against Hitler would be the Soviet Union. The rest is just propaganda...

Sarcasm, I hope. Otherwise this is some sad, scarily disillusioned stuff. Belgium, Netherlands, Norway? They were German by right?

[ATAG_Snapper]

Originally Posted by =CfC= Father Ted

Sarcasm, I hope. Otherwise this is some sad, scarily disillusioned stuff. Belgium, Netherlands, Norway? They were German by right?

All these years and I never realized that Uncle Adolf was simply a victim of a huge misunderstanding.......

[5./JG27.Farber]

I honestly give up. I surrender. This is stupid.

[carguy_]

Originally Posted by 5./JG27.Farber

Yes Poland, the Polish that were good enough to fight and die for the Glorious British Empire and then whom were left under Soviet control.... BETRAYED by the English!

Yes, +1 betrayal is the right word here.

[bongodriver]

Originally Posted by carguy_

Yes, +1 betrayal is the right word here.

Yes because the British should have fought an unwinnable war alone against the Russians just so Britain could have been part of the Soviet Union too, makes perfect sense to do this immediately after a war which practically broke our country.

[carguy_]

Originally Posted by bongodriver

Yes because the British should have fought an unwinnable war alone against the Russians just so Britain could have been part of the Soviet Union too, makes perfect sense to do this immediately after a war which practically broke our country.

So you sat back and observed execution of milions in 1939 and then again of hundreds of thousands in 1945.

And puuuhlease man! You don`t have the slightest idea of what "broken country" means.

[fruitbat]

Originally Posted by carguy_

So you sat back and observed execution of milions in 1939 and then again of hundreds of thousands in 1945.

And puuuhlease man! You don`t have the slightest idea of what "broken country" means.

What exactly do you think the British could of done out of interest?