The Battle of Britain Was The First Defeat For The German Luftwaffe.

[bongodriver]

Originally Posted by Bewolf

In general, I agree to you as not agreeing would mean ppl get a free ticket to sit idle in a similiar position. However, there are enough examples, from other countries (western included) where the people should have acted and did not.

Specifically, I adisagree in sofar as the Nazis, as your own article suggest, killed or imprisioned all people capable of forming active resistance. The Nazis had one major advantage in Germany they did not have anywhere else. They simply knew everybody and knew where everybody stood in the political sptectrum. Identifying, arresting and imprisoning or killing political opposition was much much easier in Germany then anywhere else when you had to deal with those people in the Weimar Republic in the decades before.

It also did not help that the Allies refused any help to any german resistance group.

Btw, I am an active social democrat.

Thank you for editing British with Allies....

[Kurfürst]

Originally Posted by Bewolf

Göring is an eye opener. From an interview in 1946

Göring: Why, of course, the people don't want war. Why would some poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best that he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece. Naturally, the common people don't want war; neither in Russia nor in England nor in America, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy or a fascist dictatorship or a Parliament or a Communist dictatorship.

Gilbert: There is one difference. In a democracy, the people have some say in the matter through their elected representatives, and in the United States only Congress can declare wars.

Göring: Oh, that is all well and good, but, voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country.

Did not know that one. Actually, Göring seems to be most likeable Nazi character. He wasn't anti-semitic or dogmatic, a fatalist like Hitler, fanatic like Himmler or a ruthless b@stard like Heidrich, or as naive nationalist like Hess.. he seemed to have a view on things what we call in these parts "sober farmer's intellect', meaning seeing things just as they are. Gilbert comment is extremely naive as well - it may be that only the Congress had the right to declare war, but this didn't quite stop the President from de facto waging a war on the seas on his own initiative from the spring of 1941, or to drive the US into war with any possible means.

[ATAG_Dutch]

Originally Posted by Kurfürst

Göring seems to be most likeable Nazi character. He wasn't anti-semitic or dogmatic.

Good Grief.

[xnomad]

Originally Posted by Dutch_851

Good Grief.

I remember seeing something similar about the Nuremberg trials that the captors, prosecutors etc had trouble trying not to get caught up by his (Goering's) charm.

Apparently he was quite a likable person and had a great character. This is also probably the reason he ended up getting cyanide to kill himself, wasn't it the US guard that gave it to him after he became a bit chummy with Hermann?

[csThor]

I, actually, think a statement Göring was heard to utter when he was arrested does characterize him much better: "At least 12 years of decent life." ("Wenigstens 12 Jahre anständig gelebt.")

He was greedy, he was pompous, he was boasting, a coward and absolutley ruthless in pursuing his own ambitions. As such he fit into the shark pool that was Hitler's inner circle.

[Rickusty]

Originally Posted by csThor

If I may remind you of the tasteless headlines and photos on british newspapers before the Euro 96 semi-finals, the equally tasteless "10 little Spitfires" chants propagated by british online communities before World Cup 2006 and actually sung by some (admittedly drunken) idiots in german city centers ... It's not just that the yellow press is so besotted with the topic but it's actually worse that it returns again and again and no voice is raised that tells 'em to STFU. Silent agreement or silent disagreement aren't distinguishable from the outside, you know.

As has been said, idiots are everywhere, in every corner of this sad world.

It's not war-related, by I still remember some of the offenses directed at the italian soccer team and at italians in general, in the 2006 FIFA world cup, made by some german newspapers.
IIRC they were written by some german tabloids, a-la "The Sun" ("Bild" and "Der Spiegel" I seem to recall), but still...
Some of them were reported even by our newspapers, and caused quite a little bit of a "national case".

Same as that lame "Nur Italien nicht!" song. I wonder really how many find that crap funny tbh.
Chanting "It doesn't matter who will win the world cup, as long as it is not Italy", or "pushes, spits and insults: that's the italian soccer" is astonishing.

No nation is immune to idiots, be that Italy, Germany, Uk or whatever.

As we say here:
"The mother of the imbeciles is always pregnant"

Cheers
Rick

[kendo65]

Originally Posted by Sternjaeger II

I thought that by now we agreed that the attempt was half-hearted?

As for the agreeing, the fact that the UK can call something a victory doesn't mean that it actually was one. So as much as I do understand why in Britain it's perceived as a victory, doesn't change the facts of the conflict.

And presumably the 'facts' = what is taken to constitute 'objective reality' is to be determined by you with the rest of our opinions relegated to those of propaganda-besotted dupes.

You haven't addressed my criticism of this stance of yours - the so-called 'facts' that you keep marshalling in your arguments appear to most here as opinion and interpretation, of equal value as the perspectives of other posters but not inherently different in evidence or weight.

Once again your refusal to acknowledge this or reply with massive overwhelming evidence (that is not open to either counter-interpretation or that can be contradicted by other quotes, opinions or 'facts' from the other side) strikes me as a little arrogant.

Until you can deliver incontrovertible 'facts' and evidence and not just resort to constantly saying you are right you won't change opinions.

[kendo65]

Originally Posted by Bewolf

In general, I agree to you as not agreeing would mean ppl get a free ticket to sit idle in a similiar position. However, there are enough examples, from other countries (western included) where the people should have acted and did not.

Specifically, I adisagree in sofar as the Nazis, as your own article suggest, killed or imprisioned all people capable of forming active resistance. The Nazis had one major advantage in Germany they did not have anywhere else. They simply knew everybody and knew where everybody stood in the political sptectrum. Identifying, arresting and imprisoning or killing political opposition was much much easier in Germany then anywhere else when you had to deal with those people in the Weimar Republic in the decades before.

It also did not help that the Allies refused any help to any german resistance group.

Btw, I am an active social democrat.

On the subject of resistance to thuggery and evil, as a resident of Northern Ireland I will say that resisting organised and violent paramilitary-style organisations is not something that is either easy to do or in most cases advisable.

Such people may constitute only a small percentage of the population but their level of organisation and willingness to inflict extreme violence on any challenge to their authority is enough to ensure that the masses learn quickly to keep alternative opinions to themselves.

[csThor]

Originally Posted by Rickusty

As has been said, idiots are everywhere, in every corner of this sad world.

It's not war-related, by I still remember some of the offenses directed at the italian soccer team and at italians in general, in the 2006 FIFA world cup, made by some german newspapers.
IIRC they were written by some german tabloids, a-la "The Sun" ("Bild" and "Der Spiegel" I seem to recall), but still...
Some of them were reported even by our newspapers, and caused quite a little bit of a "national case".

Same as that lame "Nur Italien nicht!" song. I wonder really how many find that crap funny tbh.
Chanting "It doesn't matter who will win the world cup, as long as it is not Italy", or "pushes, spits and insults: that's the italian soccer" is astonishing.

No nation is immune to idiots, be that Italy, Germany, Uk or whatever.

As we say here:
"The mother of the imbeciles is always pregnant"

Cheers
Rick

Bold part marked for truth.

As for BILD (or BLÖD = STUPID, as many people call it) ... it's Germany's foremost example of Yellow Press. Many people read it but denounce it as bad and claim not to read it. I don't read any newspaper (except when I visit my home village as my parents have subscribed to a local paper) and can proudly state I have never bought a BLÖD and never will. I am actually appalled by this type of media, regardles off its name, makeup and whether it's a print media, online or TV. They're all despicable IMO.

[Rickusty]

Hi Thor,
same as me: I don't read any newspapers. It's been like this for maybe 2 years by now.
I don't even like football tbh, so I'm an atypical italian in the end.