German legal experts say Poland has no right to WW2 reparations - report

[johna]

1 minute ago, ilostmypassword said:

Explicit evidence was shown again and again how he lied. But if you think Irving is a great historian that means you also think that the German slaughter of 6 million Jews was a hoax. And we know what that makes you.

What evidence, please show it,  you must be really desperate to accuse me of Holocaust denial. 

[ilostmypassword]

1 minute ago, johna said:

What evidence, please show it,  you must be really desperate to accuse me of Holocaust denial. 

Well, since Irving is a holocaust denier and you believe he's a great historian, what other conclusion could I draw?

[johna]

Just now, ilostmypassword said:

Well, since Irving is a holocaust denier and you believe he's a great historian, what other conclusion could I draw?

Yawn......................

[ilostmypassword]

Just now, johna said:

Yawn......................

Not surprised you find logic boring.

[transam]

19 hours ago, johna said:

Allied bombing of Dresden in February 1945 is considered a war crime as it had no military significance, the death toll is estimated at 250000. Coventry was a legitimate military target

My mother lived nowhere near a military target in London but was bombed out of two houses in 1940, even dodging stuff hiding in shop doorways, crouching in underground rail stations at night, all that was years before we took them on at their own game. Do not forget the Germans started what the free world had to finish..

[Thorgal]

Poland wants war with Germany and Germany will not be able to avoid it even if she wants to." (Polish Marshal Rydz-Smigly as reported in the Daily Mail, August 6th, 1939)

First, 58.000 German civilians have been killed in what became Polish territory after WW1.
This sparked to the Western invasion of Germany into Poland. In the meanwhile, the Russian invasion started from the East side of Poland.

England declared war to Germany for that, but not to Russia.

Let's not change history...


Sent from my iPad using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[ilostmypassword]

10 minutes ago, Thorgal said:

Poland wants war with Germany and Germany will not be able to avoid it even if she wants to." (Polish Marshal Rydz-Smigly as reported in the Daily Mail, August 6th, 1939)

First, 58.000 German civilians have been killed in what became Polish territory after WW1.
This sparked to the Western invasion of Germany into Poland. In the meanwhile, the Russian invasion started from the East side of Poland.

England declared war to Germany for that, but not to Russia.

Let's not change history...


Sent from my iPad using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

More neo nazi nonsense based on a claim from that model of honest scholarship Josef Goebbels:

"Goebbels had initially estimated that 5,800 Germans had been killed during Bloody Sunday but in 1940 increased the estimate to 58,000 which was subsequently published in the pamphlet "Polish Atrocities Against the German Minority in Poland" which convinced most Germans for the invasion and fueled more hatred against the Poles.^[15]"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bloody_Sunday_(1939)

That propagandistic pamphlet and Josef Goebbels are the  sources of the claim of 58,000 Germans killed. It was a lie back then and it's a lie now. And if you believe Josef Goebbels, that says pretty much all we need to know about where you're coming from.

[Lokie]

16 hours ago, johna said:

Hardly a good reason for bombing Dresden, my parents fought through WW2 and I never heard them complain about the Germans as much as you people do!!!!

I have never complained about the Germans? As a people we are very closely related which makes war all the more stupid, but It was war. Your parents?? where do you think my forbears was while the UK was being bombed, my mum was evacuated from Manchester which was blitzed, and my father and his family lived right through the Manchester blitz, go read up a bit on what actually happened and the reasons why then come back with some actual real world issues of the time to debate...

 

Hitler said he did not really want to fight a war with Great Britain, we were not their natural enemies... having pacts and alliances with other nations meant war was enviable in the end

[Khun Han]

On 01/09/2017 at 10:41 AM, johna said:

Allied bombing of Dresden in February 1945 is considered a war crime as it had no military significance, the death toll is estimated at 250000. Coventry was a legitimate military target

 

The city centre (including the cathedral)???

[ilostmypassword]

26 minutes ago, Khun Han said:

 

The city centre (including the cathedral)???

The city centre yes. The cathedral no. Why the special concern for the cathedral?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombing_of_Dresden_in_World_War_II

[Khun Han]

42 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:

The city centre yes. The cathedral no. Why the special concern for the cathedral?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombing_of_Dresden_in_World_War_II

 

I was referring to Coventry.

[halloween]

They may not get reparations, but not a bad idea to remind your citizens of how your neighbour has treated you in the past. The next worry is the new invasion from Germany, by the "new" EU citizens being created there.

[Thorgal]

6 hours ago, ilostmypassword said:

More neo nazi nonsense based on a claim from that model of honest scholarship Josef Goebbels:

"Goebbels had initially estimated that 5,800 Germans had been killed during Bloody Sunday but in 1940 increased the estimate to 58,000 which was subsequently published in the pamphlet "Polish Atrocities Against the German Minority in Poland" which convinced most Germans for the invasion and fueled more hatred against the Poles.^[15]"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bloody_Sunday_(1939)

That propagandistic pamphlet and Josef Goebbels are the  sources of the claim of 58,000 Germans killed. It was a lie back then and it's a lie now. And if you believe Josef Goebbels, that says pretty much all we need to know about where you're coming from.

 

I've quoted facts and historical numbers from Polish and German government representatives of that time which sparked in the Blitzkrieg = see my first quote related to OP.

 

Doing not so, would we "revisionism", isn't it ?

 

You've actually quoted Richard J Evans, who was actually born in 1947...after the war...

[ilostmypassword]

4 minutes ago, Thorgal said:

 

I've quoted facts and historical numbers from Polish and German government representatives of that time which sparked in the Blitzkrieg = see my first quote related to OP.

 

Doing not so, would we "revisionism", isn't it ?

 

You've actually quoted Richard J Evans, who was actually born in 1947...after the war...

Yes, Josef Goebbels was a government official at that time. Therefore he is a trustworthy source? Really?

Therefore he is to be believed. And what does Richard J Evans birthdate have to do with his work as an historian?

[Scott]

A post violating Fair Use Policy has been removed.  

 

Please only quote 3 sentences (and the headline, if you want) and a link.   No more.  

 

[Thorgal]

4 hours ago, ilostmypassword said:

Yes, Josef Goebbels was a government official at that time. Therefore he is a trustworthy source? Really?

Therefore he is to be believed. And what does Richard J Evans birthdate have to do with his work as an historian?

 

To understand OP it's better to discuss the respectieve countries relationships at that time.

 

I don't need the opinion of a post-war born, and sponsored historian for that.

 

Germany informed multiple times The League of Nations in that time about the ongoing genocide. Not the other way around...

 

Try harder.

[GinBoy2]

On 9/1/2017 at 2:57 AM, ilostmypassword said:

Actually, after WW1 Germany was forced to pay massive compensation. A big factor leading to WW2.

Somewhat untrue actually.

Yes the treaty of Versailles set reparations ay a staggering 132 Billion Gold Marks, $33B. 

But Germany never actually paid very much in point of fact. It was why France occupied the Ruhr in 1923.

In total between 1919 and 1932 they only paid less than 21 Billion Gold Marks.

Reparations were never the reason for WW2, more the myth established by the German elite that they had not been defeated. 

As General Foch said after the treaty was signed in 1919; "This is not a peace. It is an armistice for twenty years"

....he got it wrong by 63 days!

[David Walden]

Forget about all the details of how wars come about...all wars since time began are about trading arrangements and the ability of nations to produce products and to sell them to other people so they can provides jobs for their people..

 

Both Germany and Japan for the 20 years prior to WW2 had the most developed manufacturing base in the world.  They were almost totally unused until Hitler came along.  He had 60% unemployed (he blamed the Jews for this) but soon sorted that out by using his manufacturing base to produce fighter planes, battleships, submarines, cannons, roads, rifles and blast his way around.  The result was full employment and lot of soldiers...Japan did the same.  In a nutshell this is how wars are started and won.  If you screw your neighbour till he has nothing to loose he will come and bite you.

 

Hitler set out the make Germany the most influential and the best trading nation in the world, his methods as we know were just terrible.  So what did he achieve?  The best trading nation in the world or maybe it's that other nation Japan...it is a toss up who really won WW2.

 

People often say what's the point of studying history, well history will tell you how all wars are started...give it a go.

 

    

[ilostmypassword]

25 minutes ago, David Walden said:

Forget about all the details of how wars come about...all wars since time began are about trading arrangements and the ability of nations to produce products and to sell them to other people so they can provides jobs for their people..

 

Both Germany and Japan for the 20 years prior to WW2 had the most developed manufacturing base in the world.  They were almost totally unused until Hitler came along.  He had 60% unemployed (he blamed the Jews for this) but soon sorted that out by using his manufacturing base to produce fighter planes, battleships, submarines, cannons, roads, rifles and blast his way around.  The result was full employment and lot of soldiers...Japan did the same.  In a nutshell this is how wars are started and won.  If you screw your neighbour till he has nothing to loose he will come and bite you.

 

Hitler set out the make Germany the most influential and the best trading nation in the world, his methods as we know were just terrible.  So what did he achieve?  The best trading nation in the world or maybe it's that other nation Japan...it is a toss up who really won WW2.

 

People often say what's the point of studying history, well history will tell you how all wars are started...give it a go.

 

    

Well, one of the points of studying history is teach you not to accept government statistics - or anybody's for that matter - without question.

 

"Women were no longer included in the statistics so any women who remained out of work under the Nazi’s rule did not exist as far as the statistics were concerned.

The unemployed were given a very simple choice: do whatever work is given to you by the government or be classed as “work-shy” and put in a concentration camp.

Jews lost their citizenship in 1935 and as a result were not included in unemployment figures even though many lost their employment at the start of Hitler’s time in power."

http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/nazi-germany/the-nazis-and-the-german-economy/

 

Can you cite a reputable source for that 60 percent unemployment figure? The highest I've seen is 33 percent.

 

And the statement that the manufacturing base was almost totally unused is clearly not true. Are you saying that a massive industrial base was built in the face of low demand? How does that work? In fact, before the Great Depression came along, the Germany economy was growing at a rapid pace. Once the depression hit and American bankers started recalling their loans instead of making further ones, the German economy collapsed. The government chose the same kind of austerity that conservatives tried to pull in the face of the recent great recession. The result was predictable. The economy got even worse. So when Hitler came to power, he did, as you said, use a weaponized Keynesianism to stimulate the economy.  But the situation before was not as dire as you claimed nor was the improvement in unemployment as robust.

[GinBoy2]

16 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:

Well, one of the points of studying history is teach you not to accept government statistics - or anybody's for that matter - without question.

 

"Women were no longer included in the statistics so any women who remained out of work under the Nazi’s rule did not exist as far as the statistics were concerned.

The unemployed were given a very simple choice: do whatever work is given to you by the government or be classed as “work-shy” and put in a concentration camp.

Jews lost their citizenship in 1935 and as a result were not included in unemployment figures even though many lost their employment at the start of Hitler’s time in power."

http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/nazi-germany/the-nazis-and-the-german-economy/

 

Can you cite a reputable source for that 60 percent unemployment figure? The highest I've seen is 33 percent.

 

And the statement that the manufacturing base was almost totally unused is clearly not true. Are you saying that a massive industrial base was built in the face of low demand? How does that work? In fact, before the Great Depression came along, the Germany economy was growing at a rapid pace. Once the depression hit and American bankers started recalling their loans instead of making further ones, the German economy collapsed. The government chose the same kind of austerity that conservatives tried to pull in the face of the recent great recession. The result was predictable. The economy got even worse. So when Hitler came to power, he did, as you said, use a weaponized Keynesianism to stimulate the economy.  But the situation before was not as dire as you claimed nor was the improvement in unemployment as robust.

I completely agree. Germany in the early 1920's had a booming economy, fueled in large part by massive borrowing from US banks.

At that time reparations didn't even figure into the national discourse.

The Wall St crash was what triggered the collapse, and the subsequent recession, massive unemployment and hyper inflation. 

Hitler and his ilk, and remember before this he was a very marginal figure, exploited this, and used the 1919 treaty to re-enforce the myth of German victimization.

[ilostmypassword]

Just now, GinBoy2 said:

I completely agree. Germany in the early 1920's had a booming economy, fueled in large part by massive borrowing from US banks.

At that time reparations didn't even figure into the national discourse.

The Wall St crash was what triggered the collapse, and the subsequent recession, massive unemployment and hyper inflation. 

Hitler and his ilk, and remember before this he was a very marginal figure, exploited this, and used the 1919 treaty to re-enforce the myth of German victimization.

There was no hyperinflation after the crash. In fact, the reason the Weimar government did too little and, in fact, raised taxes, was because of the fear of hyperinflation. Hyperinflation occurred from 1921 to 1924. After the onset of the Great Depression, there was deflation in Germany.

[GinBoy2]

Just now, ilostmypassword said:

There was no hyperinflation after the crash. In fact, the reason the Weimar government did too little and, in fact, raised taxes, was because of the fear of hyperinflation. Hyperinflation occurred from 1921 to 1924. After the onset of the Great Depression, there was deflation in Germany.

Sorry I did misquote there. Hyper inflation was in part due the the massive over borrowing, you can't live on credit for ever. 

But the final collapse was absolutely due the US banks calling in their loans after the crash

[David Walden]

31 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:

Well, one of the points of studying history is teach you not to accept government statistics - or anybody's for that matter - without question.

 

"Women were no longer included in the statistics so any women who remained out of work under the Nazi’s rule did not exist as far as the statistics were concerned.

The unemployed were given a very simple choice: do whatever work is given to you by the government or be classed as “work-shy” and put in a concentration camp.

Jews lost their citizenship in 1935 and as a result were not included in unemployment figures even though many lost their employment at the start of Hitler’s time in power."

http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/nazi-germany/the-nazis-and-the-german-economy/

 

Can you cite a reputable source for that 60 percent unemployment figure? The highest I've seen is 33 percent.

 

And the statement that the manufacturing base was almost totally unused is clearly not true. Are you saying that a massive industrial base was built in the face of low demand? How does that work? In fact, before the Great Depression came along, the Germany economy was growing at a rapid pace. Once the depression hit and American bankers started recalling their loans instead of making further ones, the German economy collapsed. The government chose the same kind of austerity that conservatives tried to pull in the face of the recent great recession. The result was predictable. The economy got even worse. So when Hitler came to power, he did, as you said, use a weaponized Keynesianism to stimulate the economy.  But the situation before was not as dire as you claimed nor was the improvement in unemployment as robust.

I have only made the claim that all wars since time began are trading wars between nations, most could have been avoided but then rebuilding cities has been a part of world development also since time began...my figures about unemployment came from the "Funk and Wagnel' encyclopedias in their extensive section on Germany prior to WW2.  this encyclopedia has much input by Jewish people.  They are their facts, perhaps they got it wrong?

[johna]

21 hours ago, ilostmypassword said:

Not surprised you find logic boring.

What logic, you accuse me of being a Holocaust denier without a shred of evidence and call that logic. Your attacks are becoming personal, and yes I find that very boring.

[johna]

21 hours ago, transam said:

My mother lived nowhere near a military target in London but was bombed out of two houses in 1940, even dodging stuff hiding in shop doorways, crouching in underground rail stations at night, all that was years before we took them on at their own game. Do not forget the Germans started what the free world had to finish..

I'm not going down that road telling you stories about my families experience during WW2, my original reply to this topic was,  Quote "I agree that these claims should be thrown out, not because of a treaty signed in 1990 but simply because there would be no end to such claims. WW2 ended 72 years ago.  No one who fought in WW2 has clean hands." This comment has aroused the snowflakes from their slumber with fake outrage at events they only know from Hollywood movies.

[ilostmypassword]

9 minutes ago, johna said:

What logic, you accuse me of being a Holocaust denier without a shred of evidence and call that logic. Your attacks are becoming personal, and yes I find that very boring.

Again you defended the accuracy of  an historian  who is a holocaust denier. A man who is clearly a liar. What other reasonable conclusion could one draw?

 And, by the way, his Dresden book that you praised so highly? In it he claimed that the total could be as high as 250,000  - even exceeding  Goebbels' figure of 200,000 civilians killed.  The city of Dresden did a careful analysis in 2010 and concluded that the number was no higher than 25,000. Which was in line with much earlier estimates from reputable sources.

[transam]

10 minutes ago, johna said:

I'm not going down that road telling you stories about my families experience during WW2, my original reply to this topic was,  Quote "I agree that these claims should be thrown out, not because of a treaty signed in 1990 but simply because there would be no end to such claims. WW2 ended 72 years ago.  No one who fought in WW2 has clean hands." This comment has aroused the snowflakes from their slumber with fake outrage at events they only know from Hollywood movies.

What do you mean "nobody who fought in WW2 has clean hands"....?

 

Most folk who fought in WW2 were dragged from their homes and jobs and given a gun, my dad was one. Why was that, because he was told too...He ended up an RSM but as soon as he could he was OUT....

[johna]

1 minute ago, ilostmypassword said:

Again you defended the accuracy of  an historian  who is a holocaust denier. A man who is clearly a liar. What other reasonable conclusion could one draw?

 And, by the way, his Dresden book that you praised so highly? In it he claimed that the total could be as high as 250,000  - even exceeding  Goebbels' figure of 200,000 civilians killed.  The city of Dresden did a careful analysis in 2010 and concluded that the number was no higher than 25,000. Which was in line with much earlier estimates from reputable sources.

And I will go on defending Irving as one of WW2 best historians, I never defended Irving's Holocaust denial. You can Google Dresden and get as many different casualty figures as you like, none of which makes the bombing of a city packed with refugees, of no military significance in the closing days of the war justifiable. You seem to be looking for some moral high ground here if so you have failed miserably. 

[transam]

Just now, johna said:

And I will go on defending Irving as one of WW2 best historians, I never defended Irving's Holocaust denial. You can Google Dresden and get as many different casualty figures as you like, none of which makes the bombing of a city packed with refugees, of no military significance in the closing days of the war justifiable. You seem to be looking for some moral high ground here if so you have failed miserably. 

The Germans carpet bombed civilians in the UK in 1940, is that OK with you...?

[johna]

1 minute ago, transam said:

What do you mean "nobody who fought in WW2 has clean hands"....?

 

Most folk who fought in WW2 were dragged from their homes and jobs and given a gun, my dad was one. Why was that, because he was told too...He ended up an RSM but as soon as he could he was OUT....

Your argument is equally applicable to Germans who fought in the war.