NationStates Jolt Archive

Before I start, just a short disclaimer; this post is not meant to bash Jews, deny the holocaust, or call the Jewish community a bunch of whiners, just to post the below question. I'm sorry if I come across as an anti-Semitic.

Would the Holocaust have been as infamous if Hitler had not specifically targeted the Jews, and instead just rounded up six million random people and killed them? Would there be as many museums, photos and speakers?

six million people isn't a drop in the bucket. i'm sure someone woulda' set up some sort of museum.

Would the Holocaust have been as infamous if Hitler had not specifically targeted the Jews, and instead just rounded up six million random people and killed them? Would there be as many museums, photos and speakers?

The point of the Holocaust wasn't to kill just for the sake of killing. It was to get rid of particular groups that the Nazis considered "undesirable". That kind of makes your question a moot point.

Hard to know, mainly because that is not realistical.

Why would he do that?

But speaking in a more broad way, I dont think the holocaust would be AS big. It would still be big, but not as much. First, because probabily Israel wouldnt be created. Second, not as many jews would flee to the US and other countries. Third, because you would have a shitload more people in Europe.

Are you saying we give promotion to the holocaust just because many of them were Jewish?

A massacre/genocide during such a large war would be big, even if there was no method to who they chose.

You mean if he had killed, say, disabled people, mentally ill people, gypsies (Roma & Sinti), homosexuals, freemasons, Jehovah's Witnesses, Polish citizens, Soviet POWs, communists and other political prisoners?

Yes.

I think he's got a point, the virulent hatred that fed the Holocaust was so shocking and so appalling that it was burned into our minds forever. The Holocaust is not remembered because its victims were Jewish, the Holocaust is remembered because of how utterly inhuman it was. The main reason I come to this conclusion is the fact that most people have no knowledge of Stalin's purges or Mao's great leap forward, yet these both killed more people than the Nazis did.

no i think not.

stalin and mao killed more than 6 million people each and there is no memorial for that.

of course the deaths of communism were largely hidden from the west by the secrecy and lies of the regimes involved.

and instead just rounded up six million random people and killed them? Would there be as many museums, photos and speakers?

Like the Cambodian Genocide?

That wasn't random as much as: "Ok everyone move out into the fields! No no, you educated people stay behind to continue your 'education'."

Damn Pol Pot.

The Holocaust is not remembered because its victims were Jewish, the Holocaust is remembered because of how utterly inhuman it was.
Seconded.

Now can we please quit with the Jewish conspiracy all the time? It's really starting to get on my nerves.

I think the point of the topic was a comparison of genocide and mass extermination. The fact that it was enacted primarily against one group may have seved to highlight the event, but I don't think it would have made a difference in the long run compared to random mass murder.

Also, to go slightly off topic; Neu Leonstein, the latin quote in your sig was my high school motto. :eek:

Also, to go slightly off topic; Neu Leonstein, the latin quote in your sig was my high school motto. :eek:
*shifty eyes*

By the way, does anyone have a good "shifty eyes" smiley?

six million people isn't a drop in the bucket. i'm sure someone woulda' set up some sort of museum.

Yeah, but Stalin killed a f.ckload of people, and we hardly hear about that.

Well, okay, we hear about it, but not as often as we hear about the Holocaust thing.

*shifty eyes*

By the way, does anyone have a good "shifty eyes" smiley?
Yup.
http://www.wizardsforum.co.uk/images/smiles/shifty.gif
http://209.85.12.227/1381/85/emo/shiftyeyes.gif

Yeah, but Stalin killed a f.ckload of people, and we hardly hear about that.

Well, okay, we hear about it, but not as often as we hear about the Holocaust thing.

I remember we had holocaust stuff pushed down our throats ever since we were little. I have nothing against it, but Stalin killed so many more people, and I never really knew about until High School.

I am not Jewish, but I have lost relatives to the holocaust, for what its worth.

The thing about the Holocaust was that it was targeted killing, against groups of people specifically because of their ethnicity, sexuality, or religious beliefs. There was also a very strong dehumanization associated with the Nazi killing machine that made it so disturbing; it was that sheer heartlessness that made it as horrible as it was.

Seconded.

Now can we please quit with the Jewish conspiracy all the time? It's really starting to get on my nerves.

Maybe it's a jewish conspiracy to get you riled up?? :eek:

no i think not.

stalin and mao killed more than 6 million people each and there is no memorial for that.

of course the deaths of communism were largely hidden from the west by the secrecy and lies of the regimes involved.

Here is a start for at least Russia.

http://www.victimsofcommunism.org/media/article.php?article=707

This is not the one I was thinking of however this is a group trying to do something about a memorial in Russia.

Yeah, but Stalin killed a f.ckload of people, and we hardly hear about that.

Well, okay, we hear about it, but not as often as we hear about the Holocaust thing.

That's because Stalin covered it up better. Also, Stalin made it a point to target potential threats to him. Hitler used his victims as scapegoats. Most people would find both to be "evil," but would also agree that Hitler was much worse.

im thinking its a combination of factors.

that the germans should do such a horrible thing. such a civlilized country to resort to such barbarity. it makes it more creepy to us because we identify germany as one of US.

that the job wasnt finished. our soldiers came upon camps where hundreds or thousands of people had just been killed. the nazis were rushing to finish the job they started so that there would be no witnesses left. to see all the freshly dead made it more horrifying than digging up mass graves elsewhere.

and of course coming upon the camps where the survivors were like walking corpses. so many died after being rescued because they had been starved too long to recover. such a heart rending sight makes a greater impression than just finding out years later that people starved to death in china and the ukraine.

and the survivors worked to make sure that we didnt forget. god bless them for the courage to keep telling their stories.

Yup.
Thank You!

I never do this, but: :fluffle:

Not in public.

http://www.wizardsforum.co.uk/images/smiles/shifty.gif

If I had ever have to sit through another town hall about jewish victims of the holocaust I would most definetely have boy-cotted it. Unless some of the speakers, were communists, gypsies, blacks then don't try to get me to care more about what happened to your family, then any of the other 20th century genocides. As far I am concerned, my country did not go to war to save the people in the concentration camps, but because it was our turn to help England which was getting bombed.

I want the Rwandan, Kosovar, Congo, Armenian, tibetan, Peruvian mass killings to have equal weight in my history books as the concentration camps.

I want the Rwandan, Kosovar, Congo, Armenian, tibetan, Peruvian mass killings to have equal weight in my history books as the concentration camps.

Way to leave out poor little Cambodia :(

Seconded.

Now can we please quit with the Jewish conspiracy all the time? It's really starting to get on my nerves.

Um, you're the only person who's brought up a "Jewish conspiracy" . . .

Um, you're the only person who's brought up a "Jewish conspiracy" . . .
I've been on NSG long enough to know that there are only three things people want to achieve when they post something like this:

a) Troll
b) Deny Israel's right to exist as a state
c) Present the Holocaust as overhyped thanks to a Jewish/Hollywood conspiracy

Sometimes they want to do all three at once.

I've been on NSG long enough to know that there are only three things people want to achieve when they post something like this:

a) Troll
b) Deny Israel's right to exist as a state
c) Present the Holocaust as overhyped thanks to a Jewish/Hollywood conspiracy

Sometimes they want to do all three at once.

Like a Kinder Egg :)

I've been on NSG long enough to know that there are only three things people want to achieve when they post something like this:

a) Troll
b) Deny Israel's right to exist as a state
c) Present the Holocaust as overhyped thanks to a Jewish/Hollywood conspiracy

Sometimes they want to do all three at once.

Or it might be an honest question. Lets give him the benefit of the doubt until he actually PROVES himself a Nazi.

To answer the OP: It probably would even if it was just random people, because it was the first organized and industrialized mass-killing and extermination the world had seen. And seeing as how a lot more than "only" six million people died, it was indeed an act to remember.

You mean if he had killed, say, disabled people, mentally ill people, gypsies (Roma & Sinti), homosexuals, freemasons, Jehovah's Witnesses, Polish citizens, Soviet POWs, communists and other political prisoners?

Yes.

This guy gets it.
Where's the Gypsie state?

To answer the OP, no it would not be, even if it were another group besides European Jews. They have the best publicists.

Before I start, just a short disclaimer; this post is not meant to bash Jews, deny the holocaust, or call the Jewish community a bunch of whiners, just to post the below question. I'm sorry if I come across as an anti-Semitic.

Would the Holocaust have been as infamous if Hitler had not specifically targeted the Jews, and instead just rounded up six million random people and killed them? Would there be as many museums, photos and speakers?

no, most likely not. The holocaust is something that actually did more good for jews than bad. They got Israel out of it and sympathy from basically everyone, except those who see past the smoke and mirrors, for years to come.

Where's the Gypsie state?


The Roma don't want a state...do they? It would be odd if a group that espouses a nomadic culture would want their own country, to say the least.

Well, I'm sure it's already been said...but Hitler rounded up eleven million people, six million of whom were Jews.

I remember we had holocaust stuff pushed down our throats ever since we were little. I have nothing against it, but Stalin killed so many more people, and I never really knew about until High School.same here.

The holocaust is something that actually did more good for jews than bad.

You are a lunatic. And a racist one.

no, most likely not. The holocaust is something that actually did more good for jews than bad. They got Israel out of it and sympathy from basically everyone, except those who see past the smoke and mirrors, for years to come.

http://www.mp3nut.com/dl/86643

I say Sieg, you say...!

The Roma don't want a state...do they?why wouldnt they want a country they can call their own?

You are a lunatic. And a racist one.

why? Its true and you know it. before the holocuast jews were everybodies scapegoat and such. Now, if anyone even says something about jews, they are seen as evil in the flesh. Seems to me the jews made out alright.

why wouldnt they want a country they can call their own?

Because they don't.

Generally the concept of the Nation-State is tied to a specific plot of land. The Roma refuse to be tied to a specific plot of land, thus they have no desire for their own country.

why wouldnt they want a country they can call their own?

Because their culture does not espouse being tied to a single region or plot of land? I mean, some cultures just don't embrace the concept of the modern nation state.

To the OP:

I think there are two reasons why the Holocaust gets a lot more play than other atrocities in other nations.

1) The systematic, almost machine-like precision of human slaughter, which was different than the usual pogroms found throughout the world. The fact that the primary reason for this ruthlessness was someone's ethnicity, only made it seem worse.

2) The atrocity was performed by the West's enemies, and not their Allies. This makes for bigger press in the west, when our soldiers return home to nations where pogroms aren't taking place and describe what they saw in the heartland of the enemy. The millions who died in the USSR and China get less press because we weren't at war with them, and didn't hold lengthy trials to deal with them.

no, most likely not. The holocaust is something that actually did more good for jews than bad. They got Israel out of it and sympathy from basically everyone, except those who see past the smoke and mirrors, for years to come.

Sure. Smoke and Mirrors. Gotcha.

I think he's got a point, the virulent hatred that fed the Holocaust was so shocking and so appalling that it was burned into our minds forever. The Holocaust is not remembered because its victims were Jewish, the Holocaust is remembered because of how utterly inhuman it was. The main reason I come to this conclusion is the fact that most people have no knowledge of Stalin's purges or Mao's great leap forward, yet these both killed more people than the Nazis did.

QFT.

why? Its true and you know it. before the holocuast jews were everybodies scapegoat and such. Now, if anyone even says something about jews, they are seen as evil in the flesh. Seems to me the jews made out alright.

http://www.calvin.edu/academic/cas/gpa/ww2era.htm

Severe Godwin on my part. Screw it.

Specifically, http://www.calvin.edu/academic/cas/gpa/ww2era.htm#Antisem .

Doch weiter, http://www.calvin.edu/academic/cas/gpa/zionism.htm .

Sure. Smoke and Mirrors. Gotcha.

Its true. If anything even slightly anti-semitic happens anywhere the cable news will have some rabbi on screaming about how lucky we are to have Israel so another holocuast doesn't happen. That gets everybody on there side and the have the green light to murder some more Palestinians and destory houses.

Its true. If anything even slightly anti-semitic happens anywhere the cable news will have some rabbi on screaming about how lucky we are to have Israel so another holocuast doesn't happen. That gets everybody on there side and the have the green light to murder some more Palestinians and destory houses.

Oh, I see. It's true. It's all about the screaming rabbis. Now we know. Gotcha.

While a deeply commited Jew I do believe that the holocaust is overpublicized as compared to other genocides of the 20th/21st century.
Now genocides and what I learned about them in school/how I learned about them:

Armenian genocide- Nothing, the only reason I know about it is the Armenian quarter of Jerusalem.
Holocaust- Considering I went to a Jewish day school so I learned about it every year for at least 2 weeks, I've read about 4 fiction books + I've been to many museums and I even learned about the US response in US history class recently.
Cambodia- 1 book in 8th grade but the book was mostly about a Cambodian to the US (and not very good apparently it's now out of my old school's cirriculum).
Burundi- I just learned about this one a couple of weeks ago from a school assembly for 5 minutes. Apparently it's the reverse of the Rwandan genocide.
Rwanda- Nothing in school. Learned about this one through Hotel Rwanda the movie.
Bosnia- Only know this one through debate plus it's fairly recent.
Darfur- Currently happening although main stream school doesn't really deal with it, only assemblies every now and again do.
Stalin/Mao massacres- Only in the elective class that deals with Russian/Chinese history.
Peru- I just learned about it on this thread.
Anything else?- Probably but I don't know it and that's because we don't learn about it.

Add on:
We looked this up in class once and apparently the 1930s was when the Jewish populations was the highest percentage wise out of the entire world population.

why? Its true and you know it. before the holocuast jews were everybodies scapegoat and such. Now, if anyone even says something about jews, they are seen as evil in the flesh. Seems to me the jews made out alright.

Yeah, once you get past the fact that the Nazis killed an estimated SIX MILLION JEWS and AT LEAST FIVE MILLION OTHERS.

So... in terms of the worldwide Jewish population, which was estimated to be about 15.3 million.... yeah, I'd say the sacrifice of approximately 40% of the world's Jewish population might have been worth a slightly better standing in the West.

After all, how much is someone's life worth these days? :rolleyes:

The Roma don't want a state...do they? It would be odd if a group that espouses a nomadic culture would want their own country, to say the least.
I've no idea what they want. The don't have large organizations dedicated exclusively to their ethnicity. It was hypothetical. The fact is, they're still treated like shit.
By the way, not all the Roma are nomadic.
The holocaust is something that actually did more good for jews than bad.
It's plain that I'm no Israel apologist, and I also don't accept the holocaust as an excuse for the continued existence of Israel or buy into the "without Isreal there would be another holocaust" hype, but that is a disgusting and inhumane thing to say.

The holocaust isn't infamous simply because people died, but because it represents the end of a 500-year chapter in the history of European Jews. Mass murder in itself means little.. people being cruel to each other is nothing new. We study the Jews specifically because there was a long process of dehumanization of them as a group, in subtle ways and in extreme ways, over centuries.

I've been on NSG long enough to know that there are only three things people want to achieve when they post something like this:

a) Troll
b) Deny Israel's right to exist as a state
c) Present the Holocaust as overhyped thanks to a Jewish/Hollywood conspiracy

Sometimes they want to do all three at once.

Or it might be an honest question. Lets give him the benefit of the doubt until he actually PROVES himself a Nazi.

no, most likely not. The holocaust is something that actually did more good for jews than bad. They got Israel out of it and sympathy from basically everyone, except those who see past the smoke and mirrors, for years to come.

See, we should wait till he proves his antisemitism like Sovi just did.

Yeah, once you get past the fact that the Nazis killed an estimated SIX MILLION JEWS and AT LEAST FIVE MILLION OTHERS.

So... in terms of the worldwide Jewish population, which was estimated to be about 15.3 million.... yeah, I'd say the sacrifice of approximately 40% of the world's Jewish population might have been worth a slightly better standing in the West.

After all, how much is someone's life worth these days? :rolleyes:
Why? Why do they get special treatment just because they got themselves killed? Palestinians have been killed in the thousands by the jews and yet Muslims are in no better standing than before. So why the hell are the jews so special?

Palestinians have been killed in the thousands by the jews

Killed by Israelis, not Jews.

Killed by Israelis, not Jews.

same thing really

same thing really

Sort of like how Muslims slaughtered all those people in Armenia during the 1920's?

The holocaust is something that actually did more good for jews than bad. They got Israel out of it and sympathy from basically everyone, except those who see past the smoke and mirrors, for years to come.

WOW.

It's not often my mouth actually drops, but this post did it.

no, most likely not. The holocaust is something that actually did more good for jews than bad. They got Israel out of it and sympathy from basically everyone, except those who see past the smoke and mirrors, for years to come.

You truly are a moron.

Having 40% of our people killed really did us a lot of good.:rolleyes:

Why don't you go to Saudi Arabia where this forum is banned and leave us alone. No one will miss an ass like yourself.

You aren't a true Muslim. You are just a fraud and ass who converted because he hates the Jews and thought Islam would be a way to express those views. If you read the Koran you would see that it teaches you to respect Jews. You clearly are illiterate as you can't read your own religious text.

You are just a fraud and ass who converted because he hates the Jews and thought Islam would be a way to express those views.

And gays. He also converted to hate gays too.

Probably not.

Ok, here's another one:

Would the Holocaust have been as infamous in a Red Alert-style situation where the Soviets did it instead?

I don't think that the ethnicity/group of people has anything to do with how much the tragedy is remembered.

If they mostly targeted, say, the Chinese, the aftermath would most likely be the same.

It doesn't really matter that mostly Jews were killed or injured; instead, what matters is the overall absolute inhumanity displayed at that time.

Hitler needed a scapegoat, so he couldn't just kill random people (though he actually did). He focused on Jews, Gypsies, homosexuals and other "inferior" types, like the insane and retarded. It's good to know that this grand tradition continues, though in more subtle disguises. (for this incapable of telling the difference, that was sarcasm).

Well, it is somewhat strange that the holocaust is even more remembered that the other 50 million people who died in that war, or the other victims of genocide.

Sort of like how Muslims slaughtered all those people in Armenia during the 1920's?That was a Turkish thing, not a Muslim thing. And after all, Israel is the Jewish state, as envisioned by Herzl.

I think the holocaust would have still been infamous had it been focussed on any one particular group, but less so if it a multitude of groups (if it had literally been random people off the street then possibly more). But I would say that lots of people over focus on the holocaust. From anecdotal experience most people I know imagine(d) that the Jews were the only groups the Nazis really persecuted and are shocked to find out the levels of killing they meted out to other groups.

I suppose people find it easier to remember Nazis as hating and killing one specific group rather than several groups.

I suppose people find it easier to remember Nazis as hating and killing one specific group rather than several groups.Well, some folks even seem to forget the war over the holocaust.

Well, some folks even seem to forget the war over the holocaust.

I've never met any such people myself...

Before I start, just a short disclaimer; this post is not meant to bash Jews, deny the holocaust, or call the Jewish community a bunch of whiners, just to post the below question. I'm sorry if I come across as an anti-Semitic.

Would the Holocaust have been as infamous if Hitler had not specifically targeted the Jews, and instead just rounded up six million random people and killed them? Would there be as many museums, photos and speakers?

Impossible to know. How different is that from Russia, with 20+ million 'political dissenters' (largely indiscriminate) executed, deported to Gulags, etc.? Or the Congo? The tally is past 4 million now, and how much of that makes the news? Indiscriminate killing doesn't make headlines. Ethnic cleansing, xenophobia, that's the stuff that we abhor.

Well, some folks even seem to forget the war over the holocaust.

Are you suggesting World War II was fought because of (over) the Holocaust?

Before I start, just a short disclaimer; this post is not meant to bash Jews, deny the holocaust, or call the Jewish community a bunch of whiners, just to post the below question. I'm sorry if I come across as an anti-Semitic.

Would the Holocaust have been as infamous if Hitler had not specifically targeted the Jews, and instead just rounded up six million random people and killed them? Would there be as many museums, photos and speakers?

Not quite as much. The idea that he wanted to wipe out an entire ethnic group is what really offends us about the holocaust. If he hadn't targeted a particular ethnicity for extermination the holocaust would be no more talked about than Stalin's or Mao's mass murders.

Well, some folks even seem to forget the war over the holocaust.

I've never met any such people myself...
Same here...

The reason it is such a big deal is not because it was done against Jews or even that it was genocide. It was because, as was pointed out before, it was white people killing off 40% of a population of mostly white people, because of their particular ideology and origin. For the 20th century it was a little hard for us to stomach, particularly, at a time when Europe was emerging as a place respectful of human rights.

It was systematic, heartless and successful. In Europe, by a country we consider to be a part of the west against citizens of the west. That's why it was remembered.

What's terrifying about the holocaust is the precision, the mechanistic efficiency of the program. It was oriented around a very specific, very disturbing goal. When we look at the USSR or the PRC, and their mass murders of dissidents, well...that just seems to be random. A force of nature almost.

The holocaust is something that actually did more good for jews than bad.

Would you say the same about your religion if some-one killed 40% of all muslims.

Well, some folks even seem to forget the war over the holocaust.
World War II wasn't about the holocaust. I thought that they didn't actually have much of an idea that it was going on until after they'd started taking Germany over.

no, most likely not. The holocaust is something that actually did more good for jews than bad. They got Israel out of it and sympathy from basically everyone, except those who see past the smoke and mirrors, for years to come.
This has to seal the deal. Soviestan's credibility has now dropped below that which can be ranked by real numbers.

Would you say the same about your religion if someone killed 40% of muslims?

Edited to make it a better comparison

Before I start, just a short disclaimer; this post is not meant to bash Jews, deny the holocaust, or call the Jewish community a bunch of whiners, just to post the below question. I'm sorry if I come across as an anti-Semitic.

Would the Holocaust have been as infamous if Hitler had not specifically targeted the Jews, and instead just rounded up six million random people and killed them? Would there be as many museums, photos and speakers?

Yes with the amount of people and the sysematicness of it would have made it infamous

Are you suggesting World War II was fought because of (over) the Holocaust?Um, no. I meant that folks would rather remember the holocaust and its numbers, circumstances, etc, than the war and its numbers, circumstances, etc.
OK, the war is a somewhat more complex thing to comprehend and learn about.

The "Final Solution" was designed to exterminate every single Jewish man, woman and child. The only Jews who would have conceivably survived had Hitler been victorious were those who somehow escaped discovery by the Nazis.
Jewish birth (actually mere evidence of "Jewish blood") was sufficient to warrant the punishment of death. This feature distinguished Jews from Poles and Russians who were killed because there were too many of them, and from "Aryans" who were not singled out unless they chose to single themselves out. With the possible exception of Gypsies, Jews were the only people killed for the "crime" of existing.
The extermination of the Jews had no political or economic justification. It was not a means to any end; it was an end in itself. The killing of Jews was not considered just a part of the war effort, but equal to it; thus, resources that could have been used in the war were diverted instead to the program of extermination.
The people who carried out the "Final Solution" were primarily average citizens. They were "ordinary job holders with an extraordinary job." They were not perverts or sadists. "The tone-setters," he says, "were ordinary idealists, except that their ideals were torture and murder." Someone else once wrote that Germany was the model of civilized society. What was perverse, then, was that the Germans could work all day in the concentration camps and then go home and read Schiller and Goethe while listening to Beethoven.
Other examples of mass murder exist in human history, such as the atrocities committed by Pol Pot in Cambodia and the Turkish annihilation of the Armenians. But none of those other catastrophes, Fackenheim argues, contain more than one of the characteristics described above.


So, to answer your question, no, the Holocaust wouldn't have been as infamous if 6 million random people were killed.

Jews do not need to compete in a morbid contest as to who has suffered the most in history. It is important, however, to explain why the Holocaust is a unique part of human history.

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Holocaust/What_makes_the_Holocaust_unique.html

Um, no. I meant that folks would rather remember the holocaust and its numbers, circumstances, etc, than the war and its numbers, circumstances, etc.
OK, the war is a somewhat more complex thing to comprehend and learn about.

Kind of like how the civil war was boiled down to slavery ... yes that was a part but the reasoning was much more complex then that

Um, no. I meant that folks would rather remember the holocaust and its numbers, circumstances, etc, than the war and its numbers, circumstances, etc.
OK, the war is a somewhat more complex thing to comprehend and learn about.

Ah yes, that makes sense. I made an error in interpreting your statement. Isn't the English language fun?

The people who carried out the "Final Solution" were primarily average citizens. They were "ordinary job holders with an extraordinary job." They were not perverts or sadists. "The tone-setters," he says, "were ordinary idealists, except that their ideals were torture and murder." Someone else once wrote that Germany was the model of civilized society. What was perverse, then, was that the Germans could work all day in the concentration camps and then go home and read Schiller and Goethe while listening to Beethoven.wtf
so for you all germans were murderers? are you related to this Goldhagen dude?

wtf
so for you all germans were murderers? are you related to this Goldhagen dude?

No, all Germans are certainly not murderers, but ordinary people are capable of extraordinary cruelty.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milgram_experiment

Also, when Adolf Eichmann, a prominent Nazi leader, was tried for his crimes in Israel, they found he had no traces of anti-Semitism, or hatred of any kind.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adolf_Eichmann

You truly are a moron.

Having 40% of our people killed really did us a lot of good.:rolleyes:

Why don't you go to Saudi Arabia where this forum is banned and leave us alone. No one will miss an ass like yourself.

You aren't a true Muslim. You are just a fraud and ass who converted because he hates the Jews and thought Islam would be a way to express those views. If you read the Koran you would see that it teaches you to respect Jews. You clearly are illiterate as you can't read your own religious text.

I do respect jews. That is those who practice judaism and believe in the one true God. Many of those true jews, like the orthodox believe Zionism and the state of Israel goes against God. I respect them. What I have no respect for and a great dislike of are the zionist jews and secular jews. The jews who are non-religious and are jews in name only.

same thing really

Not so.
Jews not Zionists (http://www.jewsnotzionist.org/)

[QUOTEThe people who carried out the "Final Solution" were primarily average citizens. They were "ordinary job holders with an extraordinary job." They were not perverts or sadists. "The tone-setters," he says, "were ordinary idealists, except that their ideals were torture and murder." Someone else once wrote that Germany was the model of civilized society. What was perverse, then, was that the Germans could work all day in the concentration camps and then go home and read Schiller and Goethe while listening to Beethoven.[/QUOTE]

Not so. Only half of Germany's population voted Hitler when the nazis took power. The nazis only had half the vote, but the socialists, and communists refused to from a coalition against the nazis, if they had so, history might have taken a very road. But immediately all the social democrats, communists, national Bolsheviks, and liberals were imprisoned, and many murdered in their homes. By the time the holocaust had started the only "ordinary people" left, would have been nazis, or not interested in politics.

That's because Stalin covered it up better. Also, Stalin made it a point to target potential threats to him. Hitler used his victims as scapegoats. Most people would find both to be "evil," but would also agree that Hitler was much worse.

Most of the russian/chinese deaths were from either negligence or from trying to attempt their goals whilst ignoring evidence that there should be a different tactic used, a.k.a stupitity

The Roma don't want a state...do they? It would be odd if a group that espouses a nomadic culture would want their own country, to say the least.

I thought that they had an autonomous region. Or was it another minority group?

The thing about the Holocaust was that it was targeted killing, against groups of people specifically because of their ethnicity, sexuality, or religious beliefs. There was also a very strong dehumanization associated with the Nazi killing machine that made it so disturbing; it was that sheer heartlessness that made it as horrible as it was.

That about sums it up as to why the holocaust is not just another genocide or class/politic purge.

However the problem will be when a greater act is performed and whether or not it is placed higher up on historical importance.

Killed by Israelis, not Jews.

Exactamundo. There is a fair amount of difference between being part of the state of Israel, being a Semitic person and being a person of Judaism. It seems that the Israel lobby is the one most guilty of making every jew all across the world immediatly an Israeli so an attack on a states policy then automatically becomes an attack on a religious or ethnic group.

If anything even slightly anti-semitic happens anywhere the cable news will have some rabbi on screaming about how lucky we are to have Israel so another holocuast doesn't happen.

If it were something like fox then any event that happens some one from the opposing group would be brought on to rave about it.

Ok, here's another one:

Would the Holocaust have been as infamous in a Red Alert-style situation where the Soviets did it instead?

If a repear were done after WW2 I would agree with you (due to red scare propaganda). If it were pre-WW2 then there would be a chance but most likely not, due to Russia keeping a tighter lid on it (as they would not have been invaded and the northern parts of siberia are great for stopping potential fleeing groups interned there) and Russia would still have been a part of the treaties designed to stop Germany from getting any international or military clout again.

That was a Turkish thing, not a Muslim thing. And after all, Israel is the Jewish state, as envisioned by Herzl.

Btw, I think that was the point. Anyway, wasn't that during the Ottoman Empire years? So was it ruled by a religious monarchy?

I do respect jews. That is those who practice judaism and believe in the one true God. Many of those true jews, like the orthodox believe Zionism and the state of Israel goes against God. I respect them. What I have no respect for and a great dislike of are the zionist jews and secular jews. The jews who are non-religious and are jews in name only.

Well you could be a secular religious Jew (not in favour of a theocracy).

It is the atheist or secular israeli (semite or jew) lot I respect the most, as they usually are more pragmatic and intelligent in how they deal with the world and don't hole themselves in some settlement pelting stuff at the Palestinians.

So... in terms of the worldwide Jewish population, which was estimated to be about 15.3 million.... yeah, I'd say the sacrifice of approximately 40% of the world's Jewish population might have been worth a slightly better standing in the West.

After all, how much is someone's life worth these days? :rolleyes:

It was useful for the original people who wanted to set up Israel. More so it was the elites that profited as almost all of the jewish people (in terms of ratio) captured by the germans were the middle class and poor, as they had little means to escape.

Just like all of the unethical scientific information gathered by Germany that was carved up by the Russians, British and U.S.A was profiting off people's misery and torture.

I think he's got a point, the virulent hatred that fed the Holocaust was so shocking and so appalling that it was burned into our minds forever. The Holocaust is not remembered because its victims were Jewish, the Holocaust is remembered because of how utterly inhuman it was. The main reason I come to this conclusion is the fact that most people have no knowledge of Stalin's purges or Mao's great leap forward, yet these both killed more people than the Nazis did.

not much more to be said after this.

You mean if he had killed, say, disabled people, mentally ill people, gypsies (Roma & Sinti), homosexuals, freemasons, Jehovah's Witnesses, Polish citizens, Soviet POWs, communists and other political prisoners?

Yes.QFT. Jews may have been the main group targeted, but there were many others.

QFT. Jews may have been the main group targeted, but there were many others.But why are they not remembered or not represented equally well?

Would the Holocaust have been as infamous if Hitler had not specifically targeted the Jews, and instead just rounded up six million random people and killed them? Would there be as many museums, photos and speakers?

Yes.

But why are they not remembered or not represented equally well?

Well, they were in my education. It's just that Jews were in the majority, Jews were hit the worst.

Well, they were in my education. It's just that Jews were in the majority, Jews were hit the worst.Individually?

Individually?

Do you mean to say that if you were a Jew and suffered in the holocaust, you would be more respected or whatever then if you were a homosexual (for example) in the holocaust?

Before I start, just a short disclaimer; this post is not meant to bash Jews, deny the holocaust, or call the Jewish community a bunch of whiners, just to post the below question. I'm sorry if I come across as an anti-Semitic.

Would the Holocaust have been as infamous if Hitler had not specifically targeted the Jews, and instead just rounded up six million random people and killed them? Would there be as many museums, photos and speakers?

The reason why we remember what happened to the Jews the most is because they were the most heavily targeted. 5 million other "undesirables" were murdered by the Nazi regime, but we don't hear about that as much. The targeting of a specific genetic group (people of semitic ancestry) or religion appears more heinous because it is much more calculating.

That said, what bothers me most about the Holocaust is not the fact 11 million people where systematically murdered. Though a tragedy, it doesn't surprise that a small group of people would work hard to do that. What bothers me the most is the fact that so many people went along with it. So few people lifted a finger to stop it, either out of fear or naive loyalty to the German fatherland. Eichmann had no particular hatred of the Jewish people. He did what he did because he was told to. So many people blindly went along with it.

We hail those few who did resist as heroes, but when it comes down to it, is it so much to ask people to have humanity? Why during this period of time did humanity become such a preciously rare commodity in this time? Why is it "above and beyond the call of duty" to not stand by idly while some one murders your fellow human beings en masse?

But why are they not remembered or not represented equally well?
The Jews are remembered more than any other group because 40% of the global and 67% of the European Jewish populations were killed.

The Jews are remembered more than any other group because 40% of the global and 67% of the European Jewish populations were killed.

look at the bright side. 60% didn't die. Thats something.

I do respect jews. That is those who practice judaism and believe in the one true God. Many of those true jews, like the orthodox believe Zionism and the state of Israel goes against God. I respect them. What I have no respect for and a great dislike of are the zionist jews and secular jews. The jews who are non-religious and are jews in name only.

So then the only true and real Jews for you are orthodox jews who throw stones at cars when other jews drive on Shabbat and hate Israel because it has the gall to be a modern state.

Oh wonderful that is sooooooooo enlightened.

Oh yeh how is it your job to say who is a true Jew and who isn't. You're a fucking Muslim and not a real Muslim at that because you didn't go to a religious school in a Mosque (don't care if it's true that's not the argument don't create a strawman).

It's just ridicoulous to say who and what is real and what isn't. Certainly there are many Jews that I hate for their lack of religiousness but I don't care that they don't care.

Beyond that zionism is not a racist philosophy. (Fuck the UN it's wrong). All it says is that the Jews should have a homeland, ironically enough because of persecution and events like the holocaust. We wanted our homeland in the territory that today consists of modern Israel so we made gains to try to accomplish that goal (buy territory, immigrate there, etc.). We were successful and have built a very good democratic state in one of the most unstable regions of the world (although we maybe the cause for instability). Yes that paints a rosy picture of Israel but on the whole Israel has been remarkably successful as a state.

I am a secular in your mind probably. You know why? because I think that some laws that were made 5000 to 6000 years ago have no bearing on my life.

The prohibition to make a fire has no effect when it comes to light switches because while a fire is hard to start a light switch takes a flick of a wrist. That's not work.

While there are good doctrinal reasons to say no riding a car I don't follow it because I believe that in modern life walking is too cumbersome, it's a two hour walk to get from my shul to my house, I don't want to deal with that every Saturday, there is no nearer shul either (plus the service there is better and there a lot of other reasons to go there).

Point being that to follow every single commandment in the 5000 years of development of Jewish law is almost impossible and not practical. So my justified reasons for not following every law are fine and should be accepted. Espiecially by bigoted Muslims.

why wouldnt they want a country they can call their own?

Mongolia; the people are still largely nomadic, I believe.

About the OP: yes. Five million others than the Jews also died; each life lost contributes much - far, far too much to handle - towards the grief and regret we feel. Some sort of memorial would have been erected.

Soviestan: if you meant that post near the beginning of the thread then I pity you.

Ilaer

look at the bright side. 60% didn't die. Thats something.

I will no longer argue with you. You are among the most bigoted, racist, diluded, morons on the planet.

I will no longer argue with you. You are among the most bigoted, racist, diluded, morons on the planet.

Argue with me then.

Down with israel and all that other stuff.... *scuffles away from poor attempt to argue*

Hard to know, mainly because that is not realistical.

Why would he do that?

But speaking in a more broad way, I dont think the holocaust would be AS big. It would still be big, but not as much. First, because probabily Israel wouldnt be created. Second, not as many jews would flee to the US and other countries. Third, because you would have a shitload more people in Europe.

well he didn't just kill Jews, he killed a host of other groups and peoples so maybe they would fill the void instead

I will no longer argue with you. You are among the most bigoted, racist, diluded, morons on the planet.

Language, language ^^

Though, on my opinion, the question is whether it would have been as infamous, so my answer? No, it wouldn't have been, as stated earlier that it was largely targeted at a specific group. While this is semi-parallel to the events in China during Japanese occupation, the nazis were much more precise.

Beyond that zionism is not a racist philosophy. (Fuck the UN it's wrong).

I believe that a later UN resolution withdrew the claim that Zionism is a form of racism.

look at the bright side. 60% didn't die. Thats something.

It's hard to tell if this is a contrived attempt at humour or whether you really are this crass.

We hail those few who did resist as heroes, but when it comes down to it, is it so much to ask people to have humanity? Why during this period of time did humanity become such a preciously rare commodity in this time?

The longest lasting tragedy of the Holocaust is that it deludes so many people into thinking that it was an aberration, as if it could not happen again (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darfur_conflict#Genocide_claims) and again (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rwandan_genocide) and again (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bosnian_Genocide).

Why did so many go along with it? Well, ask why so many people -- including you and I -- permit genocide exist to this very day.

No, all Germans are certainly not murderers, but ordinary people are capable of extraordinary cruelty.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milgram_experiment

Also, when Adolf Eichmann, a prominent Nazi leader, was tried for his crimes in Israel, they found he had no traces of anti-Semitism, or hatred of any kind.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adolf_Eichmann

Ah, the Banality of Evil. Isn't it lovely what ordinary people are capable of being made to do?

The longest lasting tragedy of the Holocaust is that it deludes so many people into thinking that it was an aberration, as if it could not happen again (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darfur_conflict#Genocide_claims) and again (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rwandan_genocide) and again (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bosnian_Genocide).

Why did so many go along with it? Well, ask why so many people -- including you and I -- permit genocide exist to this very day.

Don't get me wrong-- I try to do what I can to fight it. But, unfortunately, people like you and I are of limited means. I've signed the petitions, and I've brought up the issues in front of everybody I know. Some of them have tried to help. But its so hard to get people to care about it, and if you can get them to care, its hard to find anybody who can do anything about it. That's the ultimate tragedy. The school here does plenty of study of the holocaust, but never raises a peep about the horrible scions of hate that we still see to this day.

Don't get me wrong-- I try to do what I can to fight it. But, unfortunately, people like you and I are of limited means. I've signed the petitions, and I've brought up the issues in front of everybody I know. Some of them have tried to help. But its so hard to get people to care about it, and if you can get them to care, its hard to find anybody who can do anything about it. That's the ultimate tragedy. The school here does plenty of study of the holocaust, but never raises a peep about the horrible scions of hate that we still see to this day.

Compulsory politico/sociological classes would work wonders here.

look at the bright side. 60% didn't die. Thats something.
It's no longer possible for us to sit on the sidelines under the assumption that you're simply expressing your opinion. Disrespect on this magnitude can only be an act of deliberate trolling.

As such, Official Warning, trolling. Continued trolling will result in bans or deletions.

~ Frisbeeteria ~
NationStates Game Moderator
The One-Stop Rules Shop



I will no longer argue with you. You are among the most bigoted, racist, diluded, morons on the planet.

Lay off the personal attacks, Milchama.

Whats TNNN?

look at the bright side. 60% didn't die. Thats something.

um... a percent is out of 100, not 127.

60% didn't die.I call bull-shit.

Prove it.
Prove that 60% did not die..
You should stop believing everything Hollywood tells you.

six million people isn't a drop in the bucket. i'm sure someone woulda' set up some sort of museum.

In that case I'd like to hear more about the museum to the millions of people that Stalin killed.

Whats TNNN?Click the pic.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v488/frisbeeteria/drone/Hoverjet_tiny.jpg
TNNN (http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=359039) Hoverdrone Report

This guy gets it.
Where's the Gypsie state?
Like the million posters before me the Gypises don't HAVE states.


And Soviestan, you aren't a muslim, your just a troll disguised as one.

look at the bright side. 60% didn't die. Thats something.
You are a racist moron

Please leave this forum. No one gives your "arguments" any credence.

amazing.. how many times you flame him..
yet, he is the one Fribisteria warns.
Because he annoys the heck out of everyone and therefore we're a little more symphatic to those who get ticked at him? After all, IDF is only posting what half of us want to post.

Do you mean to say that if you were a Jew and suffered in the holocaust, you would be more respected or whatever then if you were a homosexual (for example) in the holocaust?It seems that is what you said. I would see wrongdoers as a group, but I would never view victims of anything as groups, always as individuals. A victim is not a statistic, and a dead Roma, homosexual, socialist, etc. has suffered just as much and died just as unwillingly as a Jew.

Please leave this forum.

Alright.

Cool, so it is now time for atheists to turn up *wonders why no one is coming*.

The link seems dead Frisbeeteria.

My main beef with the Israelis are the settler groups.

Cool, so it is now time for atheists to turn up *wonders why no one is coming*.

The link seems dead Frisbeeteria.

My main beef with the Israelis are the settler groups.What does this have to do with the holocaust?

Ah, the Banality of Evil. Isn't it lovely what ordinary people are capable of being made to do?

This view is being disputed. It seems that Eichmans lack of anti-semitism is an urban legend due to recent studies, which isn't so odd considering that anti-semitism was so very common in europe those days.

Soviestan may have been trolling, but I think he had a point.

The holocaust was beneficial to Israel.
In the same way, the 9/11 tradgedy benefitted the United States.

In each case, an atrocity committed against a people allowed the victims to perpetrate atrocities against another people. There were people already living in the area that is now Israel.

National guilt has been employed in each case to provide justification for, the creation of Israel, and the invasion of the Middle East by the US.

A better phrasing than 'beneficial' might be that the tradgedies were useful.

Soviestan may have been trolling, but I think he had a point.

The holocaust was beneficial to Israel.
In the same way, the 9/11 tradgedy benefitted the United States.

In each case, an atrocity committed against a people allowed the victims to perpetrate atrocities against another people. There were people already living in the area that is now Israel.

National guilt has been employed in each case to provide justification for, the creation of Israel, and the invasion of the Middle East by the US.

A better phrasing than 'beneficial' might be that the tradgedies were useful.

When I get hit by a car, get permantly disabled and get a 1 million dollar in compensation I'd be carefull with saying that my disability was usefull.

Same goes for the Jew who would rather see their families and friends alive. For that same matter the state of Isreal wouldn't need to exist if Europe wasn't so prevalent in its anti-semitism. Many jews loved their nations but felt disgusted by same enlightend European continent that hated them.

When I get hit by a car, get permantly disabled and get a 1 million dollar in compensation I'd be carefull with saying that my disability was usefull.

Same goes for the Jew who would rather see their families and friends alive. For that same matter the state of Isreal wouldn't need to exist if Europe wasn't so prevalent in its anti-semitism. Many jews loved their nations but felt disgusted by same enlightend European continent that hated them.

Indeed. I suffer from arthritis and thus get some aid in my life from the government, I would not say that my arthritis is useful, nor would I say that the help is desired.
Unfortunately, my parents suffer much less from feelings of guilt than I do.

Ilaer

Rokugan-sho and Ilaer, I totally agree. I was simply trying to point out that tradgedies can sometimes serve a purpose - at least to some people.

In the case of Israel, the Holocaust may have benefitted a subset of Jews who wanted to establish a Jewish state and retake Jerusalem. Some members of that subset may have wanted this so much that they could consider the holocaust 'worth it.' (Just to clarify, I am not suggesting any kind of Jewish conspiracy. The Holocaust did happen and was perpetrated by Nazi Germany - by normal people led by mob mentality generated by the economic distress from the reparations of WWI.)

I suspect that G.W. Bush was thanking his lucky stars for the 9/11 tradgedy. That man was looking for war.


Now... on to the point. It is possible, perhaps even likely, that the reason the Holocaust has greater notoriety than any other massacre is that certain people took advantage of the opportunity afforded them by national guilt for the Holocaust, and channeled the publicization of it to create the nation of Israel, and maintained public awareness of the Holocaust to prolong sensations of national guilt and continue worldwide support for the nationhood of Israel.

Rokugan-sho and Ilaer, I totally agree. I was simply trying to point out that tradgedies can sometimes serve a purpose - at least to some people.

In the case of Israel, the Holocaust may have benefitted a subset of Jews who wanted to establish a Jewish state and retake Jerusalem. Some members of that subset may have wanted this so much that they could consider the holocaust 'worth it.' (Just to clarify, I am not suggesting any kind of Jewish conspiracy. The Holocaust did happen and was perpetrated by Nazi Germany - by normal people led by mob mentality generated by the economic distress from the reparations of WWI.)

I suspect that G.W. Bush was thanking his lucky stars for the 9/11 tradgedy. That man was looking for war.


Now... on to the point. It is possible, perhaps even likely, that the reason the Holocaust has greater notoriety than any other massacre is that certain people took advantage of the opportunity afforded them by national guilt for the Holocaust, and channeled the publicization of it to create the nation of Israel, and maintained public awareness of the Holocaust to prolong sensations of national guilt and continue worldwide support for the nationhood of Israel.Indeed. However, the pc-faction would never admit that.

Now... on to the point. It is possible, perhaps even likely, that the reason the Holocaust has greater notoriety than any other massacre is that certain people took advantage of the opportunity afforded them by national guilt for the Holocaust, and channeled the publicization of it to create the nation of Israel, and maintained public awareness of the Holocaust to prolong sensations of national guilt and continue worldwide support for the nationhood of Israel.

I can agree to this, seeing that the Holocaust is not supposed to be set exclusive for the Jewish/Israelites.

Supposed if there's a group of Witnesses that would want a nation of their own to avoid prosecution?

I can agree to this, seeing that the Holocaust is not supposed to be set exclusive for the Jewish/Israelites.Oh, in the strict sense the term only refers to Jewish victims.
And really, Israelites have ceased to exist a very long time ago. And at the time of the holocaust there were yet no Israelis.

For me, it has a lot to do with the fact that there are Jewish communities in just about every country in the world. So it hit people a lot harder than two ethnic groups that most people have never heard of wiping each other out, or events going on in far off countries that were quite closed off to the world. It brought home to people that it could have been their colleague, their neighbour, their friend who was deported to the camps.

I think however, the greatest reason for the infamy of the Holocaust was that it was the first time that murder was industrialised. Places were built with the express purpose of murdering a race of people as expediently as possible. Experiments were done to find out the most efficient way of killing people.

To say that it benefitted the Jews, because they got Israel is disgusting to me. One of the reasons that Israel was created was because none of the countries wanted to take them. I'm not saying that it is justification for the displacement of hundreds of thousands of people, but to suggest that the horrors of Nazism had any benefit to any of the victims is deplorable.

To say that it benefitted the Jews, because they got Israel is disgusting to me. One of the reasons that Israel was created was because none of the countries wanted to take them. I'm not saying that it is justification for the displacement of hundreds of thousands of people, but to suggest that the horrors of Nazism had any benefit to any of the victims is deplorable.But without that the UN would maybe never have agreed to divide Palestine and punish Arabs for nothing. And btw the influx of Jews into Palestine started way before the holocaust, the Jewish motivation to go to Palestine was rather what Herzl had written.

And really, Israelites have ceased to exist a very long time ago. And at the time of the holocaust there were yet no Israelis.

Just trying to join in the PC bandwagon.

Now... on to the point. It is possible, perhaps even likely, that the reason the Holocaust has greater notoriety than any other massacre is that certain people took advantage of the opportunity afforded them by national guilt for the Holocaust, and channeled the publicization of it to create the nation of Israel, and maintained public awareness of the Holocaust to prolong sensations of national guilt and continue worldwide support for the nationhood of Israel.

There are several reasons why the Holocaust is more notorious than other historical massacres and genocides:

1. When considering genocides, they are usually viewed as things which happen a long way away, and are carried out by non-whites. The realisation that genocides could be carried out in Europe, and that whites were just as capable of savagery as non-whites was (and still is) a terrible shock for many Europeans and Americans.

2. Most killings carried out by oppressive regimes are caused by the victim's actions. For example, under Saddam Hussein dissidents were dealt with brutally but if you kept a low profile and did what you were told then you were usually safe. Similarly, Stalin's artificial famine in the Ukraine killed more than the Holocaust did, but they were being killed because of their actions. The Holocaust is even more horrifying that this because its victims were killed because of who they were, not for what they'd done. Even secular Jews and Jews who'd converted to Christianity were murdered.

3. ELEVEN MILLION PEOPLE WERE SYSTEMATICALLY MURDERED!!! Yes, there have been some worse acts of murder and genocide, but not many. There certainly haven't been any which have been carried out with the same kind of systematic brutality.

Oh, and Israel managed to sustain itself for the most part without needing much international support. The weapons used to fight the 1948 war were a one off gift from Stalin, and US millitary aid didn't begin until after Israel won the 1967 war. The idea of Israel being utterly dependent on foreign support is little more than a myth.

Just trying to join in the PC bandwagon.

How the hell does Political Correctness relate in any way to what you've been writing?

But without that the UN would maybe never have agreed to divide Palestine and punish Arabs for nothing. And btw the influx of Jews into Palestine started way before the holocaust, the Jewish motivation to go to Palestine was rather what Herzl had written.

The Holocaust was the main reason for the creation of Israel and the displacement and murder of the Palestinian people. It should never have been created in the first place. But to suggest that the Holocaust had a beneficial outcome because Israel was created is horrible. I'm quite sure that the Jews who survived the Holocaust would rather have their families back and no Israel, than to have their families destroyed and a new country that they pretty much had to go to because there was nowhere else to go. Noone would take them as refugees. They couldn't remain in Europe, which still had quite virulent anti-Semitism.

How the hell does Political Correctness relate in any way to what you've been writing?

We were talking about the Israelite - Jewish terminology.

The Holocaust was the main reason for the creation of Israel ... But to suggest that the Holocaust had a beneficial outcome because Israel was created is horrible. ...So the creation of Israel was no beneficial result of the Holocaust?

So the creation of Israel was no beneficial result of the Holocaust?

The Holocaust was not beneficial. To anyone that suffered through it. Had the Holocaust never occurred, Israel would never have been created. The Jews for the most part, probably wouldn't have given two shits whether it was created or not.

And I certainly don't think it was beneficial, since it resulted in the displacement, and systematic oppression of millions of people.

The Holocaust was not beneficial. To anyone that suffered through it. Had the Holocaust never occurred, Israel would never have been created. The Jews for the most part, probably wouldn't have given two shits whether it was created or not. However, the urge for a Jewish state in Palestine predates the Holocaust.

And I certainly don't think it was beneficial, since it resulted in the displacement, and systematic oppression of millions of people.Agreed.

But without that the UN would maybe never have agreed to divide Palestine and punish Arabs for nothing. And btw the influx of Jews into Palestine started way before the holocaust, the Jewish motivation to go to Palestine was rather what Herzl had written.

I doubt the Jews fleeing the Czars pogroms had access to Herzl's works.

The Holocaust was not beneficial. To anyone that suffered through it. Had the Holocaust never occurred, Israel would never have been created. The Jews for the most part, probably wouldn't have given two shits whether it was created or not.

And I certainly don't think it was beneficial, since it resulted in the displacement, and systematic oppression of millions of people.
Israel wouldn't have been created because the Jews wouldn't have cared. The Holocaust showed us what can happen in foreign lands. The Jews of Germany were loyal citizens who had assimilated into society. Look what happened to them. Herzl had written of the antisemitism he had witnessed during the Dreyfuss Affair. Most Jews thought he was overreacted and exaggerating the state of things in Europe. It turned out he was right. If you combine that with the fact that it would be quite hard for the survivors to live there seeing what the people of that continent did to them and you can see why they moved to Israel.

Israel wouldn't have been created because the Jews wouldn't have cared. The Holocaust showed us what can happen in foreign lands. The Jews of Germany were loyal citizens who had assimilated into society. Look what happened to them. Herzl had written of the antisemitism he had witnessed during the Dreyfuss Affair. Most Jews thought he was overreacted and exaggerating the state of things in Europe. It turned out he was right. If you combine that with the fact that it would be quite hard for the survivors to live there seeing what the people of that continent did to them and you can see why they moved to Israel.

I completely understand that they would not have wanted to stay in the Axis countries and those that enabled the Holocaust after WWII. I don't agree with the creation of Israel without consideration of the people living there already. There were better solutions that could have been reached than displacing hundreds of thousands of people, and wreaking havoc on a region of the world that had little to do with the conflict.

I do consider also the fact that many countries who took in war criminals, and German and Axis refugees who almost certainly enabled the Holocaust and yet, despite their apparent sympathy and horror at what had occurred, refused to take the Jews, as being a factor in the desire for the creation of Israel.

I completely understand that they would not have wanted to stay in the Axis countries and those that enabled the Holocaust after WWII. I don't agree with the creation of Israel without consideration of the people living there already. There were better solutions that could have been reached than displacing hundreds of thousands of people, and wreaking havoc on a region of the world that had little to do with the conflict. You can't discuss that with IDF. He thinks Palestinians deserve what happened to them.

You can't discuss that with IDF. He thinks Palestinians deserve what happened to them.

It is their fault that they joined the Mufti's gangs and attacked Jews who were moving there and legally buying land in the 1920s. You can't blame the Jews for these riots. These happened before the partition when the Jews owned all the land they were living on. If the Palestinians didn't attack the Jews, then partition never would've been the issue as it wouldn't be required.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1920_Palestine_riots
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jaffa_riots
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1929_Palestine_riots
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1936%E2%80%931939_Arab_revolt_in_Palestine

BTW, the Mufti was a collaborator in the Holocaust so there is a link between him and the Palestinians. While the Palestinians never had 1 true leader during that period, he was the closest thing they had to on.

That isn't to say they deserve what happened to them. I will say though that in the end it was largely their fault. When you follow religious fundamentalists, you are going to get burned.

The Holocaust was the main reason for the creation of Israel and the displacement and murder of the Palestinian people. It should never have been created in the first place. But to suggest that the Holocaust had a beneficial outcome because Israel was created is horrible. I'm quite sure that the Jews who survived the Holocaust would rather have their families back and no Israel, than to have their families destroyed and a new country that they pretty much had to go to because there was nowhere else to go. Noone would take them as refugees. They couldn't remain in Europe, which still had quite virulent anti-Semitism.

Well the holocaust may have been the final straw but it was more due to the british that zionism became more than a small minority opinion in judaism.

We were talking about the Israelite - Jewish terminology.

Shouldn't it be israelite-jewish-semite?

When I get hit by a car, get permantly disabled and get a 1 million dollar in compensation I'd be carefull with saying that my disability was usefull.

However an enterprising member of your family (or a lawyer) may try to sue the person who hit you on your behalf in an attempt to get some money for themselves.

Same goes for the Jew who would rather see their families and friends alive. For that same matter the state of Isreal wouldn't need to exist if Europe wasn't so prevalent in its anti-semitism. Many jews loved their nations but felt disgusted by same enlightend European continent that hated them.

However many of the people in charge of the formation of Israel (which would have to include pre ww2 immigration) would more than likely have been the people who were rich enough to flee central europe.

I doubt the Jews fleeing the Czars pogroms had access to Herzl's works.

As far as I knew the large scale migration of russian jews and semites to Israel occurred after the fall of the soviet union.

Most of the jewish people fleeing the tsars methods fled to other european countries or north america; a smaller amount turned to zionism.

I completely understand that they would not have wanted to stay in the Axis countries and those that enabled the Holocaust after WWII. I don't agree with the creation of Israel without consideration of the people living there already. There were better solutions that could have been reached than displacing hundreds of thousands of people, and wreaking havoc on a region of the world that had little to do with the conflict.

If israel was formed initially as a single state that did not require a jewish majority (probably with a representative elected government system) then there would not have been as much strife. However that in itself was not likely to happen either.

I do consider also the fact that many countries who took in war criminals, and German and Axis refugees who almost certainly enabled the Holocaust and yet, despite their apparent sympathy and horror at what had occurred, refused to take the Jews, as being a factor in the desire for the creation of Israel.

Well most of the culpable nazi members that were allowed to emigrate were the scientists. Almost all of the civilian population remained in their countries and the only other emigrants tended to be mostly ex PoWs at that time.

Your ignorance shows on this one. They didn't just kill six million jews, but also millions of Christians, homosexuals, mentally/pysically handicapped people, and other minority races.

The main reason I come to this conclusion is the fact that most people have no knowledge of Stalin's purges or Mao's great leap forward, yet these both killed more people than the Nazis did.

The Nazis started WWII, which killed 52 million people. That nearly matches Stalin and Mao combined.

The Nazis started WWII, which killed 52 million people. That nearly matches Stalin and Mao combined.

A fair amount of those would be combat related deaths. Also a large number of that may come from the Japanese occupations in asia.

Shouldn't it be israelite-jewish-semite?why? israelites were those hebrews leaving egypt and invading canaan to create a tribal confederacy there (judges era), which was subsequently transformed into a kingdom (shaul, dud, jedidiya). this kingdom (after it had already split) was destroyed by the assyrian and babylonian invasions. israelites were dispersed all over mesopotamia, the zagros, and adjacent areas, where they mingled with the local populations. when some people returned from this 'babylonian captivity' only memebers of the tribe of juda returned and partially mingled with the people that had been settled in samaria and juda in their absence. that's how jews came into existence, and they subsequently claimed to be all israel. and while jews became monotheists, israelites of the times before the 'babylonian captivity' were not.
semites are all people of mesopotamia, the levant, egypt, and the arabian peninsula, along with the colonies of semitic people around the mediterranean sea.

A fair amount of those would be combat related deaths. Also a large number of that may come from the Japanese occupations in asia.And? Don't they count? Or are they less worthy of remembrance than the victims of the holocaust?

*Snippy*

I meant Israelite or Jew or (whatever region) Semite as individual groups. Not trying to lump them all up.

Situation cleared up!

And? Don't they count? Or are they less worthy of remembrance than the victims of the holocaust?

It does not make them any less than the people killed in the european areas or if they were military or civilian.

Every life is worth keeping, for the most part (termanilly ill with absolutely no hope of recovery and in chronic pain would be counted in the not worth keeping if the person does not wish to go on living).

The main point of my post in that case was that germany was not the sole, direct cause of all of the deaths. They were indirectly responsible for the combat casualties and directly for purposeful attacks on citizens performed by the military.

This view is being disputed. It seems that Eichmans lack of anti-semitism is an urban legend due to recent studies, which isn't so odd considering that anti-semitism was so very common in europe those days.

More than just Eichman. There were thousands of good German patriots who did their duty for king & country by participating in the murder of over 11 million people. They few were maniacal psychopaths. They did their "duty" even though it was morally wanton. Millions of ordinary Germans were either complicit or actively participating in this.

I meant Israelite or Jew or (whatever region) Semite as individual groups. Not trying to lump them all up.
Situation cleared up!I'm not sure. You have understood now, that Israelites no longer exist? While Jews, Semites, and Israelis do exits. And some folks indeed lump them all together, for various reasons.

It does not make them any less than the people killed in the european areas or if they were military or civilian.

Every life is worth keeping, for the most part (termanilly ill with absolutely no hope of recovery and in chronic pain would be counted in the not worth keeping if the person does not wish to go on living).

The main point of my post in that case was that germany was not the sole, direct cause of all of the deaths. They were indirectly responsible for the combat casualties and directly for purposeful attacks on citizens performed by the military.OK.

That isn't to say they deserve what happened to them. I will say though that in the end it was largely their fault. When you follow religious fundamentalists, you are going to get burned.

*Cough* Israel being pulled along by settlers *cough*

The main reason for the founding of Israel was the holocaust I think. The reason being that the illegal immigration of Jews brought on by the White Papers was becoming a bigger and bigger problem for the British. That coupled with internal conflict brought on by Palestinian pressure to annihilate the Jews with Jewish pressure on the British (The Irgun, Menachem Begin, etc.) created a terrible situation in Palestine. So the Brits gave up and asked the UN to deal with it and the UN created a partition plan to give both sides land.

The Jews accepted the partition plan and the Arabs did not (under some sound logic we got 5 countries about to kill the Jews the minute they declare so no). That started the 1948 War of Independence for Israel which shockingly the Jews won.

The argument that the holocaust was more good than bad for the Jews is wrong but it is an argument used by many Jews saying that the holocaust was part of God's plan for Judaism.

Oh yeh and I agree that it's mostly Eurocentrism for the reason why we care about the Holocaust more.

Your ignorance shows on this one. They didn't just kill six million jews, but also millions of Christians, homosexuals, mentally/pysically handicapped people, and other minority races.

Along with intellectuals, trade unionists, socialists, communists, and anyone else who dared oppose the State.

*Cough* Israel being pulled along by settlers *cough*

Clearly the same Israel that decided to pull out of Gaza over the objections of settlers.

I'm not sure. You have understood now, that Israelites no longer exist? While Jews, Semites, and Israelis do exits. And some folks indeed lump them all together, for various reasons.


Further clarification:

I was saying that that each one is seperate as an identity. The original response I was doing was to say that it isn't just Israeli or Jew it is Israeli, Jew or Semite.

... and the UN created a partition plan to give both sides land. ...You mean they took half of the land from Arabs to give it to Jews. It's not like the Arabs were just arriving there for a few years as were the Jewish immigrants.

Clearly the same Israel that decided to pull out of Gaza over the objections of settlers.Clearly the same Israel that continues to increase the number of settlers in the West Bank.

no, most likely not. The holocaust is something that actually did more good for jews than bad. They got Israel out of it and sympathy from basically everyone, except those who see past the smoke and mirrors, for years to come.

Aaaaaaannnddd heeeeeeeere we go! :headbang:

Aaaaaaannnddd heeeeeeeere we go! :headbang:

He's already been given a trolling warning.

You mean they took half of the land from Arabs to give it to Jews. It's not like the Arabs were just arriving there for a few years as were the Jewish immigrants.

I don't know about you but 70 years is a pretty long time.

Also did you see the partition plan? 80% or os of Jewish land was desert. Clearly the place to build a country. Beyond that the only places Jews bought to begin with were mostly swamps because that's all the Arab land lords would sell. Jews built the economy of Israel from mostly shit.

Clearly the same Israel that continues to increase the number of settlers in the West Bank.

You know what I don't think I will win this argument with you.

But from what I believe the places where they are increasing settlers have no Palestinians anywhere near there anyway (such as Maa'lee Adumim). My cousins are settlers and their community keeps growing, there isn't any Palestinian settlement anywhere near there, they aren't infringing on anybody's territory except I guess the former desert there. So I really don't see a problem there. Do you?

Israel wouldn't have been created because the Jews wouldn't have cared. The Holocaust showed us what can happen in foreign lands. The Jews of Germany were loyal citizens who had assimilated into society. Look what happened to them. Herzl had written of the antisemitism he had witnessed during the Dreyfuss Affair. Most Jews thought he was overreacted and exaggerating the state of things in Europe. It turned out he was right. If you combine that with the fact that it would be quite hard for the survivors to live there seeing what the people of that continent did to them and you can see why they moved to Israel.

IIRC, wasn't there a strong anti-Zionist movement among American Jews? Something about not going back to the Holy Land until the Savior actually arrives? Or am I thinking about something else?

Clearly the same Israel that decided to pull out of Gaza over the objections of settlers.

The government currently in power also put in a heavy settler supporter from a party they made a coalition with.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6084362.stm

The government currently in power also put in a heavy settler supporter from a party they made a coalition with.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6084362.stm

I forgot about him. He's a racist. Although I would say that man is more anti-Arab then pro-Palestinian. In the same way that Strom Thurman was anti-black but that didn't make him pro-redneck either (although he may be but not the point).

I don't know about you but 70 years is a pretty long time. From when to when? From 1896, when Herzl published his "Jewish State"? From 1917, when the Balfour declaration was made? To 1947, when the UN drew up the division plan?

Also did you see the partition plan? 80% or os of Jewish land was desert. Clearly the place to build a country. Beyond that the only places Jews bought to begin with were mostly swamps because that's all the Arab land lords would sell. Jews built the economy of Israel from mostly shit. What Israelis made out of that land is completely irrelevant. You will never know what Arabs would have made out of it if they had been allowed to.

You know what I don't think I will win this argument with you.

But from what I believe the places where they are increasing settlers have no Palestinians anywhere near there anyway (such as Maa'lee Adumim). My cousins are settlers and their community keeps growing, there isn't any Palestinian settlement anywhere near there, they aren't infringing on anybody's territory except I guess the former desert there. So I really don't see a problem there. Do you?Yes. It's Palestinian Arab land. The only relevant border is the Green Line. There is a treaty about it and it must be kept. And the Wall/Fence (http://unimaps.com/historic-israel-palestine3/index2.gif) must be dismantled.

But I rather not discuss this here.

IIRC, wasn't there a strong anti-Zionist movement among American Jews? Something about not going back to the Holy Land until the Savior actually arrives? Or am I thinking about something else?
It isn't among American Jews. There are even Orthodox Jews in Israel who hold those feelings. The Jews who hold those beliefs are part of a fundamentalist group that believes the Holocaust was brought on by G-d to punish us.

It isn't among American Jews. There are even Orthodox Jews in Israel who hold those feelings.

Oh, okay. I remember reading The Chosen, by Chaim Potok, in high school, and one of the characters has... a father, I think, who protested the idea of a Jewish homeland in the Holy Land.


The Jews who hold those beliefs are part of a fundamentalist group that believes the Holocaust was brought on by G-d to punish us.

Lord and Lady, every time I think religious nutbars have cornered the market on crazy...

I have some splainin' to do.

From when to when? From 1896, when Herzl published his "Jewish State"? From 1917, when the Balfour declaration was made? To 1947, when the UN drew up the division plan?

1882 the beginning of the first aliyah. Sorry I didn't make that clear.


What Israelis made out of that land is completely irrelevant. You will never know what Arabs would have made out of it if they had been allowed to.

But they didn't live there plus the land was bought legally.

Look at it through this hypothetical: You are moving away from your home. The only place you can move is a swamp with malaria infested misquitos that hasn't been cultivated since god knows when in the middle of a desert surrounded by people you know want to kill you. Why move?

The Jews did it anyway and for that they should be commended not cheap shotted by people on a computer. Beyond that you're still not responding to the argument that we actually helped the land instead of let it rot. Israel was an awful place to live pre-1882 most of it was desolute desert destroyed by the Ottomans but the Jews helped build it back up again.


Yes. It's Palestinian Arab land. The only relevant border is the Green Line. There is a treaty about it and it must be kept. And the Wall/Fence (http://unimaps.com/historic-israel-palestine3/index2.gif) must be dismantled.

The only reason why I won't win this arg is because no matter what I argue you will call me wrong. Anyway you're still not responding to the crux of that argument which is the majority of the increases settlements aren't anywhere near Palestinian lands. So what do you know I'm winning.

The Palestinians had their chance at a country and blew it, that's their fault they should stop complaining. Espiecially after the Israelis have offered them several peace deals which they have all refused most notably in 2000 when they could have had East Jerusalem.

But they didn't live there plus the land was bought legally. 1. Alaska is mainly unpopulated. That does not mean, however, that it is just waiting for someone to take it.
2. how much of what was Palestine in 1946 had been bought by Jews?

Look at it through this hypothetical: You are moving away from your home. The only place you can move is a swamp with malaria infested misquitos that hasn't been cultivated since god knows when in the middle of a desert surrounded by people you know want to kill you. Why move?

The Jews did it anyway and for that they should be commended not cheap shotted by people on a computer. Beyond that you're still not responding to the argument that we actually helped the land instead of let it rot. Israel was an awful place to live pre-1882 most of it was desolute desert destroyed by the Ottomans but the Jews helped build it back up again.What Jews did with the land that they took from Arabs is of no relevance whatsoever. Palestine was not waiting for Jews to come and take it.

The only reason why I won't win this arg is because no matter what I argue you will call me wrong. Anyway you're still not responding to the crux of that argument which is the majority of the increases settlements aren't anywhere near Palestinian lands. So what do you know I'm winning. So you are saying that the West Bank inside the Green Line is not Palestinian land?

The Palestinians had their chance at a country and blew it, that's their fault they should stop complaining. Espiecially after the Israelis have offered them several peace deals which they have all refused most notably in 2000 when they could have had East Jerusalem.All of those "peace deals" would have resulted in the de-facto annexation of the West Bank by Israel. Autonomy is not sovereignty, you know.

1. Alaska is mainly unpopulated. That does not mean, however, that it is just waiting for someone to take it.
2. how much of what was Palestine in 1946 had been bought by Jews?

1. It does mean however that if someone wants to buy land legally and try to farm and make a living there they should be able which is all that the Jews did.
2. Most of what was in the Partition Plan which the Arabs rejected.



What Jews did with the land that they took from Arabs is of no relevance whatsoever. Palestine was not waiting for Jews to come and take it.

Yes it is of plenty of relevance. If the land was shit and they made it not shit then shouldn't they get to keep the land they worked so hard on? Espiecially since they bought it legally and turned malarian invested swamps into farm land.

If you buy land legally and cultivate it from the people who were there before you then you deserve to have the land. You can't just ignore the impact of having the land because that's like saying that all positive contributions of the US don't matter because it was originally Native American land.


So you are saying that the West Bank inside the Green Line is not Palestinian land?

Yes I'm saying that lifeless desert the Jews turned into settlements nowhere near any Palestinian settlement is not Palestinian land. And I'd also say that territory won in a legal war is territory they deserve. Israel deserves to be in the West Bank as much as the US deserves to be in California.


All of those "peace deals" would have resulted in the de-facto annexation of the West Bank by Israel. Autonomy is not sovereignty, you know.

Not true. The one in 2000 would have given the Palestinians 91% of the West Bank plus all of Gaza, East Jerusalem and compensation packages for refugees. All that for only dismantling terrorist infrastructure by Arafat refused. Eventually leading to a new Palestinian. I really don't see how that was a fair deal at all by Israel they are conceding a lot of territory for only 1 thing, the end of terror but the Palestinians refused. Why? because they only want terror.

There is a difference between people buying lands, and those lands being removed from the sovereignty of a government.

Let's take the example of California. Oh noes! Mexicans are flooding the borders. A lot of them actually own land. A lot of the land is grouped together in communities. Would the US accept a proposition to create a new nation out of those lands - one that was no longer under the sovereignty of the United States?

There is a difference between people buying lands, and those lands being removed from the sovereignty of a government.

Let's take the example of California. Oh noes! Mexicans are flooding the borders. A lot of them actually own land. A lot of the land is grouped together in communities. Would the US accept a proposition to create a new nation out of those lands - one that was no longer under the sovereignty of the United States?

No, not a chance.