Freethought & Rationalism Archive

August Spies · 02-23-2003, 10:10 AM

sullster:

Quote:

I don't study Marxist history so I don't know the dialectical materialist class struggle mechanisms behind the allied actions during the 1930's. I am sure that is the history to which you refer.

no I refer to the general history they teach in european history 2. If you want to attack the west for their actions regarding Hitler attack the west. Don't pretend it was only france.

Quote:

There were huge segments of the French establishment who were happy to be a part of the Third Reich. The French could have resisted everywhere, they didn't.

again... so what? There were large segments of EVERY country that welcomed Hitler. Im sure you would be chombing at the bit to collaborate if Hitler had gotten to America, lots of people were. But as noted the French resisted more than anyone else who were conquered. I guess you can attack France for not resisting more, but you might as well attack the other countries first.

Quote:

They cooperated on a level which was unnecessary.

:banghead: They were installed by teh fucking Nazis. OF COURSE THEY WERE GOING TO COLLABORATE. This wasn't Italy, this wasn't a goverment taht decided to ally itself with the Nazis. It was installed by the Nazis.

sullster · 02-23-2003, 10:49 AM

Augustus,

Funny, I do not recall a collaborationist regime in any other German occupied country where the Germans felt safe enough to not garrison occupation forces. The Germans were so confident of French cooperation that they could ignore their southern flank in France until the Allies landed in North Africa in Nov. 1942.

I don't claim that you would have become a commissar in the Gulag if the Soviets took over, so don't say that I would join Hitler.

Happy Wonderer · 02-23-2003, 11:13 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by sullster
I will condemn France for things which applied to them alone. They were the largest power in Western Europe and the major force for the Versailles Treaty punishing Germany after WW1. They utterly failed in enforcing the treaty during the rise of Nazi Germany. Agreed, that France was in a state of denial like other Western nations, yet they were the sole nation in a position to check the rise of German militarism and they didn't. France and France alone deserves a lot of blame.

Er, you should probably consider the Anglo-German naval treaty of 1935 where Britain unilaterally allowed the German navy to vastly increase in size over the Versailles limits. This pissed off the French who considered that the British were allowing Germany to rearm (which they were.)

International politics were just as complicated then as they are now.

HW

August Spies · 02-23-2003, 11:15 AM

sullster:

There were lots of German forces in France, what are you talking about?

Why would I join the Bolsheviks? I consdier them in the same boat as the imperalist capitalists.

Anyway you cliamed earlier that Denmarks' resistance was more trouble to Germany than Frances. Could you please provide a source for this claim?

seanie · 02-23-2003, 11:21 AM

And have you ever heard the term quisling?

Who he?

August Spies · 02-23-2003, 11:31 AM

seanie, if you are really asking who he is Quisling was the king of norway who was the perfect model of a collaborator.

seanie · 02-23-2003, 12:30 PM

I know who Quisling was and no he wasn't the king of Norway.

My question was directed to Sullster who seems to think the French are uniqely blamefull.

JGL53 · 02-23-2003, 05:01 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by August Spies

sounds more like a description of people from Mississippi.

But apparently our king lives in D.C. How'd that happen?

sullster · 02-24-2003, 03:25 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by seanie
I know who Quisling was and no he wasn't the king of Norway.

My question was directed to Sullster who seems to think the French are uniqely blamefull.

The bigger countries deserve more blame, because they had more resources for stopping the Nazi rise. France had the largest force in Western Europe. They could have stopped Hitler early, they failed.

They blew it, and the USA has dominated since WW2. They could have been masters of Europe and a world influence. They are neither and should shut their faces.

Happy Wonderer · 02-24-2003, 05:40 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by sullster
The bigger countries deserve more blame, because they had more resources for stopping the Nazi rise. France had the largest force in Western Europe. They could have stopped Hitler early, they failed.

They blew it, and the USA has dominated since WW2. They could have been masters of Europe and a world influence. They are neither and should shut their faces.

Who had the largest Navy at the time....?

Population statistics (in 1000's) during 1935

Code:

USA------127,362
GERMANY---66,870
ENGLAND---46,870
FRANCE----41,940

'Nuff said?

HW

From Here

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

02-23-2003, 10:49 AM	#62
sullster Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2001 Location: North of Boston Posts: 1,392	Augustus, Funny, I do not recall a collaborationist regime in any other German occupied country where the Germans felt safe enough to not garrison occupation forces. The Germans were so confident of French cooperation that they could ignore their southern flank in France until the Allies landed in North Africa in Nov. 1942. I don't claim that you would have become a commissar in the Gulag if the Soviets took over, so don't say that I would join Hitler.

02-23-2003, 11:15 AM	#64
August Spies Contributor Join Date: Apr 2001 Location: The Vine Posts: 12,950	sullster: There were lots of German forces in France, what are you talking about? Why would I join the Bolsheviks? I consdier them in the same boat as the imperalist capitalists. Anyway you cliamed earlier that Denmarks' resistance was more trouble to Germany than Frances. Could you please provide a source for this claim?

02-23-2003, 11:21 AM	#65
seanie Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Edinburgh. Scotland Posts: 2,532	And have you ever heard the term quisling? Who he?

02-23-2003, 11:31 AM	#66
August Spies Contributor Join Date: Apr 2001 Location: The Vine Posts: 12,950	seanie, if you are really asking who he is Quisling was the king of norway who was the perfect model of a collaborator.

02-23-2003, 12:30 PM	#67
seanie Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Edinburgh. Scotland Posts: 2,532	I know who Quisling was and no he wasn't the king of Norway. My question was directed to Sullster who seems to think the French are uniqely blamefull.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.