Did you USED TO like Metallica? How about now??

[brocktonblockbust]

beanz the SJWs are the pussies, not the law & order Trumpsters.

[Beanz]

beanz the SJWs are the pussies, not the law & order Trumpsters.

Where are all the SJW's (your teenage girl text speak acronym not mine ) threads started in response to being offended by the Trumpster or his groupies tweets then ?

This very thread is you posting a trumpster moaning about a tweet that does not suck up to the Don. That is a pretty pussy thing to do.


If you are all so robust and secure then why are still days after his election on high alert defense duty ?


I mean Lyle is still addicted to updating his anti-woman (who are not exactly as he prescribes they should be) dressed up as anti-feminist thread, and you are on a non-stop roll posting thread after thread of goobldeegook about how you want the police to lock up transgender people or put immigrants in internment camps. That your idea of being a man is it?


Sounds a lot more like miaow to me

[Gandalf]

They do sound rather threatened. The man is in, he wants to bring back torture, thinks invading countries and stealing their resources is a good idea, he appoints bankers and war mongers and all the Trumpsters can do is moan about SJW's? They ignore what is happening and pick out the extreme examples of those who resist. It is very childish. Then they wonder about the psychology of Nazi Germany.

[walrus]

They do sound rather threatened. The man is in, he wants to bring back torture, thinks invading countries and stealing their resources is a good idea, he appoints bankers and war mongers and all the Trumpsters can do is moan about SJW's? They ignore what is happening and pick out the extreme examples of those who resist. It is very childish. Then they wonder about the psychology of Nazi Germany.

Hitler did nothing wrong . You have said that miles

[Gandalf]

They do sound rather threatened. The man is in, he wants to bring back torture, thinks invading countries and stealing their resources is a good idea, he appoints bankers and war mongers and all the Trumpsters can do is moan about SJW's? They ignore what is happening and pick out the extreme examples of those who resist. It is very childish. Then they wonder about the psychology of Nazi Germany.

Hitler did nothing wrong . You have said that miles

I have never said that. Hitler was clearly a crazed dictator. What I have suggested is that we don't always know the complete truth about Nazi Germany because the West has made it its mission to turn WW2 into a battle between 'good' and 'evil' and in a situation like that the 'winners' make the history and the 'losers' have to be branded, and of course in the case of Nazi Germany, there was a lot wrong with how the state behaved. For instance, the holocaust clearly happened, but I don't know for sure that the numbers are as high as in the higher estimates. Some historians question that, the numbers go up and down depending on source. Also, Nuremberg ended up being a 'victor's court' where every crime carried out by the Nazi's was deemed evil, but it ignored that the allies carried out numerous war crimes of their own. It's good to put war criminals on trial, but it is hypocritical if you are going to let your own war criminals walk free as happened. There was only a Nuremberg for the Germans.

[TitoFan]

They do sound rather threatened. The man is in, he wants to bring back torture, thinks invading countries and stealing their resources is a good idea, he appoints bankers and war mongers and all the Trumpsters can do is moan about SJW's? They ignore what is happening and pick out the extreme examples of those who resist. It is very childish. Then they wonder about the psychology of Nazi Germany.

Hitler did nothing wrong . You have said that miles

I have never said that. Hitler was clearly a crazed dictator. What I have suggested is that we don't always know the complete truth about Nazi Germany because the West has made it its mission to turn WW2 into a battle between 'good' and 'evil' and in a situation like that the 'winners' make the history and the 'losers' have to be branded, and of course in the case of Nazi Germany, there was a lot wrong with how the state behaved. For instance, the holocaust clearly happened, but I don't know for sure that the numbers are as high as in the higher estimates. Some historians question that, the numbers go up and down depending on source. Also, Nuremberg ended up being a 'victor's court' where every crime carried out by the Nazi's was deemed evil, but it ignored that the allies carried out numerous war crimes of their own. It's good to put war criminals on trial, but it is hypocritical if you are going to let your own war criminals walk free as happened. There was only a Nuremberg for the Germans.

Maybe it's just me, but I don't see the need to constantly try and "overanalyze" everything. It's good to question and dig. But when facts stare you in the face. When you've seen real footage of the horrors committed by the Nazis directed by Hitler. When you consider Hitler's penchant for invading countries for the hell of it. When you hear personal accounts from some of the perpetrators themselves...... Why would you want to keep going over it with a fine-toothed comb? Some things in life are indeed gray. Most things, actually. But once in awhile, events happen that are clearly black or white. Where there is an absolute right and an absolute wrong. No need to nitpick and find fault where there isn't any, IMO. Were war crimes committed by the Allies? Very likely so. It was a war.... a massive war, fought on many fronts. War in itself is full of suffering, stressful decisions, anger, misery. Atrocities are bound to happen on both sides. Questioning numbers of slaughtered Jews is something else I don't get. So does a million less slaughtered men, women and children make it any less of an unspeakable tragedy? What does it matter in the overall scheme of things? Many armed conflicts have blurred sides and motives. The war against Nazi Germany wasn't one of them.

[Gandalf]

They do sound rather threatened. The man is in, he wants to bring back torture, thinks invading countries and stealing their resources is a good idea, he appoints bankers and war mongers and all the Trumpsters can do is moan about SJW's? They ignore what is happening and pick out the extreme examples of those who resist. It is very childish. Then they wonder about the psychology of Nazi Germany.

Hitler did nothing wrong . You have said that miles

I have never said that. Hitler was clearly a crazed dictator. What I have suggested is that we don't always know the complete truth about Nazi Germany because the West has made it its mission to turn WW2 into a battle between 'good' and 'evil' and in a situation like that the 'winners' make the history and the 'losers' have to be branded, and of course in the case of Nazi Germany, there was a lot wrong with how the state behaved. For instance, the holocaust clearly happened, but I don't know for sure that the numbers are as high as in the higher estimates. Some historians question that, the numbers go up and down depending on source. Also, Nuremberg ended up being a 'victor's court' where every crime carried out by the Nazi's was deemed evil, but it ignored that the allies carried out numerous war crimes of their own. It's good to put war criminals on trial, but it is hypocritical if you are going to let your own war criminals walk free as happened. There was only a Nuremberg for the Germans.

Maybe it's just me, but I don't see the need to constantly try and "overanalyze" everything. It's good to question and dig. But when facts stare you in the face. When you've seen real footage of the horrors committed by the Nazis directed by Hitler. When you consider Hitler's penchant for invading countries for the hell of it. When you hear personal accounts from some of the perpetrators themselves...... Why would you want to keep going over it with a fine-toothed comb? Some things in life are indeed gray. Most things, actually. But once in awhile, events happen that are clearly black or white. Where there is an absolute right and an absolute wrong. No need to nitpick and find fault where there isn't any, IMO. Were war crimes committed by the Allies? Very likely so. It was a war.... a massive war, fought on many fronts. War in itself is full of suffering, stressful decisions, anger, misery. Atrocities are bound to happen on both sides. Questioning numbers of slaughtered Jews is something else I don't get. So does a million less slaughtered men, women and children make it any less of an unspeakable tragedy? What does it matter in the overall scheme of things? Many armed conflicts have blurred sides and motives. The war against Nazi Germany wasn't one of them.

My points were to counter what Walrus said. It doesn't make anything less of a tragedy to go over anything, but people have a general perception of good versus evil and it wasn't as cut and dry as that. The lines were much more blurred. Churchill had a lot of blood on his hands too. The carpet bombing of Dresden was a case in point. Clear examples of war crimes, but at the end of the war, it was all about holding Germany completely responsible and like you say there were blurred sides and motives. Hitler was obviously deranged and it was a terrible tragedy that he was voted in. A very dangerous man, so it was wrong to say that I said Hitler did nothing wrong. I just look at sources and question narratives really, but it isn't a subject I have read about for a long while.