Erasing Cold War History?

[moy3rd]

I served with the First Infantry Division 1961-1964 & was in W. Berlin during the Cuban Missile Crisis.

The city of Berlin was a divided city back then,the west occupied (divided into sectors) by U.S.,French and British. The entire eastern portion belonged to The Soviet Union.

W. Berlin was a small island of democracy,110 miles inside E. Germany,surrounded by appox. 55 Soviet & E. German divisions,many of them armored.

The Cold War lasted from 1946 until 1991 when the Soviet Union was disbanded.

Thought you might find this interesting



Seems like the new Government in Berlin (many are from former E. Berlin) wants
to erase anything to do with the Wall & the dividing of the city.

Berliners are very upset that they have torn down
Templehof Air Base,Check Point Charlie & almost
all the military installations in recent years.

This video shows the last
remnants of the wall that divided a small town
outside of W.Berlin.



--video: Remnants of wall linger in German town

Maybe the 'last' spot.



Remnants of wall linger in German town
Nov. 9: In the heart of reunified Germany ,
the anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall
still brings back painful memories for a town
that was once cut in half by the infamous border.
NBC News' Andy Eckardt reports.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3032619/vp/27580167#27580167
_________________

[Murray B]

The Nazis termed this technique camoflaging history. That is knowingly altering the facts to suit political objectives. I wonder what their objectives are?

[Woody]

I think its more redeveleopment for moneys sake rather than any evil scheme .Unfortunatly the stuff is just in the wrong place.

[Murray B]

I think its more redeveleopment for moneys sake rather than any evil scheme.

Perhaps there are just some interesting coincidences. Like the Tank Museum featuring a Tiger (terror of the Allies) instead of a Firefly or an Archer or another Allied tank. It may also be coincidence that the actual intro date of the T-34/85 has been pushed back by 8 months by the revisionists. Some of these same fellows also tell us that the Panther was a fantastic tank instead of the logistical nightmare that it really was. All of these revisions, coincidencially, agree with the Nazi point of view.

The Nazis said they lost WWI because the Jews betrayed Germany and the second war was lost when the army betrayed them. Revisionists now write that Germany had a significant technical advantage at Kursk in mid '43 and could only have lost by such a betrayal.

Of course Naziism is long dead and must have ended with its leaders. It is the same as the way the Republican party ended with the death of Lincoln and Marxism ended with Marx.

Clearly, all political parties must end with the death of their founders. Pardon my paranoia.

[Woody]

Calm down the nazis are not coming back .
A Museum bigging up its own countrys tanks over the someone elses is hardly the start of the 4th reich.Having germany flattened by bombers and occupied by the allies pretty much stopped the germans being too intrested in anything the nazis
have to say.Not even very keen on letting their army fight in afganistian.

[Murray B]

Calm down the nazis are not coming back.

Um, okay, I am calm now.

Nazis were in every country, but Germany is where they first managed to take power. To me, it seems that Germans were the first victims.

Mind what Teddy Roosevelt said, "Behind the ostensible government sits enthroned an invisible government owing no allegiance and acknowledging no responsibility to the people."

Now assuming that "invisible" governments are not just an American problem what happened to the invisibles [wealthy families really] that bankrolled the Nazis?

Methinks the Nazis were never really gone but just went underground.

Want proof? Witness the power of the best propagandists the world has ever seen.

Today most people believe that smoking causes smokers to die quickly, die young and yet cost more for health care. This is a contradictory statment and yet billions of people believe that these contradictory things are all true at the same time. This indicates mindfouling of the highest order and it originates with the Nazi funded "Institute for Tobacco Hazards Resarch” (also translates to “Institute of the Foregone Conclusion”) at Jena in ’41.

Even if I am paranoid, that does not mean that we have not been deluded.

Now, featuring a Tiger at Bovington shows callous disregard for Allied WWII vets. The weapon was so terrifying that it created a condition called "Tiger Phobia" and for good reason. The "88" could penetrate any British tank at 2500 yards and the six pounder could only penetrate a Tiger from the rear and at less than 300 yards. When Tigers came on the battlefield British tankers died, and more died, and then even more died. Truly, the Tiger was a terror weapon. What were they thinking at Bovington?

[Woody]

Smoking does kill approximatly every other smoker early .Also leads to a
lot of chronic illness .Lung cancer is pretty cheap as it can kill quickly .Heart disease patient can linger for decades needing meds and care .So while it does kill early while their waiting to meet their well deserved fate (Anyone who has had to pick up ciggerette butts in the cold would agree with me:devil:) They need a lot of health care.

The Tiger tank cant really tell History of tanks or WW2 without it .Sherman Firefly could kill it though.Nazi uniforms and equipment will allways hold a fascination.Bad guys actually dressed as the bad guys for once.
Secret nazis thats just conspricy theory rubbish.

[HairyEyeball]

And on what documentation and medical credentials do you base your conclusions, tim? Enough 'studies' on smokers - and more on 'second-hand smokers' - have proven combinations of wishful thinking and junk science to place them somewhere just above human-induced global warming on the 'believability scale'.

And Murray, you mention "The Tank Museum" as if there were only one. Which one, precisely, would you be referring to? There may well be obvious reasons a museum displays one example of something: To demonstrate a significant 'advance', to 'prove a point' - or a lack of space or funding, among others.

[Woody]

Lots of experince as a nurse .Seen an awful lot of ill health& death which smoking seems to be the only common factor .Smoking is very bad for you plenty of science proves it.

[SlightlyCatholic]

Enough 'studies' on smokers - and more on 'second-hand smokers' - have proven combinations of wishful thinking and junk science to place them somewhere just above human-induced global warming on the 'believability scale'.

...so it's completely harmless to have carcinogens and tar in one's lungs? There's a reason those warning labels are on the cigarette boxes.

[HairyEyeball]

First, the thread is not about smoking - if people want to discuss that, feel free to open a thread on it in the proper area.

Second, Tim, you might try reading what was actually written: Please point out where anyone used the word 'harmless' - your unfounded assumptions reflect poorly on your credibility. What was pointed out was that many of the 'studies' on which the warnings - and discriminatory legislation - are based do not stand strict scientific scrutiny.

[Murray B]

And Murray, you mention "The Tank Museum" as if there were only one. Which one, precisely, would you be referring to? There may well be obvious reasons a museum displays one example of something: To demonstrate a significant 'advance', to 'prove a point' - or a lack of space or funding, among others.

It is the Bovington museum and they glorify the Tiger with its own web site www.tiger-tank.com. They should be putting the thing in their hall of shame not featuring it as some great thing.

Back in the seventies I talked to a WWII vet that was a tank commander and he lost three crews to Tigers. He said what they had to do with a Tiger was hide a Sherman in the bush and send a light tank right up close and then around the Tiger. If they were close enough, the Tiger's turret could not traverse fast enough to acquire the light tank. If all went well the hidden Sherman could hit the Tiger's turret from behind as it traversed.

A few years later I read that, on average, five Allied tank crews died for every Tiger destroyed.

If featuring a Tiger bothers a civilian like me then I can't imagine what it does to an Allied WWII vet. It has got to bring back a lot of bad memories.

What are the people at Bovington thinking?

[SlightlyCatholic]

Second, Tim, you might try reading what was actually written: Please point out where anyone used the word 'harmless' - your unfounded assumptions reflect poorly on your credibility. What was pointed out was that many of the 'studies' on which the warnings - and discriminatory legislation - are based do not stand strict scientific scrutiny.

My apologies for not filling out a proper Diction Request Chit. I'll be sure to fill out the proper forms the next time I want to use a word in a sentence. In regards to my reading comprehension, please do not mistake alternate interpretation for misunderstanding. There's more than one way to eat a Reese's.

Anyway, please continue with the intended subject matter.

[HairyEyeball]

While I can't speak to what survivors may be thinking, 'featuring' the Tiger may just be nothing more than a tribute to the advance it was, not who may have designed and used it, or what it 'represented'. The attitude you appear to be displaying is the same one that causes the ignorant to condemn firearms, rather than the criminals who abuse them.

The tank itself is merely an inanimate piece of machinery, and in practice, the best example of its era. It didn't have an allegiance or intent, it was the tool of those who used it. Had we lost the war, it's well within reason to assume that in some German infantry museum, the M-1 Garand would have the place of honor.

[Murray B]

It didn't have an allegiance or intent, it was the tool of those who used it. Had we lost the war, it's well within reason to assume that in some German infantry museum, the M-1 Garand would have the place of honor.

Well, HairyEyeball, you always were a lot more tolerant than I am.

The main problem I have with this tank is not the vehicle but the "Tiger Phobia" that it created. This tank dominated the battlefield to an amazing extent on the Western Front for a couple of years. It never did dominate the Eastern front though.

Despite what the revisonists now write the Tiger was met with even greater numbers of KV-1S/85s starting in August '42 and the Germans started getting their own phobias when the SU-152 (actually a tank hunter and not SPA like they say today) went into service in early '43. Remember the photos of Tigers on their backs like turtles? That is what the 100 pound H.E. round of an SU-152 could do. I don't know what the 152mm anti-tank round was like but I do know that the plasma plume of the smaller 122mm AT round caused the PzV to fly apart completely. The back end wound up several yards from the front. Do any German museums feature the SU-152s or Stalins and give them their own web site?

There is more to it than tanks though. A few years ago I was trying to get a tank article published and I met with a young British publisher. He was a skinhead that dressed Gestapo style and all of his books camoflaged the facts of history to make the Nazis look better. His kind of stuff used to be for kooks and cranks but now seems to be increasing in popularity.

P.S. Those Garands used to be available locally for about $300. Too bad it is so hard to get a permit. They are imported from Europe somewhere but I understand they are not supposed to go back to the U.S.

[HairyEyeball]

A decent one today can be had in a (reasonably) free country - like the one just to the south of you - for as little as $650 or so American, with both military surplus and commercial ammunition at reasonable prices. In most States, a 'permit' or 'license' is not required, and since the majority change hands from one private individual to another, there are no government records of the transactions.

At another time, many of us would be happy to help you regain the right to the tools of self-defense, but from all appearances, we're about to get dragged into a fight to keep us from following you down that road.

As to 'tolerance', I have little if any for the folks who employed the Tiger - my late father spent the end of WW II as a 'guest' of the Bohemian paper-hanger - but I respect fine machinery. Of course, given the preceeding fact, I have also never owned a German auto, or camera - also finely engineered and built machinery - but I do respect their quality.

As to 'Tigerphobia', it's understandable: More than one North Korean officer in captivity in the early 1950s remarked that his men were terrified of the 'yellowlegs' - Marines (we wore khaki canvas leggings in those days) because of their ferocity in battle. Sometimes, 'reputation' is as devastating to morale as whatever was done to earn it.

[03_SHOOTER]

It is the Bovington museum and they glorify the Tiger with its own web site www.tiger-tank.com. They should be putting the thing in their hall of shame not featuring it as some great thing.

<snip>

What are the people at Bovington thinking?

Murray B, one question; did you even bother to check out their website?

The Tiger page is one dedicated to the restoration of their Tiger, but it is FAR from the only tank they have. They have examples of tanks and APC's from WWI, including one of the original Mark I's all the way up to the Challenger 2 V5 prototype, and representing American, British, Soviet, French, and Swedish armor for a total of over 300 vehicles from 29 countries. Also, their library and archives are, arguably, unparalleled in the world on the history of armored vehicles, and all of this because they are in fact, one of, if not THE premier museum in the world dedicated to armored warfare.

So, to answer your question directly, the people at Bovington were thinking about working very hard to have as complete a MUSEUM as possible so that those interested in the history of armored warfare could come see, and touch, actual pieces of that history, and study the advances in design over the past nearly 100 years in order to have a greater appreciation of that history!

[Murray B]

A decent one today can be had in a (reasonably) free country - like the one just to the south of you - for as little as $650 or so American, with both military surplus and commercial ammunition at reasonable prices. In most States, a 'permit' or 'license' is not required, and since the majority change hands from one private individual to another, there are no government records of the transactions. ?

They used to have a Civilian marksmanship program and sold surplus rifles real cheap. $30 for a carbine comes to mind. $650 for a Garand seems kind of steep to me but it is a part of history, I suppose. If I was in the Army and I had a choice of a Lee Enfield or a Garand (K98 is the wrong army) I would take the Garand.

At another time, many of us would be happy to help you regain the right to the tools of self-defense, but from all appearances, we're about to get dragged into a fight to keep us from following you down that road.

I know the U.S. has always promoted democracy and this is something I like. A difficult job but somebody has to do it. As far as the Canadian gun registry goes, it was not my idea. I never thought they would be able to convince criminals to register their guns. Now I understand that a government committee has found poor compliance with the law among criminals. Imagine that.

As to 'tolerance', I have little if any for the folks who employed the Tiger - my late father spent the end of WW II as a 'guest' of the Bohemian paper-hanger - but I respect fine machinery. Of course, given the preceeding fact, I have also never owned a German auto, or camera - also finely engineered and built machinery - but I do respect their quality.

Little tolerance, eh? So why are you always reminding everyone about this constitutional right and that freedom then? Don’t ever remember seeing this intolerance you speak of in any of your posts.

As to 'Tigerphobia', it's understandable: More than one North Korean officer in captivity in the early 1950s remarked that his men were terrified of the 'yellowlegs' - Marines (we wore khaki canvas leggings in those days) because of their ferocity in battle. Sometimes, 'reputation' is as devastating to morale as whatever was done to earn it.

Do you expect that a North Korean museum will feature the “yellowlegs” as their main attraction at any time in the future.


Murray B, one question; did you even bother to check out their website?

Yes, for several years already. It does not bother me that they have a Tiger but that it is their number 1 feature. The museum even gives the thing its own site and yet does not do that for and Allied tank, or any other tank for that matter.

It is a vehicle, and inanimate object but it is also a symbol (especially if it was an SS Panzer as I suspect this one was).

Sometimes in your country people burn "Old Glory" and this bothers me. Not because they are burning some piece of cloth, but because it is a symbol that represents something. The bad people are trying to harm their neighbors by burning the flag. Of course, it is not my flag but it bothers me anyway. To me it represents John Wayne, and Coca-Cola, and Winchester rifles, and Corvettes, and a whole bunch of other good things that I don't have time to list. But even if your flag did not mean anything to me, I would be against burning it because of the hurt that burning the symbol will cause. It is really not that much different than punching a veteran in the face. [Your flag is also nice looking.]

Maybe I shouldn't get so worked up when someone burns your flag or a British museum glorifies the Tiger. It is not my flag and I am not British and they are inanimate objects.

Hmm, nope, took a few deep breaths and am still so angry I could just spit.

Anyway, not mad at you guys so I'll talk to you later.

[03_SHOOTER]

Yes, for several years already. It does not bother me that they have a Tiger but that it is their number 1 feature. The museum even gives the thing its own site and yet does not do that for and Allied tank, or any other tank for that matter.

Then you're aware that the reason it is so prominently featured is that they're still seeking assistance in the full restoration of it and are in need of some aspects that are still missing, like the radio, so dedicating a specific web site to the restoration of this particular piece of history is only prudent.

[Murray B]

Then you're aware that the reason it is so prominently featured is that they're still seeking assistance in the full restoration of it and are in need of some aspects that are still missing, like the radio, so dedicating a specific web site to the restoration of this particular piece of history is only prudent.

Why couldn't they have a Firefly site and then put the donations in a general fund that could be used to restore the Tiger? Then they could put it in a special section featuring the tools used by the SS murder troops.

I have read a book called "Balkan Nightmare" that was written by a non-German (Bulgarian, I think) SS conscript. He wrote that the tattoo under his left arm was virtually a death sentence unless he could surrender to Americans. It seem he was also very fearful of being captured by Canadians for some reason. This is surprising since we are all just so nice and polite up here.

Its a good book if you can find it. The Library of Congress should have it for sure.

[HairyEyeball]

You appear to be letting your emotions color your interpretation of facts: Most of the German troops, including Tiger crews, were just soldiers serving their country - the percentage of Nazi 'true believers' was minimal, and SS troops comprised an even smaller percentage. And yes, if captured by the Russians, the tattoo was an immediate death sentence, if captured by the Americans or Empire troops it did merit the individual 'special attention'. Many of those cut it off themselves for just that reason.

Have you written the museum with your concerns? I'm certain they can give an explanation that, while it may not allay your concerns, will at least offer a perspective you may not have appreciated.

And for the record, I would have no objection to the public execution of any and all 'Death's Head' troops, but I don't understand the antipathy to a piece of equipment because it was used by them. Would you have a similar reaction if a museum 'featured' a swastika-stamped Luger pistol because it was used by SS troops?

[JohnP]

I have read a book called "Balkan Nightmare" that was written by a non-German (Bulgarian, I think) SS conscript. He wrote that the tattoo under his left arm was virtually a death sentence unless he could surrender to Americans. It seem he was also very fearful of being captured by Canadians for some reason. This is surprising since we are all just so nice and polite up here.

Its a good book if you can find it. The Library of Congress should have it for sure.

There are several books out that depict life in the service of both the regular German Army and with SS. All are very interesting reading, but remember, there are a lot of embellishments out there.

That being said, I have a friend here who is an active mason and was SS during WWII. His name is Hans and he does talk about the war and what his job was. He was a member of the SS because his father wanted to keep the family business open and the only way was to have the entire family join the party. Han's joined the military because he had no choice. He would have preferred to stay in Austria and work in the family business. His military job was a tank destroyer unit. He and another were given a motorcycle and side car. They were to wait until the enemy tanks were sighted. The two would drive the motorcycle directly in the path of the armor. Hans had an 8.8mm rifle that he would shoot at the tank (between the turret and the body) this would damage the turret of the tank and keep it from turning. The 2nd person would then come in from the side or rear, jump on the tank, open the hatch, and drop in a grenade. Hans has 8 tank badges. He also can't be an American citizen because of his affiliation with the SS. (He immigrated to Canada in 1955 and after 10 years became a Canadian Citizen.)

There is another mason here that was an American tanker. His name is Doyle. Doyle's unit and Hans' unit were engaged, directly, at Normandy. Doyle and Hans sit next to each other when we have dinner ever other Thursday and they will talk to each other and to us about the war. They hold no animosity towards each other. Why should we?

[Woody]

Canadians are alleged to have been not too keen on taking prisoners during the Normandy Invasion in retaliation for stories of prisoners being killed after The dieppe raid.

[Guardsman-CA]

the tattoo was an immediate death sentence, umm what tattoo would this be?

[Javier]

You appear to be letting your emotions color your interpretation of facts: Most of the German troops, including Tiger crews, were just soldiers serving their country - the percentage of Nazi 'true believers' was minimal, and SS troops comprised an even smaller percentage.
The Waffen SS -the german Armed Forces´ "cream of the cream"- was the nazi "Foreign Legion".
Men of a lot of countries -the US included- served in this branch.
An interesting link:
http://axishistory.com/index.php?id=307

[Woody]

umm what tattoo would this be?*Small tattoo of blood group on arm .Easy way to identify members of the SSand if they burned it off scar just as incriminating .** Heard at least one veteran going on about checking prisoners for the tattoo.

[HairyEyeball]

*Small tattoo of blood group on arm .Easy way to identify members of the SSand if they burned it off scar just as incriminating .** Heard at least one veteran going on about checking prisoners for the tattoo.

Not quite. The 'incriminating' tattoo was the SS rune - twin lightning bolts - on the torso, just under the armpit.

[JohnP]

Why couldn't they have a Firefly site and then put the donations in a general fund that could be used to restore the Tiger? Then they could put it in a special section featuring the tools used by the SS murder troops.

I have read a book called "Balkan Nightmare" that was written by a non-German (Bulgarian, I think) SS conscript. He wrote that the tattoo under his left arm was virtually a death sentence unless he could surrender to Americans. It seem he was also very fearful of being captured by Canadians for some reason. This is surprising since we are all just so nice and polite up here.

Its a good book if you can find it. The Library of Congress should have it for sure.

My apologies for getting back so late on this in the game.

Don't ever confuse being nice and polite at home to being a feared and deadly opponent on the battle field.

I went through Canadian Jump school in your home town in 1988. They may have been polite, professional, and nice guys to hang with off duty, but I can tell you, the Canadian Paratroopers are a very tough, military organization. I would go into battle with anyone of them at any time.

Another thing to remember, the Canadians were at war as a colony of England during WWII and had been involved with front line fighting since the first. They had seen the atrocities committed by their enemy and received nor drew quarter.

Final note: The 1st American Special Unit was comprised of both US and Canadian Regiments. The distinctive shoulder patch was that of an arrow head with the USA horizontal at the top supported by Canada vertical in the center.

[Woody]

No Canadian paras anymore got disbanded for what they did in somalia .:devil:

[JohnP]

No Canadian paras anymore got disbanded for what they did in somalia .:devil:

True but they have other airborne units.

"In April 2005, the Canadian government's new defence policy statement was made public. It included a concept of first responders for international tasks consisting of "special forces" (such as Joint Task Force 2) supported by one of the light battalions (presumably on a rotational basis), including the parachute capability of its integral para company.

As a result, the Canadian Special Operations Regiment (CSOR) was formed

No offense meant to my para brothers from the UK.

[Murray B]

I went through Canadian Jump school in your home town in 1988. They may have been polite, professional, and nice guys to hang with off duty, but I can tell you, the Canadian Paratroopers are a very tough, military organization. I would go into battle with anyone of them at any time.

The entire Airborne were disbanded after two or three members did bad things in Somalia. The vast majority were professionals as you say and did not deserve the punishment. Note, however, that it was the Prime Minister that disbanded the Airborne and it seems to have been done for political reasons. It made me so mad I could have just spit and I am completely civilian.

Another thing to remember, the Canadians were at war as a colony of England during WWII and had been involved with front line fighting since the first.

Technically Canada was a Dominion in the Commonwealth at the time but effectively pretty much the entire former British Empire declared war. I have read an interesting paper that points out that even though war was declared officially by Canada some time after Britian the state of war actually existed instantly. HRH is also the head of our armed forces.

They had seen the atrocities committed by their enemy and received nor drew quarter.

There is much more to what happened to the lunatic elite SS than that. It is hard to figure out because nobody wants to talk about it even now. What I have been able to determine is that the SS had murdered 11 million civilians under their jurisdiction and were no longer considered soldiers by Commonwealth forces. Murdering women, children and old people seems to be what did it.

Final note: The 1st American Special Unit was comprised of both US and Canadian Regiments. The distinctive shoulder patch was that of an arrow head with the USA horizontal at the top supported by Canada vertical in the center.

During WWII Canada had a huge military for her size. More than a million in total over the course of the war. It was possible to do serious joint operations like that back then. Today the Canadian Forces number about the same as Fort Bragg and that limits what can be achieved no matter how good they are.

Being understrength bothers me quite a bit but not as much as assigning them tasks that they do not have the manpower or equipment to do with reasonable safety. Maybe they should form a union.

[JohnP]

The entire Airborne were disbanded after two or three members did bad things in Somalia. The vast majority were professionals as you say and did not deserve the punishment. Note, however, that it was the Prime Minister that disbanded the Airborne and it seems to have been done for political reasons. It made me so mad I could have just spit and I am completely civilian .

I was set straight on this statement earlier and have done some research on it. You are right, it appears to be more political than anything substantial. That's like saying let's disband the entire US Army due to Mei Lei.



Technically Canada was a Dominion in the Commonwealth at the time but effectively pretty much the entire former British Empire declared war. I have read an interesting paper that points out that even though war was declared officially by Canada some time after Britian the state of war actually existed instantly. HRH is also the head of our armed forces.

I stand corrected. Thank you for keeping me informed.



There is much more to what happened to the lunatic elite SS than that. It is hard to figure out because nobody wants to talk about it even now. What I have been able to determine is that the SS had murdered 11 million civilians under their jurisdiction and were no longer considered soldiers by Commonwealth forces. Murdering women, children and old people seems to be what did it.

It's easier to repress a memory until it's a blatent sore.

During WWII Canada had a huge military for her size. More than a million in total over the course of the war. It was possible to do serious joint operations like that back then. Today the Canadian Forces number about the same as Fort Bragg and that limits what can be achieved no matter how good they are.

It's still possible to do joint ops with other countries. It's just not done to the extent it was during WWII and Korea. There's a great article in the January VFW magazine about a French unit assigned to the 24th ID.



Being understrength bothers me quite a bit but not as much as assigning them tasks that they do not have the manpower or equipment to do with reasonable safety. Maybe they should form a union.

This is also a downward trend that's happening throughout the military. It gives the term "Army of One" a whole new meaning.

[Murray B]

[That's like saying let's disband the entire US Army due to Mei Lei.

Shh, liberals might be listening. It is a good comparison because they are both instances of media misrepresenting isolated incidents as representative of the whole.

I stand corrected. Thank you for keeping me informed. .

Um, well, you were not really wrong. The former colonial relationship is the reason that Canada declared war and there was no national vote on it. It is unclear to me what the difference between a colony and a dominion is anyway. Maybe it is just “lawyer speak” like how we never had nuclear weapons on our soil when we actually did.

It's easier to repress a memory until it's a blatent sore.

Nope, I don’t think that was it at all. Can your congress try and convict someone? Could they try a group in absentia and convict them?

The Thule Society believed that they were the descendents of Aryan super-humans and had the right to exterminate all ‘lesser’ beings. The SS are the embodiment of this ideal and the tattoo was to certify the purity of their genes. In some ways the SS are like a demonic version of your Marine Corps. Converting a real Aryan SS man into a democrat is just as impossible as converting an old Marine Sergeant into a liberal f***tard [funny way to spell leotard, by the way]. The SS men hated communism and democracy equally and it is not possible to ever “convert” one no matter what. By the war’s end the SS and the SS Gestapo had murdered close to 20 million civilians under their jurisdiction. They were not soldiers.

It's still possible to do joint ops with other countries. It's just not done to the extent it was during WWII and Korea.

Canada is quite safe nestled next to a superpower but safety is not why Canada should increase her military forces. The reason we should do this is so that our defense is not paid for by U.S. taxpayers. This kind of freeloading really bugs me.

This is also a downward trend that's happening throughout the military. It gives the term "Army of One" a whole new meaning.

Not good...not good at all.

[Woody]

As Hairy eyeball will confirm comparing the USMC with the SS is very flawed for many reasons not least the SS was number one when it came to budget and equipment .While the USMC had to fix its choppers with duct tape that they had to buy !
Most elite units consider themselves better than anyone else wrongly or rightly so you could quite easily make comparisons with the SS to any unit you could think of and come out with similarities .
I dont think many units since the SS have massacring villages down as an sop .Mai lei was neither planned or condoned .

[Murray B]

As Hairy eyeball will confirm...

Well, I do respect Hairy Eyeball and he has much experience but I do not understand how you know what he will confirm.

For many reasons I believe that the vast majority of people in the USMC are dedicated to their creed. They are faithful to it long after they leave the service. Part of that creed involves the U.S. constitution and having read that document I believe that Marines are the opposite of what the SS were.
Sorry, I did not make myself clear on that point.

It is sad that they have to fix things with duct tape and even sadder that it was paid for out of their own pockets. Nevertheless, they got the job done and that does not really surprise me.


I dont think many units since the SS have massacring villages down as an sop .Mai lei was neither planned or condoned.

No soldiers, before or since, have come close to murdering 20 million civilians like the SS did. That is why they, were not, are not, and can never be, soldiers. As far as media coverage of the Vietnam conflict goes. Much of it was what I call "strategic propaganda" and served the interest of America's enemies. A lot of the rest was just ridiculous hippie nonsense coming from rebels without a clue.

Running the story about the murders must have been planned and condoned by somebody. Things do not get on television by themselves.