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/...80167#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]

Originally Posted by timwoodhead@hotmail.com

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]

Originally Posted by timwoodhead@hotmail.com

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) 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.