When do people change their minds. | PUNT ROAD END | Richmond Tigers Forum
  • IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.

When do people change their minds.

Giardiasis said:
WW2 and WW1 (which you can’t ignore when looking at WW2) were included in the essays. You asked for some material I provided it, I suggest you actually read it before throwing strong counter arguments.

Again you make a strong statement about who “started” the war, you haven’t read the counter arguments so I’m not sure why you asked for me to provide material given how you aren’t interested in reading it.

Point I’m making is that the atomic bombs dropped by the US was an abhorrent crime, yet I don’t think anyone involved faced any consequences of it given they were the victors nor would the US government admit that it was a crime. Official line is that it was required to end the war without risking American lives, the historical record shows this to be false.

Reduction ad absurdum isn’t fallacious reasoning. Just because one side is more palatable doesn’t mean they are good in any sense.
Click to expand...

No, I pointed out that Hitler decided to annex the Sudetenlands, Hitler decided to then invade the rest of Poland, Hitler decided to invade France and Belgium, fortunately for the rest of the world Hitler also tried to invade the Soviet Union which turned the war against him.

Your argument is facile - because Germany wasn't 100% responsible for the causes of war, and there are shades of good and bad on both sides that both sides were somehow equally morally culpable.

You completely neglect to address what would have happened to the world if Hitler and the Nazis were unopposed, and focus only on the causes of the war. And we haven't even talked about what the Japanese did in Asia.

I agree that Hiroshima/Nagasaki were war crimes.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
AngryAnt said:
You completely neglect to address what would have happened to the world if Hitler and the Nazis were unopposed, and focus only on the causes of the war.
Click to expand...
Well, the Hitler moustache for one wouldn't have become extinct so quickly.
 
AngryAnt said:
No, I pointed out that Hitler decided to annex the Sudetenlands, Hitler decided to then invade the rest of Poland, Hitler decided to invade France and Belgium, fortunately for the rest of the world Hitler also tried to invade the Soviet Union which turned the war against him.

Your argument is facile - because Germany wasn't 100% responsible for the causes of war, and there are shades of good and bad on both sides that both sides were somehow equally morally culpable.

You completely neglect to address what would have happened to the world if Hitler and the Nazis were unopposed, and focus only on the causes of the war. And we haven't even talked about what the Japanese did in Asia.

I agree that Hiroshima/Nagasaki were war crimes.
Click to expand...
Please see previous response re: read the material before spouting the official line
 
Giardiasis said:
Please see previous response re: read the material before spouting the official line
Click to expand...

You dispute that Hitler annexed the Sudetenlands, then Poland, Belgium and France for starters? That's the "official line" I'm spouting.

If you have evidence to the contrary produce it.
 
pretty funny that the change-your-mind thread

has decended into a semantic argument about Hitler :rotfl1

I changed my mind yesterday

first I thought Tigers were no chance, now I think we are near certain to win
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users
eZyT said:
pretty funny that the change-your-mind thread

has decended into a semantic argument :rotfl1

I changed my mind yesterday

first I thought Tigers were no chance, now I think we are near certain to win
Click to expand...
I always feel that way game day.
 
AngryAnt said:
You dispute that Hitler annexed the Sudetenlands, then Poland, Belgium and France for starters? That's the "official line" I'm spouting.

If you have evidence to the contrary produce it.
Click to expand...
No but you need to understand the history of Germany and what happened at the end of WW1 then to simply claim they were completely in the wrong.
 
Giardiasis said:
No but you need to understand the history of Germany and what happened at the end of WW1 then to simply claim they were completely in the wrong.
Click to expand...

Sure, history is complex. I agree with that. But the Nazis and Japanese still needed to be defeated.
 
Giardiasis said:
I mean if you shoot someone in the leg and they start to shoot at your head I guess you need to start shooting at their head too.
Click to expand...

G, everyone knows the causes of the war were complex. Weimar Republic, Treaty of Versailles, German reparations and ban on rearming, economy, yada yada yada. What you saying is well-known and not at all controversial, has been covered by many many historians before. It's not something that is unique to Mises.org.

The West even tried appeasement pre-WWII but Germany just kept re-arming and went ahead on their mission to invade the whole of Europe anyway.

This debate is clapped-out anyway, no-one's mind is gonna be changed on this today. But if you want a clear cut example of the Americans as the bad guys, try the second Iraq war.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
AngryAnt said:
G, everyone knows the causes of the war were complex. Weimar Republic, Treaty of Versailles, German reparations and ban on rearming, economy, yada yada yada. What you saying is well-known and not at all controversial, has been covered by many many historians before. It's not something that is unique to Mises.org.

The West even tried appeasement pre-WWII but Germany just kept re-arming and went ahead on their mission to invade the whole of Europe anyway.

This debate is clapped-out anyway, no-one's mind is gonna be changed on this today. But if you want a clear cut example of the Americans as the bad guys, try the second Iraq war.
Click to expand...
Yes I know that, but the material I provided (not just mises.org, AJP Taylor was hardly libertarian) challenges your claim that Germany had a mission to invade the whole of Europe, which is very much the mainstream position. The US as the bad guy in Iraq is pretty mainsteam. The allies as bad guys of WW1 and WW2 certainly ain't.
 
Giardiasis said:
Yes I know that, but the material I provided (not just mises.org, AJP Taylor was hardly libertarian) challenges your claim that Germany had a mission to invade the whole of Europe, which is very much the mainstream position. The US as the bad guy in Iraq is pretty mainsteam. The allies as bad guys of WW1 and WW2 certainly ain't.
Click to expand...

Maybe you confuse the popular understanding with actual scholarly history, as most historians acknowledge the factors which led to the rise of Hitler and Nazism and German rearmament in the 1930s. That's completely uncontroversial.

As for Germany not being on a mission to invade the whole of Europe, I suppose they got to this position by sheer accident


1942-Europe-map.jpg
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: 1 users
AngryAnt said:
Maybe you confuse the popular understanding with actual scholarly history, as most historians acknowledge the factors which led to the rise of Hitler and Nazism and German rearmament in the 1930s. That's completely uncontroversial.

As for Germany not being on a mission to invade the whole of Europe, I suppose they got to this position by sheer accident
Click to expand...
No I understand that those factors are acknowledged, it is the other bit, the controversial bit that I’m disputing. You can keep making non sequiturs or you can read AJP Taylor.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
< Contraception, abortion and stem-cell research [Split and merged] | NBN >
Official PRE merch now on Redbubble!
Top Bottom