Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 107

Thread: Good Side and Bad Side in War?

  1. #41
    Miles
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    140
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0

    Default Re: Good Side and Bad Side in War?

    Quote Originally Posted by Ritterbruder44 View Post
    I'm sorry but where does that 'If Germany had won the war, we'd all be German right now'-bull always come from?

    Hitler did go for a Pan-German reich in a way, but we should note the difference between conquest and occupation. If the Germans somehow would have forced England to give up and sign peace, all those Wehrmacht boys would just leave France as it was and go die on the Eastern Front.
    And even those invasion in the East were rather to deal with Communism and Stalin rather than actually claiming Russian soil (since the USSR controlled pretty much everything East from Germany

    I got this crap as well as learning about WW1, though they always leave out the fact that Germany already had completely crushed the French army in 1870, and after that, they all just went back home (with some minor adjustments in the mining areas of the Elzas, agreed)
    One German word... Lebensraum. The idea that Germany needed to expand and displace "inferior" races to make room for "superior" ones. Make no mistake, the British/French/etc were considered part of the "superior" races, that does not mean Hitler didn't want to just leave France and Britain alone. True, early war he did try forcing peace with Britain, but that was only a stalling move so that he could deal with his ideological enemies in the east. Like his first steps - Austria, Sudetenland Czechoslovakia, the rest of the Czechs, etc, Hitler would have kept making demands. Assuming a policy of appeasement continued and never ended, and assuming Hitler beat the Soviet Union, Britain would have eventually be isolated and it would have been, "Surrender peacefully to the Third Reich or prepare for war."

    Now how long his ideology would have carried on with successors to his empire is another debate.

  2. #42
    Lord Oda Nobunaga's Avatar Sixth Heaven Demon Lord
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Azuchi-jō Tenshu
    Posts
    11,166
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0

    Default Re: Good Side and Bad Side in War?

    Actually Hitler did not want to dissolve countries, if he did that then German nationalism wouldn't work out since there are all of these other nationalities. Hitler also had no reason to bother France at all other than the construction of the Atlantic wall. Hitler can't even touch the French since they are of the Empire of Charlemagne and that would be strictly taboo. He also doesn't want to bother any other countries anyway.

    Saying someone is bad is one thing but saying that they would do untold millions of other things because they are bad doesn't really make sense either. I see no reason why Hitler would enslave every nationality that wasn't German, that's not really the point of nationalism. More like the establishment of a state for every nationality and hence nationalism.
    110th Anniversary of the Russo-Japanese War

  3. #43
    Miles
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    140
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0

    Default Re: Good Side and Bad Side in War?

    Quote Originally Posted by money View Post
    Actually Hitler did not want to dissolve countries, if he did that then German nationalism wouldn't work out since there are all of these other nationalities. Hitler also had no reason to bother France at all other than the construction of the Atlantic wall. Hitler can't even touch the French since they are of the Empire of Charlemagne and that would be strictly taboo. He also doesn't want to bother any other countries anyway.

    Saying someone is bad is one thing but saying that they would do untold millions of other things because they are bad doesn't really make sense either. I see no reason why Hitler would enslave every nationality that wasn't German, that's not really the point of nationalism. More like the establishment of a state for every nationality and hence nationalism.
    You're talking about a man who knew that six million plus people were being butchered in Nazi concentration camps and was still able to go to sleep at night, and you think its beyond him to have even grander goals? Hitler is the epitome of pure evil.

    No, Hitler was doing what every smart empire does - making "vassals" out of certain areas like Czechoslovakia and the tripartite division of Poland and taking whatever he could in a massive land-grab. And Hitler had a policy of making non-Aryan Germans an equal through the usage of "Honorary Aryan" titles, but these were bestowed only amongst Germany's allies and supporters - such as Japan and the other Western European Caucasian ethnic groups.

    Hitler had grander plans than simply creating another empire over territory. Like the rulers of old, he was planning the construction of a city, but unlike the rulers of old, it was to be the capital of the world. Unlike Alexander, Hitler foresaw cities being built to house pure blood Aryans while a caste system developed keeping everyone else below them. It's not quite unlike what usually happened throughout most of human history - the caste system bit.

    If Hitler didn't want to dissolve countries, why did Austria, Poland, Czechoslovakia, most of France, Norway, etc get occupied, most of which dissolved?

    The only argument that he was "occupying" instead of dissolving was because World War II only lasted six years and Hitler never had the time to properly annex territories into his empire. If he had won and had 20 years to consolidate his gains, Europe would look a lot different right now.

  4. #44
    Lord Oda Nobunaga's Avatar Sixth Heaven Demon Lord
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Azuchi-jō Tenshu
    Posts
    11,166
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0

    Default Re: Good Side and Bad Side in War?

    So because Hitler dislikes Jews then he also dislikes everybody?
    It doesn't matter if he killed 6 million (apparently it is 4 million now) Jews, that is no proof to suggest that he wants to depopulate the world and kill everyone else. There isn't any evidence to suggest even that.

    If every smart empire does things such as that then I hope there is no insinuation that Germany was a smart empire, as short lived as it was. Why shouldn't Austria be conquered, they are German and they wanted in, in fact why is austria even a country right now (but that is beyond the point so ignore that last bit). France was only occupied in the North so that the Germans could defend against an allied attack and to use as bases to combat the British. Poland and Czechoslovakia sort of enticed Germany at them as well. Norway and Denmark was occupied because of the war but I missed the part where the Germans put bullets in the heads of every Norwegian and Dane and used them as cheap labour.
    There is no actual evidence that Hitler planned a super caste system especially when his ideology calls for states for every European non-minority to house them, the only exceptions were basically "Germanic territories". Sure they would all be vassal states but vassals aren't the same as actual slavery.

    Saying that Hitler was bad is one thing but the epitome of pure evil? If we are going by body counts then Stalin or Mao could easily challenge for that title if not win all together.
    110th Anniversary of the Russo-Japanese War

  5. #45
    ╬Ritterbruder╬'s Avatar Princeps Prior
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    1,334
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0

    Default Re: Good Side and Bad Side in War?

    Quote Originally Posted by ColtonCM View Post
    You're talking about a man who knew that six million plus people were being butchered in Nazi concentration camps and was still able to go to sleep at night, and you think its beyond him to have even grander goals? Hitler is the epitome of pure evil.

    No, Hitler was doing what every smart empire does - making "vassals" out of certain areas like Czechoslovakia and the tripartite division of Poland and taking whatever he could in a massive land-grab. And Hitler had a policy of making non-Aryan Germans an equal through the usage of "Honorary Aryan" titles, but these were bestowed only amongst Germany's allies and supporters - such as Japan and the other Western European Caucasian ethnic groups.

    Hitler had grander plans than simply creating another empire over territory. Like the rulers of old, he was planning the construction of a city, but unlike the rulers of old, it was to be the capital of the world. Unlike Alexander, Hitler foresaw cities being built to house pure blood Aryans while a caste system developed keeping everyone else below them. It's not quite unlike what usually happened throughout most of human history - the caste system bit.

    If Hitler didn't want to dissolve countries, why did Austria, Poland, Czechoslovakia, most of France, Norway, etc get occupied, most of which dissolved?

    The only argument that he was "occupying" instead of dissolving was because World War II only lasted six years and Hitler never had the time to properly annex territories into his empire. If he had won and had 20 years to consolidate his gains, Europe would look a lot different right now.
    it's not that we get the Lebensraum and White power spooned in at breakfast that that's all there is to the NSDAP and WWII, it is a politcal party with a policy and a political struggle that concerned the entire world.
    It's because that is so easy to distinguish from other conflicts what makes it so popular to use to tell about it.
    Also Hitler was not evil, he's the personification of a party, a party that was formed without him and had a lot of followers, even before he became president. This idea that Adolf Hitler is solely responsible for everything between 1930-1945 and every decision that happened (including other countries) would be the same as to blame the entire Middle-Eastern Crisis on Osama Bin Laden or George W. Bush
    Quote Originally Posted by wyrda78 View Post
    Well maybe if there was a thread instructing people on how to mod there would be more modders.

  6. #46
    Lord Oda Nobunaga's Avatar Sixth Heaven Demon Lord
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Azuchi-jō Tenshu
    Posts
    11,166
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0

    Default Re: Good Side and Bad Side in War?

    I think something that is severely overlooked is why World War 2 was possible. Why blame Germany for absolutely everything when the likes of Czechoslovakia and Poland are easy enough to victimize when they are on the losing end but fact is both countries were able to give Germany a casus belli. A bad person pulling strings and starting a war is certainly one choppy version of the tale, but if someone can actually invade you because you helped or gave a reason to start the war then you ed up pretty good as well. There actually was a crisis which Poland and Czechoslovakia helped start, that is why World War 2 is two sided as are all conflicts.
    110th Anniversary of the Russo-Japanese War

  7. #47
    Shashu
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    199
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0

    Default Re: Good Side and Bad Side in War?

    This thread is if there is a good side in a war; and I think this thread shows there is.

    Quote Originally Posted by money View Post
    I think something that is severely overlooked is why World War 2 was possible. Why blame Germany for absolutely everything when the likes of Czechoslovakia and Poland are easy enough to victimize when they are on the losing end but fact is both countries were able to give Germany a casus belli. A bad person pulling strings and starting a war is certainly one choppy version of the tale, but if someone can actually invade you because you helped or gave a reason to start the war then you ed up pretty good as well. There actually was a crisis which Poland and Czechoslovakia helped start, that is why World War 2 is two sided as are all conflicts.
    The crisis was that neither were willing to give any concessions to Germany and actively looked for help against it when the Germans continued making unreasonable demands on two new countries that had every right to be concerned about a more powerful neighbor undermining it's sovereignty.

    Unlike Czechoslovakia Poland under Pilsudski gave the Germans the ultimate cassus belli of asking the French for political cover to remove Hitler; but Hitler didn't know about it and such a cassus belli died with Pilsudski; which is why the Germans didn't use it. If anything it was the way the allies drew borders in granting the Czechs every inch of their medieval kingdom, and Poland's desire to avoid being in a position to be embargoed on a whim by Germany, and unwillingness to be an ally of Hitler (Hitler offered the Poles alternative ports from future taking on the Soviet Union) that enabled Hitler to spin things into be given concessions/getting Germany into war. In both cases it leaves a very clear impression of who was good and who was bad.

  8. #48
    Lord Oda Nobunaga's Avatar Sixth Heaven Demon Lord
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Azuchi-jō Tenshu
    Posts
    11,166
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0

    Default Re: Good Side and Bad Side in War?

    There wouldn't need to be concessions if Czechoslovakia and Poland hadn't began attacking minorities. If neither of those countries had done that then Germany doesn't have an urgent casus belli. Danzig for example was willing to join Germany and Danzig had that right. Poland was very intent on the expansion of its territory at German extent. The problem is really whether Poland should give a port up and become essentially land locked. In exchange though Poland would have received recognition for the parts of West Prussia that it annexed as well as the strip from East Prussia so it wasn't a completely one sided offer. But that just proves how ed up nationalism can be and the idea of a country for every ethnicity, which is why the "solutions" after World War 1 provided more problems. Although Czechoslovakia gave Germany a casus belli I also don't see why Germany was able to annex it, even though the Czechs had previously annexed towns that were supposed to be German (as did Poland). But I can't really say that Poland is innocent as they conspired with France, refused every offer and began to rid themselves of German and Ukrainian minorities but also adopted an agressive policy against many of its neighboors.
    110th Anniversary of the Russo-Japanese War

  9. #49
    Shashu
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    199
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0

    Default Re: Good Side and Bad Side in War?

    Quote Originally Posted by money View Post
    There wouldn't need to be concessions if Czechoslovakia and Poland hadn't began attacking minorities. If neither of those countries had done that then Germany doesn't have an urgent casus belli. Danzig for example was willing to join Germany and Danzig had that right. Poland was very intent on the expansion of its territory at German extent. The problem is really whether Poland should give a port up and become essentially land locked. In exchange though Poland would have received recognition for the parts of West Prussia that it annexed as well as the strip from East Prussia so it wasn't a completely one sided offer. But that just proves how ed up nationalism can be and the idea of a country for every ethnicity, which is why the "solutions" after World War 1 provided more problems. Although Czechoslovakia gave Germany a casus belli I also don't see why Germany was able to annex it, even though the Czechs had previously annexed towns that were supposed to be German (as did Poland). But I can't really say that Poland is innocent as they conspired with France, refused every offer and began to rid themselves of German and Ukrainian minorities but also adopted an agressive policy against many of its neighboors.
    The Czechs didn't attack the German Minority, that was a fabrication. Neither did the Poles. I'm not justifying it; but the future expulsion of Baltic Germans by the Soviet Army with local support doesn't justify anything Germany did 5 years earlier. Again I don't think it was right but you also should remember what the Germans did in Russia; the Russians didn't wake up in the morning and decide we will expel these Germans; they knew from their own experience what the nazis were doing in occupied slavic nations and determined it would be better for everyone if the Germans all went to Germany. Compared to what the Germans did in every occupied Eastern European Nation that is saintly.

    Saints? No, but when your enemy is Stalin and Hitler in Alliance with each other you don't have to be to clearly be the good side; considering that compared to Hitler Stalin is clearly the good side. The OP asked if there is ever a good side; your own wording seems to show you know Poland and Czechoslovakia were both the good side when Hitler was making his demands; why else would you use words like "not totally innocent"?

    The East Europeans (Soviets don't deserve all of the blame; the Germans were quickly identified by locals who very dearly desired to be rid of the Germans) did expel the Germans, did expel them with high brutality, and did actively make them suffer; but that was often after the war and in all cases after a long and unforgivable amount of extreme violence on the locals. The Germans were treated well before the war.

  10. #50
    Lord Oda Nobunaga's Avatar Sixth Heaven Demon Lord
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Azuchi-jō Tenshu
    Posts
    11,166
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0

    Default Re: Good Side and Bad Side in War?

    "compared to Hitler, Stalin is clearly the good side"
    I disagree with that statement and I think you will find that many others will do so as well. Stalin is usually regarded as worse than Hitler and although I originally disbelieved that, I could not refute it based on any evidence.
    110th Anniversary of the Russo-Japanese War

  11. #51
    Karabekian's Avatar Aquilifer
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    317
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0

    Default Re: Good Side and Bad Side in War?

    Why did a good question end up as a 10yo debate on Hitler and Stalin? Granted they and you are cool, but come on.

    The original question was whether there is a good and bad side in war. I think you can say there have been "good" sides in war, but there are many wars with no good side. The Syrian civil war is a war between various groups with various motives, but not one of them is innocent or can be considered good. That there are innocent people is not our concern. It is they who mess their lives up and must learn to take responsibility. My country has, and so has many others.

    It should be clear to anyone that the Nazis had to be defeated, just like the Japanese. The various conquests (or attempts to it) of individuals with individual motives can be condemned. The many civil wars where individual groups with individual motives disrupt society can be condemned. The many wars where these motives are based on religious, racial and other imaginary motives can be condemned.

    It all depends on the motive of the war. The atrocities that follow depend on the nature of the enemy. And the one fact you should always include is human behavior and natural instinct.

  12. #52
    ╬Ritterbruder╬'s Avatar Princeps Prior
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    1,334
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0

    Default Re: Good Side and Bad Side in War?

    Quote Originally Posted by Karabekian View Post
    Why did a good question end up as a 10yo debate on Hitler and Stalin? Granted they and you are cool, but come on.

    The original question was whether there is a good and bad side in war. I think you can say there have been "good" sides in war, but there are many wars with no good side. The Syrian civil war is a war between various groups with various motives, but not one of them is innocent or can be considered good. That there are innocent people is not our concern. It is they who mess their lives up and must learn to take responsibility. My country has, and so has many others.

    It should be clear to anyone that the Nazis had to be defeated, just like the Japanese. The various conquests (or attempts to it) of individuals with individual motives can be condemned. The many civil wars where individual groups with individual motives disrupt society can be condemned. The many wars where these motives are based on religious, racial and other imaginary motives can be condemned.

    It all depends on the motive of the war. The atrocities that follow depend on the nature of the enemy. And the one fact you should always include is human behavior and natural instinct.
    But wars never are rooted in a single or a few motivations, it usually has it's roots in the past 100-200 years of history of that nation
    Quote Originally Posted by wyrda78 View Post
    Well maybe if there was a thread instructing people on how to mod there would be more modders.

  13. #53
    Shashu
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    199
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0

    Default Re: Good Side and Bad Side in War?

    Quote Originally Posted by money View Post
    "compared to Hitler, Stalin is clearly the good side"
    I disagree with that statement and I think you will find that many others will do so as well. Stalin is usually regarded as worse than Hitler and although I originally disbelieved that, I could not refute it based on any evidence.
    Stalin and Hitler's big difference is Stalin treated everyone like cattle to be butchered while Hitler wanted to exalt the "Aryan" race.

    In 1939 when Poland was attacked however they were both in Alliance; I spoke in haste earlier and agree saying that Stalin was clearly better then Hitler is wrong; but it is very easy to call Poland the good side; Rydz Smigley would have to be pretty evil to not be the good side when up against an alliance between Hitler and Stalin.

  14. #54
    flota's Avatar Miles
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    México
    Posts
    132
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0

    Default Re: Good Side and Bad Side in War?

    there are not good or bad sides.
    depends on the point of view, the side you´re on, etc

    the world is not black or white
    Imposible is Nothing.

    The individual has always had to struggle to keep from being overwhelmed by the tribe. If you try it, you will be lonely often, and sometimes frightened. But no price is too high to pay for the privilege of owning yourself.
    -Friedrich Nietzsche

  15. #55
    Karabekian's Avatar Aquilifer
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    317
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0

    Default Re: Good Side and Bad Side in War?

    Quote Originally Posted by Ritterbruder44 View Post
    But wars never are rooted in a single or a few motivations, it usually has it's roots in the past 100-200 years of history of that nation
    Most wars are fought because someone wants it and profits from it, not because someone insulted you a hundred years ago. That someone needs to motivate his actions somehow.

  16. #56
    Indefinitely Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    6
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0

    Default Re: Good Side and Bad Side in War?

    There are no good countries or bad countries only these countries and those countries.

  17. #57
    Condottiere 40K's Avatar Tribunus Laticlavius
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    15,393
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0

    Default Re: Good Side and Bad Side in War?

    British bomber strategy developed on the basis that anything would be better than another four years of trench warfare, and that the bleeding edge of bomber aviation technology would ensure that nothing would stop them from delivering their payload on target.

    And Frederick had a grievance against Austria, as apparently Marie Therese torpedoed his marriage plans. The fact that Silesia was an economically tempting fruit waiting to be plucked by a plucky Prussian was just icing on the cake.
    Eats, shoots, and leaves.

  18. #58
    Miles
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    140
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0

    Default Re: Good Side and Bad Side in War?

    Where are you guys getting it that I said he wanted to depopulate the entire world?

    For Hitler there was a clear difference of peoples:

    There were the pure-blood German Aryans, top of the gradient;
    then came the other noble whites, like the French and British;
    then came the "Honorary Aryans," which was basically anyone the Nazi Party said was an Aryan (Japan, for instance, even though deep down both Japan and Germany racially disliked each other, and if they did win and their empires eventually bordered each other, who knows what would have happened - there's a video game on this I believe lol).

    Then came the more savage peoples (in his mindset):

    Slavs
    Arabs
    Africans
    Native Americans

    These people most certainly would have been evicted from their lands, forced into slave labor to build cities for more "pure" colonists, and would have formed the bottom of the social hierarchy.

    Most human societies have had this. The Greeks and Romans relied extensively on slavery to get things done. Hitler would (and maybe did) use that as justification for wanting to enslave the Slavic peoples amongst others.

  19. #59
    ╬Ritterbruder╬'s Avatar Princeps Prior
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    1,334
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0

    Default Re: Good Side and Bad Side in War?

    Quote Originally Posted by ColtonCM View Post
    Where are you guys getting it that I said he wanted to depopulate the entire world?

    For Hitler there was a clear difference of peoples:

    There were the pure-blood German Aryans, top of the gradient;
    then came the other noble whites, like the French and British;
    then came the "Honorary Aryans," which was basically anyone the Nazi Party said was an Aryan (Japan, for instance, even though deep down both Japan and Germany racially disliked each other, and if they did win and their empires eventually bordered each other, who knows what would have happened - there's a video game on this I believe lol).

    Then came the more savage peoples (in his mindset):

    Slavs
    Arabs
    Africans
    Native Americans

    These people most certainly would have been evicted from their lands, forced into slave labor to build cities for more "pure" colonists, and would have formed the bottom of the social hierarchy.

    Most human societies have had this. The Greeks and Romans relied extensively on slavery to get things done. Hitler would (and maybe did) use that as justification for wanting to enslave the Slavic peoples amongst others.
    Where did YOU get that is the only reason behind WW2?
    Quote Originally Posted by wyrda78 View Post
    Well maybe if there was a thread instructing people on how to mod there would be more modders.

  20. #60
    PikeStance's Avatar Imperial Splendour- PM
    Vault Staff

    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Changchun, China
    Posts
    3,181
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0

    Default Re: Good Side and Bad Side in War?

    Ok, I first started to read this thread on the train, but someone made a great point- this should probably be in the Ethics forum, but since it is here...

    I always found it interesting that the worse most cruel endeavor of man is war, and yet is one of the most romanticized.

    I do not think war can ever be moral. We certainly do try to however. War, at best, is an amoral affair. Any morality we assign to it is done to rationalize the death and destruction it causes. Don't be fooled by the facade of a noble fight, it is all about power and wealth.

    The state would do anything to protect its own self- interest. It s a real coup is they convince you of their righteousness!

    ---

    [Historical Research Society] [Archivum] [Modding Vault] [Live Action Studio] [BAI Submod for IS]
    [ Under Patronage of Omnipotent- Q ] [ The House of Wild Bill Kelso]

Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •