dimreepr

Shamima Begum

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
15 hours ago, MigL said:

Offering a 'way back' does seem reasonable.
But I have to wonder, how many Germans, after WW2, claimed they were not NAZIs, or were simply following orders.

1
1

most of them probably, usually not unreasonably.

Germany seems to have survived... the others.

Edited by dimreepr

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Killing/brutalizing their neighbors to get back at the West John ?

I know ISIS ideology doesn't make sense, but that is really stretching.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

well, it was her decision to go there and she seems anti Europe I mean saying the bombings where okay. we don't need people like that.

it is sad but she made a decision a treasonous one and should be left to her just desserts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, peterwlocke said:

well, it was her decision to go there and she seems anti Europe I mean saying the bombings where okay. we don't need people like that.

it is sad but she made a decision a treasonous one and should be left to her just desserts.

I'll have to give her one thing: she's honest, which seems consistent with her family's values that I've read so far about them. That transparency is not helping her out of her mess. I think she could probably be deradicalised.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

The thing I asked about was 

11 hours ago, John Cuthber said:

And where did that come from?
How was it "justified"?

And the thing you have answered is "Where did it end"

1 hour ago, MigL said:

Killing/brutalizing their neighbors to get back at the West John ?

I know ISIS ideology doesn't make sense, but that is really stretching.


Why did you do that?

Edited by John Cuthber

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I must be obtuse.
Please enlighten me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/11/2019 at 6:39 PM, MigL said:

But I have to wonder, how many Germans, after WW2, claimed they were not NAZIs, or were simply following orders.
Should we have just given them a hug and said " All's well; Too bad about the 60 million dead in Europe"

There were a lot, and despite the efforts of denazification of Germany quite a few become members of the new democratic order.  Ultimately, only a handful were convicted and many that were deemed to be collaborators were allowed to pursue careers in politics, police and so on. Perhaps around 1% of all  cases resulted in ban from public offices or worse punishments. Not entirely sure what your point is here, to be honest as no one lost their citizenship in the process. In fact, due to ius sanguinis there were quite a few folks from the former Soviet Union with German ancestry who were allowed to return to Germany and assume citizenship. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, StringJunky said:

I'll have to give her one thing: she's honest, which seems consistent with her family's values that I've read so far about them. That transparency is not helping her out of her mess. I think she could probably be deradicalised.

1
Quote

"I'm a 19-year-old girl with a newborn baby."I don't have any weapons; I don't want to hurt anyone even if I did have weapons.

probably..

so many in this thread have chosen rep over content... such a shame we have so little confidence in human nature... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 3/12/2019 at 12:39 AM, MigL said:

ISIS doesn't think the West is evil; Nor biased against non-Christian and non-whites.
They think ANYONE who doesn't share their ideology ( medieval religious zealotry ) is evil.

And do you think that started out as a deep and abiding love of the West?
Imagine you are mister religious zealot nutter.
You want to recruit people to your cause. There are some "floating voters" as it were who have not made up their mind about your view
There are " The other people"- it hardly matters what the differences are.

If "The Other People " behave kindly towards the floaters is that going to make it easier or harder for you to recruit to your cause than if "The Other People" behave like arseholes?


 

Edited by John Cuthber

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see.
I can just imagine how many new members ISIS will recruit now that they've been given a sound thrashing by the international community. I guess they would have had less members if we'd been 'nice' to them and let them brutalize the whole region.

Maybe if we'd been nice to A Hitler and let him have Poland, he wouldn't have tried to take all of Europe.
And If we had let North Korea take the southern peninsula, Kim Jung Un would be a nice respectful head of state today.
And why not. Let J Stalin  have Eastern Europe. It's a small price to pay for good relations with the Russians.
( I know, a little 'over the top', but it illustrates my point )

No, some evil just has to be stamped out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, MigL said:

No, some evil just has to be stamped out.

And we both agree that is achieved by love not hate, right. ;)

On 2/26/2019 at 6:03 PM, MigL said:

I don't know whether I gave Dimreepr the +1 or J Jefferies.
( or neither messenger, but the message )

I have never argued against the rule of law.
That's what separates us from the ISIS a*sholes.

 

otherwise, that +1 seems hollow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hey, at least it is agreed that it must be stopped.

also, how can you stop extream hate with diplomacy if you first don't make them concede(let it be known that we aren't taking their s... after we deal them a death blow like Hiroshima and Nagasaki a necessary evil(but that could be argued to make us as bad as them(but they started it and we just want it to never happen again)? I know it did not work with the Germans after ww1 but if they change it a bit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Always love, Dimreepr, never hate.
But you have heard of 'tough' love, haven't you ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, peterwlocke said:

hey, at least it is agreed that it must be stopped.

also, how can you stop extream hate with diplomacy if you first don't make them concede(let it be known that we aren't taking their s... after we deal them a death blow like Hiroshima and Nagasaki a necessary evil(but that could be argued to make us as bad as them(but they started it and we just want it to never happen again)? I know it did not work with the Germans after ww1 but if they change it a bit.

it's all too easy to let fear and loathing cloud our reasoning.

7 hours ago, MigL said:

Always love, Dimreepr, never hate.
But you have heard of 'tough' love, haven't you ?

1

we all love to see the bully get there's, we all just forget they already have had there's, which just seems vindictive.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

it's all too easy to let fear and loathing cloud our reasoning.

we all love to see the bully get there's, we all just forget they already have had there's, which just seems vindictive.   

true, but the risk of letting her in is too great and she already was like screw you I don't see how she will contribute.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
47 minutes ago, peterwlocke said:

true, but the risk of letting her in is too great and she already was like screw you I don't see how she will contribute.

that you don't see it, has little to do with her potential contribution. 

there are few more zealous than an ex-smoker. ;)

Edited by dimreepr

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/13/2019 at 8:56 PM, MigL said:

I see.
I can just imagine how many new members ISIS will recruit now that they've been given a sound thrashing by the international community. I guess they would have had less members if we'd been 'nice' to them and let them brutalize the whole region.

Maybe if we'd been nice to A Hitler and let him have Poland, he wouldn't have tried to take all of Europe.
And If we had let North Korea take the southern peninsula, Kim Jung Un would be a nice respectful head of state today.
And why not. Let J Stalin  have Eastern Europe. It's a small price to pay for good relations with the Russians.
( I know, a little 'over the top', but it illustrates my point )

No, some evil just has to be stamped out.

Populist propaganda and slowly administered anesthesia to evil of the late 20’s and early 30’s which led Hitler to power has nothing on the way things are going right now... some day a Shamima Begum of this world will become the next Hitler or Stalin (a smarter one that is) Imagine having practically infinite powers socially and being immune to any consequences of your actions, someone who will be manipulative, intelligent and evil enough can make use of this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
28 minutes ago, koti said:

Populist propaganda and slowly administered anesthesia to evil of the late 20’s and early 30’s which led Hitler to power has nothing on the way things are going right now... some day a Shamima Begum of this world will become the next Hitler or Stalin (a smarter one that is) Imagine having practically infinite powers socially and being immune to any consequences of your actions, someone who will be manipulative, intelligent and evil enough can make use of this.

3
3
3

thats the other end of the bell curve.

Edited by dimreepr

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, koti said:

Populist propaganda and slowly administered anesthesia to evil of the late 20’s and early 30’s which led Hitler to power has nothing on the way things are going right now...

The conflicts leading up to the rise of Hitler were anything but that. It was a time of clashing ideologies and one of the thing that the establishment feared was the rise of communists movements, especially after the Russian revolution. There more things, but much of it was related to the rise of new social ideas, and the eventual clashes arising from them. Hitler's view were anything but fringe and it is not that folks just let it happen. Support was given from conservative circles for many reasons, but one of them was their ability to gain control over workers and an attempt to diminish communist parties. It was also not the exploitation of a helpless system. It was something that at the core folks sympathized with, even if there were unsavory elements. And it should be noted that these views were not unique to Germany and the war was not predominantly a rebuke of the repugnant ideology but rather fueled by power political considerations. An as we can see, the ideology was never eradicated, just removed from power. Though there are ways where it begins creeping back. This time around packaged in more digestible packaging, but with the same turd inside.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, CharonY said:

The conflicts leading up to the rise of Hitler were anything but that. It was a time of clashing ideologies and one of the thing that the establishment feared was the rise of communists movements, especially after the Russian revolution. There more things, but much of it was related to the rise of new social ideas, and the eventual clashes arising from them. Hitler's view were anything but fringe and it is not that folks just let it happen. Support was given from conservative circles for many reasons, but one of them was their ability to gain control over workers and an attempt to diminish communist parties. It was also not the exploitation of a helpless system. It was something that at the core folks sympathized with, even if there were unsavory elements. And it should be noted that these views were not unique to Germany and the war was not predominantly a rebuke of the repugnant ideology but rather fueled by power political considerations. An as we can see, the ideology was never eradicated, just removed from power. Though there are ways where it begins creeping back. This time around packaged in more digestible packaging, but with the same turd inside.

After WWI Germans were left decimated with no clear goal, vulnerable to potent NSDAP propaganda and prone to ideological brain washing which promissed them greatness while people had barely food on the table. There is no stronger motivator than a well delivered ideology at the right time. You’re right that turds tend to creep back into peoples minds, we just have to be careful to look out for them all around us not only from one direction. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, koti said:

After WWI Germans were left decimated with no clear goal, 

I disagree with that sentiment to some degree. While it is true that the loss of WWI resulted in a rise in resentment, it was not specifically used by the NSDAP. The myths around the loss of WWI (which typically included anti-Semitic propaganda) were heavily used by pretty much all rcenter- right-wing groups and parties as well as to some lesser degree by left groups (though less consistently). What I am saying is that it was not just a poor, traumatized population that got brainwashed. The sentiments were there (rather strongly even) and these sentiments were leveraged by various groups, including the NSDAP. Populism is not brainwashing. It is supporting what folks think/feel in the first place.

Even from a historic timeline, the post-WWI brainwashing scenario is a bit of a myth (as well as the often repeated myths surrounding the treaty of Versailles). After all, before the rise of the NSDAP the Weimar Republic has gone through a phase of relative financial stability. If one wants to fault economic development, it is not so much the immediate post-WWI time, but rather the Wall Street Crash of '29 that gave them a boost. In fact, in the years preceding the crash, folks like Gustav Stresemann has rebuilt much of Germany's international reputation and renegotiated reparations. Internally, the economy was in decent shape, hyperinflation was stopped, wages were rising and there was strong pro-Weimar support in the '28 elections. 

However, it is again important to note that the KPD (communist party) was also on the rise following the crash, which prompted the other right-wing parties to support the NSDAP as a counter balance. One could argue rather than dazzling everyone with a great and shiny ideology (which had relatively little traction as a whole), one big issue was that the ideology became mainstream and socially accepted, due to the support of the established groups. That, together with anti-democratic sentiments following the crash were ultimately elements that propelled the NSDAP to prominence, rather the events immediately post-WWI.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A bit of revisionism there, CharonY.
You recall that the Weimar Republic was struggling economically in 1923, mostly due to war reparations which the Germans greatly resented.
It was at this point that France chose to invade/occupy the Ruhr valley , central to German industry, and causing further resentment among Germans who had convinced themselves they had NOT lost the Great war, as there had been no fighting on, or invasion of the German homeland.
in effect, things were already bad, but made much worse by the events of 1929.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, MigL said:

A bit of revisionism there, CharonY.
You recall that the Weimar Republic was struggling economically in 1923, mostly due to war reparations which the Germans greatly resented.
It was at this point that France chose to invade/occupy the Ruhr valley , central to German industry, and causing further resentment among Germans who had convinced themselves they had NOT lost the Great war, as there had been no fighting on, or invasion of the German homeland.
in effect, things were already bad, but made much worse by the events of 1929.

Not at all. Up to 23 the economy was struggling, however following reforms under Stresemann (Schacht should also be mentioned in the context) the economic situation improved. While one could argue how much it recovered, the situation was very much improved in many metrics (stop of hyperinflation, increasing wages, increased production, increased exports etc.). The economic growth during that time coincided with continuation of reparation payments (under a new plan) and the overall growth (fueled in part by US loans) exceeded those of France, for example. At the same time housing and education programs and other welfare programs were initiated. Prior to the crash, homlessness was reduced by more than half. In other words, things were getting way better before the NSDAP got hold of power. In fact in the 1928 federal election the NSDAP fell below 3% in the votes. So clearly, it is not possible to draw a direct line from the hyperinflation years to the success of the NSDAP following the financial crash.

I think the issue is that many folks conflate the hyperinflation times  with the rise of the NSDAP and are unaware of the development in-between. My suspicion is that it is because it makes such a simple, compelling story, whereas the reality was far more complex.

Also, the struggle up to that time were not exclusively or even predominantly due to reparations (much of which was not paid anyway). The impact of the Treaty of Versailles has been taken apart by historians quite a bit. It was propagated as early as in 1919 (Keynes) but since then several differing viewpoints developed. One is that Germany could have actually honored the reparations (and again, note that they did not) but wanted to make a show out of their inability to pay in order to get a better deal. Documents to this extent are part of regular history curricula including shelving of the autobahn system, as folks were worried that the allies would want to see reparations paid when it becomes obvious that Germany could afford such infrastructure projects. According to some historians, this strategy at least in part has added to the hyperinflation following the war. There is a lot (and I mean a lot) of discussion out there but yes, modern historians (which basically means after the 60s or so) have done some revisionism of the prevailing historiography, but much of it is due to the integration of more information that became available and with increasing distance to the actual events. I will say that I am not knowledgeable enough in the subject to unequivocally claim a particular historic consensus. I will say that the impact of the reparations are not quite as trivial or obvious as some make it to be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/13/2019 at 7:56 PM, MigL said:


I can just imagine how many new members ISIS will recruit now that they've been given a sound thrashing by the international community. 

Am I the only one who read that and thought " watch this space"?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, koti said:

Populist propaganda and slowly administered anesthesia to evil of the late 20’s and early 30’s which led Hitler to power has nothing on the way things are going right now...

3

indeed, lucky arent we... for now... depending on how we take it from here...  

12 hours ago, John Cuthber said:

Am I the only one who read that and thought " watch this space"?

nobut were in the minority I think

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now