Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by sarforaz)
    if the nazis didnt come to power, WWII may not have occured, so those 55mil may not have died
    nazis to blame? i think yes
    No, World War 2 was going to happen, with or without the Nazis. There was too much resentment of the Treaty of Versailles, too much tension in Eastern and Central Europe for there to be peace for very long. Germany resentful and angry about reparations and the loss of territory, Eastern Europe itching to break out into war and settle some old scores, Italy annoyed that it hadn't got a better deal out of Versailles, and above all Communist Russia in the East...one of these things was bound to cause a major war.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by saturn)
    Are women really forced to dress in veil etc in middle east? What if one day they decide not to wear a veil?
    They get stoned :eek:

    My aunt moved to Saudi Arabia with my uncle. She's not allowed to drive, she must cover up when she goes out, and most ridiculous of all, when she got to the airport they went thru her stuff, found some girly magazines and ripped out all the pages where the women weren't covered up.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Tonight Matthew)
    What about legal immigrants? Protected under the law just as much as you or I, just as much right to complain, it's their country too in the eyes of the law, whether you agree with that or not.
    I don't think anyone's got a problem with people who've genuinely been persecuted, and especially those who contribute to society. I DO have a problem with those that bum off the government with their 27 kids.

    I'm not going to complain about immigrants. I'm part polish, thanks to Hitler. But my grandad came to Britain then fought for the British army. I wonder if any persecuted Afghans would go fight for Britain against Iraq?
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lauren)
    I'm not going to complain about immigrants. I'm part polish, thanks to Hitler. But my grandad came to Britain then fought for the British army. I wonder if any persecuted Afghans would go fight for Britain against Iraq?
    Zalmay Khalilzad, who was born in Afghanistan, is America's ambassador to the country and will soon be ambassador to Iraq. If he's not risking his life for his country, I don't know who is.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lord Waddell)
    No, World War 2 was going to happen, with or without the Nazis. There was too much resentment of the Treaty of Versailles, too much tension in Eastern and Central Europe for there to be peace for very long. Germany resentful and angry about reparations and the loss of territory, Eastern Europe itching to break out into war and settle some old scores, Italy annoyed that it hadn't got a better deal out of Versailles, and above all Communist Russia in the East...one of these things was bound to cause a major war.
    So if a person other than Hitler/a Nazi was chosen as PM Germany would have still gone to war? I suggest you read some books that contain analysis written by historian. Every single one of them will tell you that Hitler was probably the most influential figure and factor that contributed the to the beginning of WW2.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Alexdel)
    Hitler was probably the most influential figure and factor that contributed the to the beginning of WW2.
    Let's not forget he was supported by 98%+ of Germans following various acts of expansionist Foreign Policy. Not to mention the appeasal which encouraged him throughout 1933-39.

    Hitler was steering, but by-heck did other factors give him the wheels.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lauren)
    I don't think anyone's got a problem with people who've genuinely been persecuted, and especially those who contribute to society.
    I think that's quite idealisitc.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Alexdel)
    So if a person other than Hitler/a Nazi was chosen as PM Germany would have still gone to war? I suggest you read some books that contain analysis written by historian. Every single one of them will tell you that Hitler was probably the most influential figure and factor that contributed the to the beginning of WW2.
    That assumes that history wouldn't produce another Hitler if this one didn't exist. There were too many opportunities for territorial revisionism, too much hatred towards the peace settlement, and too much fear of each other's intentions for Europe to not have WWII. I suggest you do some research on the history of the Weimar Republic, including its remilitarization policy, the Treaty of Rapallo, and other steps that it took to bring about WWII. You might also want to look up the biography of von Hindenburg and his militaristic tendencies.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Dreama)
    Let's not forget he was supported by 98%+ of Germans following various acts of expansionist Foreign Policy. Not to mention the appeasal which encouraged him throughout 1933-39.

    Hitler was steering, but by-heck did other factors give him the wheels.
    More like he wasn't opposed by 98+% of Germans. Don't forget that Hitler came to power by winning ~35% of the popular vote. Another ~20% went to the Communist party, and another ~15% to the socialists. I doubt they supported Hitler's policies.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by LC01)
    1.we are not german
    What kind of stupid argument is this?

    (Original post by LC01)
    2.we have jewish members
    What like that crazy black man that you go around using as a way of showing you are not racist?

    (Original post by LC01)
    3.we dont go around smashing up jewish streets
    This was not part of the manifesto, it was done after the NAzis came to power.

    (Original post by LC01)
    4.our bases for the economy is totaly different
    'Taken from bnp manifesto: The BNP stands for a British national economy and is opposed to globalism,international socialism, laissez-faire capitalism and economic liberalism.We stand forrebuilding a strong national economy operating solely in the national interest. We favour as much national self sufficiency as is practicably possible.' So how does this differ from the Nazi manifesto?

    (Original post by LC01)
    5.we are not fascist(although you would try and dispute that)
    Ye and Im Brad Pitt.

    (Original post by LC01)
    6.we dont want to ban homosexuality
    You sure about that?


    (Original post by LC01)
    7.we dont want to build concentration camps
    Yet again you are confusing the manifesto with practical measures taken by the Nazis, like the BNP the Nazis wrote that any further immigration of non-Germans must be prevented and those already hear made to leave.

    (Original post by LC01)
    8.we prefer to keep our noses out of other countries buisness, where as hitler wanted to take them over
    The nazis demanded the union of all Germans in a Great Germany, there is already a Great Britain and im sure if there was other territory in dispute for Britain the BNP would put it in their manifesto. e.g Falklands.

    (Original post by LC01)
    I really cant be arsed listing anymore
    Please do..they will all be disproved.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Alexdel)
    So if a person other than Hitler/a Nazi was chosen as PM Germany would have still gone to war? I suggest you read some books that contain analysis written by historian. Every single one of them will tell you that Hitler was probably the most influential figure and factor that contributed the to the beginning of WW2.
    I suggest that you read the rest of my post and also read about the Treaty of Versailles and the inter-war years. I wasn't suggesting that WW2 had to be started by Germany, indeed it may have been a war between Communist Russia and the rest of Europe. And if Hitler hadn't come to power in 1933, many historians believe that someone as extreme would have. These were desperate times, and in the eyes of the German people the Weimar Republic had failed to deliver.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bismarck)
    That assumes that history wouldn't produce another Hitler if this one didn't exist. There were too many opportunities for territorial revisionism, too much hatred towards the peace settlement, and too much fear of each other's intentions for Europe to not have WWII. I suggest you do some research on the history of the Weimar Republic, including its remilitarization policy, the Treaty of Rapallo, and other steps that it took to bring about WWII. You might also want to look up the biography of von Hindenburg and his militaristic tendencies.
    So you are saying that with all the territorial dispute whoever came into government would see war, with basically all European states, as the only way to settle them?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    With or without hitler ww2 would of took place, if not hitler then himmler, goebols etc and if the facists hadnt took over then wot about the rising communist movement in germany? the kaap putsch WW2 would of took plce no matter wot sooner or later due to the resentment amongst the majority of the german population.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Alexdel)
    So you are saying that with all the territorial dispute whoever came into government would see war, with basically all European states, as the only way to settle them?
    When almost every country in Europe had claim on the land of at least one other country in Europe, and when many of these countries thought that they had a realistic chance of reclaiming this land, it is to be expected that they would start wars. Hitler was far from the only German to call for territorial revisionism, just like Germany was far from being the only nation in Europe willing to put forth its irredentist claims. Many of the European states were just created in 1918 and were led by militaristic dictators (Germany, Austria, Soviet Union, Hungary, Spain, Portugal, Poland, Bulgaria, Yugoslavia, Romania, Greece, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Italy, and Albania were all ruled by dictators by the mid-'30s). Their legitimacy rested on their claims of wanting to create a "Greater Germany", "Greater Hungary", "Greater Greece", etc.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Prad)
    Oh come on - given the choice between Britain and France, we all know who anyone would choose..

    That was a joke, by the way.. before anyone starts throwing rotting vegetables and the such..

    There are certain traits though - North Afrians migrate to France. Turks migrate to Germany. And Asians migrate to the UK..
    Idd alot of it is down to old colonial links.

    I think immigration does need to be controlled we are overpopulated as it is. If immigration is not taken under control then i think we will see the the rise of more extremists and as for this politically correct climate on racism etc how stupid is that i think it is causing alot of tensions between communitys
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Whizz Kid)
    What on earth do you base this on?

    How is Islam 'strict' and Christianity not?

    lol. if you knew anything about the two religions you wouldn't ask. i won't answer an idiotic question like that.
    Oh, I'm very sorry - all those years and several SQA Highers in religious and philosophical subjects must've been for nothing. Because I don't know 'anything' about Islam and Christianity.

    Look here, you bloody fool: if you're going to make sectarian comments in a public forum, prepare for them to be questioned. I imagine that it is you that knows nothing about Islam and Christianity.

    So I restate my question in the same form as above.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Straight Talker)
    No I don't, because western people appreciate and respect other cultures. Therefore, people who come into this country should respect our cultures and dress how we do. Simple.
    Yes, we Britons really respect the native culture of wherever we go.... :rolleyes:

    Look at the underground alcohol trade in Saudi Arabia, look at the villages in Britanny where they have 'Brits out' written across the walls. More significantly, look at Majorca or Ibiza.

    Women wear veils in Islamic countries because it is the law. In Britain, it is the law that a woman must cover her breasts in public - yet this would seem equally illogical to certain African tribeswomen.

    the schol girl who recently won a court case (very expensive to us tax payers btw) so she could wear a head scarf to school. Its utterly disgusting to be frank. If they don't like it, get out. Now thats simple.
    Yes, the taxpayer paid for it because her school was breaking the law. I hope the local council was voted out or that at least influenced their support in the elections.

    You're the one who's complaining about the laws of this country - maybe YOU should get out.

    Yes I can understand that, but why must they all come to England? You don't see France offering to help do you?
    France has a far larger immigrant population than the United Kingdom does.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    back to the topic,

    Firstly the mirror is a BS paper....

    I dont think this country will become muslim by whatever date the article said because our country is too much consumed with 'devilish' activities such as sex and drugs, its practiacly become socially acceptable to think of these things on a daily basis.
    casual Sex and drugs is anti-muslim?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by THE UNDERDOG)
    back to the topic,

    Firstly the mirror is a BS paper....

    I dont think this country will become muslim by whatever date the article said because our country is too much consumed with 'devilish' activities such as sex and drugs, its practiacly become socially acceptable to think of these things on a daily basis.
    casual Sex and drugs is anti-muslim?
    There's a significant proportion of young muslims who practice casual sex and take drugs..
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Prad)
    There's a significant proportion of young muslims who practice casual sex and take drugs..
    True, but I somehow doubt that the jihadists would condone such "infidel-like" behaviour
 
 
 

1,079

students online now

800,000+

Exam discussions

Find your exam discussion here

Poll
Should universities take a stronger line on drugs?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.