It’s like 70% of those guys wake up every morning and decide that what they’re really going for is the Kip from Napoleon Dynamite look.
Let’s say I’m watching newsreel footage of 1931 Weimar Republic Germany. Hitler is not yet in power, but clearly the Nazis are no joke anymore, either. They’re starting to gain power and become more visible. In the newsreel footage, Heinrich Himmler is giving an interview. A Jewish man runs up to him and punches him in the face and scampers off.
The positing that in that hypothetical, I’m supposed to hope that the Jewish man is caught and brought to heel for his actions is hard for me to go along with.
Punching Nazis is (legally) wrong. And I’ll smile every single time someone does it.
Meanwhile, back on topic. (Not endorsing this viewpoint, just sharing.)
I meant to put “not”. It was late, and I went to bed. it changes nothing though. Do I have the morale high ground over Nazis, you bet I do. Most the human race does. These people decided to exit civil society when they self-selected to be Nazis. Again, this is not a group that we get to wonder what they’d do in power. We know. It’s not about jobs or some scared kids wanting to be heard. This leads to mass murder. So yeah, when a Nazi gets a mic, punch the shit out of him. We’ll not have this history repeat while some of us can still fill an entire room with the pictures of the monstrosities this belief system led to.
Now back to the non-Nazis regular programming.
Except me, right? What with me being a Nazi defender and all.
I respect Zoidberg’s pacifism, but I don’t think it works with Nazis.
Hey, I get anger. And I’m not about to say I’ve never lost my cool. Just don’t go telling me punching people, yes even nazis, is some kind of moral imperative.
Just to establish a baseline of agreement though, the allied response to Nazi Germany was correct and just, right? Even though we killed over 5 million of them?
Not sure any side can claim much of a “moral high ground” for what their side did during that period.
Are you asking me if it was correct to go to war to stop the Nazis from actually tryouts by to take over the world, firebombing England, expanding into Africa, and oh yeah, committing genocide against an entire race? Yeah I think I can find my way to seeing the morality in that choice? Not sure what that has to do with punching assholes who, as best I can tell, are pretty much guilty only of holding abhorrent views though.
Right? I mean, if only European Jews had made themselves more likeable and amenable to the Aryan forces of power, so much pain could’ve been avoided. They really brought that shit on themselves, huh?
And the Czechs. What a bunch of cucks, right? Trying to establish a western democracy in central Europe in the 1930s. Trying to protect their sovereign national borders. Fuck those provocational assholes, right?
And the English. Holy shit the English. With all that “Never surrender” and “We will fight them on the fields” provocation, they clearly were just asking for it.
Couldn’t that asshole Churchill see that Mussolini and Hitler were making the goddamned trains run on time??? What fucking right did they have to throw a wrench into that.
I sure as fuck can.
In WWII, the allied forces absolutely had the moral high ground.
Full fucking stop.
Just like anyone with Japenese anscenstry brought it upon themselves when they were interned in camps in the US, or noncombatants in cities throughout Germany or Japan brought it upon themselves when they were firebombed?
the Allies did not go into the war to protect European Jews either, and many of those countries certainly shared the same sentiments against the Jews as was exhibited in Germany prior to the NSDAP coup.
Speaking of Czechoslovakia, wasn’t tit the European allies who agreed with “Herr Hitler” that they could have peace in our time if they just gave away another sovereign state?
I’m not disagreeing, nor did I ever - despite what you “read into it” to fuel your mistaken reaction, that Germany and Japan were the ultimate aggressors in this, and their acts in Manchuria (where the US helped cover it up in the aftermath just to get access to research data - just as they were willing to disregard acts in Europe just to get access to top German scientists) and the many concentration camps certainly put them in a league of evil on their own, but to act or even believe that the US, UK or USSR were shining beacons of honest “gentlemanly” warfare is folly, or just bad edjumecation.
tl;dr; both sides were in the mud fighting, and both sides got their hands dirty.
Look, nice strawman. No one in this thread has excused any of the stuff you bring up to defend your cartoonishly idiotic hottake.
That your ultimate takeaway is that all participants, willingly or otherwise, in WWII were equally guilty of being equally bad tells me that …never mind. You’re just trolling.
Instant has a history of those type hot takes. Now I’m not going to accuse him of any of those negative types, but I do agree that they are historically shallow and facile takes on what happened.
Was Japanese internment horrible and a national shame we do ourselves no favors by forgetting? Abso-fucking-lutely. But to claim that the US and allies did not possess perhaps the clearest historical high ground in war ever? Pure fantasy.
Math is hard, so all numbers are equally large.