Announcement

Collapse

The Rules of Pacers Digest

Hello everyone,

Whether your are a long standing forum member or whether you have just registered today, it's a good idea to read and review the rules below so that you have a very good idea of what to expect when you come to Pacers Digest.

A quick note to new members: Your posts will not immediately show up when you make them. An administrator has to approve at least your first post before the forum software will later upgrade your account to the status of a fully-registered member. This usually happens within a couple of hours or so after your post(s) is/are approved, so you may need to be a little patient at first.

Why do we do this? So that it's more difficult for spammers (be they human or robot) to post, and so users who are banned cannot immediately re-register and start dousing people with verbal flames.

Below are the rules of Pacers Digest. After you have read them, you will have a very good sense of where we are coming from, what we expect, what we don't want to see, and how we react to things.

Rule #1

Pacers Digest is intended to be a place to discuss basketball without having to deal with the kinds of behaviors or attitudes that distract people from sticking with the discussion of the topics at hand. These unwanted distractions can come in many forms, and admittedly it can sometimes be tricky to pin down each and every kind that can rear its ugly head, but we feel that the following examples and explanations cover at least a good portion of that ground and should at least give people a pretty good idea of the kinds of things we actively discourage:

"Anyone who __________ is a liar / a fool / an idiot / a blind homer / has their head buried in the sand / a blind hater / doesn't know basketball / doesn't watch the games"

"People with intelligence will agree with me when I say that __________"

"Only stupid people think / believe / do ___________"

"I can't wait to hear something from PosterX when he/she sees that **insert a given incident or current event that will have probably upset or disappointed PosterX here**"

"He/she is just delusional"

"This thread is stupid / worthless / embarrassing"

"I'm going to take a moment to point and / laugh at PosterX / GroupOfPeopleY who thought / believed *insert though/belief here*"

"Remember when PosterX said OldCommentY that no longer looks good? "

In general, if a comment goes from purely on topic to something 'ad hominem' (personal jabs, personal shots, attacks, flames, however you want to call it, towards a person, or a group of people, or a given city/state/country of people), those are most likely going to be found intolerable.

We also dissuade passive aggressive behavior. This can be various things, but common examples include statements that are basically meant to imply someone is either stupid or otherwise incapable of holding a rational conversation. This can include (but is not limited to) laughing at someone's conclusions rather than offering an honest rebuttal, asking people what game they were watching, or another common problem is Poster X will say "that player isn't that bad" and then Poster Y will say something akin to "LOL you think that player is good". We're not going to tolerate those kinds of comments out of respect for the community at large and for the sake of trying to just have an honest conversation.

Now, does the above cover absolutely every single kind of distraction that is unwanted? Probably not, but you should by now have a good idea of the general types of things we will be discouraging. The above examples are meant to give you a good feel for / idea of what we're looking for. If something new or different than the above happens to come along and results in the same problem (that being, any other attitude or behavior that ultimately distracts from actually just discussing the topic at hand, or that is otherwise disrespectful to other posters), we can and we will take action to curb this as well, so please don't take this to mean that if you managed to technically avoid saying something exactly like one of the above examples that you are then somehow off the hook.

That all having been said, our goal is to do so in a generally kind and respectful way, and that doesn't mean the moment we see something we don't like that somebody is going to be suspended or banned, either. It just means that at the very least we will probably say something about it, quite possibly snipping out the distracting parts of the post in question while leaving alone the parts that are actually just discussing the topics, and in the event of a repeating or excessive problem, then we will start issuing infractions to try to further discourage further repeat problems, and if it just never seems to improve, then finally suspensions or bans will come into play. We would prefer it never went that far, and most of the time for most of our posters, it won't ever have to.

A slip up every once and a while is pretty normal, but, again, when it becomes repetitive or excessive, something will be done. Something occasional is probably going to be let go (within reason), but when it starts to become habitual or otherwise a pattern, odds are very good that we will step in.

There's always a small minority that like to push people's buttons and/or test their own boundaries with regards to the administrators, and in the case of someone acting like that, please be aware that this is not a court of law, but a private website run by people who are simply trying to do the right thing as they see it. If we feel that you are a special case that needs to be dealt with in an exceptional way because your behavior isn't explicitly mirroring one of our above examples of what we generally discourage, we can and we will take atypical action to prevent this from continuing if you are not cooperative with us.

Also please be aware that you will not be given a pass simply by claiming that you were 'only joking,' because quite honestly, when someone really is just joking, for one thing most people tend to pick up on the joke, including the person or group that is the target of the joke, and for another thing, in the event where an honest joke gets taken seriously and it upsets or angers someone, the person who is truly 'only joking' will quite commonly go out of his / her way to apologize and will try to mend fences. People who are dishonest about their statements being 'jokes' do not do so, and in turn that becomes a clear sign of what is really going on. It's nothing new.

In any case, quite frankly, the overall quality and health of the entire forum's community is more important than any one troublesome user will ever be, regardless of exactly how a problem is exhibiting itself, and if it comes down to us having to make a choice between you versus the greater health and happiness of the entire community, the community of this forum will win every time.

Lastly, there are also some posters, who are generally great contributors and do not otherwise cause any problems, who sometimes feel it's their place to provoke or to otherwise 'mess with' that small minority of people described in the last paragraph, and while we possibly might understand why you might feel you WANT to do something like that, the truth is we can't actually tolerate that kind of behavior from you any more than we can tolerate the behavior from them. So if we feel that you are trying to provoke those other posters into doing or saying something that will get themselves into trouble, then we will start to view you as a problem as well, because of the same reason as before: The overall health of the forum comes first, and trying to stir the pot with someone like that doesn't help, it just makes it worse. Some will simply disagree with this philosophy, but if so, then so be it because ultimately we have to do what we think is best so long as it's up to us.

If you see a problem that we haven't addressed, the best and most appropriate course for a forum member to take here is to look over to the left of the post in question. See underneath that poster's name, avatar, and other info, down where there's a little triangle with an exclamation point (!) in it? Click that. That allows you to report the post to the admins so we can definitely notice it and give it a look to see what we feel we should do about it. Beyond that, obviously it's human nature sometimes to want to speak up to the poster in question who has bothered you, but we would ask that you try to refrain from doing so because quite often what happens is two or more posters all start going back and forth about the original offending post, and suddenly the entire thread is off topic or otherwise derailed. So while the urge to police it yourself is understandable, it's best to just report it to us and let us handle it. Thank you!

All of the above is going to be subject to a case by case basis, but generally and broadly speaking, this should give everyone a pretty good idea of how things will typically / most often be handled.

Rule #2

If the actions of an administrator inspire you to make a comment, criticism, or express a concern about it, there is a wrong place and a couple of right places to do so.

The wrong place is to do so in the original thread in which the administrator took action. For example, if a post gets an infraction, or a post gets deleted, or a comment within a larger post gets clipped out, in a thread discussing Paul George, the wrong thing to do is to distract from the discussion of Paul George by adding your off topic thoughts on what the administrator did.

The right places to do so are:

A) Start a thread about the specific incident you want to talk about on the Feedback board. This way you are able to express yourself in an area that doesn't throw another thread off topic, and this way others can add their two cents as well if they wish, and additionally if there's something that needs to be said by the administrators, that is where they will respond to it.

B) Send a private message to the administrators, and they can respond to you that way.

If this is done the wrong way, those comments will be deleted, and if it's a repeating problem then it may also receive an infraction as well.

Rule #3

If a poster is bothering you, and an administrator has not or will not deal with that poster to the extent that you would prefer, you have a powerful tool at your disposal, one that has recently been upgraded and is now better than ever: The ability to ignore a user.

When you ignore a user, you will unfortunately still see some hints of their existence (nothing we can do about that), however, it does the following key things:

A) Any post they make will be completely invisible as you scroll through a thread.

B) The new addition to this feature: If someone QUOTES a user you are ignoring, you do not have to read who it was, or what that poster said, unless you go out of your way to click on a link to find out who it is and what they said.

To utilize this feature, from any page on Pacers Digest, scroll to the top of the page, look to the top right where it says 'Settings' and click that. From the settings page, look to the left side of the page where it says 'My Settings', and look down from there until you see 'Edit Ignore List' and click that. From here, it will say 'Add a Member to Your List...' Beneath that, click in the text box to the right of 'User Name', type in or copy & paste the username of the poster you are ignoring, and once their name is in the box, look over to the far right and click the 'Okay' button. All done!

Rule #4

Regarding infractions, currently they carry a value of one point each, and that point will expire in 31 days. If at any point a poster is carrying three points at the same time, that poster will be suspended until the oldest of the three points expires.

Rule #5

When you share or paste content or articles from another website, you must include the URL/link back to where you found it, who wrote it, and what website it's from. Said content will be removed if this doesn't happen.

An example:

If I copy and paste an article from the Indianapolis Star website, I would post something like this:

http://www.linktothearticlegoeshere.com/article
Title of the Article
Author's Name
Indianapolis Star

Rule #6

We cannot tolerate illegal videos on Pacers Digest. This means do not share any links to them, do not mention any websites that host them or link to them, do not describe how to find them in any way, and do not ask about them. Posts doing anything of the sort will be removed, the offenders will be contacted privately, and if the problem becomes habitual, you will be suspended, and if it still persists, you will probably be banned.

The legal means of watching or listening to NBA games are NBA League Pass Broadband (for US, or for International; both cost money) and NBA Audio League Pass (which is free). Look for them on NBA.com.

Rule #7

Provocative statements in a signature, or as an avatar, or as the 'tagline' beneath a poster's username (where it says 'Member' or 'Administrator' by default, if it is not altered) are an unwanted distraction that will more than likely be removed on sight. There can be shades of gray to this, but in general this could be something political or religious that is likely going to provoke or upset people, or otherwise something that is mean-spirited at the expense of a poster, a group of people, or a population.

It may or may not go without saying, but this goes for threads and posts as well, particularly when it's not made on the off-topic board (Market Square).

We do make exceptions if we feel the content is both innocuous and unlikely to cause social problems on the forum (such as wishing someone a Merry Christmas or a Happy Easter), and we also also make exceptions if such topics come up with regards to a sports figure (such as the Lance Stephenson situation bringing up discussions of domestic abuse and the law, or when Jason Collins came out as gay and how that lead to some discussion about gay rights).

However, once the discussion seems to be more/mostly about the political issues instead of the sports figure or his specific situation, the thread is usually closed.

Rule #8

We prefer self-restraint and/or modesty when making jokes or off topic comments in a sports discussion thread. They can be fun, but sometimes they derail or distract from a topic, and we don't want to see that happen. If we feel it is a problem, we will either delete or move those posts from the thread.

Rule #9

Generally speaking, we try to be a "PG-13" rated board, and we don't want to see sexual content or similarly suggestive content. Vulgarity is a more muddled issue, though again we prefer things to lean more towards "PG-13" than "R". If we feel things have gone too far, we will step in.

Rule #10

We like small signatures, not big signatures. The bigger the signature, the more likely it is an annoying or distracting signature.

Rule #11

Do not advertise anything without talking about it with the administrators first. This includes advertising with your signature, with your avatar, through private messaging, and/or by making a thread or post.
See more
See less

Iraq Now Longer Than WWII

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Iraq Now Longer Than WWII

    Troops have now been fighting longer in Iraq than we fought in WWII. (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15898612/) And this comes as news that the insurgency is financially self-sustaining
    (http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/26/wo...tner=homepage).
    Is it now safe to stop saying that the United States has the most awesome military machine of all time? I mean, we can't even pacify this puny little state that we've been beating up on forever. Here's an interesting factoid: Iraq is smaller than Afghanistan, both population and people. Even righties admit we attacked because we thought it would be the easiest bad guy to put down. But we can't. Our military has become like our health care system: the most expensive in the world, but not all that effective for all that.

    I've been reading a history of the Pentagon which is very interesting. For example, did you realize that the reason the Pentagon is shaped like it is was for landscaping reasons? The original plan was for a rectangle, but a corner had to be cut off to make room for roads. The architect thought it looked funny, so he evened it out on the other sides. The building was later moved (originally it was going to be built on Robert E. Lee's family farm), but we were in too big a hurry to redesign the thing (WWII and all). It has almost no steel because it was all going into war material (that's why there are lot of ramps and few elevators). It was originally built to have segregated bathrooms, but when Roosevelt realized that on his first tour of the building, he outlawed them. Therefore the Pentagon was the first building in Virginia to have desegregated bathrooms.

    But here is my point: the air war in WWII was incredibly ineffective. At most our air campaign nullified theirs. Our bombing did little to impact production, and arguably increased production by destroying city centers and forcing even more of the workforce into factories. In fact, air power has never worked liked it always seemed it should. We bombed the hell out of Vietnam (hundreds of pounds of explosives for every man, woman, and child) to no effect except terrorism. The same has been true everywhere we've tried it. For all of our reliance on air power and "precision" munitions, are we really that powerful?

  • #2
    Re: Iraq Now Longer Than WWII

    WWII and the war against "terrorists-partisans" are two different things.

    For example, Lithuanian partisans fought 10 years after Soviets have occupied Lithuania. And they fought like men, not bombing children, women and everybody around.

    That's a very difficult form of war. This is not a war in battlefield.

    The only effective thing in that type of war are MDG.
    "Things should be made as simple as possible, but not any simpler."

    - Albert Einstein

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Iraq Now Longer Than WWII

      Originally posted by Pitons View Post
      And they fought like men, not bombing children, women and everybody around.
      You have to be pretty careful with statements like this. You might end up condemning some surprising people. Now, just who in history has bombed the most "women, children, and everybody around"?...

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Iraq Now Longer Than WWII

        Originally posted by 3Ball View Post
        You have to be pretty careful with statements like this. You might end up condemning some surprising people. Now, just who in history has bombed the most "women, children, and everybody around"?...
        Terrorists?
        "Things should be made as simple as possible, but not any simpler."

        - Albert Einstein

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Iraq Now Longer Than WWII

          Originally posted by Pitons View Post
          Terrorists?
          Now you're really saying something dangerous...

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Iraq Now Longer Than WWII

            Originally posted by 3Ball View Post
            Now you're really saying something dangerous...
            What dangerous?

            People, who kill innocent people, bombing them in buses, airplanes and so on I call terrorists.
            There primary target is to terrorize people that they could achieve their whatever goals.

            I don't understand what do you mean "saying something dangerous".
            "Things should be made as simple as possible, but not any simpler."

            - Albert Einstein

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Iraq Now Longer Than WWII

              Originally posted by 3Ball View Post
              Troops have now been fighting longer in Iraq than we fought in WWII. (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15898612/) And this comes as news that the insurgency is financially self-sustaining
              (http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/26/wo...tner=homepage).
              Is it now safe to stop saying that the United States has the most awesome military machine of all time? I mean, we can't even pacify this puny little state that we've been beating up on forever. Here's an interesting factoid: Iraq is smaller than Afghanistan, both population and people. Even righties admit we attacked because we thought it would be the easiest bad guy to put down. But we can't. Our military has become like our health care system: the most expensive in the world, but not all that effective for all that.

              I've been reading a history of the Pentagon which is very interesting. For example, did you realize that the reason the Pentagon is shaped like it is was for landscaping reasons? The original plan was for a rectangle, but a corner had to be cut off to make room for roads. The architect thought it looked funny, so he evened it out on the other sides. The building was later moved (originally it was going to be built on Robert E. Lee's family farm), but we were in too big a hurry to redesign the thing (WWII and all). It has almost no steel because it was all going into war material (that's why there are lot of ramps and few elevators). It was originally built to have segregated bathrooms, but when Roosevelt realized that on his first tour of the building, he outlawed them. Therefore the Pentagon was the first building in Virginia to have desegregated bathrooms.

              But here is my point: the air war in WWII was incredibly ineffective. At most our air campaign nullified theirs. Our bombing did little to impact production, and arguably increased production by destroying city centers and forcing even more of the workforce into factories. In fact, air power has never worked liked it always seemed it should. We bombed the hell out of Vietnam (hundreds of pounds of explosives for every man, woman, and child) to no effect except terrorism. The same has been true everywhere we've tried it. For all of our reliance on air power and "precision" munitions, are we really that powerful?

              I'm sorry but does your post even make any sense at all?????

              It starts out talking about the length of the current Iraq occupation, which I'll get to in a second & then you go on to talk about the shape of the pentagon & then the ineffectiveness of airpower?

              I know I tend to have odd thoughts that go everywhere on things myself but I think this takes the prize as the most off track post I've ever seen.

              Now to the length of the Iraq occupation (& that is what it is btw) I will strongly disagree with you about the length of time.

              We are still in Germany & we are still in Japan to this day. Now we may not be fighting them anymore but we did fight partisans in Germany for about 10 years after the war was over. Now in all fairness they were never as violent as the Iraqi's.

              So while we have been in Iraq for 5 years we have been in Japan and Germany for over 60 years, not to mention Korea.

              As to the rest of your post, well lets just say that I differ with you greatly on world views.

              I don't wake up every day hating the country I was born in or the things we do. I recognize that, as all country have, we make mistakes & will continue to do so. But I do not believe that there is an evil intent in our actions.

              Look I have always respected your view point & I appreciate the open dialoge that you have always carried. But lately it seems, at least to me anyway, that your view point on our country has become more & more dismall & you think less & less of what we have done or are doing.


              Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Iraq Now Longer Than WWII

                Originally posted by Pitons View Post
                What dangerous?

                People, who kill innocent people, bombing them in buses, airplanes and so on I call terrorists.

                I don't understand what do you mean.

                Don't worry, he's just trying to be cute.

                He's going to tell you that our country (the U.S.) has bombed more men, women & children than any other country in the history of the world.


                Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Iraq Now Longer Than WWII

                  Thanks, Peck for clearing it out.

                  As I know, during WW2 there were killed 22 mill russians alone mostly by germans. Germans were aggressors and they killed I dunno maybe 40 mill people (6 mill innocent jews) during only that war.

                  Stalin (soviet leader) was psycho who had killed millions of people. Around 800000 lithuanians were killed or deported. And our nation was about 3,5 mill only. That was a real genocide.

                  So, in killing people leads other countries that's for sure.

                  Yea, USA had nuked Hirosima and Nagasaki, it wasn't nice, but it was WW2 and japans were aggressors.

                  But mainly in wars as I know innocent people weren't a primary target.

                  As I know 3000 USA soldiers were killed in Iraq.

                  Do you know how many innocent people were killed by terrorists? Much much much much more. Their primary target is not soldier.

                  Their primary target is to terrify people (their people too) because they are too weak and chicken-livers to confront the opponents' army.

                  That's only my opinion.
                  "Things should be made as simple as possible, but not any simpler."

                  - Albert Einstein

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Iraq Now Longer Than WWII

                    Originally posted by Peck View Post
                    ...I think this takes the prize as the most off track post I've ever seen....

                    but we did fight partisans in Germany for about 10 years after the war was over...

                    I don't wake up every day hating the country I was born in or the things we do....
                    I'm sorry if I didn't connect these ideas as clearly as I should have. Our army, powerful though it is, cannot stop the insurgency because we have a small force on the ground and are mostly trying to bomb the hell out of the insurgency, which doesn't work. It has never worked. I think it has probably worked mostly to turn the Iraqi people against us by killing so many tens of thousands of innocents.

                    Any numbers on the number of troops killed by German partisans? I may be wrong about this, but I seem to remember that the number was 0.

                    I also don't wake up hating this country. I love this country very much, and I want to live my life and die here. We are rich, free, and exciting, and few other places in the world can match us in any of those ways, much less all. I have never heard so much hate spewed over "what this country does" than has come from the right over the last decade, so I think it is ludicrous for them to say that I hate this country, when all I really hate is us attacking other countries. It's true that I find it despicable that we are the world's worst aggressor, but I believe in this country and I know with work we can improve.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Iraq Now Longer Than WWII

                      Originally posted by 3Ball View Post
                      I'm sorry if I didn't connect these ideas as clearly as I should have. Our army, powerful though it is, cannot stop the insurgency because we have a small force on the ground and are mostly trying to bomb the hell out of the insurgency, which doesn't work. It has never worked. I think it has probably worked mostly to turn the Iraqi people against us by killing so many tens of thousands of innocents.

                      Any numbers on the number of troops killed by German partisans? I may be wrong about this, but I seem to remember that the number was 0.

                      I also don't wake up hating this country. I love this country very much, and I want to live my life and die here. We are rich, free, and exciting, and few other places in the world can match us in any of those ways, much less all. I have never heard so much hate spewed over "what this country does" than has come from the right over the last decade, so I think it is ludicrous for them to say that I hate this country, when all I really hate is us attacking other countries. It's true that I find it despicable that we are the world's worst aggressor, but I believe in this country and I know with work we can improve.

                      You see I was ok with everything you said up until this part right here. The worst? Really?

                      You mean of all time? Or just today? Or what?

                      We are worse that Imperial Japan? We are worse than Nazi Germany? We are worse than the early English Empire? We are worse than Communist Russia? Or better yet we are worse than Al Quida?

                      Yes, answer that last one please. Are you saying we are worse than Al Quida?

                      As to bombing the insurgency, I'm not sure we're doing that. Frankly I'm not sure were doing anything.

                      We have a small armed forces on the ground for the exact reason that if we had a large one on the ground you would hate. Remember the small unit number means that there have also been very few u.s. military deaths on the ground in action.

                      We've had more people killed in a day in WW2 than we have all of the Iraq conflict. During Vietnam there were 250 U.S. deaths a week.

                      If that were happening you would be screaming about that as well.

                      However the small force number also means we cannot actually sustain the country either.

                      So here we are.

                      As to U.S. soldiers killed by German partisons after WW2?

                      I'll try & find a number for you but here is an article about "werewolves" from post war germany.

                      The Werewolves were originally organised by the SS and the Hitler Youth as a diversionary operation on the fringes of the Third Reich, which were occupied by the Western Allies and the Soviets in the autumn of 1944. Some 5,000 -- 6,000 recruits were raised by the winter of 1944-45, but numbers rose considerably in the following spring when the Nazi Party and the Propaganda Ministry launched a popular call to arms, beseeching everybody in the occupied areas -- even women and children -- to launch themselves upon the enemy. In typical Nazi fashion, this expansion was not co-ordinated by the relevant bodies, which were instead involved in a bureaucratic war among themselves over control of the project. The result was that the movement functioned on two largely unrelated levels: the first as a real force of specially trained SS, Hitler Youth and Nazi Party guerrillas; the second as an outlet for casual violence by fanatics.

                      The Werewolves specialised in ambushes and sniping, and took the lives of many Allied and Soviet soldiers and officers -- perhaps even that of the first Soviet commandant of Berlin, General N.E. Berzarin, who was rumoured to have been waylaid in Charlottenburg during an incident in June 1945. Buildings housing Allied and Soviet staffs were favourite targets for Werewolf bombings; an explosion in the Bremen police headquarters, also in June 1945, killed five Americans and thirty-nine Germans. Techniques for harassing the occupiers were given widespread publicity through Werewolf leaflets and radio propaganda, and long after May 1945 the sabotage methods promoted by the Werewolves were still being used against the occupying powers.

                      Although the Werewolves originally limited themselves to guerrilla warfare with the invading armies, they soon began to undertake scorched-earth measures and vigilante actions against German `collaborators' or `defeatists'. They damaged Germany's economic infrastructure, already battered by Allied bombing and ground fighting, and tried to prevent anything of value from falling into enemy hands. Attempts to blow up factories, power plants or waterworks occasionally provoked melees between Werewolves and desperate German workers trying to save the physical basis of their employment, particularly in the Ruhr and Upper Silesia.

                      Several sprees of vandalism through stocks of art and antiques, stored by the Berlin Museum in a flak tower at Friedrichshain, caused millions of dollars worth of damage and cultural losses of inestimable value. In addition, vigilante attacks caused the deaths of a number of small-town mayors and, in late March 1945, a Werewolf paratroop squad assassinated the Lord Mayor of Aachen, Dr Franz Oppenhoff, probably the most prominent German statesman to have emerged in the occupied fringes over the winter of 1944-45. This spate of killings, part of a larger Nazi terror campaign that consumed the Third Reich after the failed anti-Hitler putsch of July 20th, 1944, can be interpreted as a psychological retreat back into opposition, even while Nazi leaders were still clinging to their last few months of power.

                      Although the Werewolves managed to make themselves a nuisance to small Allied and Soviet units, they failed to stop or delay the invasion and occupation of Germany, and did not succeed in rousing the population into widespread opposition to the new order. The SS and Hitler Youth organisations at the core of the Werewolf movement were poorly led, short of supplies and weapons, and crippled by infighting. Their mandate was a conservative one of tactical harassment, at least until the final days of the war, and even when they did begin to envision the possibility of an underground resistance that could survive the Third Reich's collapse, they had to contend with widespread civilian war-weariness and fear of enemy reprisals. In Western Germany, no one wanted to do anything that would diminish the pace of Anglo-American advance and possibly thereby allow the Red Army to push further westward.

                      Despite its failure, however, the Werewolf project had a huge impact, widening the psychological and spiritual gap between Germans and their occupiers. Werewolf killings and intimidation of `collaborators' scared almost everybody, giving German civilians a clear glimpse into the nihilistic heart of Nazism. It was difficult for people working under threat of such violence to devote themselves unreservedly to the initial tasks of reconstruction. Worse still, the Allies and Soviets reacted to the movement with extremely tough controls, curtailing the right of assembly of German civilians. Challenges of any sort were met by collective reprisals -- especially on the part of the Soviets and the French. In a few cases the occupiers even shot hostages and cleared out towns where instances of sabotage occurred. It was standard practice for the Soviets to destroy whole communities if they faced a single act of resistance. In the eastern fringes of the `Greater Reich', now annexed by the Poles and the Czechoslovaks, Werewolf harassment handed the new authorities an excuse to rush the deportations of millions of ethnic Germans to occupied Germany.

                      Such policies were understandable, but they created an unbridgeable gulf between the German people and the occupation forces who had pledged to impose essential reforms. It was hard, in such conditions, for the occupiers to encourage reform, and even harder to persuade the Germans that it was necessary.

                      By the time that this rough opposition to the occupation had started to soften, the Cold War was under way and reform became equally difficult to implement. As a result, both German states created in 1949 were not so dissimilar to their predecessor as might have been hoped, and changes in attitudes and institutions developed only slowly. Thanks partly to the Werewolves there was no German revolution in 1945, either imposed from above or generated from below.


                      I'm sorry I don't have a link for this.


                      Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Iraq Now Longer Than WWII

                        Ah the werewolves! The reason you don't have a link for it is that it is basically an internet hoax. Goebbels did launch a plan for what you are describing, but the attempt to carry it out was a total, ineffectual joke and did not kill allies. In fact, the only major killing by the Werewolves was of a German mayor before the end of the war. Read about it here:
                        http://www.slate.com/id/2087768/

                        And yes, I should have phrased it as "we are now the world's world aggressor nation" although it should be pointed out that we have killed far more civilians than even Al Qaeda.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Iraq Now Longer Than WWII

                          Originally posted by 3Ball View Post
                          The same has been true everywhere we've tried it. For all of our reliance on air power and "precision" munitions, are we really that powerful?
                          I'd say the final airstrikes on Japan in WWII were particularly effective.

                          -Bball
                          Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                          ------

                          "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

                          -John Wooden

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Iraq Now Longer Than WWII

                            3Ball... We are not fighting wars to conqueror other countries (or civilizations for that matter). We are fighting politically correct battles trying to be surgical in our strikes and minimize collateral damage. We've used our power rather judiciously thru the years following WWII considering what we have been capable of.

                            The propagandists use this restraint to flaunt it as a weakness. We don't break the will of the people, we don't even try because it's not our goal. We many times fight with a hand tied behind our backs. We try to occupy a moral high ground and we try not to ignite bigger conflicts.

                            And yet you try to make the same hay of this restraint as the terrorists and their minions.

                            Perhaps you're both correct (you and the radical anti-American movement that has become self fueling) and this is a weakness... a fatal flaw. Either way, reality or perception, it won't make us less likely to avoid further wars or major attacks (even on our own soil.. I'm assuming you think 9/11 was a major attack altho your postings make me question whether you would condone the event as 'deserved'). The more the perception of weakness grows, the more likely we will be painted into a corner...eventually. And many of the 'hate America first' ilk will need to take a look in the mirror when they try and decide who to blame for this.



                            -Bball
                            Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                            ------

                            "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

                            -John Wooden

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Iraq Now Longer Than WWII

                              Originally posted by 3Ball View Post
                              Ah the werewolves! The reason you don't have a link for it is that it is basically an internet hoax. Goebbels did launch a plan for what you are describing, but the attempt to carry it out was a total, ineffectual joke and did not kill allies. In fact, the only major killing by the Werewolves was of a German mayor before the end of the war. Read about it here:
                              http://www.slate.com/id/2087768/

                              And yes, I should have phrased it as "we are now the world's world aggressor nation" although it should be pointed out that we have killed far more civilians than even Al Qaeda.

                              Slate.com that's your reply? Ok, well when I get a quote from the Limbaugh institute you better pay close attention.

                              While I am deeply tempted to find something from the weekly standard or the like I think I will reply with an article from http://www.canadafreepress.com/2005/rubin082005.htm

                              Now honestly I don't know the politics of this paper so if you are going to tell me it is a right wing paper I will believe you, but I'm not sure.

                              Either way I'm not sure why a Canadian paper would print this as I don't believe the majority of Canadians agree with our war (or any of our recent wars for that matter)

                              Also here is a copy of Life magazine showing some of the problems with post war germany. However it does not talk about the post war resistance.

                              LIFE Magazine: Americans Are Losing the Victory in Europe

                              January 7, 1946


                              We are in a cabin deep down below decks on a Navy ship jam-packed with troops that’s pitching and creaking its way across the Atlantic in a winter gale. There is a man in every bunk. There’s a man wedged into every corner. There’s a man in every chair. The air is dense with cigarette smoke and with the staleness of packed troops and sour wool.

                              “Don’t think I’m sticking up for the Germans,” puts in the lanky young captain in the upper berth, “but…”

                              “To hell with the Germans,” says the broad-shouldered dark lieutenant. “It’s what our boys have been doing that worries me.”

                              The lieutenant has been talking about the traffic in Army property, the leaking of gasoline into the black market in France and Belgium even while the fighting was going on, the way the Army kicks the civilians around, the looting.

                              “Lust, liquor and loot are the soldier’s pay,” interrupts a red-faced major.

                              The lieutenant comes out with his conclusion: “Two wrongs don’t make a right.” You hear these two phrases again and again in about every bull session on the shop. “Two wrongs don’t make a right” and “Don’t think I’m sticking up for the Germans, but….”

                              The troops returning home are worried. “We’ve lost the peace,” men tell you. “We can’t make it stick.”

                              A tour of the beaten-up cities of Europe six months after victory is a mighty sobering experience for anyone. Europeans. Friend and foe alike, look you accusingly in the face and tell you how bitterly they are disappointed in you as an American. They cite the evolution of the word “liberation.” Before the Normandy landings it meant to be freed from the tyranny of the Nazis. Now it stands in the minds of the civilians for one thing, looting.

                              You try to explain to these Europeans that they expected too much. They answer that they had a right to, that after the last war America was the hope of the world. They talk about the Hoover relief, the work of the Quakers, the speeches of Woodrow Wilson. They don’t blame us for the fading of that hope. But they blame us now.

                              Never has American prestige in Europe been lower. People never tire of telling you of the ignorance and rowdy-ism of American troops, of out misunderstanding of European conditions. They say that the theft and sale of Army supplies by our troops is the basis of their black market. They blame us for the corruption and disorganization of UNRRA. They blame us for the fumbling timidity of our negotiations with the Soviet Union. They tell us that our mechanical de-nazification policy in Germany is producing results opposite to those we planned. “Have you no statesmen in America?” they ask.


                              The Skeptical French Press

                              Yet whenever we show a trace of positive leadership I found Europeans quite willing to follow our lead. The evening before Robert Jackson’s opening of the case for the prosecution in the Nurnberg trial, I talked to some correspondents from the French newspapers. They were polite but skeptical. They were willing enough to take part in a highly publicized act of vengeance against the enemy, but when you talked about the usefulness of writing a prohibition of aggressive war into the law of nations they laughed in your face. The night after Jackson’s nobly delivered and nobly worded speech I saw then all again. They were very much impressed. Their manner had even changed toward me personally as an American. Their sudden enthusiasm seemed to me typical of the almost neurotic craving for leadership of the European people struggling wearily for existence in the wintry ruins of their world.

                              The ruin this war has left in Europe can hardly be exaggerated. I can remember the years after the last war. Then, as soon as you got away from the military, all the little strands and pulleys that form the fabric of a society were still knitted together. Farmers took their crops to market. Money was a valid medium of exchange. Now the entire fabric of a million little routines has broken down. No on can think beyond food for today. Money is worthless. Cigarettes are used as a kind of lunatic travesty on a currency. If a man goes out to work he shops around to find the business that serves the best hot meal. The final pay-off is the situation reported from the Ruhr where the miners are fed at the pits so that they will not be able to take the food home to their families.

                              “Well, the Germans are to blame. Let them pay for it. It’s their fault,” you say. The trouble is that starving the Germans and throwing them out of their homes is only producing more areas of famine and collapse.

                              One section of the population of Europe looked to us for salvation and another looked to the Soviet Union. Wherever the people have endured either the American armies or the Russian armies both hopes have been bitterly disappointed. The British have won a slightly better reputation. The state of mind in Vienna is interesting because there the part of the population that was not actively Nazi was about equally divided. The wealthier classes looked to America, the workers to the Soviet Union.

                              The Russians came first. The Viennese tell you of the savagery of the Russian armies. They came like the ancient Mongol hordes out of the steppes, with the flimsiest supply. The people in the working-class districts had felt that when the Russians came that they at least would be spared. But not at all. In the working-class districts the tropes were allowed to rape and murder and loot at will. When victims complained, the Russians answered, “You are too well off to be workers. You are bourgeoisie.”

                              When Americans looted they took cameras and valuables but when the Russians looted they took everything. And they raped and killed. From the eastern frontiers a tide of refugees is seeping across Europe bringing a nightmare tale of helpless populations trampled underfoot. When the British and American came the Viennese felt that at last they were in the hands of civilized people. But instead of coming in with a bold plan of relief and reconstruction we came in full of evasions and apologies.

                              U.S. Administration a Poor Third

                              We know now the tragic results of the ineptitudes of the Peace of Versailles. The European system it set up was Utopia compared to the present tangle of snarling misery. The Russians at least are carrying out a logical plan for extending their system of control at whatever cost. The British show signs of recovering their good sense and their innate human decency. All we have brought to Europe so far is confusion backed up by a drumhead regime of military courts. We have swept away Hitlerism, but a great many Europeans feel that the cure has been worse than the disease.

                              The taste of victory had gone sour in the mouth of every thoughtful American I met. Thoughtful men can’t help remembering that this is a period in history when every political crime and every frivolous mistake in statesmanship has been paid for by the death of innocent people. The Germans built the Stalags; the Nazis are behind barbed wire now, but who will be next? Whenever you sit eating a good meal in the midst of a starving city in a handsome house requisitioned from some German, you find yourself wondering how it would feel to have a conqueror drinking out of your glasses. When you hear the tales of the brutalizing of women from the eastern frontier you think with a shudder of of those you love and cherish at home.

                              That we are one world is unfortunately a brutal truth. Punishing the German people indiscriminately for the sins of their leader may be justice, but it is not helping to restore the rule of civilization. The terrible lesson of the events of this year of victory is that what is happening to the bulk of Europe today can happen to American tomorrow.

                              In America we are still rich, we are still free to move from place to place and to talk to our friends without fear of the secret police. The time has come, for our own future security, to give the best we have to the world instead of the worst. So far as Europe is concerned, American leadership up to now has been obsessed with a fear of our own virtues. Winston Churchill expressed this state of mind brilliantly in a speech to his own people which applies even more accurately to the people of the U.S. “You must be prepared,” he warned them, “for further efforts of mind and body and further sacrifices to great causes, if you are not to fall back into the rut if inertia, the confusion of aim and the craven fear of being great.”

                              The first winter of peace holds Europe in a deathly grip of cold, hunger and hopelessness. In the words of the London Sunday Observer: “Europe is threatened by a catastrophe this winter which has no precedent since the Black Death of 1348.”

                              These are still more than 25,000,000 homeless people milling about Europe. In Warsaw nearly 1,000,000 live in holes in the ground. Six million building were destroyed in Russia. Rumania has her worst drought of 50 years, and in Greece fuel supplies are terribly low because the Nazis, during their occupation, decimated the forests. In Italy the wheat harvest, which was a meager 3,450,000 tons in 1944, fell to an unendurable 1,304,000 tons in 1945. In France, food consumption per day averages 1,800 calories as compared with 3,000 calories in the U.S.

                              Germany is sinking even below the level of the countries she victimized. The German people are still better clothed than most of Europe because during the war they took the best of Europe’s clothing. But their food supply is below subsistence level. In the American zone they beg for the privilege of scraping U.S. army garbage cans. Infant mortality is already so high that a Berlin Quaker, quoted in the British press, predicted. “No child born in Germany in 1945 will survive. Only half the children aged less than 3 years will survive.”

                              On Germany, which plunged the Continent into its misery, falls the blame for its own plight and the plight of all Europe. But if this winter proves worse even than the war years, blame will fall on the victor nations. Some Europeans blame Russia for callousness to misery in eastern Europe. But some also blame America because they expected so much more from her. On the following pages the distinguished novelist John Dos Passos, who has been abroad as LIFE correspondent, reports on Europe’s suffering and what it means for America.


                              Also I invite you to look at March 30, 1946 in this online timeline that to the best of my knowledge has zero political thoughts to it.

                              http://timelines.ws/20thcent/1946.HTML

                              I've been checking the Arlington cemetary websight & have found several servicemen killed from 1946-1950 in Post war germany. However they do not list the cause of deaths so I won't try & force that on this subject.

                              I don't have any more time now to look but I will keep going sometime in the near future.


                              Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X