If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Jewish World Review)   'What if we fought the Nazis like we are fighting the Taliban?' asks Columnist   ( newsandopinion.com) divider line
    More: Interesting  
•       •       •

5919 clicks; posted to Main » on 05 Nov 2001 at 4:19 PM (16 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»

118 Comments     (+0 »)

Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Newest | Show all

2001-11-05 04:28:19 PM  
Trying to draw parallels between two completely separate and distinct events that occurred in 2 separate centuries is such a cheap shot.
2001-11-05 04:28:41 PM  
Erster Pfosten

"As if that weren't bad enough, the Allies had to confront the ticklish question of whether to suspend the bombing of Germany during Oktoberfest"

Yeah.. because Oktoberfest is so religious! with all the beerdrinking and kielbasa.
2001-11-05 04:29:25 PM  
Utterly ridiculous comparison.
2001-11-05 04:29:34 PM  
Fick dich!

lousy WorldCitizen
2001-11-05 04:30:29 PM  
Of course, the source would also not possibly be biased...
2001-11-05 04:31:44 PM  
Brilliant! Absolutely brilliant! I love it! Although, to be fair Christmas should have been mentioned instead of Oktoberfest.
2001-11-05 04:31:58 PM  
i just hope the rest of this world's citizens have better judgement than fark's worldcitizen.
2001-11-05 04:32:41 PM  
Der Amerikaner habe hundekuchen en der tasche!!!

World- yep, 2 fifferent things.
2001-11-05 04:33:09 PM  
although we also went into battle on Christmas back in the 1770s
2001-11-05 04:33:47 PM  
yeah, most of the rest of the world's citizens are much less informed of world events than Americans (deep sarcasm present if not detected).
2001-11-05 04:34:04 PM  
Let's see. I don't remember asking the Poles to fight hitler at Midway, or at Normandy, or anywhere else. We're asking the Northern Alliance to do our fighting, then promising that MAYBE we'll let them rule the country when we're finished.

You want war? Well, war is dirty and some Americans are going to get killed. But it'll give O'Reilly something to biatch about.
2001-11-05 04:35:04 PM  
Woo-Hoo! Let's play the "What if" game!

What if WW II era germany was one of the poorest countries on earth and a 'humanitarian crisis', while afghanistan was an out of control dictator ship bent on conquering the world?

What if Bin Laden really is Hilter in disguise?

how about if you make a cow laugh? Does milk shoot out of it's nose?
2001-11-05 04:35:51 PM  
Analogy as seen through the eyes of a right-wing lunatic.. cute. Yes, we'd like to believe that the Taliban's army of a handful of peasants with Kalishnikovs unable to defend their own country against a rebel alliance.. is pretty much the same as a hugely powerful and efficient army which overran most of Europe (including many of our allies) on its quest towards domination and genocide. Certainly they deserve exactly the same treatment.

All the same, this guy does raise some good points, just in a bad way. Is it really a good idea to run a war this way? War is ugly, war is brutal, and war is.. well, it's hell. Trying to portray it any other way for PR reasons is just plain cowardice. Either fight a real war or don't fight any war at all.. of course, the Bush administration knows as well as you and me that if they weren't being all namby-pamby wishy-washy about the delicate matter of blowing people into little pieces, they wouldn't have the sky-high popular support that they need now and are going to need for quite a long time. Let's hope that this guy's comments indicate that Bush's "bi-partisan alliance" is crumbling from both ends at once.. that way they'll have to show some honesty and accountability for this wacky war..
2001-11-05 04:36:58 PM  
This is one opinionater that ought to have his poetic lisence revoked. The parallel that he attempts to create is such a sham that I was actually giggling when I read this. Then I realized he was being serious, then I realized who he was writing for, then I didn't find it quite as funny anymore.
2001-11-05 04:37:02 PM  
My German is a little soft...did you just day "the American has dog cake in the purse?"
2001-11-05 04:39:20 PM  
what if worms had machine guns? Then the birds would not fark with them!
2001-11-05 04:40:35 PM  
Tonight on FOX: "When Reasoning by Weak Analogies Goes Bad"
2001-11-05 04:40:58 PM  
Hey Bugster--Poles fought bravely (on our side) at Normandy. Poles in exile also pioted British planes during the Battle of Britain. There were more Polish soldiers fighting for the Allies by the end of the war than there were Frenchmen (who preferred surrendering, of course) You might consider doing a little research before shooting your mouth off...
2001-11-05 04:41:19 PM  
WorldCitizen: for the record I agree with ya (especially on the author's bias). Reactionary trolls like Perrin need to understand that disagreeing with this kind of article doesn't necessary mean you disagree with the war.
2001-11-05 04:43:51 PM  
I'm curious, since I don't have cable and ready access to cspan, when did congress declare war?
2001-11-05 04:44:51 PM  
This conflict is not quite the prime time special many people wanted it to be. Although it has a great cast of characters: the dimwitted, but well-meaning Dubya, the stern but calm Rumsfeld, the confident Powell, this show lacks the boobies of niki cox or christina applegate. Sure, the chick commentators on CNN are ok, but they never get to jiggle around.
Worse that that, it has run too long. Even if they had programmed it as a mini-series, they would still have to preempt the news every night, and maybe even letterman.

I bet in the end, they'll cancel America Strikes Back in favor of reality tv. You can't have a show like this run on and on cuz it farks up the tv guide too much and requires a normal attention span.
2001-11-05 04:45:07 PM  
lrkr, yes, you arew right, but they did not take our place. We had troops at Guadalcanal before anyone of Polish descent was fighting in Europe for the US Army.

My point stands. We fought our war back then and are asking Afghanis to fight ours now. Are we afraid to get our hands dirty? We fly around ar supersonic speed dropping bombs allover the place, but get our few troops in and out in a hurry.

my point stands. war by proxy is stupid.
2001-11-05 04:46:27 PM  
not all jews are idiots. really.. trust me on this one.
2001-11-05 04:49:04 PM  
Lbo- pre-WWII Germany was one of the poorest nations on earth...They just had a between-war break to get organized.
The frustration of Germans who had to push a wheelbarrow of money just to buy a loaf of bread was an easy thing for Hitler to capitalize on to whip a nation up into a pseudo-religious frenzy.
2001-11-05 04:49:38 PM  
What a lame article. Two different wars; two different enemies with different objectives. His points of comparison are overly simplistic and tenuous at best. I don't really have the energy to pick apart his article...maybe after some caffeine and a snack.
2001-11-05 04:52:03 PM  
i agree with Rebrane

this article brings up some good arguments in a very bad way. War is hell and people get hurt and sometimes even *gasp* DIE during war. It's not a pleasant thing but it is neccessary to rid the world of evil and to protect human rights.
2001-11-05 04:55:14 PM  
Ferel-kiwi I would have to say such totalitarianism of one's own view point is Nazi like. Only Hitler would of said something so outlandish. hehe.

On another note, I would like to define 2 enemies:
1. Nazi Germany = Well defined, structured enemy.
2. Terrorists = Anyone, anywhere.

Don't expect to fight #2 the way #1 was fought.
2001-11-05 04:56:07 PM  
i noticed in your bio that you live in a vacum. It all makes sense when i read your opinions!
2001-11-05 04:56:29 PM  
"But their professors knew that many semester hours of causal analysis lay ahead, especially since several very promising root-cause seminars in Poland and Belgium had been interrupted by Panzer divisions rolling through on their way to Paris."

Argh! Don'tcha hate that?

Appeasement rulez. Rock on.
2001-11-05 04:56:29 PM  
That was a completely pathetic article without a shred of logic or balance, and it doesn't deserve the time spent to tear apart its ridiculous shoddy premise. The only thing it deserves is to gain its author a slap around the face with a large wet fish, and loss of all access to publishing.

What a farking load of bollox, eh, readers?
2001-11-05 04:57:59 PM  
I just knew when I read this that it would turn into an unreadable post, give me some photoshop op's and I am happy
2001-11-05 04:58:23 PM  
Bugster: What about the first couple of years of WWII when we were really leaning toward the Allies, but did not want to fight? We had Lend-Lease, which was basically supplying the British to fight for us. We let them get bloodied up for quite a bit before we finally stepped in.
2001-11-05 04:59:30 PM  
On the other hand, do we want to actually wait around until Osama has created a multi-national Islamic caliphate that we can fight?
2001-11-05 05:02:40 PM  
Remarkably non-surprising op-ed piece. Considering the high likelihood that the author would consider a war between the US and every Islamic state (or secular state of a highly Islamic population) the best thing ever to happen to the world (talk about asking someone to fight your wars for you...), I'm surprised he didn't include in the analogy the idea that attacking only Afghanistan at this point would be like only attacking the Prussian north of Germany instead of the whole country.
2001-11-05 05:06:25 PM  
Gee, could this guy have been a little more biased?
2001-11-05 05:06:29 PM  
so basically you people don't see a problem with us asking others to fight for us? They the trade center our new pearl harbor. as I recall, we fought our own fight back then and invited those that wanted to join, to help us. prior to 12-7-41 we had little reason to fight anyone. afterwards, it was different. prior to 9-11-01 we have reason to figh our won war and to allow others to help.

does this make me weird? I think that we should fight our own war and not let the northern alliance carry our burden.

"what did you do in the war daddy?"

"i watched a lot of TV."
2001-11-05 05:06:53 PM  
Don't forget the Tet Offensive, RobbieFal. We let up for a holiday, and got the biggest asskicking of the war because of it. Hell, the Yom Kippur War. The most successfull invasion of Israel this century. It pays to not fight P.C.
2001-11-05 05:11:55 PM  
On the otherhand, the Northern Aliance has already been fighting this war long before 9-11, so it's not exactly like we're asking them to do something drastically different.
2001-11-05 05:16:08 PM  
Let's have a 'sensitive' war

GAWD I hate this PC, Politcal Correctness CRAP. War is war! This means kill people and break stuff!

"What makes the grass grow?"


2001-11-05 05:22:51 PM  
If. If. If.

We would have strictly kept our neutral noses out of their business until we were attacked unprovoked. Then we would have geared-up the entire Nation and gone after them with everything we had until they surrendered unconditionally.
2001-11-05 05:25:23 PM  
If so many of us agree on war, what's with supporting three months of bombing to kill a couple dozen fighters? Either stay out, or send in the troops now. Or not now, when we have a good plan to replace the Taliban. But causing "collateral damage" (killing 10 civilians to kill the occasional Taliban soldier) to save a few of our soldiers is dumb. War means we die too.
2001-11-05 05:30:36 PM  
Apples and oranges.

And coming from a jewish source makes it even more bogus. Oppressive hypocrites.
2001-11-05 05:37:52 PM  
hey, armchair generals. godIi>damn i hope you find some way to convince Colon Powell of your well-considered opinions. that way we can go full-scale and end up taking on the whole of Islam, just like bin Laden wants. won't that be fun?

grrrrr!!!! just like G.I. Joe!

"sensitive war," my ass. this is tricky shiat, people. you can't just go in blasting cause it makes you feel like a badass cowboy.

and who the hell gave Morty Seinfeld a column?
2001-11-05 05:38:13 PM  
11-05-01 04:28:19 PM WorldCitizen
Trying to draw parallels between two completely separate and distinct events that occurred in 2 separate centuries is such a cheap shot.

Ever hear the addage "History repeats itself"? Of course its not a 1:1 mapping but only by examining the past can you truly understand human nature and motivation.

As hidious as the events of Sept 11th were they are not equal to the holocaust, but even still look at the basics. In the middle east the people are poor, and know nothing but conflict for generations. Here is Bin Boy saying "Americans are the great evil that causes this" (conveniently forgetting that he once took our aid). Its very similar use of a scapegoat that Hitler rode to power on. When your life so utterly sucks its easy for someone to come along, create a scapegoat, point a finger and ride the wave and ol Bin Boy is trying to do it.

So no its not a 1:1 mapping of events or magnitude, but there is a lesson to be learned in history that applies to current events just in my personal observation.
2001-11-05 05:40:34 PM  
Comparisons to Nazis are of limited value. If you want to know more about the nature of the culture we're fighting, take a look at this: Out of Sparta. The face of the Pashtuns. These guys have a very Klingon-like social structure and worldview. The only thing that's going to stop them is utter, crushing defeat.
2001-11-05 05:42:06 PM  
You people are totally missing the point of this article and picking on one or two little points, to prove your whole theory, i.e., that the whole entire article is BS. I think you can definitely draw parallels between WWII and what's happening today.

Whether you're fighting Nazis or terrorists, there are certain commonalties that exist in war, as well as the climate at home while these wars are being fought. One good point the author made is that while all the "liberals" complain that war is wrong and hold demonstrations, American people will continue to die...something must be done. Imagine if people had listen to those dissenters during WWII and we had continued to stand by? The world today would be a much different place today.
2001-11-05 05:53:22 PM  
We were declared war on by Hitler in December of 41. It was a YEAR AND A HALF before a single US soldier faced a German. We sent planes to England. We sent tanks to England. We biatched at England for not giving us more accurate intel when they had it. We fought Japan because there was no one else to do so. But with British troops in Egypt, we were more than happy to fight Hitler by sending in a few dozen Grants and freaking out Rommel for about 8.2 minutes until he got back to his lines and got the 88s set up. It wasn't until mid 43 that we actually met him ourselves at Kessering (and got an amazingly bad butt-kicking).
Then it was June of 44 - 2 and a half years after "entering the war" that we bothered to put our own forces onto the European continent in such a way as to actually make Germany break a sweat defending against them. From December 41 to June 44 our contribution to the war on Europe proper was to send planes and tanks (and planes we wouldn't use ourselves, unlike the ones we sent England) to the Soviet Union so they could continue to beat the Germans through sheer lack of giving up.
Then, of course, it wasn't until the war was almost decided (although no one really knew it yet, on either side) that we entered the first WW, despite German attacks on US shipping. Our major contribution there was moral - we kept a lot of really tired Frenchmen from deserting. The overwhelming number of tanks the British were able to field in 1918 would have decided the war all by themselves (Germany managed to field something like 18 tanks.)
Heck, were only won our own revolution because the French navy was on our side.
2001-11-05 05:53:48 PM  
world citizen......take sarcasm with you...take bay bridge...then back to berkley.....you expert in all foreign affairs you
2001-11-05 05:58:00 PM  
I wouldn't trust any Jewish source when on the subject of Islam or Islamic country's. They are great masters when it comes to bending (and breaking) the truth in these matters.
2001-11-05 05:58:44 PM  
Subash Gurung
Displayed 50 of 118 comments

Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Newest | Show all

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

On Twitter

Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.