The Holocaust is Overrated

reply to post by benign.psychosis


Can you tell me how anything you posted there adds to the topic?

Originally posted by intrepid
reply to post by benign.psychosis

 

Can you tell me how anything you posted there adds to the topic?

It adds to the topic by clearing up the fact that we are not trying to be racist. About 20% of this topic actually answering my questions and the other 80% is just calling us Jew-haters.

Now if we can get past the alleged racism, lets get back to discussing.

Originally posted by italkyoulisten
It adds to the topic by clearing up the fact that we are not trying to be racist. About 20% of this topic actually answering my questions and the other 80% is just calling us Jew-haters.

Now if we can get past the alleged racism, lets get back to discussing.

Funny then that you would quote this post and ignore this one.

Reply to intrepid

benign.psychosis has posted more to the topic than anyone else.Hes tryna show how even the 'Mature' Mods are trying to bury the reality by smokescreening the topic with ‘AGENDA’.

I expected better from the ‘More close to reality conspiracists’ in this forum.

Originally posted by intrepid
reply to post by benign.psychosis

 

Can you tell me how anything you posted there adds to the topic?

Sure. I've described what one would expect from others when attempting to discuss the topic, as "agenda" seems to be surgically attached to topics that people find offensive, ones that concern Jews/Holocaust specifically. I gave a reason why I did not reply to a post by another user, and I've asked another poster to clarify if they saw this topic/thread as being anti-jewish or even pro-nazi.

I also indirectly showed that some moderators appear to be either biased, or genuinely interested in if I thought my own post was on topic.

Case in point:

whats the point steve. this dude's mind is set. he'll be like that for life.

Was not questioned for it's validity toward the topic. So, I take it you are just genuinely interested in my last post. Perhaps you should ask that guy too. You know, just to be fair.

I think the question that needs to be asked is whether there are formal groups out there that are calling the 20 million killed by Stalin a hoax, or the 80 million killed in China faked by extremist, or the 2.4 million kill in Cambodia inflated, or 6 million Poles, Russians and other undesirables killed by the Germans alongside the Jews impossible, or whether the atrocities of Japan on China were not true?

Much of the focus on the holocaust is because people will not let it rest in history as a terrible event, but instead need to argue every little point of it. For those who say we need to argue it all because they get X billions for those atrocities then first I would need to see data showing they still get compensations, and second if they do get it then I say good on them. I think many others should also be compensated too, but are not, and if they have been able to then GREAT!

Hell anyone willing to start a post that Stalin was just misunderstood and actually he was a nice guy that just wanted people to like him?

I would like to start it all off by stating that it is a verifiable fact that the US never fire bombed Japan and in fact the two nuclear detonations were actually accidents by the Japanese themselves in their attempts to build their own nukes to use against the US, and that it was only until after the war that the US got their ability to make nukes from the Japanese.

See how easy it is…

[edit on 18-1-2008 by Xtrozero]

Originally posted by Xtrozero
I think the question that needs to be asked is whether there are formal groups out there that are calling the 20 million killed by Stalin a hoax, or the 80 million killed in China faked by extremist, or the 2.4 million kill in Cambodia inflated, or 6 million Poles, Russians and other undesirables killed by the Germans alongside the Jews impossible, or whether the atrocities of Japan on China were not true?

Yes, there are. I've ran into Nanjing Massacre deniers when I was doing research for my paper. And they used the same old tactics like "how can you prove this picture is of a Chinese guy getting his head chopped off by a Japanese guy?" or whatever, and would have a defense for everything and I'd argue with him for hours only to never get anywhere in the debate because of his fervid belief that the Nanjing Massacre is communist propaganda.

Those deniers just don't get the attention a Holocaust denier does, so that they are not heard about, but those deniers do exist.

Originally posted by intrepid

Originally posted by italkyoulisten
It adds to the topic by clearing up the fact that we are not trying to be racist. About 20% of this topic actually answering my questions and the other 80% is just calling us Jew-haters.

Now if we can get past the alleged racism, lets get back to discussing.

Funny then that you would quote this post and ignore this one.

You know, I can't keep up with all these posts, but since you requested it, I will answer it.

This is what you said:
"We can't see the forest for the trees

The fact of the matter is that the Holocaust was a part of the single largest event in modern history, WW2. What came out of that? The Cold War, 2 major superpowers, the atomic age, etc. The Holocaust is but a part of that major event. What about the Battle for Britain? Pearl Harbor? Battle for Stalingrad?

It was an event that involved most western nations. There are those still with us that were directly influenced by WW2. If it wasn't for that I wouldn't be here(I know, that wouldn't be such a bad thing to some ), my Grandmother was a war bride. The fact that Asian atrocities aren't given the same due is because they aren't directly related to the west. Does that lessen them? Of course not and bringing them to light is a good thing but let's keep perspective."

Response:
The war in Asia is definitely directly involved with the West. The Japanese were a major power back then. Their success would contribute to the success of Hitler's army in the West. US soldiers fought Japanese in the Pacific. why? Because is was a part of the SAME WAR. To say that WWII only involved Western White people and that Asians were somehow not a part of WWII (though they were) is RACIST. The atrocities in Asia were also a part of WWII, which makes it as much a part of the "single largest event in modern history" as the Holocaust.

Officially, the war in the East, which includes the Atrocities, is a part of World War II.

[edit on 18-1-2008 by italkyoulisten]

Originally posted by italkyoulisten
Response:
The war in Asia is definitely directly involved with the West. The Japanese were a major power back then. Their success would contribute to the success of Hitler's army in the West. US soldiers fought Japanese in the Pacific. why? Because is was a part of the SAME WAR. To say that WWII only involved Western White people and that Asians were somehow not a part of WWII (though they were) is RACIST. The atrocities in Asia were also a part of WWII, which makes it as much a part of the "single largest event in modern history" as the Holocaust.

OK padawan, I'll play.

I thought we were past calling people "racist". You didn't seem to like it. I'll pass though.

I didn't say Asians weren't involved, notice my reference to Pearl Harbor. Where was the "Asian theater" as far as the west was concerned, aside from Japan? That didn't start until 1950 but that's a different war.

I'm not "trivializing" what happened in Asia, just explaining the relevance to the west and why the Holocaust is taught more than Asian affairs.

I think that this quote from an earlier page and your response combined with a post from you on an earlier thread you authored; answers to intent.

Originally posted by benign.psychosis

Originally posted by neformore

Originally posted by Crakeur
It isn't being overtaught. Other atrocities are not being taught enough. Don't teach less, teach more. About all of them.

Bingo! Yes. We have a winner.

Thats exactly it.

Oh Excite! I am very excite!! Hello! Hello U S and A!!

There is only a limited amount of time for students to learn to become more ignorant of other events in the school system. The emphesis and additional readings about the Holocaust only works to speed this up.

If you two would like to petition the department of education to extend school hours and shorten Christmas vaction, then go ahead.

When presented with a rational solution you immediately reject it which means you are giving false motives. In fact your response is childish it evokes such a strong emotion. You really want the teaching of the Holocaust eliminated but don't have the courage to admit it.

From your THREAD on a similar topic.

The Holocaust was carried out by the Allies, not the Nazis! (Hypothesis)

I have to protect the source of this information. This is not speculation, or opinion. What you are about to read is the truth. I have attempted to explain a method for arriving at this truth, and although the truth is so deviously simple, it has been ignored. It is hidden in plain sight.

Even though you say "hypothesis" in the title it is presented as a fact. You even say you have to protect the source and this is not speculation meaning the term hypothesis is false.

Why even deny your motives if you believe you are correct. It would seem you are here for reasons quite different than those intended by the OP. Unless this is a purposeful collaboration? A meeting of friends or those of like minds?

This thread and the other one mentioned; appear on their face to be an attempt by Holocaust Deniers to use logic to bring others to their cause without ever admitting to intent. Then you ran into intelligent people that can not be easily manipulated and you end up with this meaningless back and forth and won't let it die due to a determined desire to win the point.


[edit on 1/18/2008 by Blaine91555]

Originally posted by italkyoulisten

Yes, there are. I've ran into Nanjing Massacre deniers when I was doing research for my paper. And they used the same old tactics like "how can you prove this picture is of a Chinese guy getting his head chopped off by a Japanese guy?"

You could be right, but then maybe this is also much bigger than the hype over the holocaust, but we just do not know it for it all might be in mandarin Chinese.

Could part of the reason be that we basically considered the asians an inferior race to the western world? We didn't have a personal attachment to them? Most of our ancestors came from Europe (at that time) and we couldn't care less about what the "yellow man" was doing to his own kind? I know that doesnt account for the acts committed in Eastern Europe...if there is any explaining to any of it at all.

I dont mean to say that it shouldn't be studied but there could be many reasons as to why. It doesn't mean that I am agreeing with it either. I am just asking questions that's all.

reply to post by benign.psychosis


very well put.


I hope people can read your post without being scared they are wrong.
Then trying to manipulate your message.
again...

Originally posted by benign.psychosis

Here is a simple comparitive illustration of what the OP is getting at, I think. This would represent something along the lines of the emphisis of such events in schooling and in the media:

|------------------------------Holocaust---------------------------------|

|-other genocides-|

In fairness, here in the East the graph is similar, except you flip the labels like so --

|-----------------------Various Japanese atrocities--------------------|

|-other genocides-|

(With the Holocaust being within the 'other genocides' category)

Speaking of labels, why is the Holocaust the only genocide with that label? What's so special about it that it deserves that label? In the East, there is no specific label for the horrors the Japanese did to us. Furthermore, we don't have laws that legislate against questioning the events and we are not reminded of it annually in our media (except when the Japanese visit their war criminals shrine).

I don't know whether that is a tragedy or a good thing. Tragedy because eventually people will forget it's impact (because honestly, who really remembers the stuff they read for an exam which they've already taken?). A good thing because it allows us a people (of the East and Pacific) to move on and not demonize another group (as it is, most young people here look at the Japanese and their culture as 'cool', despite the fact that as a nation, they're quite racist).

Originally posted by Beachcoma
Speaking of labels, why is the Holocaust the only genocide with that label? What's so special about it that it deserves that label? In the East, there is no specific label for the horrors the Japanese did to us. Furthermore, we don't have laws that legislate against questioning the events and we are not reminded of it annually in our media (except when the Japanese visit their war criminals shrine).

That is a very easy question to answer my friend. The reason is because the victors were the ones who did the atrocities. If Hitler won would there have ever been a holocaust? The estimate number for people out right killed by communism is 150 to 200 million. That is a 50 million swing! Just crazy, but that is because no one really knows the upper limit, except those who did the killing. Cambodia is called the “killing fields” I been there and it was bad. There is a school where the kids of the school were taught how to torture people to death. No questions asked just pure torture until they died, millions. Well that got a labled because the world was able to get into there and finally stop it.

[edit on 18-1-2008 by Xtrozero]

reply to post by Xtrozero


I don't get it. What do you mean by "the victors were the ones who did the atrocities"?

Originally posted by Beachcoma
reply to post by Xtrozero

 

I don't get it. What do you mean by "the victors were the ones who did the atrocities"?

Stalin won and did the killing of 20 million or more so no news or investigations. Russia killed millions during WWII too just like the Germans did, but there was no other side to witness it. China killed 100 million plus in the communism takeover...no witness but the those who did the killing.

When the victors do the killing who is there to account for it or to go against it?

[edit on 19-1-2008 by Xtrozero]

reply to post by Xtrozero


But I was speaking of the Japanese and their collective atrocities throughout Asia-Pacific in World War II. Though they lost, the collective atrocities were not given a single label. No, it was broken down into individual, per region per location events. No all-encompassing term for it.

• Nanking Massacre (Rape of Nanking)
• Yellow River Blood
• The Laha Airfield Executions
• Philippine Massacre
• Bangka Island Massacre
• Parit Sulong Massacre
• Tol Plantation Atrocity
• Balikpapan Massacre
• Chekiang Massacre
• Luzon Atrocity
• Truk Massacre
• Tanoura Beach Massacre
• Wake Island Murders
• Massacre of Kokopo and Balalae Island
• The Akikaze Destroyer Executions
• Port Blair Massacres
• Various revenge murders
• Massacres on Andaman and Palawan
• The atrocity of the Pig Basket in Java
• The Genocide in Singapore
• Sandakan Death March
• Various Hospital Massacres
• "Comfort Women" from China, Korea Philippines and Malaya
• The Burma/Thailand Railroad construction
  and of course,
  
• Unit 731 Human Guinea Pig experiments in Manchuria

I could go on, but you get the idea. The point is, we don't have an all encompassing label for all of that, except maybe the Asian Holocaust, or as Wikipedia puts it, "Japanese War Crimes" (as though to downplay the scale and monstrosity of the events). These events also do not get repeated by our various media outlets ad nauseum.

Let me rephrase my earlier queries quite simply:

1. Why does the West have an all-encompassing label for the atrocities done by the loser of WWII in that hemisphere?
2. Why does the West have dozens of films and documentaries to further remind people of those atrocities (as compared to us in the East)?
3. Why do certain countries in the West have laws against questioning the events during the Holocaust?

Do you see the difference in how the West handles their holocaust as compared to the East?

Originally posted by Crakeur
I remember being told once that the reason the holocaust is discussed and mentioned as often as it is (might have heard this in hebrew school, might have been regular school) is to ensure that we never forget. Forgetting something like this allows it to happen again.

That's what I was told also. We can't forget, or else we are doomed to repeat it. I remember thinking, "No way, it could never happen in America". Yet, I look around at a country that has it's rights taken away daily. No one cares. We are told that driving is a priviledge, not a right. No one says anything.

Does this mean that we are on a crash course for a holocaust? I don't think so. I do think it shows, that no matter how much it is taught, if the right person comes into power at the right time then we're still doomed to repeat history.

Originally posted by Beachcoma
Do you see the difference in how the West handles their holocaust as compared to the East?

Yes I do, but once again not all west atrocities have labels. There is also the fact that America has a lot of Jews here to ensure the interest. Also Germany embraced their war crimes and Japan has continually denied theirs, and that is most likely one of the bigger reasons. Actually the word Holocaust was not commonly referred to the Jews in Germany until the late 1950s. The Jews used the word “Shoah” that means “destruction” for the acts against the Jews of Europe. The word holocaust actually means "burnt sacrifice" so I’m not totally sure how it became the label.
The word holocaust has also been used for other atrocities, but today it is mainly the generic term for the atrocities against the Jews.

Also, I do not see the countries that the Japanese did these atrocities against jump up and do their own labeling, maybe they did in their own language. Cambodia was also called a holocaust, but then there were some big outrages for the small number of westerners killed alongside the millions of Cambodians, and that might have been a factor in the big recognition by the west. I also agree with you in that Asia is a long way from the US and back then was not really part of our western culture. I would not call it a racist attitude as much as we aligned ourselves more with our historic past of Europe. China, Japan and many other parts of Asia back then might as well been on another planet to us. BTW I have lived in Japan for 5 years, Korea 1 year, and spent many more years traveling to most of the countries over there.