Nova Historiae

GENERAL DISCUSSION => Spam Forum => Topic started by: The Dynasty of Esterfort on January 19, 2016, 09:50:48 pm


Title: NATO ****
Post by: The Dynasty of Esterfort on January 19, 2016, 09:50:48 pm
(http://i.imgur.com/1LFxvyY.jpg?1)
Title: Re: NATO ****
Post by: Fascist States of America on January 19, 2016, 10:15:56 pm
I have a patriotic boner!  8)
Title: Re: NATO ****
Post by: Nomna on January 19, 2016, 11:14:05 pm
 :P :P :P
Title: Re: NATO ****
Post by: Greater Roman Republic on January 20, 2016, 08:58:12 pm
the "Good Guys" who violate everyone's sovereignty, forced Germany to join, helped make the EU to weaken the German economy, and sprung up from the Allied powers who commited such a huge amount of war crimes in WW2 its sickening.
Title: Re: NATO ****
Post by: Francophone Alliance on January 20, 2016, 08:59:03 pm
Exactly, a wonderful organization.
Title: Re: NATO ****
Post by: Fascist States of America on January 20, 2016, 09:06:44 pm
Like Nazi Germany was any better, or the Warsaw Pact, or the Central Powers, or the UN
Title: Re: NATO ****
Post by: The Dynasty of Esterfort on January 20, 2016, 09:08:12 pm
The UN is great, doesn't enforce anything :D
Title: Re: NATO ****
Post by: Greater Roman Republic on January 20, 2016, 09:17:52 pm
Quote
Central Powers

 The Central Powers where better, i cant say the same about the rest, but every time someone points out the central powers and the German Empire as "Evil" or "The bad guys" it makes me cringe, the Germans fought an incredibly clean war in WW1, meanwhile the brits had concentration camps in Africa and where blockading civilian cities in Germany till millions died starving on the streets.

Quote
Nazi Germany was any better, or the Warsaw Pact

 I fully agree, but how often to Germans go around yelling about how fuckin fantastic the nazi's where? now how often do you here Americas do it for their country in WW2.

Quote
UN

What has the UN done wrong?
Title: Re: NATO ****
Post by: the belkan states on January 20, 2016, 09:34:37 pm
Quote
What has the UN done wrong?
more like what has it done period lol
Title: Re: NATO ****
Post by: Celatoro on January 20, 2016, 09:36:26 pm
NATO was made in 1949.
Title: Re: NATO ****
Post by: Bavaria on January 20, 2016, 09:43:03 pm
I burned an old NATO medal yesterday.

It was fun.
Title: Re: NATO ****
Post by: the belkan states on January 20, 2016, 09:44:05 pm
what and why
Title: Re: NATO ****
Post by: Nomna on January 20, 2016, 09:47:02 pm
It depends who you ask about the Central powers, Nazis, Allies, A war, a country or etc because I am sure things equal good and bad happen related to said things.


I never really research ww1 but I know most leaders or all of the European nations were related.

WW2 shouldn't have happened but it did and who knows what would have happen if it didn't end like it did.
Title: Re: NATO ****
Post by: Bavaria on January 20, 2016, 09:54:49 pm
what and why
I found it in an old box in my basement.

And because I despise the very existence of NATO.
Title: Re: NATO ****
Post by: Greater Roman Republic on January 20, 2016, 09:56:40 pm
Quote
I never really research ww1 but I know most leaders or all of the European nations were related.

And i have spent almost my entire life reserching WW1, i will tell you right now, the Central powers did nothing wrong, Britain however...
Title: Re: NATO ****
Post by: Francophone Alliance on January 20, 2016, 09:58:39 pm
I would define being the first to use gas filled artillery shells as "something wrong".

In WW1, there was no such thing as innocence. Everyone had blood on their hands. Their was no right or wrong, only warfare.
Title: Re: NATO ****
Post by: The Dynasty of Esterfort on January 20, 2016, 10:03:30 pm
I love NATO, their structure fascinates me.
Title: Re: NATO ****
Post by: Greater Roman Republic on January 20, 2016, 10:06:54 pm
Quote
I would define being the first to use gas filled artillery shells as "something wrong".

  And how is it wrong? The germans where trying to speed up the war and save lives in the process, anyways, death is death, dying by gas is just as bad as sitting in a field after being shot bleeding for hours. Now if the Germans where to gas civilians i would agree, but they did not.
Title: Re: NATO ****
Post by: Nomna on January 20, 2016, 10:23:56 pm
Quote
I never really research ww1 but I know most leaders or all of the European nations were related.

And i have spent almost my entire life reserching WW1, i will tell you right now, the Central powers did nothing wrong, Britain however...
I agree with you

Title: Re: NATO ****
Post by: United Kingdom of Portugal, Brazil, and the Algarves on January 21, 2016, 03:14:33 am
Have you guys ever heard about the American "concentration camps" of WWII? I didn't find out about these until I followed George Takei on Facebook (I'm a Trekkie).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internment_of_Japanese_Americans
Title: Re: NATO ****
Post by: The Dynasty of Esterfort on January 21, 2016, 05:19:35 am
They were the biggest mistake of FDR's Presidency. And they weren't concentration camps like the Nazi's or Soviets did em, it was more civilized.
Title: Re: NATO ****
Post by: Domount on January 21, 2016, 06:09:31 am
They were the biggest mistake of FDR's Presidency. And they weren't concentration camps like the Nazi's or Soviets did em, it was more civilized.


Forcing people into camps and racism are civilized?
I had no idea
Title: Re: NATO ****
Post by: The Dynasty of Esterfort on January 21, 2016, 06:16:38 am
They were the biggest mistake of FDR's Presidency. And they weren't concentration camps like the Nazi's or Soviets did em, it was more civilized.


Forcing people into camps and racism are civilized?
I had no idea

You gotta understand Japs weren't seen as people by Americans after they bombed Pearl Harbor.
Title: Re: NATO ****
Post by: The Western Commonwealth on January 21, 2016, 07:05:29 am
Same goes with the Japanese Canadian Internment Camps.
Title: Re: NATO ****
Post by: The Republic of Redern on January 21, 2016, 07:46:10 am
Quote
And i have spent almost my entire life reserching WW1, i will tell you right now, the Central powers did nothing wrong, Britain however...
Now the allies weren't much better but the Germans were the first group to do mass research poisonous gasses that had already been banned. Also the **** of Belgium.
Title: Re: NATO ****
Post by: Greater Roman Republic on January 21, 2016, 01:36:50 pm
Quote
Now the allies weren't much better but the Germans were the first group to do mass research poisonous gasses that had already been banned. Also the **** of Belgium.

No, they had not been banned, that was not intill after WW1, during WW1 gas was actually pretty human, it hardly ever killed you, it just sent you home for a few years (Which is all the Germans wanted, you to not be a threat anymore) only like 20% of them even died, and while thats not good, its a hell of a lot better than artillery that kills anything in its path with deadly shrapnel, i will take my chance with the gas thank you very much!

Dont even get me started about the "**** of Belgium" it was complete propaganda, i want you to remember something, during WW1 Britain cut Germany's communication lines to the US, the only information America got was through British Wartime radio, and that was notoriously biased to the point where it is basically propoganda.
Title: Re: NATO ****
Post by: Nomna on January 21, 2016, 01:56:22 pm

Quote
No, they had not been banned, that was not intill after WW1, during WW1 gas was actually pretty human, it hardly ever killed you, it just sent you home for a few years (Which is all the Germans wanted, you to not be a threat anymore) only like 20% of them even died, and while thats not good, its a hell of a lot better than artillery that kills anything in its path with deadly shrapnel, i will take my chance with the gas thank you very much!
Please tell me your joking?

(http://www.compoundchem.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/Chemical-Warfare-World-War-1-Poison-Gases1.png)

I presume this are just some of chemical weapons deployed.
Title: Re: NATO ****
Post by: The Republic of Redern on January 21, 2016, 01:58:39 pm
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hague_Conventions_of_1899_and_1907#Hague_Convention_of_1899
 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hague_Conventions_of_1899_and_1907#Hague_Convention_of_1899)
Second off, while yes the **** of Belgium was used in propaganda it also actually happened:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Rape_of_Belgium#War_crimes (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Rape_of_Belgium#War_crimes)
Title: Re: NATO ****
Post by: Greater Roman Republic on January 21, 2016, 02:38:38 pm
"1.2 million non fatal Casualties (this means the troops where not killed, but wounded) 91,000 Fatalities" lets see that means about 13% of people exposed to gas died, the rest wounded got to live, would you rather have a 150 mm shell fall through your roof with explosvies and kill you 99% of the time, or have a gas one fall through and kill you 13% of the time, assuming you dont just throw on a gas mask? and may i add that everyone used gas, you know what everyone did not do though right? starve millions of civilians to death and make african concentration camps, only the brits did that.


Quote
Second off, while yes the **** of Belgium was used in propaganda it also actually happened:

 Germany did in fact invade Belgium, i do not dispute that, and civilians did in fact die (Its impossible to prevent) but no, German soldiers did not run around "Killing babies" and "Raping women" they did not kill civilians in mass, and if soldiers where found killing civilians (Something that did not happen nearly as often as propoganda would have us belive) they where punished by the German command.


Also Christ people, its not hard to resise images so you can actually see them!
Title: Re: NATO ****
Post by: Francophone Alliance on January 21, 2016, 02:40:19 pm
Of course, the Germans would never starve civilians. By, say, cutting off supplies to an island nation. Twice.
Title: Re: NATO ****
Post by: The Republic of Redern on January 21, 2016, 02:51:06 pm
Sorry I had used image instead of URL. My mistake.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hague_Conventions_of_1899_and_1907#Hague_Convention_of_1899 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hague_Conventions_of_1899_and_1907#Hague_Convention_of_1899)

Second off, while yes the **** of Belgium was used in propaganda it also actually happened:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Rape_of_Belgium#War_crimes (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Rape_of_Belgium#War_crimes)
Title: Re: NATO ****
Post by: Greater Roman Republic on January 21, 2016, 02:53:13 pm
"in Dinant, the German army believed the inhabitants were as dangerous as the French soldiers themselves.[5][6] German troops, afraid of Belgian guerrilla fighters"
 
   I dont consider killing Guerilla fighters a war crime, if you fight like an army, then you should be treated like one, and again i agree bad stuff hapened there, but not any more than what the british and French soldiers did when they took Central Powers land
Title: Re: NATO ****
Post by: The Republic of Redern on January 21, 2016, 02:56:39 pm
If you want to blame anyone for the horrors of the war I would say Conrad van Hotzendorf, but the Germans did commit serious war crimes. Plus the British and French didn't attack civilian ships with U-boats.
Title: Re: NATO ****
Post by: Greater Roman Republic on January 21, 2016, 03:08:07 pm
Quote
If you want to blame anyone for the horrors of the war I would say Conrad van Hotzendorf

 I would say Austria as a whole, along with Russias poor leadership at the time, and i would say Germany gave Austria to much power (The whole "Blank Check" deal) However, Germany and Russia did not want war, it was a serious of catastrophic mistakes that led to WW1, in all the nations i just mentioned.

Quote
but the Germans did commit serious war crimes

The German Government, as a whole simply did not, the only War Crime the army actually committed was to an extent, what is claimed to have happened in Belgium (It did happen, but it was NOT anywhere near what the Brits claimed) and that was not the German Government, but rather a few misguided officers, much like the time the US massacred a village in Vietnam (I forget the name of the incident) it was not the US, but a few officers that let it happen.

Quote
Plus the British and French didn't attack civilian ships with U-boats.

 The Germans made it quite clear that any civilian ships in the area where in a war zone, and even gave the ships warnings to turn around, and the ships where by no means "Civilian" you stop being a "Civilian ship" when you smuggle arms and food into a country, knowingly, through a war zone, even Lusitania was carrieng weapons. and as a matter of fact the British did sink civilian ships, not with U-Boats but with warships, the Germans even made special Cargo U-Boats (The Deutschland class) to sneak past the British blockade. its funny you never hear about the brits blockading Germany and starving millions, but you always learn about the German blockade of england.
Title: Re: NATO ****
Post by: Nomna on January 22, 2016, 11:02:25 pm
Gas attack: is just another type of weapon used to win a terrible war faster and there is a reason why its banned.(I think its banned if it isn't shame on us)

British empire did a lot of terrible stuff in its life but so did a lot of other nations.

British blockade compared to Germany blockage: both terrible maybe not equally though.

concentration camps: by reading some of the information posted on this topic and other I know. I must say most or all major nations around the World wars time had some sorted of concentration camps.

Austria-Hungarian empire starting world war 1: ok yes they did declare war on Serbia which result Russia declaring war on them, then Germany declaring war on Russia, and so on.

Civilian ****, and killing: War can change a men into animals which results in this non soldier behavior,(Its sad really for the victims) But a few incidents is all it needs to paint a picture of a army even if that's just a few bad apples and not all of them.



WAR IS WAR and that's sad because a nation, a group, or even a alliance could do anything to turn the odds in their favor even if it'll cost lives, breaking laws, using banned weapons, pleasing the soldiers or starving a city or nation. Everyone has blood on their hands in wars sad to say.