Is History about to repeat itself?

[JFKvsNixon]

But isn't that a description of the huge migrant influx heading into Europe now?

 

Explain????

[999tigger]

Yes. History is repeating itself. One murderous fanatic is much the same as another. Appeasement will fail. Daesh will grow in strength until they become an existential threat to the rest of the world and only then will action be taken. Millions will die.

 

Stand by for a barrage of criticism for daring to discuss the subject either on the grounds that it's already been discussed or that you're secretly just after having a go at Muslims in general.

 

I wondered what you would say unbeliever and agree with you on the History repeating itself.

 

Its not unique at all. the silimilarities with the Nazis is that they are a violent group wanting to gain further ends through violence. That puts them on a par with every other group that decides it wants to use force to meet its aims.

 

The idea that knocking down a few temples or a bit of cultutal vandalism makes them unique is poor. All winners in conflicts rewrite history to some degree.

 

The Russians, the Chinese, Japanese etc am sure everyone does it. Rewriting history you would need to look at the Khmer Rouge and Year zero or Stalin.

 

IS is still tiny when compared to Germany. they arent a fully functioning country/state.

 

The Corbyn point is a complete red herring as he isnt in power and is never likely to get into power. Completely different from Chamberlain and the rest of Europe appeasing the Nazis.

 

Nobody is appeasing IS, to the extent we can politically do so, then we are trying to put a stop to it.

[SnailyBoy]

I think you're missing a crucial aspect of your comparision.

 

Adolf Hitler

 

The 'Furher Cult' was the driving force in the recritment of ordinary citizens to the Nazi party and the subsequent takeover of the German polictical system.

 

As for peace talks prior to WWII, are you talking about the Munich agreement?

 

If so, I don't see how that compares at all.

 

Consideration was given to peace talks with Germany prior to the capitulation of France, but they were dismissed by Winston Churchill because of the incredibly weakend position it would leave the country in militarily and still at the mercy of Germany.

 

So once again, i don't see the comparison.

[tinfoilhat]

The British Army have killed far more people than Islamic State. Perhaps we are the bad ones?

 

When was the last time the british army beheaded people en mass or set fire to a POW in a cage?

[999tigger]

It already had when Hitler was still only a mere no-name corporal in WW1 trenches

 

Agree with unbeliever's post. The West is doing nothing more than the hot-cold shower treatment of strong words and token action mitigated by apathy and appeasement, same as the late 30s to May 40 period.

 

Like all nation bullies since time immemorial, Daesh grow and rule only by force. Until enough force is visited upon them, they ain't going anywhere.

 

TBF there is apathy towards war and people coming back in bodybags. There is also the cost so containment is good enough. Public opinion is against ground troops being deployed plus full on wars are expensive. They also dont have a clear solution (which will be political) so until that time arrives an everything aligns there is nothing they can or will do.

 

Strong words arent going to make any difference to IS, they dont care.

[runningman1]

When was the last time the british army beheaded people en mass or set fire to a POW in a cage?

 

That isn't the only qualifier for bad. We may not have done that but we have over ran countries, executed state leaders and placed the video on youtube, been responsible for millions of deaths, set up puppet governments, supplied weapons to and trained insurgency groups, some of whom became IS.

 

We are pretty awful.

[unbeliever]

I think you're missing a crucial aspect of your comparision.

 

Adolf Hitler

 

The 'Furher Cult' was the driving force in the recritment of ordinary citizens to the Nazi party and the subsequent takeover of the German polictical system.

 

As for peace talks prior to WWII, are you talking about the Munich agreement?

 

If so, I don't see how that compares at all.

 

Consideration was given to peace talks with Germany prior to the capitulation of France, but they were dismissed by Winston Churchill because of the incredibly weakend position it would leave the country in militarily and still at the mercy of Germany.

 

So once again, i don't see the comparison.

 

I think what's being referred to is more the Chamberlain administration than Churchill. By the time Churchill became PM we were committed.

[JFKvsNixon]

They're rising again. In Germany, Denmark, Sweden, Hungary, France, Greece, Italy, Belgium <...>. Fast.

 

Just don't look at mass media reporting à la BBC or broadsheets, seek out independent news, blogs, footage by individuals here, there and everywhere and form a mental picture of the whole (just making the point, as I'm quietly confident you already do, at least to an extent).

 

And there will be ever less of a difference made between indigenous and freshly-arrived Muslim populations, who will be this century's Jews in the said industrialised nations.

 

I believe that the Nazis were the culmination of hundreds of years of antisemitism right across Europe, added to the then recent upheaval of most of Europe's social foundation, with the fall of the monarchies and the trauma of WW1, and background of the great depression included for good measure.

 

The 1930s in Europe was the "perfect storm" inside which political extremism flourished. If it wasn't the Nazis, it would have been the communists or some other extremist organisation that led us down the road to the eventual barbarous conflict.

[PeteMorris]

Explain????

 

Well...As we know, there's a huge influx of people heading into Europe (which doesn't seem to be slowing at all), who's culture is completely at odds with the 'modern west'. Whichever way you look at it, that's going to lead to conflict, and already has (New years eve in Cologne). We know that terrorists 'have' and probably continue to swan back and forth between the Arab states and Europe (Paris bombers)....So your statement about:

 

Also the Nazis had built upon the foundations of hundreds of years of ignorance and prejudice, there were regular pogroms across Europe where it seemed that people were free to carry out wonton acts of violence against anything perceived to be Jewish. I just don't see the same conditions that'll lead to the same levels of extremism nowadays in the industrialised countries

 

Seems to be a similar pattern...I know, it's not exactly the same...But there's a pattern.

[L00b]

TBF there is apathy towards war and people coming back in bodybags.

British KIAs in Iraq 2001-2013: 179.

 

France, victims in the period Jan-Nov 2015: 167.

 

Just adding a little slant/perspective on the point

 

If the West ever takes on IS on the ground, it will not be the rolling desert of Iraq or the fields of Helmand. It will be Stalingrad in every last city, town and hamlet. And it will be all the more terrible since this will be so much more of an ideological fight than a territorial/nationalist one. Don't think I'm not aware of that, as part and parcel of my opinion-forming

I believe that the Nazis were the culmination of hundreds of years of antisemitism right across Europe, added to the then recent upheaval of most of Europe's social foundation, with the fall of the monarchies and the trauma of WW1, and background of the great depression included for good measure.

Nazis grew strong pre-war through their nationalist and socialist policies, giving a population beaten to a pulp until then a fresh sense of pride and purpose. Antisemitism was only ever, at least initially and then still for a good part of the 30s, a minor aspect of Nazism, just a convenient demonization vehicle. It was a personal prejudice of Hitler allowed to be writ large once he had absolute power. Had he not been a stark anti-Semite for years and years since well before he even became politicised, then it would have been some other minority or interest group.

The 1930s in Europe was the "perfect storm" inside which political extremism flourished. If it wasn't the Nazis, it would have been the communists or some other extremist organisation that led us down the road to the eventual barbarous conflict.

I agree. My point was that this perfect storm is brewing afresh. Europe is not down with 2008, far from it. Edited January 26, 2016 by L00b