Spyke

Well, maybe. But it was already being built for a good half-century at that time.

5

If you are arguing like that we can also find the blame for WW2 by whatever unified the German Reich in the first place. It's a silly way to pass blame.

2

I take comfort in knowing I would be decimated before even realizing what's happening in the case on a full-on nuclear warfare.

5
lemmy.world

Germany is Europe's biggest supporter of Israel.

The biggest issue is that we, the EU, are on the side of Germany now. And their track record with world wars isn't great.

90
lemmy.world

To be fair to the Germans, I can understand how the Holocaust is integrated into them as a kind of "original sin". What was done to the Jews under the Nazis was so unspeakable terrible, and German society as a whole has done an enormous job at ingraining in themselves that nothing of the sort should ever repeat itself.

The problem is that "nothing of the sort" has translated into "opposing Jews in any way". It seems to me like Germany sees itself as bound to support Jews (and thereby the Jewish state Israel) no matter what in order to "atone for their sins", and I can understand that. However, right now, Israel is suddenly the state committing the closest thing we've seen to the Holocaust since the actual Holocaust. It's very hard for Germany to oppose Israel without tickling a part of their history that they've done a laudable job at condemning.

What Germany needs now, is to separate their history from their current politics. I understand that it's difficult, and I don't have an answer to how it should be done, but it needs to happen, lest the same crimes are committed again.

40
p3nreply
lemmy.world

Israel is suddenly the state committing the closest thing we’ve seen to the Holocaust since the actual Holocaust.

I don't say this to excuse anything Israel is doing, but this is gross recency bias that is glossing over numerous genocides that have occurred since the Holocaust, including:

Not technically genocides, but also worth mentioning in the same vein:

So ya, other than those events, this is the closest thing to the Holocaust since the actual Holocaust.

26
lemmy.world

It's laudable of you to bring attention to these other atrocities. Without creating a "race to the bottom" regarding what was worse, I still want to point out that the horror of the Holocaust was not only in the number of killed.

I'm aware of a couple of the atrocities you mentioned, but as far as I'm aware, they don't carry the clinical state-sponsored efficiency that is a hallmark of the Holocaust. When I compare Gaza today to the holocaust, that's what I'm comparing, rather than the number of killed. It's about the way Isreal has decided to wipe out the population of Gaza, and systematically does so completely unhindered.

7

To be clear, aside from the part I quoted, I agreed with everything else in your post and thought it was an interesting take, but again I have to take issue with this:

as far as I’m aware, they don’t carry the clinical state-sponsored efficiency that is a hallmark of the Holocaust.

I'm not going to analyze every single atrocity since 1945, but the Cambodian genocide was certainly state-sponsored, efficient, and horrific:

"20,000 people passed through the Security Prison 21, one of the 196 prisons the Khmer Rouge operated,[4][28] and only seven adults survived.[29]"

"The executed were buried in mass graves. In order to save ammunition, the executions were often carried out using poison or improvised weapons such as sharpened bamboo sticks, hammers, machetes and axes.[6] ... In some cases the children and infants of adult victims were killed by having their heads bashed against the trunks of Chankiri trees, and then were thrown into the pits alongside their parents. The rationale was "to stop them growing up and taking revenge for their parents' deaths."

"People were imprisoned and tortured merely on suspicion of opposing the regime or because other prisoners gave their names under torture. Whole families (including women and children) ended up in prisons and were tortured because the Khmer Rouge feared that if they did not do this, their intended victims' relatives would seek revenge. Pol Pot said, "if you want to kill the grass, you also have to kill the roots".[169]"

"There are many accounts of torture in both the Security Prison 21 records and the documents of the trial; as told by the survivor Bou Meng in his book (written by Huy Vannak), tortures were so atrocious and heinous that the prisoners tried in every way to commit suicide, even using spoons, and their hands were constantly tied behind their back to prevent them from committing suicide "

"all medical experiments were systematically conducted without proper anesthetics.[173] A medic who worked inside S-21 said that a 17-year-old girl had her throat slit and her abdomen pierced before being beaten and put into water for an entire night. This procedure was repeated many times and carried out without anesthetics.[174] In a hospital of Kampong Cham province, child medics cut out the intestines of a living non-consenting person and joined their ends to study the healing process. The patient died after three days due to the "operation".[173]"

"Twenty-six-year-old John D. Dewhirst, a British tourist, was one of the youngest foreigners to die in the prison.[17] He was sailing with his New Zealand companion, Kerry Hamill, and their Canadian friend Stuart Glass when their boat drifted into Cambodian territory and was intercepted by Khmer patrol boats on August 13, 1978. Glass was killed during the arrest, while Dewhirst and Hamill were captured, blindfolded, and taken to shore. Both were executed after having been tortured for several months at Tuol Sleng. Witnesses reported that a foreigner was burned alive; initially, it was suggested that this might have been John Dewhirst, but a survivor would later identify Kerry Hamill as the victim of this particular act of brutality."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cambodian_genocide

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tuol_Sleng_Genocide_Museum

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killing_Fields

6

Germany doesnt care about Jews. The moment Jews are not fitting the box Germany designed for them by not blindly supporting Israel, those Jews are facing the same repressions like anyone else who challenges Germanies blind support for Israel.

German politics, media and parts of civil society think that blind support of Israel is serving certain interests of Germany and they do it purely for these reasons. In particular we see it being used to justify racist discrimination against Arabs and other "brown" people and to crack down with increasing authoritarianism on leftist and ecological political positions.

Like Israeli society they have deluded themselves into thinking that they know better than everyone else in the world what is right and wrong and fail to see, how this actually harms Germany tremendously.

8
Icemanreply
lemmy.world

The problem is that Germans now just look generally pro-genocidal.

5
lemmy.world

This is a classic problem of going into one ditch, then oversteering and hitting the opposite ditch.

Germany has worked so hard on "The Holocaust was terrible, we will forever support the Jews to make up for it" that they're now supporting a genocidal Jewish state.

My point is that I understand why this is hard for them. For them to oppose Israel invokes some associations that they really want to keep far away. However, now, supporting Israel invokes the same associations. This puts them in a kind of catch-22 situation, where no matter what they do, they're invoking associations to the Nazis.

To be clear: I think the only right thing to do now is to oppose Israel. I just understand why that is exceptionally hard for Germany.

23

Well put! It's a shame that they put all focus on supporting their primary victim and so little on never again allowing their actions. Their word would weigh heavy thou if they ever stepped on that land mine.

4
lemmy.world

You're wilfully ignoring the historical context that makes it hard for Germany to oppose Israel. By doing so, you're not helping anyone.

1

If that were the reason, Germany would also have trouble opposing Russia. Yet they don't.

-1

Don't you see that if you want to effect change, it helps to understand why Germany is doing what they're doing now?

I have no idea what brings the ICC into this, I'm not aware of cases against any other country than Isreal here.

By the way, how does trying to understand why people are doing what they do make me an asshole? I'm trying to be civil here, and I think you're being very impolite.

0

To be fair to the Germans, I can understand how the Holocaust is integrated into them as a kind of “original sin”. What was done to the Jews under the Nazis was so unspeakable terrible, and German society as a whole has done an enormous job at ingraining in themselves that nothing of the sort should ever repeat itself.

The problem with Germany is that they learned the wrong lesson out of WW2.

Instead of learning "genocide is bad", it's "Jews are always on the right side of history". And that's why Germany is completely uncritically supporting Israel with everything that it does.

4

They could've gone down the Humanist route of "Never again shall this be allowed to happen to anyone", making it about the victims and their human suffering rather than their race, but instead they chose to make it about Race, keeping the way of seeing other human beings from before, just with different untermenschen and ubermenschen.

The visual artifacts of NAZIsm might have been forbidden, but the whole judging and treating people differently depending on their race is a strong as ever.

Their continued support for Israel whilst they're trying to commit a new Holocaust, shows that Racism as a way of viewing and relating to others in Germany is as strong today as it was in the 1930s.

1
reddthat.com

What was done to the Jews under the Nazis was so unspeakable terrible, and German society as a whole has done an enormous job at ingraining in themselves that nothing of the sort should ever repeat itself

Nazi Germany also murdered more than 10 million Russians, both civilians and soldiers, and had a literal genocidal plan against slavic peoples (Generalplan Ost), and yet they don't support the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Almost as if the whole "holocaust shame" thing was a myth, and it was used to manufacture consent towards Israel's genocide of Palestinians.

-1
lemmy.world

As mentioned in one of my other comments: Yes, the Holocaust targeted other groups than Jews (Slavs, Romani, Gays, etc.). However, in learning about the Holocaust, there is usually a strong focus on Jews. In short, most people learn a lot about how Jews were targeted, and a lot of memorials and media focus on Jewish prosecution by the nazis.

At the same time, Russia has been built up as an adversary since the beginning of the Cold War, and committed plenty of their own atrocities before, during, and after WWII. The same cannot be said about Romani, Gays, Jews, or other groups targeted during the Holocaust.

With all this in mind, it's not very hard to understand why "Holocaust guilt" is centered on Jews more than other groups, and why Russians are largely exempt from the feeling altogether. I'm not saying that's fair or right, I'm saying it's very understandable.

On the other hand: I really don't see any motive from Germanys side to support genocide on Palestinians. So my argument is essentially trying to understand why Germany would support Isreal despite . The only good explanation I've found is centred on "Holocaust guilt", and the way it's been portrayed and conveyed the past eighty years.

1
reddthat.com

I understand your explanation, I just think it's more believable that holocaust remembrance is most often focused on those who stand on the side of NATO

trying to understand why Germany would support Isreal despite

The overwhelming media directive of being pro-pissrael is in my opinion the more likely reason

-2

I think the overwhelming media directive (...)

I don't follow German media much, so I can't comment on that. The media in Norway is typically pro-Palestinine. The pro-Isreal pieces that are published are usually debate pieces written by fringe politicians or pieces written by Isrealian officials.

1
lemmy.ml

The Nazis were just as brutal to Russians as they were to Jews, and yet modern Germany has no trouble understanding it shouldn't support Russia today. The "holocaust guilt" excuse for supporting Israel seems like an excuse

-1

It's absolutely true that the Holocaust hit several groups with the same brutality as the Jews (Slavs, Romani, Gays, etc.). However when the Holocaust is taught about, it's usually with a strong focus on Jews and antisemitism. Additionally, Russia has been built up as an adversary throughout the past 50-70 years. With that in mind, I don't see it as strange that the "Holocaust guilt" is centred around Jews, and that Germany finds it easier to oppose Russia than Isreal.

2
wpb
lemmy.world

They're highly complicit in Israel's actions.

53

Germany has great PR, it plays itself as such a progressive nation free of hate or want. It’s bullshit when you look beyond the surface

12
gibsonreply
sopuli.xyz

They also ditched nuclear energy and stayed over reliant on russian fossil fuel, funding the Russian war machine

7
Salehreply
feddit.org

The nuclear rods in Europe are mainly made with Uranium from Kazakhstan processed in Russia.

The German failure was not expanding renewables. Getting out of nuclear energy is geopolitically and financially sound.

14
Cornreply
lemmy.ml

Not when coal and gas fill the void. They can get fuel rods from France, Canada, China. Hell Germany could just refine their own, Niger is looking for trading partners.

3
Salehreply
feddit.org

France works together with Russia in the nuclear industry.

https://apnews.com/article/germany-france-russia-nuclear-power-rosatom-framatome-ce47027005349580306d55553c7f1142

Also in 2023 none of the European supply came from China. Almost half came from Russia/Kazakhstan

The relationship with Niger is fragile, since Niger kicked out the remaining French troops from France post-colonial presence in West Africa. It seems Niger is instead looking towards Canada.

https://www.neimagazine.com/news/uranium-tensions-subside-in-niger/

And this only represents principal availability, without looking at the costs.

1
Cornreply

France was forcing Niger to give up its resources for a fraction of market value while keeping them from developing industry. Buy their product at a fair market value, or even better: follow China's mutual development strategy and provide funds and experts to build a refinery.

China doesnt mine much uranium, but they do fabricated fuel pellets with ore from Kazakhstan.

2
albert180reply
piefed.social

These nuclear energy zealots are spilling over from r/europe with the same stupid arguments

9
Cornreply

Nuclear energy was the answer between like 1950 and 2010. But the fact that China isnt going all in on nuclear despite having optimal conditions; central planning allows them to predict maximum prices for materials and labor available 5-10 years in advance, the scale allows them to produce reactors more efficiently with better investment in tooling than any other country, and being the workshop of the world ensures higher demand than any other country. They are at <5% nuclear right now and expect <10% by 2035.

9

Now we're funding the US regime war machine after they blew up NS2 and 'sanctions'.
Paying extortion prices for dirty US fracking gas that make companies uncompetitive and causing the economy to collapse.
The US leeches always profit from war, same as in WW2.

2

Always on the wrong side of history.
Not a coincidence that fascism and zionism are twins

4

Germany is the second largest provider of weapons to Israel, and a huge longtime consumer of Russian gas, this is a tonedeaf as hell meme.

49
feddit.org

Please dont mistake the German government for the entirety of Germany. I would say, that the support for Israel has massively decreased, due to their genocide. Our government however, does not fucking care.

8
Bloomcolereply
lemmy.world

Hey, our government is not licking the US/pissrahell genocider boot any less is it?

1

That DE40 has not been going up since the terrorist act by the US of blowing up NS2 and the 'sanctions' on themselves making them buy wildly expensive fracking gas from the US.
EU can't compete and their economy is dying.
BASF, Thyssen-Krupp,etc... all closing down shop and reorganising.
A nice fertile ground for creating more AfD fascists, exactly the same as in the 1930's.
And again the prospect of getting trashed on the eastern front just like their opa's.

4
lemmy.world

Except Germany keeps delivering weapons to Israel, gives them diplomatic and political coverage, and apparently even has planes in the air to support Israeli fighter jets in their attacks on Iran.

45
Fusselwurmreply
feddit.org

you think WW3 is starting because of Israel? Can I also get under the rock your been living under, must be nice there.

-23

Israel is a prominent member of the global western capitalistic hegemony, and they are escalating tensions with their genocide and attack on Iran. I wouldn't say they're the only ones responsible, but they do share a large portion of the blame.

15

Yeah sounds like you're under deep rock for so long, you mistake the sky for an even larger rock.

7
discuss.tchncs.de

Israel is not only at the very center of the world (look at maps: it's very much the geographic center. That's why we call it middle east.)

it's also reckless and like a dying star, a supernova. it blows up without regards to casualties. it is a very dangerous situation that we're in indeed.

7
Flipperreply
feddit.org

geographic center

Just shows where you buy your maps.

5

fair

i guess most western maps are arranged in such a way that the middle east is in the center and the atlantic is on the map completely because

  1. the atlantic has probably been more important historically than the pacific, as europeans sailed over the atlantic, not the pacific.

  2. the pacific ocean is a bigger body of water, so having it on the "back" side of the globe makes sense because this way, you have a more uninteresting back-side of the globe and a more interesting front-side.

2

No, they are not. I really suggest you look at an European map. Algeria/Mali are in the center of the map, depending on how much Antarctica is included.

Maps are normally centered roughly around the region you buy them in. European maps are centered on the 0 meridian, because it fits so nicely while keeping the European countries around the center. The 0 meridian was just defined by the Brits as going through Greenwich.

The bottom is cut of more, because Antarctica is less interesting than Canada, Greenland and Siberia.

2
Fusselwurmreply
feddit.org

I dont see the potential for global conflict.

Israel and Iran have been trading blows for decades now. Some direct, many indirect. It's a regional conflict, and regional it will remain.

Every now and then, Israel acts to prevent Iran from becoming a nuclear power – and honestly, we're all the better for it, the world does not need another set of religious crazies to have nukes.

(That being said, is Netanyahu a deplorable asshat? Absolutely yes – but for different reasons)

-3
sh.itjust.works

Every now and then, Israel acts to prevent Iran from becoming a nuclear power – and honestly, we’re all the better for it, the world does not need another set of religious crazies to have nukes.

At this point, I would be fine with Iran having the bomb. I really don't see any evidence that they would behave more recklessly with it than Israel does.

9
Fusselwurmreply
feddit.org

cue Oprah

YOU GET THE BOMB, YOU GET THE BOMB, YOU GET THE BOMB, EVERYONE GETS THE BOMB!


Them not behaving more recklessly than Israel is unfortunately not a high bar; which given their past actions I'm not sure they'd pass. I'd like to err on the side of caution here.

1

Iran has a right to self defense. Them getting the bomb is the side of caution here. Otherwise they will keep being attacked by Israel and it's allies

2
technocritreply
lemmy.dbzer0.com

What "past actions"? Being constantly attacked and threatened by empire and a genocidal cult?

0

for starters, If you'd like to immerse yourself into the system of Middle Eastern clients and proxies, you will have an especially fun and long day going through the rather noxious minions of Iran.

1
lemmy.ml

"have been trading blows for decades now. Some direct, many indirect. It’s a regional conflict, and regional it will remain."

Lol, this sounds like a quote from someone in 1914 being catastrophicly wrong.

Every now and then, Israel acts to prevent Iran from becoming a nuclear power – and honestly, we’re all the better for it, the world does not need another set of religious crazies to have nukes.

But apparently we do need religious crazies who already have nukes, are in the middle of a massive genocide, are attacking and occupying multiple other countries, and have ambitions of conquering the whole middle east, to act as World Police?

You're literally endorsing war crimes.

Netanyahu a deplorable asshat

By "deplorable asshat", you mean the fascist leader of a genocidal ethnostate currently launching multiple wars of aggression.

3

Lol, this sounds like a quote from someone in 1914 being catastrophicly wrong.

...or from someone describing one of the scores of conflicts since where "regional" has been a fitting description

1

They are complicit in supporting and arming Israel as well as supporting the genocide.

37
lemmy.world

I'd find Germany less responsible for WWIII if maybe they ya know didn't support a genocidal terrorist ethnostate at the expense of domestically suppressing speech calling out that foreign policy, but I guess it just be like that sometimes

31
albert180reply
piefed.social

It's very mean of Germany that foreigners who trash University property and threaten their staff violently face deportation.

How can they do such a suppression of free speech?

1
tresspassreply
lemmy.world

foreigners who trash University property and threaten their staff violently face deportation

What are you referring to here?

1
albert180reply
piefed.social

About the handful "poor and innocent protestors" which the Berlin government tried to deport for taking part in a violent occupation of the Berlin Free University, which then tried to claim this was a retaliation for "simple demonstrating against Israel."

https://www.tagesspiegel.de/berlin/besetzung-an-der-freien-universitat-berlin-beendet-vermummte-anti-israelische-aktivisten-sturmten-prasidium--70-polizisten-vor-ort-12550436.html

Here are some pictures of the damages caused inside the university

https://www.rbb24.de/politik/beitrag/2025/04/berlin-humboldt-universitaet-hoersaal-besetzung-protest-schaden-bilder-zerstoerung.html

1
tresspassreply
lemmy.world

Awesome. And it worked because it got the media to focus on the genocide even if it took further escalation and even if it was negative press. This is an entirely righteous and historically common way to raise attention that hey our government and university is complicit in the murder of 10s of thousands of kids and civilians. This is no different than the white rose resistance. Good for these students. They are heros who are risking their education, rights, and careers to give a voice to those who may not have one.

0
albert180reply
piefed.social

Oh so threatening innocent people with violence and thrashing public universities is righteous?

Completely disgusting. Cheering criminal activities is also a criminal offence in Germany

Also the Weiße Rose never attacked innocent people. So don't dirt their name by comparing them to these people

1
tresspassreply
lemmy.world

While I don't tend to idolize America be any means, at least we have of freedom of speech. You focus on a protest in the context of a native ethnic group getting wiped off the face of the earth. There is mass starvation and civilian targeting. Its terrible that one person was injured and it's terrible this is what it takes for people to pay attention, but compared to genocide? You need to take a look at your priorities.

0

Wow, another comparison dumb as a rock. So if I murder an innocent person to get attention for Palestine, it's also okay, because compared to Genocide it's also not that bad?

1

While Hitler was Austrian, Germans carried out the orders.

But honestly, the 1918 influenza was largely responsible for WWII, because the people who would have prevented Germany from getting ass fucked in the Treaty of Versailles were sick and didn't attend.

17
Nangijalareply
feddit.dk

That's not how you spell Australians and last I checked they didn't start any world wars.

...

....

...

....

/s

3

They also might not be a zionist county. Hard to say what things would look like now if dumbassery 1 & 2 hadn't occurred.

4
Lumidaubreply
feddit.org

Yes, hi, you may not know of us, understandably - we like to keep to ourselves and not meddle in the affairs of others, ever since... The Incidents.

39

::: spoiler Tap for spoiler That time Bayern declared itself a soviet Republic in 1919, probably. Or maybe the toilet paper crisis of 1923. Or possibly the Affenkrawatte-Affair during the Weimar republic. :::

20
Lumidaubreply
feddit.org

At least II. Now shut up, people are going to hear.

13

It really doesn't matter, very boring set of occurrences, I'd hate to bore you. Have some Weißwurst. Or maybe a Fischbrötchen? Do try some of the beer.

7
reddthat.com

we like to keep to ourselves and not meddle in the affairs of others

Tell that to Yugoslavia, Libya or Iraq

-2
discuss.tchncs.de

Germans when they realise WW2 was caused by an man from Austria

Germans when they realise WW1 was caused by the assassination of the archduke of Austria and the subsequent declaration of war from Austria-Hungary on Serbia.

You could say Austria is responsible, but Hitler was in Germany, so WW2 is kinda our problem…

13
Uranus_Hzreply
lemm.ee

Also, the State of Israel was created right after, and as a direct response, to WWII.

2

No it wasn't, settlers had been moving into palestine since the late 1800s. The zionists utilised the persecutions of jews in europe to get bodies to staff the frontier sure, but that had also been an established MO since Herzl. The creation of Israel coincides more with the US taking charge of europes colonies and settler projects. Which is why the Lehi and Irgun had to do the terror attacks on the UK in order to establish themselves as a country. They pledged their allegiance to the new white overlord and got rewarded with statehood for it.

1
sh.itjust.works

Clearly, this is all Austria's fault. To punish Austria, Germany needs to invade and annex it....

1
benjaminbreply
discuss.tchncs.de

I know you're being sarcastic. Although I tried to say that WW2 is "our" fault (Germany caused it). But as I read my last sentence again, I do see it's weirdly written.

Anyway, I am just frustrated that we (Germans) are apologizing forever, paying other countries huge amounts of money, etc. Yes, it was very very bad what happened during that time, but we weren't the only ones doing bad shit! The "great and free" land of the fucking USA is (TO THIS DAY) the ONLY state, that has ever dropped a nuclear weapon on another country. Or have they apologized to Vietnam? To the hundreds (if not thousands) of victims to the crimes of the CIA? Have they apologized for Project MKUltra? Or the Tuskegee Syphilis Study? I could go on, but it's already a pretty good list... Now, did the US do anything to apologize, pay compensation or anything? NO! They tried to hide it. Just like communists in China or Russia or the former USSR. And whose the biggest enemy of the US? THE FUCKING COMMUNISTS! (I am not a communist by the way, I just wanted to point out the irony.) Furthermore: China, Russia, USSR, etc. have been spying their people. Guess who is spying (not only US Citizens): the motherfucking NSA! Like with the Intel ME ( Great Video from Mental Outlaw btw ). Or EternalBlue, which the NSA exploited for years and not telling Microsoft to fix it...

Sorry, this hatred has been building up in me the last several months. But I am not hating the citizens, they (systematically) don't receive education, it's not their fault.

1
sh.itjust.works

You're reading way too much into this. My comment was simply a joke. An absurdity. Someone so mad about being blamed for wars they go and start a war over it.

1
benjaminbreply
discuss.tchncs.de

You’re actually right - I do spend way too much time with this.

And yes, I kinda got lost in finally having some valve open to let out my built up pressure, sorry it was you.

2
lemmy.world

Well if they didn't genocide all those millions of innocent Jews 80 years ago, western countries wouldn't accept the invasion and genocide in Palestine over the last decades

12
entwine413reply
lemm.ee

So it was the Austrian military, not the German military? I guess they should update the history books.

2
Owlreply
mander.xyz

WWI: Franz Ferdinad of Austria gets assasinated —> Austria-Hungary starts WWI

WWII: A famous Austrian failed painter wasn’t happy about the outcome of WWI

And the initial post doesn’t mention any “military”

9
lemmy.dbzer0.com

Ne digga, unsere scheiß Regierung macht den Kack ja mit, weil einzige Demokratie im nahen Osten und Staatsräson und so

11
lemmy.dbzer0.com

Ne digga

BRUH y'all can't just use my dyslexia against me like that wtf. Did not read this right at first!

14

Glad to see the responsible countrys flag on the left side.

7

Last time, germany at least had the guts to spearhead the reich. This time they're just a bootlicker, following their imperialist friends.

7
feddit.org

It's still possible to ask if Germany could have prevented it.

6
JasonDJreply
lemmy.zip

Sure. Maybe if they did a better job at WW2. But I don't think that'd necessarily be an improvement...

10
lemmy.nz

Do people actually think the middle east conflict will start ww3?

6
Salehreply
feddit.org

Israel is currently attacking Iranian Oil and Gas.

Iran could retaliate by closing the Persian Gulf, where 20% of global Oil and Gas shipping goes through and to weaken US, UK and other support for Israel. This could bring these countries onto the plan, but also Israels allies UAE and Saudi Arabia. When more countries join against Iran, China could feel threatened, or see an opportunity in the distraction, Russia will certainly ramp up its efforts in Ukraine. The economic fallout of the explosion in oil and gas prices globally could tip over other conflicts into wars.

This can definitely spiral into another world war. Remember that WW1 was caused by serbian seperatists assasinating the austrio-hungarian crown prince.

13
Denjinreply
lemmings.world

WW2 started as a series of separate, regional conflicts that gradually pushed the world to a major war. Japan in China, Italy in Africa, Germany in Central and Eastern Europe.

The world didn't just wake up on Sept 1st 1939 and say: I guess we at war now. These things always start this way and spiral out of control.

Even the world's first global conflict, the War of Spanish Succession started with French and Austria fighting over the crown of Spain but various other European powers were dragged in as various regional conflicts coalesced into a major war.

5

Well, there is Russia-Ukraine, China-Taiwan, India-Pakistan, Sudan, Libya, USA-Canada/Greenland/Mexico...

1

Iran can draw more aggro if they want but theyre getting pretty fucked as is and probably dont want anymore countries pilling on.

China doesnt care about iran and theyre winning by not being involved while the other super powers get bogged down in war and internal conflict.

Russia doesnt have anything left to increase vs Ukraine unless it goes nuclear.

WW1 was started because both Austria-hungry and Germany (partly) wanted a war. The assassination was the excuse and not the reason.

2
lemmy.world

This is a very novel take of historical revisionism, first time I've encountered it.

Do you have any sources other than yourself that support your claim that ww1 was started by Germany attacking Belgium?

7
lemmy.world

That's an article about a military campaign in a war that was already on going. The article even has a section called "outbreak of the war", in which the actual outbreak of the war is explained (which was not Germany invading Belgium). The article does not in any way support your claim that Germany started world war 1 by invading Belgium.

Why are you linking articles and then misrepresenting what is in those articles?

7

Bravo, another vague link. Can you explain how what you link to supports your claim?

2
Bloomcolereply
lemmy.world

1 Wikipedia is a garbage source.
2 Russia/Ukraine has nothing to do with it.

-1
lemmy.world

The wiki article is actually very good. The historical revisionist is just claiming that it says things which it definitely does not.

1

He is indeed a revisionist or more probably ignorant and stupid from seeing his other comments.
In this case the wiki article looks OK but I stand by my claim about Wikipedia.
It's useful to look up stuff about flowers, geography, mathematics and other stuff.
But if the subject has the slightest political relevance it can't be trusted.

-1

You are OC not right, especially since you're putting words into my mouth I didn't say.
Clearly mentioning facts that show you are wrong on WW1 Germany is not 'defending them'.

"Russia’s invasion doesn’t have an historical conect they’re inherently evil "
Again didn't say anything like that, only that it has nothing to do with WW1

0
feddit.org

That's not the whole story.

Let's quickly remind ourselves of what was the situation before the war:

Britain had the strongest naval forces and had a rule saying, that their naval forces should be as strong as the two (other) strongest naval forces together. Germany meanwhile was massively expanding its naval forces to be able to compete with the UK. This caused politic tension and an arms race between Germany and the UK.

France has be politically isolated since the 1870s, but due to the German monarch not caring about the contracts that isolated France, that lost a war to Germany, ran out. At the same time the contracts that caused a situation where if anyone in Europe would have started a war would immediately pull 2-3 other countries into it ran out.

Russia was experiencing inner political tension due to the citizens not being satisfied with the Zar ruling. To counter this it tried shifting the focus away from the inner political problems by gaining influence in the middle east

Autria-Hungary tried to gain more influence in the middle east.

After the assassination Austria Hungary gave Serbia an Ultimatum to allow their forces and government officials to operate in Serbian territory to catch the murderer, who's suspected to be supported by Russia IIRC, and threatening a war if they didnt comply with the Ultimatum. Germany gave Austria-Hungary safety guarantees stating that if they were to go to war with Serbia, they would support them. Ultimately it came to a war with Serbia. Causing Russia to join, since they also wanted more influence in Serbia.

Germany then decided to Attack France in an preemptive Attack, since France hated Germany due to the lost war and the political Isolation caused by Bismarck. Since the German border with France was heavily guarded they decided to attack Belgium first and the go to France to avoid having to fight against a lot of bunkers. The attack against Belgium caused the UK to join the war in order, who were willing to go to war due to the German threat to their naval dominance.

It isn't really that easy to say who caused the war, since it was a very complex political climate where everyone was willing to go to war to defend their own interests.

7

The glider attack happened in ww2, not ww1.

If you are from Luttich as you say, then in ww1 the part of Belgium where you're from, was a part of Germany. The German speaking parts of Belgium, namely Eupen and Malmedy, were only allocated to Belgium with the treaty of Versailles (1919). But since you are from the German speaking part of Belgium, you of course already knew this.

For those confused by the place names: in Belgium there is a city called Liège (French speaking) in a province called Liège. Luttich is the German name for Liège. Eupen and Malmedy became a part of the province of Liège in the 1920s.

2

What are you saying? Definitely not 'caused by'.
It was caused by many factors and events.
This was a result and not a cause.
You are also completely wrong that 'Nobody was fighting before that'.
There was already fighting in eastern Europe.

1
technocritreply
lemmy.dbzer0.com

There's a genocide like in ww2, but it doesn't threaten capital so every state supports it.

3

What are you getting at? Ww2 wasn't started over a genocide.

1
discuss.tchncs.de

there's a low likelyhood.

The key question is what will happen to Israel in the future?

In my opinion, Israel cannot stay in the middle east for much longer. They have to move out.

Israel is so universally hated in the middle east, it's difficult to put into words. (at least that's what i got from other people's messages). it's difficult/impossible to conceive a long-term stability in the region with Israel in it. and israel knows this, of course.

The question is: what will israel do? Will it escalate the conflict to try to grasp to power through military dominance in the area? Or will it soften its grip and let go of control in the middle east?

3

I just want to respond to my own comment with some follow-up thoughts:

Israel is mostly backed by the US to "protect US interests in the area", which i translate as: mostly oil.

Since the transition to renewable energy is happening at an exponential speed, i guess that the consumption of fossil fuels could be reduced by 2040 by 90%. That would make the US completely independent from oil from the middle east, and the US would no longer need Israel, which would weaken Israel's grip in the region. That is why i think they would retreat, instead of attack.

Just my two cents.

1
Fizzreply
lemmy.nz

I think your souces for whats actually happening is clouding your judgement. There is no world where isreal is forced out of the middle east. They've made the strategic moves to take those options off the table.

Isreal is more than capable of defending themselves with us support. They have destroyed almost all major threats in rhe region with Iran being the last one.

Arabs in the region will never forget this war. But Arabs also hated isreal before so I doubt much has changed on the perception front.

Most likely isreal will go back to normalisation with governments in the region since all major terrorist factions are virtually eliminated. If they can get regime change in Iran there is a good chance things will stabilise. Maybe they will need to destroy the houthis as well.

0
technocritreply
lemmy.dbzer0.com

They’ve made the strategic moves

Aka threatening the planet with a nuclear holocaust.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samson_Option

all major terrorist factions are virtually eliminated

No. The zio regime is still fully in control of large areas of palestine. Not to mention wider imperial terrorism.

0

Yes nuclear powers ensure their security by threatening to use nukes this is known and not some big revelation. Its why they are so reluctant to let others join that club.

The conversation is about Isreal. I am obviously talking from the perspective of isreal who do not considers themselves a terrorist threat.

1
Cornreply
lemmy.ml

China has absolutely no reason to invade the pile of self-extracting resources that currently can only sell to them.

2
Cornreply
lemmy.ml

Even if they could, they wouldn't get the resources as cheaply as theyre getting them now. Also China has recall elections, if Xi went mad and unilaterally decided to go to war with a country so important to Chinas economy, he'd be booted so fast.

1
aussie.zone

Wwi lead to wwiii lead to wwiii it's germans all the way down

6
OBJECTION!reply
lemmy.ml

Germans were no more responsible for WWI than the British, French, etc.

11
Taleyareply
aussie.zone

I mean if you wanted to peg a nation state, Austria-Hungary were the ones who declared and set off all the other connected traps

2
midwest.social

Damned multi-level conspiracy ring headed by the Serbian Crown Prince and various military officers

1

All this coulda been avoided if they just let Princip serve you know.

2
OBJECTION!reply
lemmy.ml

Pretty sure nobody was fighting before the Germans attacked Eben emael with gliders.

That's the wrong war. Fort Eben Emael wasn't even constructed yet, and there were no paratroopers on any side.

Franz Ferdinand was assassinated on June 28th, 1914. On July 28th, Austria-Hungary began shelling Belgrade, in the first shots of the war. Germany occupied Luxembourg August 2nd and invaded Belgium August 4th.

But regardless, the European powers were always going to end up fighting each other after running out of places to colonize, building up enormous militaries, and forming a bunch of secret alliances. No nation was the "good guys" in WWI, they were a bunch of imperialist colonial states jockeying for power, and sending ordinary people into awful conditions to die for no good reason.

2

I can understand that perspective, but I'm looking at things from more of a class based and realpolitik perspective. The international order, I would say even now, but especially at that time of peak colonialism, was pretty much like this.

The Allied powers dominated the world, and they achieved that through force, brazen, unapologetic aggression. Germany didn't have a problem with that, except for the part where they weren't the ones on top, that they didn't have colonies to exploit like everyone else.

From my perspective, the real problem is that socialists at the time didn't follow through on the Basel declaration of 1912 where socialists of every country promised to oppose the coming war. When the war actually broke out, everyone rallied around their respective flags, the British and French socialists talked about Germany invading neutral countries and not being as democratic, but the German socialists justified it by talking about serfdom in Russia and the colonialism of Britain and France, and at the end of the day, tons of regular people got drafted to go die in the trenches over these power games.

Admittedly, I've never really considered it from a Belgian perspective before, but I think the bigger nations were all more motivated by power than by a genuine commitment to upholding neutrality and national sovereignty.

0
lemmy.dbzer0.com

They have a big share in the current state of affairs, whether it is the genocide of the Palestinian people or the complete failure of Europe. the German state hasn't changed a fucking bit

6

I'm being hyperbolic, but whenever tensions hit the EU members will just go back to their old ways, the idea European states will somehow unify in face of a threat is absolutely laughable, no Belgian soldier will ever take orders from a polish sergeant.

When the question was asked of "How will we pay for covid" The dutch gov was instantly saying they "won't pay for those lazy southerners"

The EU alliance always was about monetary gain, not building an actual coherent political entity.

1

Probably the endless degradation of worker rights, welfare state, salaries and infrastructure since 2008, coupled with the rise of the far right?

-1
Foofighterreply
discuss.tchncs.de

I think Germany stopped invading Poland and killing Jews in gas chambers. So I'd say Germany changed at least a little bit.

3
reddthat.com

Germany happily joined the bombing of Libya and Yugoslavia, and the invasion of Iraq. Just because now it's brown people dying, it doesn't make it better.

0
Foofighterreply
discuss.tchncs.de

Don't quite remember Germany being in Iraq or Lybia lately. Also, while being a bit rusty on my history, wasn't the military involvement in Yugoslavia to stop the genocide on the local Muslim, or, as you call them, brown, population?

0

as you call them, brown

I was obviously being critical of the disregard westerners exercise on the lives of those they consider non-whites, sorry you're too obtuse to see that.

Don't quite remember Germany being in Iraq or Lybia lately

Sorry, you're right, I mixed up German involvement in the invasion of Afghanistan with Iraq. Germany did participate in the bombing of Libya during the NATO maneuvers that ended up precipitating the murder of Gaddafi and the Libyan Civil War.

-1

Donald Drumpf would be his name if I remember John Oliver correctly.

6

Oh come on, tell me your country, then we can start the blaming game, in which we both can't change shit due to our politics!

0
vga
sopuli.xyz

Fuck Iran. Their government is way worse than Israel's. Do I need to remind everyone that they're feeding Russia with the drones that they use to attack civilians in Ukraine?

Here's hoping that Iran's next revolution won't end up in a total disaster like the previous one did.

-3
Fusselwurmreply
feddit.org

Do I need to remind everyone

Judging by the number of downvotes your getting: yes.

4
sqglreply
sh.itjust.works

Iranian citizens are not being targeted whereas Iran (and previously Hezbollah) bombed at least one Israeli town where there are no military.

-1

Their government is way worse than Israel’s.

You can just come out and say you don't think non-white people are human.

-1
reddthat.com

As much as you hate Russia's actions in Ukraine, Israel is literally committing a genocide, how can you say that's not worse than giving drones to Russia?

-2
reddthat.com

I don't abide by ICJ rulings, I abide by credible reporting and evidence. Compare the civilian deaths ratio in the Ukraine invasion (however bad they may be) to the one in Palestine

-1

Yes a higher civilian death ratio in Gaza but the Ukraine military are not in civilian areas.

Admittedly Russia actually targets civilians but it is with long range missiles and drones, most of which get intercepted.

That article says Ireland is also trying to expand the definition of genocide to include Ukrainian deaths. I don't know why it does not fit the definition currently; perhaps because Russia are not trying to wipe out the Ukrainian population? I dunno. Get back to us if you find out.

2
sqglreply
sh.itjust.works

Am just pointing out the legal definition of the word regardless of whether courts are just

1
reddthat.com

Yeah but according to the current legal definition, looking at the evidence, I can confidently claim it's a genocide

-2
sqglreply
sh.itjust.works

No, not according to the current definition. That is why Ireland is trying to change it. Words change all the time so it is possible.

That would equate Gaza and Ukraine with the Holocaust, Rwanda, Cambodia, the nature and magnitude of which were very different. Perhaps they could create a new word for those?

0

equate Gaza and Ukraine with

Huh? Gaza and Ukraine are completely different conflicts. Ukraine is a military invasion, Gaza is a genocide.

No, not according to the current definition

Can you post the current definition? I'm happy to argue about that, because i do maintain that it's a genocide in the case of Gaza because there's a manifest intent to eliminate an entire people, unlike the case of Ukraine.

-2

If the Gaza war grows to a world war youre right, but until then I am glad to only be ashamed of our Government murdering one group of people instead of half the fucking world.

2
feddit.org

There has been no money made. The supplied arms have always at least been partially (50+%) payed for by the German government

1

Of course it is, but the way you're spinning it you insinuate that the German state is profiting

1

If it's 'paid' someone made money.
German arms peddlers to be exact.
Whoever pays the bill: government (the suckers voting for them and the ones that didn't too) doesn't matter.

1
lemmy.world

Jewish people when they realize they are the new nazis

-20

Cause every jewish people on Earth are far right israelis 🙄

19
wpbreply
lemmy.world

Not every jew is a zionist. Don't conflate the two. Israel does not have a right to exist, and jews do.

5
wpbreply
lemmy.world

Same place the Germans went after the holocaust ended. Same place the white South Africans went after their apartheid ended.

1
sqglreply
sh.itjust.works

Most surviving German Jews went to the Levant (bear in mind that ⅔ were killed by Nazis).

White South Africans didn't experience genocide.

1
wpbreply
lemmy.world

Isreal is committing a genocide right now, and has been maintaining an apartheid state for decades. In this analogy, they're the white South Africans. They're the nazis.

2

Whether or not Israel has a right to exist, it is a childish fantasy to imagine it will vanish.

1

Black South African leadership did not express a desire to kill all whites. Hamas have expressed a desire to kill all Jews in the Levant so the analogy does not hold.

1
Fusselwurmreply
feddit.org

You want to force Jews into the diaspora again? Brilliant move, that worked so well for them the first time around. /s

-2
reddthat.com

You want to force Jews into the diaspora again?

So, the only alternative to diaspora is an apartheid ethnostate in occupied land?

1
Fusselwurmreply
feddit.org

of course not. the alternative should be a free and open society where Jews are but one of many groups.

Israel is currently sliding away from this - sadly - but it still has the potential

1
reddthat.com

Israel is currently sliding away from this

It's not. It's the very conception of the state of Israel. It was funded through the Naqba, a forcible relocation of hundreds of thousands of Palestinians. The very idea of the modern state of Israel is genocidal and an apartheid ethnostate

0
Fusselwurmreply
feddit.org

would you also claim the same for the United States? Their original sin is even darker, as most natives did not move away but simply died.

Iriginal sin is not necessarily destiny.

1

Hitler famously inspired his Lebensraum theory in the US example and the Manifest Destiny doctrine. The US successfully genocided almost the entirety of native Americans. So yes, I would make a similar claim for the USA

1