Aha! Ben is defending Nazis on LF

[MojoNixon]

Now i understand why Steve was getting angry.

"30's blah blah blah" now that's stupid rubbish Ben.

[erchie]

utter ass hole is our Ben ! :sleep:

[Lee.]

Is he really? I can't really believe that! What exactly has he said? Is he actaully arguing a case for Nazism??

[Chels]

I know :| he said Britain shouldn't have got involved in the war! ****ing idiot!!

[MissKittyFantastico]

Ben is explaining himself now, saying that he just doesn't agree with us getting involved in wars all the time, though how he can say that he doesn't think we should have been involved in the Second World War baffles me lol.

[MojoNixon]

Is he really? I can't really believe that! What exactly has he said? Is he actaully arguing a case for Nazism??

Not directly, but he says that war could been avoid back then 30's, with different foreign policy.

Like Hitler could been different then....

[-Sue-]

OMG if that what was really said I am lost for words...I knew Ben was an opinionated pompus vile human being but that is beyond a joke...

[SocietyIsRuined]

Of all the things that are taboo to talk about on television, Ben breaks another one. Don't agree with him but he's entitled to have his views. That's why I like him, you know it's him and he's not playing a moralistic puppet for the sake of the public.

[DrunkerThanMoses]

Ben is explaining himself now, saying that he just doesn't agree with us getting involved in wars all the time, though how he can say that he doesn't think we should have been involved in the Second World War baffles me lol.

you have summed it up Michelle :)

So if he loves this country so much, he rather we let Nazis come here and take us over and us speaking all german?

[Fetch The Bolt Cutters]

i think he sometimes says things just for the sake of being controversial

[oddballmisfitsFTW]

can someone unbiased give brief outline of what he actually said rather than everyone jumpin on the bandwagon

if he said somethin like the jews had it comin, then obviously he is out of line

but if he said he thinks Britain should avoid going to war, this is good idea

country would be lot better off if we didnt keep going to war to fund the banks

[MojoNixon]

Basically Ben says : If UK were nicer to Germany, they would have not invade Poland, France, Norway (killing Jews, Jehovas and so on)? He is out of his mind.

[MissKittyFantastico]

you have summed it up Michelle :)

So if he loves this country so much, he rather we let Nazis come here and take us over and us speaking all german?

He really is a twit :laugh:

I mean I do agree with him when he says we get involved in wars that don't concern us really, but to say that if we had a different foreign policy then the second world war could have been avoided is just crazy! How would that have stopped an evil lunatic like Hitler? I swear he's on another planet :hugesmile:

[DrunkerThanMoses]

God even if uk were nice to Germany they were stil lgoing to invade other countries

[Lee.]

can someone unbiased give brief outline of what he actually said rather than everyone jumpin on the bandwagon

if he said somethin like the jews had it comin, then obviously he is out of line

but if he said he thinks Britain should avoid going to war, this is good idea

country would be lot better off if we didnt keep going to war to fund the banks

Yeah.. that's what I want to know too.. It's kind of a misleading thread title if Ben has been saying that he thinks Britain should stay out of conflict!
I kinda thought he had been bigging up Adolf and goosestepping about the house!

[MojoNixon]

God even if uk were nice to Germany they were stil lgoing to invade other countries

Exactly! Ben is stupid. And after Nazis would have conquer Europe, UK would have leaved alone? :joker:

[Kazanne]

can someone unbiased give brief outline of what he actually said rather than everyone jumpin on the bandwagon

if he said somethin like the jews had it comin, then obviously he is out of line

but if he said he thinks Britain should avoid going to war, this is good idea

country would be lot better off if we didnt keep going to war to fund the banks

he said he doesn't think we should get involved in the wars all the time,I'm sure more will come out during the day of what he ACTUALLY said and meant,in the meantime best to take what is said hear by the haters with a pinch of salt,i have not posted all that happened as so much was going on and I wanted to post FACTS,but it will be up on the sites soon:xyxwave:

[DrunkerThanMoses]

He really is a twit :laugh:

I mean I do agree with him when he says we get involved in wars that don't concern us really, but to say that if we had a different foreign policy then the second world war could have been avoided is just crazy! How would that have stopped an evil lunatic like Hitler? I swear he's on another planet :hugesmile:

I fully agree with you, I dont belive this country should fight in certain wars, only just wars like world war 2. Ben shouldnt of said that, surely someone smart like him would off know britain was always going to get involved because germany was doing everything to invade every european counrty.

[MissKittyFantastico]

can someone unbiased give brief outline of what he actually said rather than everyone jumpin on the bandwagon

if he said somethin like the jews had it comin, then obviously he is out of line

but if he said he thinks Britain should avoid going to war, this is good idea

country would be lot better off if we didnt keep going to war to fund the banks

He didn't say that he supports Nazism or that Hitler was a good guy or anything like that, basically he just thinks the second world war could have been avoided if our policies had been different, which is a flawed ideology but he wasn't saying anything terribly controversial, just that he thinks we should prioritise and not jump into every country's war that comes along. That doesn't really apply when it comes to the 2nd World War though so he's making a twit of himself again.

[spitfire]

can someone unbiased give brief outline of what he actually said rather than everyone jumpin on the bandwagon

if he said somethin like the jews had it comin, then obviously he is out of line

but if he said he thinks Britain should avoid going to war, this is good idea

country would be lot better off if we didnt keep going to war to fund the banks
It's nice to know that you appreciate the sacrifice many made,for you!:nono:

[SocietyIsRuined]

He didn't say that he supports Nazism or that Hitler was a good guy or anything like that, basically he just thinks the second world war could have been avoided if our policies had been different, which is a flawed ideology but he wasn't saying anything terribly controversial, just that he thinks we should prioritise and not jump into every country's war that comes along. That doesn't really apply when it comes to the 2nd World War though so he's making a twit of himself again.

Thanks for that. Nothing to do with defending Nazis at all.

[Fetch The Bolt Cutters]

this reminds me of those t shirts peter had made for lois when she was running for mayor

vote for lois.
unless your queer.
no wait,
even if your queer.
no jews though.
okay jews.

[MissKittyFantastico]

I fully agree with you, I dont belive this country should fight in certain wars, only just wars like world war 2. Ben shouldnt of said that, surely someone smart like him would off know britain was always going to get involved because germany was doing everything to invade every european counrty.

Agreed 100%. I mean if our country is being attacked or threatened then of course we have to defend ourselves (or rather the army should do, that's what they sign up for bless them) but wars like Iraq and Afghanistan I don't think we have any place in, and we shouldn't allow ourselves to be so pressured by America to follow their lead.

I honestly don't think Ben thinks before he speaks sometimes tbh.

[DrunkerThanMoses]

Agreed 100%. I mean if our country is being attacked or threatened then of course we have to defend ourselves (or rather the army should do, that's what they sign up for bless them) but wars like Iraq and Afghanistan I don't think we have any place in, and we shouldn't allow ourselves to be so pressured by America to follow their lead.

I honestly don't think Ben thinks before he speaks sometimes tbh.

Agreed

[-Sue-]

Agreed 100%. I mean if our country is being attacked or threatened then of course we have to defend ourselves (or rather the army should do, that's what they sign up for bless them) but wars like Iraq and Afghanistan I don't think we have any place in, and we shouldn't allow ourselves to be so pressured by America to follow their lead.

I honestly don't think Ben thinks before he speaks sometimes tbh.

agreed 100% well said...

[King Gizzard]

Misleading title..

[StGeorge]

Not directly, but he says that war could been avoid back then 30's, with different foreign policy.

Like Hitler could been different then....

One thing that History has shown us is that Hitler and his gang had a gameplan which involved the extermination of so called inferior races. The fact that the majority of Brits are from the Germanic races, doesnt mean we would of not been put under his spotlight sooner or later, but the fact is as a peoples, the Brits have always fought or disagreed with the Nazi indoctrines, whether by the Hitlers, Pol Pots etc..

[MojoNixon]

Misleading title..

Not at all. Hitler would have done same things, no matter if UK did have a different foreign policy. Possibility is that Ben is a complete moron, but i doubt that.

[spitfire]

I know :| he said Britain shouldn't have got involved in the war! ****ing idiot!!
There are millions of reasons why we go/went to war,Ben.
Here are two of them.. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MWJyjAYyF8E

[starry]

One thing that History has shown us is that Hitler and his gang had a gameplan which involved the extermination of so called inferior races. The fact that the majority of Brits are from the Germanic races, doesnt mean we would of not been put under his spotlight sooner or later, but the fact is as a peoples, the Brits have always fought or disagreed with the Nazi indoctrines, whether by the Hitlers, Pol Pots etc..

All ethnic nationalisms including places like Israel, Ruanda, Sudan, Bosnia/Serbia, South Africa have been very unpleasant and generally not supported in a place like Britain where people live together with equal rights.

[skkc16]

okay that title is totally misleading he didn't say he supported the nazis jesus haters stop tryna drag him down he has his opinion and its not that the nazis were right or anything like that smh

[MojoNixon]

okay that title is totally misleading he didn't say he supported the nazis jesus haters stop tryna drag him down he has his opinion and its not that the nazis were right or anything like that smh

No, "different foreign policy" he said. And can you explain what that is?

[johnx]

Some things amatuer historians might want to research related to this;

King Edward's abdication and admiration of Hitler.See Ch4 Doc "Britians Nazi King."

Engalnd football team giving Nazi salute before 1938 match with Germany in Berlin.

Sir Oswald Mosely-1930s British Union of Facist leader-member of aristocracy.

Queens cousin,German Prince,who was commandant of Nazi Concentration Camp as revealed in Ch4 doc.

Funding of Hitler in the 1930's from Wall St. and City of London banks.George W. Bush's grandfather revealed to Hitlers banker in the US.

US Government relocates Nazi scientists and others to work on projects such as the Space Programme(Operation Paperclip).Former Nazi-Verner Von Braum goes on to become head of Nassa.

Nazis helped to flee to South America with help of Vatican insiders.

[Amhuinn]

Ben airs controversial points of view to get a reaction out of people. If they are challenging him, then he is getting what he wants.

If Big Brother were to air this uncut, then Ben might be in trouble. But they won't, so he is safe.

[skkc16]

No, "different foreign policy" he said. And can you explain what that is?

no idea what it is lol:spin:

[BB_Eye]

There are actually a surprising amount of WWII pacifists. I disagree strongly with that view, but the great composer Benjamin Britten was one of them.

[Ketman]

The title of this thread reminds me of the tabloid headline in Ricky Gervais's Extras. "TV Bully Kicks Dwarf in Face".

What Ben was saying is that Britain might have neutralized Hitler in other ways, either by better diplomacy, or if all else failed could have sent someone to assassinate him. About later conflicts, he said Britain and the US picked on easy targets, tin-pot dictators, but would never dream of standing up to powerful countries whose regimes are just as oppressive (meaning Russia and China probably).

He's mistaken about the chances of avoiding WWII, but the rest of what he said was fair enough.

[lynz]

yeah.. That's what i want to know too.. It's kind of a misleading thread title if ben has been saying that he thinks britain should stay out of conflict!
I kinda thought he had been bigging up adolf and goosestepping about the house!

psml

[oddballmisfitsFTW]

No, "different foreign policy" he said. And can you explain what that is?

maybe Ben was talking about events before WWII.
Once I see the footage I will know myself.
I would be very surprised if Ben was saying we should have not gone to war with Germany and was defending Nazis, like your gutter press headline made out

[Kazanne]

The title of this thread reminds me of the tabloid headline in Ricky Gervais's Extras. "TV Bully Kicks Dwarf in Face".

What Ben was saying is that Britain might have neutralized Hitler in other ways, either by better diplomacy, or if all else failed could have sent someone to assassinate him. About later conflicts, he said Britain and the US picked on easy targets, tin-pot dictators, but would never dream of standing up to powerful countries whose regimes are just as oppressive (meaning Russia and China probably).

He's mistaken about the chances of avoiding WWII, but the rest of what he said was fair enough.

that is nearer the truth than the whole thread!lol:joker:

[MojoNixon]

maybe Ben was talking about events before WWII.
Once I see the footage I will know myself.
I would be very surprised if Ben was saying we should have not gone to war with Germany and was defending Nazis, like your gutter press headline made out

No. Ben said = we should have not gone to war with Germany
For me, that is defending nazies

You were talking about "save our money" and all that BS.

that is nearer the truth than the whole thread!lol:joker:

That it is.

[StGeorge]

All ethnic nationalisms including places like Israel, Ruanda, Sudan, Bosnia/Serbia, South Africa have been very unpleasant and generally not supported in a place like Britain where people live together with equal rights.

Exactly, we do have our own little hitlers etc but generally our peoples stick up for the underdog and fight against those that oppress others.

[Fuzzylogic]

you have summed it up Michelle :)

So if he loves this country so much, he rather we let Nazis come here and take us over and us speaking all german?

haha, I love it when people say "If they germans had won he'd all be speaking German."

Hang on, we won the war, but the Germans are not all speaking English.

[StGeorge]

The title of this thread reminds me of the tabloid headline in Ricky Gervais's Extras. "TV Bully Kicks Dwarf in Face".

What Ben was saying is that Britain might have neutralized Hitler in other ways, either by better diplomacy, or if all else failed could have sent someone to assassinate him. About later conflicts, he said Britain and the US picked on easy targets, tin-pot dictators, but would never dream of standing up to powerful countries whose regimes are just as oppressive (meaning Russia and China probably).

He's mistaken about the chances of avoiding WWII, but the rest of what he said was fair enough.

That is a very good point.

My take on it is this:

If diplomacy works..then be diplomatic. If diplomacy is failing....then turn to the gun.
If by turning to the gun, you start WW3 and introduce nuclear annialation to your people....then stick with diplomacy.

This justifies why some countries can be nuked and yet others cant. Its not about being a bully....its about knowing your limitations and how far you can go.

Knowing when to step in or step out is difficult and hindsight is a wonderful thing.

If we had sent in an assassin or declared war on hitler after kristallnacht, we would of been in the same boat we are now with it being declared an illegal act. Who was to know what was to come.

[oddballmisfitsFTW]

No. Ben said = we should have not gone to war with Germany
For me, that is defending nazies

You were talking about "save our money" and all that BS.



That it is.

No, you were assuming I was talking about "save our money"

I said "did Ben say we should stop having wars to fund banks"

There is a big difference.

[Blueisthecolour]

I haven't heard the conversation.

If he says that WWII could have been avoided had we acted differently, then he's right.

If he says we should have been "nicer" to Germany then he is dead wrong. We appeased Hitler too much and that was the problem - as did the Russians for that matter - as did other countries.

A lot of us got it wrong.

But until I hear for myself what Ben actually said I'll withold judgement on him.

[James]

I've deleted the posts in this thread which involve arguing or insults against other posters. No need for insults.

[StGeorge]

I haven't heard the conversation.

If he says that WWII could have been avoided had we acted differently, then he's right.

If he says we should have been "nicer" to Germany then he is dead wrong. We appeased Hitler too much and that was the problem - as did the Russians for that matter - as did other countries.

A lot of us got it wrong.

But until I hear for myself what Ben actually said I'll withold judgement on him.

I would be interested to know how you think we could of acted differently?
From purely a hindsight point of view, i think we had no choice and war was inevitable, whether via our pledge to Poland (incedently our reasoning for war) or whether due to a later act which would of peeved us off. More Invasions of innocent countries and mass exterminations perhaps.

IMO its no different to Iraq. Whether we went in on the premise that there were W.O.M.D.s (which have never been found) or not, i think his track record of invading a sovereign country and then after being given another chance....exterminating Kurds & Shiites....justified blowing his arse away.
No one will ever know what his next step was going to be....i dont think the Nobel Peace Prize contenders were threatened that year....but my view is that if i could go back in time to Hitler as a 1 month old baby....i would have no qualms with putting a bullet in his head, irrespective of the fact he was just a loveble innocent child.

As i say..hindsight is wonderful....foresight is guessing.

[Kazanne]

MojoNixon,don't mess with peoples posts.:nono:

[Angus]

No, "different foreign policy" he said. And can you explain what that is?

Well perhaps if he wasn't being shouted down and people did him the courtesy of listening to what he had to say, we would have had his views on that.

Has everyone forgotten one crucial fact and that is that Ben is JEWISH - in fact he is the only Jewish contestant in the house. Far from defending Hitler I got the impression he was trying to say that there were other ways Britain could have handled Hitler. Revisionists would say that in 1940 when Britain's back was to the wall the Germans offered a number of peace deals and guarantees to Britain and her empire but they were refused. America was still pursing an isolationist policy and the Russians had a non-aggression pact at that time with the Germans.

Had Britain decided to engage in talks with the Germans, who knows whether the genocide that followed could have been averted by diplomatic intervention. We shall never know because by then Churchill was PM and was intent on pursuing the war, rejecting any peace talks. It is no coincidence that when the war was over, the voters overwhelmingly voted him out of office as he was seen as a "war monger".

So FFS give Ben a break. He is a Jew and I guarantee he does not condone the genocide that was inflicted on the Jewish people during Hitler's regime; I believe he was trying to say that Britain had other options on the table in 1940 other than all out war, and had these other options been explored, who knows how the course of the war would have gone?

[lynz]

Well perhaps if he wasn't being shouted down and people did him the courtesy of listening to what he had to say, we would have had his views on that.

Has everyone forgotten one crucial fact and that is that Ben is JEWISH - in fact he is the only Jewish contestant in the house. Far from defending Hitler I got the impression he was trying to say that there were other ways Britain could have handled Hitler. Revisionists would say that in 1940 when Britain's back was to the wall the Germans offered a number of peace deals and guarantees to Britain and her empire but they were refused. America was still pursing an isolationist policy and the Russians had a non-aggression pact at that time with the Germans.

Had Britain decided to engage in talks with the Germans, who knows whether the genocide that followed could have been averted by diplomatic intervention. We shall never know because by then Churchill was PM and was intent on pursuing the war, rejecting any peace talks. It is no coincidence that when the war was over, the voters overwhelmingly voted him out of office as he was seen as a "war monger".

So FFS give Ben a break. He is a Jew and I guarantee he does not condone the genocide that was inflicted on the Jewish people during Hitler's regime; I believe he was trying to say that Britain had other options on the table in 1940 other than all out war, and had these other options been explored, who knows how the course of the war would have gone?

Excellent post!

[setanta]

I haven't seen what went on, so I'm just going by what's been said on here and what I know myself of history and yes, Ben is right when he says that the foreign policies of the major powers during the 30's were questionable and Hitler's march could have been halted before he had such a stranglehold on mainland Europe. I mean, what's wrong with that?

[StGeorge]

Had Britain decided to engage in talks with the Germans, who knows whether the genocide that followed could have been averted by diplomatic intervention. We shall never know because by then Churchill was PM and was intent on pursuing the war, rejecting any peace talks. It is no coincidence that when the war was over, the voters overwhelmingly voted him out of office as he was seen as a "war monger".



Im sorry but that is not an exellent post due to the bit i have quoted.

People forget that the atrocities as you put it had already started long before Germany invaded Poland ( and subsequently our involvement), and things like kristallnacht, the anti-Jewish pogrom in Nazi Germany and Austria from the 9th until the 10th November 1938, were just a sign of Hitlers plan and indoctrines with regards his views on the Aryan Races and the inferior Jewish and Slav races.

[Livia]

Well perhaps if he wasn't being shouted down and people did him the courtesy of listening to what he had to say, we would have had his views on that.

Has everyone forgotten one crucial fact and that is that Ben is JEWISH - in fact he is the only Jewish contestant in the house. Far from defending Hitler I got the impression he was trying to say that there were other ways Britain could have handled Hitler. Revisionists would say that in 1940 when Britain's back was to the wall the Germans offered a number of peace deals and guarantees to Britain and her empire but they were refused. America was still pursing an isolationist policy and the Russians had a non-aggression pact at that time with the Germans.

Had Britain decided to engage in talks with the Germans, who knows whether the genocide that followed could have been averted by diplomatic intervention. We shall never know because by then Churchill was PM and was intent on pursuing the war, rejecting any peace talks. It is no coincidence that when the war was over, the voters overwhelmingly voted him out of office as he was seen as a "war monger".

So FFS give Ben a break. He is a Jew and I guarantee he does not condone the genocide that was inflicted on the Jewish people during Hitler's regime; I believe he was trying to say that Britain had other options on the table in 1940 other than all out war, and had these other options been explored, who knows how the course of the war would have gone?


Good post Angus. Balanced and informed.

Furthermore, at the end of the war, the allies decided it would do Europe no good to keep Germany in rags, so we rebuilt their country at our own expense. We had borrowed an enormous amount of money from the USA in order to be able to afford to fight a war at all, and we only finished paying that war loan back in December 2006. Germany is now a major manufacturer and economic power, while we're... well, a bit wobbley economically and we produce nothing. In fact we've sold off most of our family jewels too; Rolls Royce, Jaguar, Land Rover... they're all German now.

I don't disrespect the valour of the generation that pulled us through the war, nor the sacrifices they made. I respect absolutely that we had to do something, but with the benefit of hindsight I think we would have been in a much better situation now had we been able to negotiate a peace instead of fighting for it.

[oddballmisfitsFTW]

It's nice to know that you appreciate the sacrifice many made,for you!:nono:

why you say this at me? ask me to clarify next time

I do appreciate the sacrifice many made for me and everyone.

But I think avoiding war at all cost is the best option if possible.

But avoiding WWII was not possible, so we went to war, which I agree with.

[StGeorge]

Good post Angus. Balanced and informed.

Furthermore, at the end of the war, the allies decided it would do Europe no good to keep Germany in rags, so we rebuilt their country at our own expense. We had borrowed an enormous amount of money from the USA in order to be able to afford to fight a war at all, and we only finished paying that war loan back in December 2006. Germany is now a major manufacturer and economic power, while we're... well, a bit wobbley economically and we produce nothing. In fact we've sold off most of our family jewels too; Rolls Royce, Jaguar, Land Rover... they're all German now.

While I don't disrespect the valour of the generation that pulled us through the war, nor the sacrifices they made. I respect absolutely that we had to do something, but with the benefit of hindsight I think we would have been in a much better situation now had we been able to negotiate a peace instead of fighting for it.

Read my post above and go and research what Hitlers plans were. There was no way in hell any appeasement was going to stop him. That is not hindsight....thats historical fact. His own indoctrines were well known to his gang from day 1 and that was their cause.

[Claymores]

And Ben is back on it AGAIN on LF - suggesting people like Goebels weren't truly Nazis at heart and slagging off Dave's view!

[Blueisthecolour]

I would be interested to know how you think we could of acted differently?



Simple really, Hitler promised Chamberlain that he had no claim on Europe and that he was no threat to Britain whom he saw as his friends.

Whether or not Chamberlain believed it...he chose to accept it and came back waving the infamous piece of paper proclaiming "Peace in our time".

There was also the fact that we turned a blind eye to Germany's rearmament which was against the Versailles Treaty, we were told he was rearming...we did nothing.

Then there was the boatload of "Undesirables" ejected from Germany which we refused to give refuge to.

We were sending the message to Hitler that as long as he didn't threaten us, we would pretend we hadn't noticed.

Lots of other countries made the same mistakes, whilst Russia made an even more blatant agreement with Hitler could take land that he laid claim to as long as Russia could have lands that they laid claim to. That led directly to Hitler invading Poland, the Russians had told him he could.

After the invasion of Poland we had no choice but to go to war, I accept that. But it should never have got to that situation.

The policy of appeasement during the 30s was the problem.

[Livia]

Read my post above and go and research what Hitlers plans were. There was no way in hell any appeasement was going to stop him. That is not hindsight....thats historical fact. His own indoctrines were well known to his gang from day 1 and that was their cause.

Actually, I've done a lot of research on that period... But thanks for the advice.

[BB_Eye]

I'm not getting involved in this debate... I just don't know enough about it, but does anyone think all of this will be omitted from the HL show?

[Livia]

I'm not getting involved in this debate... I just don't know enough about it, but does anyone think all of this will be omitted from the HL show?

They would have to show the discussion in its entirety in order to give a balanced view, so I'm thinking they'll probably cut it. We'll see...

[StGeorge]

And Ben is back on it AGAIN on LF - suggesting people like Goebels weren't truly Nazis at heart and slagging off Dave's view!

He is truly a nutcase if that is his belief.

Goebbels was known for his zealous oratory and anti-Semitism. He was the chief architect of the Kristallnacht attack on the German Jews, which historians consider to be the beginning of the Final Solution, leading towards the genocide of the Holocaust.

wow....Goebels wasnt a Nazi...and Pol Pot just hated his teacher as a kid. :rolleyes:

[Angus]

Im sorry but that is not an exellent post due to the bit i have quoted.

People forget that the atrocities as you put it had already started long before Germany invaded Poland ( and subsequently our involvement), and things like kristallnacht, the anti-Jewish pogrom in Nazi Germany and Austria from the 9th until the 10th November 1938, were just a sign of Hitlers plan and indoctrines with regards his views on the Aryan Races and the inferior Jewish and Slav races.

You are correct that the precursors of what was to come were there for anyone with eyes to see long before the war started, and Chamberlain's foreign policy of appeasement and his signing of the Munich Agreement in 1938 were fundamental errors of judgment which strengthened Hitler's hand and his belief that Britain would not intervene if they invaded Poland and continued their aggressive occupation of neighbouring countries. However, there was still a good chance that if Britain had engaged in diplomatic talks with Hitler in 1940 the worst of the atrocities may have been averted.

[StGeorge]

Simple really, Hitler promised Chamberlain that he had no claim on Europe and that he was no threat to Britain whom he saw as his friends.

Whether or not Chamberlain believed it...he chose to accept it and came back waving the infamous piece of paper proclaiming "Peace in our time".

There was also the fact that we turned a blind eye to Germany's rearmament which was against the Versailles Treaty, we were told he was rearming...we did nothing.

Then there was the boatload of "Undesirables" ejected from Germany which we refused to give refuge to.

We were sending the message to Hitler that as long as he didn't threaten us, we would pretend we hadn't noticed.

Lots of other countries made the same mistakes, whilst Russia made an even more blatant agreement with Hitler could take land that he laid claim to as long as Russia could have lands that they laid claim to. That led directly to Hitler invading Poland, the Russians had told him he could.

After the invasion of Poland we had no choice but to go to war, I accept that. But it should never have got to that situation.

The policy of appeasement during the 30s was the problem.

100% agree with you on all of that....what it says to me is we should of gone to war earlier perhaps, but then wouldnt we of been in the same boat we are in now over Iraq?
Same in the Falklands....we now know that Thatchers gov' knew certain things were going to happen, but if we had garrisoned the islands with a million men or started blowing up Argy boats prior to the invasion....we would of been a laughing stock around the world and hung out to dry.
Its unfortunate that sometimes you may know you're about to be punched in the face, but you have to wait and take the hit to justify retaliatory action.

[eviled2010]

I could believe Ben is a Nazi apologist. Ben is out for Ben. I doubt he feels any allegiance to any group or individual, jew or non-jew, unless there was some benefit in it for him.
Many of the the "blue bloods" always loved Hitler and the Nazis, that is well documented too.

[Livia]

He is truly a nutcase if that is his belief.

Goebbels was known for his zealous oratory and anti-Semitism. He was the chief architect of the Kristallnacht attack on the German Jews, which historians consider to be the beginning of the Final Solution, leading towards the genocide of the Holocaust.

wow....Goebels wasnt a Nazi...and Pol Pot just hated his teacher as a kid. :rolleyes:

Yours second para is in a completely different style to the rest of your posts, so I Googled it... and guess what? It's a direct cut and past job from Wiki.

Looks like you're the one who should do a little research.

And actually... if Ben did say that about Geobbels... it was an idiotic thing to say.

[Livia]

...Many of the the "blue bloods" always loved Hitler and the Nazis, that is well documented too.

And many of them died fighting them... let's not forget that.

[Blueisthecolour]

Had Britain decided to engage in talks with the Germans, who knows whether the genocide that followed could have been averted by diplomatic intervention. We shall never know because by then Churchill was PM and was intent on pursuing the war, rejecting any peace talks. It is no coincidence that when the war was over, the voters overwhelmingly voted him out of office as he was seen as a "war monger".




The bit about Churchill is a little unfair.

He was negotiating with Hitler and exploring avenues to avoid all out war, he wasn't comfortable with it - but he was doing it.

Eventually he reached the conclusion that Hitler was just paying lip-service and wasn't serious about an agreement being reached.

Hitler felt he had what he wanted and didn't need to compromise.

This was the period immediately before Churchill's "Fight them on the beaches" speech.

[WOMBAI]

Yeah.. that's what I want to know too.. It's kind of a misleading thread title if Ben has been saying that he thinks Britain should stay out of conflict!
I kinda thought he had been bigging up Adolf and goosestepping about the house!

Exaggeration is the name of the game on this forum - some members do nothing but exaggerate - just a tactic to discredit hms they don't like!

[oddballmisfitsFTW]

on a serious note, I would like to ask the people who are knowledgable about WWII this

We now know Iraq and Afghanistan was not about WMDS or any other reason the goverment said, but there was and is some other motive for these wars. I am not gonna speculate but there are plenty of theories from various people.

My question is, was there some sinister motive behind WWII? Obviously Hitler and his evil is sinister enough, but I mean, is there a lot more to WWII than people know about.

on a lighter note, who would have thought so many BB fans on a BB forum would be so knowledgable about WWII :joker:

[StGeorge]

You are correct that the precursors of what was to come were there for anyone with eyes to see long before the war started, and Chamberlain's foreign policy of appeasement and his signing of the Munich Agreement in 1938 were fundamental errors of judgment which strengthened Hitler's hand and his belief that Britain would not intervene if they invaded Poland and continued their aggressive occupation of neighbouring countries. However, there was still a good chance that if Britain had engaged in diplomatic talks with Hitler in 1940 the worst of the atrocities may have been averted.

Its unfortunate that we will never know. Same as we will never know whether Saddam was intending to build bridges with the world and then become the next Nobel Peace winner. Who knows?

I think the politics of the time were very different to today as armourment mobilization and military means were the predominant policy of most of the nations at the time. But i cant believe that there wasnt at least some negotiations and diplomacy via all those mentioned before who were sympathetic to Hitler like the Prince of Wales etc.

[StGeorge]

Yours second para is in a completely different style to the rest of your posts, so I Googled it... and guess what? It's a direct cut and past job from Wiki.

Looks like you're the one who should do a little research.

And actually... if Ben did say that about Geobbels... it was an idiotic thing to say.

100% correct and i apologise for being a lazy git, but i quickly researched Goebbells as i will not post what i do not know about.

[Livia]

100% correct and i apologise for being a lazy git, but i quickly researched Goebbells as i will not post what i do not know about.


LOL... okay. That's honest!

[StGeorge]

LOL... okay. That's honest!

Thanks i try to be....good spot tho'. :blush:

[Livia]

Thanks i try to be....good spot tho'. :blush:


Yeah well, sometimes it saves time to let someone else have written it down what you were thinking. I've never done it myself of course. Never. Not ever. Not even once. Do you believe that?!?

[calyman]

Im sorry but that is not an exellent post due to the bit i have quoted.

People forget that the atrocities as you put it had already started long before Germany invaded Poland ( and subsequently our involvement), and things like kristallnacht, the anti-Jewish pogrom in Nazi Germany and Austria from the 9th until the 10th November 1938, were just a sign of Hitlers plan and indoctrines with regards his views on the Aryan Races and the inferior Jewish and Slav races.

It also has to be said that it was people of Ben's class who allowed the rise of the nazis to occur. After the Germans were beaten in the 1st world war. The Rhineland was controlled by the allies. They allowed Hitler to walk in, take the place back and then begin mass production of armaments. One of the few voices warning the British Government to do something about this was Churchill.

It was the inaction of the rulling classes in France and Britain that allowed Hitler to prepare for war. Right up to the early 30's, Hitler could have been easily defeated. The ruling classes in Britain, France and even Germany allowed Hitler to gain strength because they all thought he could be controlled by them. Big ****in mistake. So Ben and people of his class were partly responsible because of their narrow minded and short sighted views, which then brought the the whole of Europe to into appalling violence and genocide.

[StGeorge]

Yeah well, sometimes it saves time to let someone else have written it down what you were thinking. I've never done it myself of course. Never. Not ever. Not even once. Do you believe that?!?

I know..i usually post it in italics or as a quote, but pure expediancy got the better of me.

off home now tally ho!

[Livia]

It also has to be said that it was people of Ben's class who allowed the rise of the nazis to occur. After the Germans were beaten in the 1st world war. The Rhineland was controlled by the allies. They allowed Hitler to walk in, take the place back and then begin mass production of armaments. One of the few voices warning the British Government to do something about this was Churchill.

It was the inaction of the rulling classes in France and Britain that allowed Hitler to prepare for war. Right up to the early 30's, Hitler could have been easily defeated. The ruling classes in Britain, France and even Germany allowed Hitler to gain strength because they all thought he could be controlled by them. Big ****in mistake. So Ben and people of his class were partly responsible because of their narrow minded and short sighted views, which then brought the the whole of Europe to into appalling violence and genocide.

There was a HUGE depression before WW2. Did you hear about that? The whole of the world suffered. The reason Hitler came to power was that he promised the Germans, who were starving, he would put food on their table. They worked, they built autobahns, he fed their children. Hearts and minds. Thats how he rose to power so astonishingly quickly. The mass production of arms didn't occur until quite a while after Hitler was in power.

To say that the upper Class British gave Hitler power is ill-informed and really classist. It wasn't just the working class that died in WW2, people from all classes died.

[setanta]

No need for a history lesson: we've already established that Ben made a legimate statement that's supported by facts, so let's leave it at that, shall we? No need to start a pi$$ing competition here. Instead, we should concentrate on the title of this thread, which is misleading rubbish.

[oddballmisfitsFTW]

It also has to be said that it was people of Ben's class who allowed the rise of the nazis to occur. After the Germans were beaten in the 1st world war. The Rhineland was controlled by the allies. They allowed Hitler to walk in, take the place back and then begin mass production of armaments. One of the few voices warning the British Government to do something about this was Churchill.

It was the inaction of the rulling classes in France and Britain that allowed Hitler to prepare for war. Right up to the early 30's, Hitler could have been easily defeated. The ruling classes in Britain, France and even Germany allowed Hitler to gain strength because they all thought he could be controlled by them. Big ****in mistake. So Ben and people of his class were partly responsible because of their narrow minded and short sighted views, which then brought the the whole of Europe to into appalling violence and genocide.


The part in bold is interesting. I dont trust the ruling classes of Europe at all. In the part i highlighted in Italics you say they allowed Hitler to gain strength cos they thought they could control him and big effin mistake. But what if they had no intention of stopping him and it wasnt a mistake. What if they actually wanted it to happen?
And the same ruling classes are the real reason we went to war in Iraq and Afghanistan too?

[johnx]

It's clear that the main motivation for any war is that large corporations make alot of money out of them.Lets not forget Britian,like Nazi Germany, invaded many countries when building a vast empire.Former US General Butler wrote a book "War is a Racket" comparing the US Govt. he fought for to organized crime families.Likewise books such as "Trading With the Enemy" by Charles Highman document how large Corporations such as Standard Oil,Ford and General Electric continued trading with Germany and her allies into 1942.The econonies of US and Great Britian were in the toilet in the 1930s-WW2 helped the US become the superpower it is.Ben is right to highlight the complexities of WW2 but as he says himself he's arguing with people who've never read a book.

[Angus]

Its unfortunate that we will never know. Same as we will never know whether Saddam was intending to build bridges with the world and then become the next Nobel Peace winner. Who knows?

I think the politics of the time were very different to today as armourment mobilization and military means were the predominant policy of most of the nations at the time. But i cant believe that there wasnt at least some negotiations and diplomacy via all those mentioned before who were sympathetic to Hitler like the Prince of Wales etc.


That is the beauty of revisionism - the "what might have been" if such and such course had been pursued. We can all be wise after the event. But it's still fascinating to debate.

To paraphrase Burke "All it takes for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing", which is basically what the British government did in the 1930s.

[setanta]

It's clear that the main motivation for any war is that large corporations make alot of money out of them.Lets not forget Britian,like Nazi Germany, invaded many countries when building a vast empire.Former US General Butler wrote a book "War is a Racket" comparing the US Govt. he fought for to organized crime families.Likewise books such as "Trading With the Enemy" by Charles Highman document how large Corporations such as Standard Oil,Ford and General Electric continued trading with Germany and her allies into 1942.The econonies of US and Great Britian were in the toilet in the 1930s-WW2 helped the US become the superpower it is.Ben is right to highlight the complexities of WW2 but as he says himself he's arguing with people who've never read a book.

Good post and yeah, that's more than likely true.

[oddballmisfitsFTW]

There was a HUGE depression before WW2. Did you hear about that? The whole of the world suffered. The reason Hitler came to power was that he promised the Germans, who were starving, he would put food on their table. They worked, they built autobahns, he fed their children. Hearts and minds. Thats how he rose to power so astonishingly quickly. The mass production of arms didn't occur until quite a while after Hitler was in power.

To say that the upper Class British gave Hitler power is ill-informed and really classist. It wasn't just the working class that died in WW2, people from all classes died.


There was the great depression and there is the "economic crisis" that happened recently. I have a very bad feeling something seriously ****ed up is gonna happen within next few years. I dont trust the ruling classes who own the politicians.
I am very paranoid about it. I do think there is something behind WWII and the depression is connected to it and the economin crisis of recent times is connected to the Iraq, Afghanistan and any future wars we may have (eg Iran).
And, WWII and modern wars are connected in some way, I think
Knee jerk reaction I even say to myself is paranoid etc, but they got found out to be blatantly lying about Iraq and Afghanistan, so what else are they lying about. Seems very dodgy to me, very sinsister and doesnt sit right with me at all
Economic crisis was caused by the banks themselves, no question in my mind. They are greedy and stealing the publics money from under their noses under the guise of "oooh we have a crisis, we need help"
NO they are lying just like Iraq and Afghanistan.

[oddballmisfitsFTW]

It's clear that the main motivation for any war is that large corporations make alot of money out of them.Lets not forget Britian,like Nazi Germany, invaded many countries when building a vast empire.Former US General Butler wrote a book "War is a Racket" comparing the US Govt. he fought for to organized crime families.Likewise books such as "Trading With the Enemy" by Charles Highman document how large Corporations such as Standard Oil,Ford and General Electric continued trading with Germany and her allies into 1942.The econonies of US and Great Britian were in the toilet in the 1930s-WW2 helped the US become the superpower it is.Ben is right to highlight the complexities of WW2 but as he says himself he's arguing with people who've never read a book.

:joker: classic ben

Ben to win :dance: (as long as he isnt a nazi lover) :joker:

[StGeorge]

There was a HUGE depression before WW2. Did you hear about that? The whole of the world suffered. The reason Hitler came to power was that he promised the Germans, who were starving, he would put food on their table. They worked, they built autobahns, he fed their children. Hearts and minds. Thats how he rose to power so astonishingly quickly. The mass production of arms didn't occur until quite a while after Hitler was in power.

To say that the upper Class British gave Hitler power is ill-informed and really classist. It wasn't just the working class that died in WW2, people from all classes died.

Its true that Hitler fed off the impoverished to gain power.

A similar thing is what is happening in this country now. I personally do not agree with our open door policy regarding immigration under Labour. But some quarters, use this to stir up those who are out of work or generally feeling down and depressed due to the economy etc, and they try to gain acceptance by misguided policies and playing on peoples fears and worries. The BNP in particular springs to mind.

[StGeorge]

That is the beauty of revisionism - the "what might have been" if such and such course had been pursued. We can all be wise after the event. But it's still fascinating to debate.

To paraphrase Burke "All it takes for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing", which is basically what the British government did in the 1930s.

I love that saying, and its a shame that when good men do actually do something, their motives are questioned and they are called criminals because they havent got the appropriate United Nations resolution bla bla bla.

[Kazanne]

Well at least Benny boy got a good debate going on here

[Angus]

Well at least Benny boy got a good debate going on here

It's a shame he couldn't do the same in the house instead of being shouted down by idiots who really don't have sufficient grasp of the facts to conduct a meaningful debate.

Poor Ben is flogging a dead horse in there if he's hoping for any intellectual stimulation - I often feel he deliberately plays the devil's advocate in order to stimulate conversation and opinions, but you can't really discuss any meaningful issues with people who have such small and closed minds.

[StGeorge]

There was the great depression and there is the "economic crisis" that happened recently. I have a very bad feeling something seriously ****ed up is gonna happen within next few years. I dont trust the ruling classes who own the politicians.
I am very paranoid about it. I do think there is something behind WWII and the depression is connected to it and the economin crisis of recent times is connected to the Iraq, Afghanistan and any future wars we may have (eg Iran).
And, WWII and modern wars are connected in some way, I think
Knee jerk reaction I even say to myself is paranoid etc, but they got found out to be blatantly lying about Iraq and Afghanistan, so what else are they lying about. Seems very dodgy to me, very sinsister and doesnt sit right with me at all
Economic crisis was caused by the banks themselves, no question in my mind. They are greedy and stealing the publics money from under their noses under the guise of "oooh we have a crisis, we need help"
NO they are lying just like Iraq and Afghanistan.

I dont know the complete ins and outs of the reasoning behind Iraq and Afghan' but if in Iraq in particular we went knowing there were no WOMDs, then those in power at the time should be questioned accordingly.
IMO we were wrong not to have finished the job in the freeing of Kuwait. We gave Saddam the benefit of the doubt and a second chance and he preceded to annialate the Kurds & Shiites and push the boundaries until the Allies kicked him out. I personally beleive we have been justified in removing an Hitlerite tyrant irrespective of WOMDs or not.
Afghan? I think we are again justified to enter a country and remove those responsible for one of the worsed terrorist acts against a civilian population in modern times. What narks me is that the USA intelligence network(there's an anomaly if ever there was one) had a perfect opportunity prior to 911 to remove Ossie Bin Liner and bulked. It resulted in the murder of a prominent Afghan leader who was working with the west. Shameful period.
I agree with the Afghan war but know that its one we wont win unless we win the people, which we arent doing in certain areas. This type of war has failed in Vietnam and even as close as N.Ireland, where armed conflict against an enemy you cant identify hinders your chances of success. Fortunately both those conflicts ended once both sides came to the table and talked. But with the indoctrines that the Bin Liner Fundamentalists follow, talking is never ever going to be an option.

[oddballmisfitsFTW]

It's a shame he couldn't do the same in the house instead of being shouted down by idiots who really don't have sufficient grasp of the facts to conduct a meaningful debate.

Poor Ben is flogging a dead horse in there if he's hoping for any intellectual stimulation - I often feel he deliberately plays the devil's advocate in order to stimulate conversation and opinions, but you can't really discuss any meaningful issues with people who have such small and closed minds.

what is also a shame is that Ben may lose a lot of fans if this gets shown on HLs, if they misunderstand him or BB edit him badly.
I need to see it myself first as well, but I dont think Ben is a nazi supporter or sympathiser judging from what people have said so far.
I always thought Ben was unable to be brought down, because his lazy attitude to tasks and all other stuff negative, was part of what made him such a comedy legend.
This however IS a "downfall" moment, pardon the pun :joker:

[StGeorge]

It's a shame he couldn't do the same in the house instead of being shouted down by idiots who really don't have sufficient grasp of the facts to conduct a meaningful debate.

Poor Ben is flogging a dead horse in there if he's hoping for any intellectual stimulation - I often feel he deliberately plays the devil's advocate in order to stimulate conversation and opinions, but you can't really discuss any meaningful issues with people who have such small and closed minds.

Unfortunately those of us who havent been party to the whole conversation, probably will not ever see it to judge for ourselves. If you look at C4s BB site, there is no mention of it yet in the news section.
Censorship is the tool of dictators methinks.:devil:

[StGeorge]

what is also a shame is that Ben may lose a lot of fans if this gets shown on HLs, if they misunderstand him or BB edit him badly.
I need to see it myself first as well, but I dont think Ben is a nazi supporter or sympathiser judging from what people have said so far.
I always thought Ben was unable to be brought down, because his lazy attitude to tasks and all other stuff negative, was part of what made him such a comedy legend.
This however IS a "downfall" moment, pardon the pun :joker:

I hope that is not the case and we do get to judge ourselves as its not fair on Ben either way as they have shown LF and thus judgements are made regardless.
I dont think he has sounded like a nazi sympathiser so far, but i dont agree about his views on the politics or policies of the time, based on whats has been revealed.
We in 2010 cannot truly judge those in 1939, no more than i could question Caesars decision in entering the Roman Senate without his bodyguard Mark Antony. Who's to know whether MA was taking a leak at the time? In Diplomacy..timing is crucial.

[Ketman]

And, WWII and modern wars are connected in some way, I think
Knee jerk reaction I even say to myself is paranoid etc, but they got found out to be blatantly lying about Iraq and Afghanistan, so what else are they lying about. Seems very dodgy to me, very sinsister and doesnt sit right with me at all


No need to suppose a grand conspiracy that includes all wars ever fought. The war against Iraq was an opportunist war for the US and there is very little that can be said in defence of Bush-Blair. WWII is a different case, however. Fighting that war impoverished Britain for a generation. There were no material gains of any kind for us. The only motives in 1939 were those of sheer survival - fight and win, or go under. They should have acted earlier, and Churchill wanted them to, but he was out of the loop in those years. Instead they let the armed forces go to pot while the Nazis were building theirs up, and this had the effect of leading the Nazis to believe that they could act as they liked in Europe, and Britain would just let them. That was a mistake, but we have to take some blame for allowing them to make it. But, overall, it was one of the few wars in our history where we can be proud of our role.

[-Sue-]

**passes round the popcorn**..hmm should I sneak out quietly or sit on the bean bag in the corner flicking elastic bands at unsuspecting passers by??? hmmm

[Angus]

Unfortunately those of us who havent been party to the whole conversation, probably will not ever see it to judge for ourselves. If you look at C4s BB site, there is no mention of it yet in the news section.
Censorship is the tool of dictators methinks.:devil:


Judging by the glee displayed on this forum by many of Ben's haters, it will be just another stick to beat him with, despite the fact that most of them seem to have a very shaky grip on what exactly was said and in what context. I'm sure C4 will be more than capable of manipulating public opinion by the use of careful editing and censorship, as they did with Sunshine last week.

[StGeorge]

Judging by the glee displayed on this forum by many of Ben's haters, it will be just another stick to beat him with, despite the fact that most of them seem to have a very shaky grip on what exactly was said and in what context. I'm sure C4 will be more than capable of manipulating public opinion by the use of careful editing and censorship, as they did with Sunshine last week.

Im neither a fan or hater of Ben, but i do think that in some cases when certain subjects are broached on BB, that it could lead to a distortion of the facts and events. This is why i have posted here as i feel WW2 was justified and the timing was unavoidable.
Someone says Ben is Jewish....i dont know, but there are some who actually would still take his views and turn it. Im amazed that with all the photographic evidence out there, some still disbeleive the Holocust.

[oddballmisfitsFTW]

I dont know the complete ins and outs of the reasoning behind Iraq and Afghan' but if in Iraq in particular we went knowing there were no WOMDs, then those in power at the time should be questioned accordingly.
IMO we were wrong not to have finished the job in the freeing of Kuwait. We gave Saddam the benefit of the doubt and a second chance and he preceded to annialate the Kurds & Shiites and push the boundaries until the Allies kicked him out. I personally beleive we have been justified in removing an Hitlerite tyrant irrespective of WOMDs or not.
Afghan? I think we are again justified to enter a country and remove those responsible for one of the worsed terrorist acts against a civilian population in modern times. What narks me is that the USA intelligence network(there's an anomaly if ever there was one) had a perfect opportunity prior to 911 to remove Ossie Bin Liner and bulked. It resulted in the murder of a prominent Afghan leader who was working with the west. Shameful period.
I agree with the Afghan war but know that its one we wont win unless we win the people, which we arent doing in certain areas. This type of war has failed in Vietnam and even as close as N.Ireland, where armed conflict against an enemy you cant identify hinders your chances of success. Fortunately both those conflicts ended once both sides came to the table and talked. But with the indoctrines that the Bin Liner Fundamentalists follow, talking is never ever going to be an option.

I dont know whole truth about Iraq/Afghanistan either but I lean more towards Afghanistan was more justifiable than Iraq, IF what the US/UK government tells us is true.
Problem is I dont trust a single word they say at all.
I do know that both Bin Laden and Saddam were formerly "allies" with the west. Both times it was the CIA who were involved. These sneaky guys are always around at the start of trouble are they not?
Who was involved at start of Vietnam, CIA again.
Something is not right and the governments of the west I think are treating us like gullible idiots.
I just wanna know what they are upto, what is the reason they causin so much **** around the world. Is it simply due to fundamentalists wanting to bring down the west? I dont believe that is the reason, because my philosophy now is, whatever the politicians tell you, thats a lie and the truth is hidden somewhere. They tell us over and over and over war on terror war on terror.
What could be true is that the west wants to control the middle east and Saddam and Taleban needed to be removed for them to do this. Next they might move onto Iran, which cause WWIII, if Iran have nuclear weapons.
Maybe thats what the sick, twisted ruling classes want though.

[StGeorge]

I dont know whole truth about Iraq/Afghanistan either but I lean more towards Afghanistan was more justifiable than Iraq, IF what the US/UK government tells us is true.
Problem is I dont trust a single word they say at all.
I do know that both Bin Laden and Saddam were formerly "allies" with the west. Both times it was the CIA who were involved. These sneaky guys are always around at the start of trouble are they not?
Who was involved at start of Vietnam, CIA again.
Something is not right and the governments of the west I think are treating us like gullible idiots.
I just wanna know what they are upto, what is the reason they causin so much **** around the world. Is it simply due to fundamentalists wanting to bring down the west? I dont believe that is the reason, because my philosophy now is, whatever the politicians tell you, thats a lie and the truth is hidden somewhere. They tell us over and over and over war on terror war on terror.
What could be true is that the west wants to control the middle east and Saddam and Taleban needed to be removed for them to do this. Next they might move onto Iran, which cause WWIII, if Iran have nuclear weapons.
Maybe thats what the sick, twisted ruling classes want though.

Unfortunately there probably isnt much wrong with what you say. And thats worrying.

[Angus]

what is also a shame is that Ben may lose a lot of fans if this gets shown on HLs, if they misunderstand him or BB edit him badly.
I need to see it myself first as well, but I dont think Ben is a nazi supporter or sympathiser judging from what people have said so far.
I always thought Ben was unable to be brought down, because his lazy attitude to tasks and all other stuff negative, was part of what made him such a comedy legend.
This however IS a "downfall" moment, pardon the pun :joker:

I wouldn't be at all surprised if Ben gets loads of nominations next week, but it will be because he is not a "team player". If people like Steve and Nathan (if he's still here next week) nominate him they might well cite this conversation just as Dave was nommed loads because he had said he didn't want to compromise his faith by marrying gay people. The HMs will latch on to anything they think will fly with the public to get them onside, and put themselves in a good light.

[oddballmisfitsFTW]

No need to suppose a grand conspiracy that includes all wars ever fought. The war against Iraq was an opportunist war for the US and there is very little that can be said in defence of Bush-Blair. WWII is a different case, however. Fighting that war impoverished Britain for a generation. There were no material gains of any kind for us. The only motives in 1939 were those of sheer survival - fight and win, or go under. They should have acted earlier, and Churchill wanted them to, but he was out of the loop in those years. Instead they let the armed forces go to pot while the Nazis were building theirs up, and this had the effect of leading the Nazis to believe that they could act as they liked in Europe, and Britain would just let them. That was a mistake, but we have to take some blame for allowing them to make it. But, overall, it was one of the few wars in our history where we can be proud of our role.

there may well be no connection at all, but I dont discount it completely, I just keep at back of my mind and try not to worry bout it :joker:

if it was true there wouldnt be material gains for us the general population, but there would for the ruling classes.
The UK was in massive debt before the crisis, who was the money borrowed from? and then cos of the economic crisis the banks cry help, so taxpayer helps out the banks and UK has even more debt. Then to get rid of the debt (yeah right) cuts are made and taxes go up again.
Its all ****ed up and they are getting away with it before our very eyes. Alomst comical really how much they have PWNED us :joker:
To me it equates to "we got you by the short and curlies, now this is what we gonna do....."

[Angus]

Im neither a fan or hater of Ben, but i do think that in some cases when certain subjects are broached on BB, that it could lead to a distortion of the facts and events. This is why i have posted here as i feel WW2 was justified and the timing was unavoidable.
Someone says Ben is Jewish....i dont know, but there are some who actually would still take his views and turn it. Im amazed that with all the photographic evidence out there, some still disbeleive the Holocust.

Let's face it we have all had debates with friends, colleagues etc, about all sorts of sensitive subjects and often they are eye opening as to a person's true character, and often they are just the ramblings of someone making a controversial statement to shock or provoke a discussion. If someone is determined to believe or disbelieve something they will always be able to justify their stance one way or another. That's human nature.

Yes, Ben is Jewish - there is a brief piece about him in The Jewish Chronicle.
http://www.thejc.com/news/the-diary/34481/bbs-ben-his-bum

[starry]

I don't care what 'race' Ben is thought to be, whether he is the right % of a particular 'race'.

[Angus]

I don't care what 'race' Ben is thought to be, whether he is the right % of a particular 'race'.

Nor do I, but the point I am making is that specifically because Ben is Jewish I do not believe for one moment he would condone the holocaust.

[calyman]

There was a HUGE depression before WW2. Did you hear about that? The whole of the world suffered. The reason Hitler came to power was that he promised the Germans, who were starving, he would put food on their table. They worked, they built autobahns, he fed their children. Hearts and minds. Thats how he rose to power so astonishingly quickly. The mass production of arms didn't occur until quite a while after Hitler was in power.

To say that the upper Class British gave Hitler power is ill-informed and really classist. It wasn't just the working class that died in WW2, people from all classes died.

It's a well documented fact of history that Churchill was a lone voice warning about the danger of the rise of the nazis, it's clear that the Allies had the resources to stop Hitler until he began rebuilding Germany's armaments, after seizing the Rhineland, indefiance of the versailles treaty, that itself was sufficient reason for the allies to take effective action when they could.

Hitler also fed the Germans, the lie that the previous war's Government had given victory to the allies, he fuelled hatred of Jews, eastern europeans, Homosexuals, the disabled and Romany peoples.

Working class people have never had power in Government, have never decided national policy in respect of Government, had no say in deciding what to do about the bazis, though many working class people did fught for the Republican forces in Spain, this was not sanctioned by the British Government.

It was the British ruling classes who denied Jewish immigrants entry to Britain, fleeing from Nazi persecution, the ruling classes who allowed Hitler's rise unopposed, the ruling classes who by their inaction and tacit support of nazism, who are ultimately responsible, along with the nazis; for the slaughter of disabled, Jewish, Homosexual and other minorities in Germany. Also responsible for the countless deaths of young British soldiers in a conflict that need never have happened.

[vesavius]

The problem here I think is that Ben was arguing form a logistical standpoint, with a focus on the loss and wealth and empire for the country, while the others were arguing from a ethical standpoint (the moral stand against Nazism).

The two priorities are always gonna clash.

It's just how Ben sees things... he dosent emotionally connect to anything- people or events. He dosent get the concept of ethical politics (as we have seen from his cold lying and using of others in the house) and sees no value for fighting in something just because it 'right', especially if there is an attached personal cost.

We see exactly the same dynamic when he is arguing with JJ... Ben argues from a calm unemotional stance, disattached and logical, and JJ argues from the heart for what he believes. Ironically, this is the very reason why many consider JJ to 'lose' this arguments, because many see being calm as an automatic win, no matter what is actually said.


If Ben had been around during WW2 he would have been a British Nazi apologiser, appeaser, and sympathiser, simply because that would have been the stance in which he would have seen the least personal cost for himself and potentiolly he best financial choice for the Empire.

There were nore of them around then many think, and most of them came from the very social classes that Ben tries so hard to emulate.

[Shasown]

It's a well documented fact of history that Churchill was a lone voice warning about the danger of the rise of the nazis, it's clear that the Allies had the resources to stop Hitler until he began rebuilding Germany's armaments, after seizing the Rhineland, indefiance of the versailles treaty, that itself was sufficient reason for the allies to take effective action when they could.

Hitler also fed the Germans, the lie that the previous war's Government had given victory to the allies, he fuelled hatred of Jews, eastern europeans, Homosexuals, the disabled and Romany peoples.

Working class people have never had power in Government, have never decided national policy in respect of Government, had no say in deciding what to do about the bazis, though many working class people did fught for the Republican forces in Spain, this was not sanctioned by the British Government.

It was the British ruling classes who denied Jewish immigrants entry to Britain, fleeing from Nazi persecution, the ruling classes who allowed Hitler's rise unopposed, the ruling classes who by their inaction and tacit support of nazism, who are ultimately responsible, along with the nazis; for the slaughter of disabled, Jewish, Homosexual and other minorities in Germany. Also responsible for the countless deaths of young British soldiers in a conflict that need never have happened.

Lots of good facts there too, but again you are missing the point that Ben was probably trying to make.

Why did Hitler rise to power? Because of the state of Germany after World War 1. We pretty much imposed the Versaille Treaty on them and let them get on with it. If instead of punitive measures against Germany we had actually helped rebuild the country and assist them through the Depression,(like we did in the late 40's and 50's) Germany wouldnt have been such an easy country to take over for the Nazi Party.

Although he stated Britiains Foreign Policy was flawed towards Gemany through the 1930's, it was flawed far earlier than that. It was flawed from the turn of the century, and didnt change until the end of the Second World War. In the 1900's and 1910's Germany was jealous of the Empires of other countries and tried to build her own, this is what lead to the First World War.


Following their defeat in WW1 they had to make reparations and comply with certain requirements which made the proud old germans lose their national pride, along comes Hitler with his ideas of Germany being equal to any of the worlds powers, and people to blame for the German Defeat, a bit of attitude like why cant we have an army to defend ourselves, lets build one.

Of course people were going to follow him. If our foreign policy had been different after WW1 we could have possibly prevented his rise to power.