[King Gizzard]

Misleading title..

[StGeorge]

Originally Posted by MojoNixon

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]

Originally Posted by Nate

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]

Originally Posted by Chels

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]

Originally Posted by StGeorge

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]

Originally Posted by 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

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]

Originally Posted by MojoNixon

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

no idea what it is lol

[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]

Originally Posted by happyland

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]

Originally Posted by MojoNixon

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]

Originally Posted by 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.

that is nearer the truth than the whole thread!lol

[MojoNixon]

Originally Posted by oddballmisfitsFTW

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.

Originally Posted by kazanne

that is nearer the truth than the whole thread!lol

That it is.

[StGeorge]

Originally Posted by starry

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]

Originally Posted by DrunkerThanMoses

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]

Originally Posted by 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.

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]

Originally Posted by MojoNixon

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]

Originally Posted by 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.

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.

[Angus]

Originally Posted by MojoNixon

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?