The Politics Thread

[Storm]

I would like to correct a mistake I made on another post somewhere on this board.

I said there that the Americans didn't bother to bomb the Nazi's death camps since they were too busy securing the Nazi occupation territories from Russian takeover.

Today I watched a documentary about the Jews in WW2 and the US, and it was clearly shown there that the US was not at all interested in saving Jews in WW2, even after they knew what was being done to them in Nazi Germany.
The reason they didn't try to save those Jews is that they feared they might actually succeed, and will have to take in the thousands of refugees. They didn't want to import the "Jewish problem" any more than the European countries who refused to accept Jewish immigrants before & during the war.


The real reason that they didn't bother bombing death-camps was that these places had no strategic value for them.
The government agency for saving the jews, which was formed in the US after much hindrence from the state department, actually requested that the Allied forces bomb the death-camp Auscwitz. That request was refused, saying that the bombers coming from England can't reach that far into the occupied Poland, while in fact Allied forces planes coming from Italy were bombing distillaries not 70 km from that camp. Ironically, some of those bombs accidently hit the death-camp, killing 85 prisoners.

[Oldbushie]

Dang. I did know that at one point, a ship full of thousands of Jews came into a US harbor and was turned away, so they ended up going back to Germany I think and got caught. So much for the whole "give me your tired, your hungry, and poor" phrase on the Statue of Liberty...

[Storm]

I guess that those words don't apply to the Jews...

I just re-checked that information on the "Yad Vashem" website, and I liked the way they put it there: "The Allied forces did not put the same energy and resolve to saving Jews as the Nazies did to murdering them".

[Rosedragon]

Ach, like other counties, the idealism of our democracy is in reality based on hypocrisy and lies. America is suposedly a country of liberty, but for more than half of our history non-whites, women, jews, catholics and the poor have been denied their liberty. Just goes to show you what humanity is like. People care only about their freedom, when it comes to giving that freedom to others, then they lose then they are reluctant.

[copycat]

America is suposedly a country of liberty

I has been anything but, since 9/11. Or so I heard, a safe distance away from the war and the US.

[Rosedragon]

Law enforcement officials have been getting really paranoid, security has been tightened. It's mainly around airports and government buildings. I almost never fly, so I don't know what the airports are like now. I heard that foreigners and foreign born citizens are really getting hit the worse, a lot of their rights have been taken away, especially for those of Arabic or muslim origin. A lot of prominet muslims and people from the Middle East are complaining about their lack of civil rights. I recall speeches about some of our freedoms being taken away for the sake of security, well, how much freedom has to be taken away before America becomes like a police state? So far, though I don't think things are that bad. Perhaps thirty years in the future things, will be worse, already people seem to have lost the right to protest.

[Storm]

Yeah, I heard about Israeli citizens getting harassed and even arrested in the US because they come from the middle east
I wish I could say things were better here... here you have bag checks and metal detectors on almost every shop/mall/bus/building or whatever. Arab citizens are also getting the worse for it, not to mention palestinians of the occupied territories.

[copycat]

Double posting Storm? And yesterday I was unable to post. What is happening to this board?
P.S Even Israeli citizens (in the US)? I never got that bit of information.

[Storm]

Not intentionally. For some reason the forum was so slow that I wasn't sure if it's responding, so I clicked the "post" button over again... Anyway, It's gone now.

And YES, even Israeli citizens. I think it's because to the Americans, some Israeli citizens look just like Arabs

[copycat]

Originally posted by Storm
Not intentionally. For some reason the forum was so slow that I wasn't sure if it's responding, so I clicked the "post" button over again... Anyway, It's gone now.

I didn't mean you did it intentionally either. I've done it once before too, but since it's been moved it would seem the board is being more unreliable than before.

Some people quickly generalize, particulary by appearance. That's the main reason for my opposition to extreme fascist groups, they overgeneralize.

[Storm]

Copycat -
I've heard some stuff about the Belgians and the Congo.
Being a Belgian, could tell me what's that about?

[copycat]

The Politics Thread

[Storm]

I heard references to it in various places, I can't remember all of them. The most recent was someone saying on the media that after what the Belgians did in the Congo, they have no right to judge others. I would like to know what exactly it was that they did there to disqualify them (in that person's eyes) from being the world's guardians of moral.

I don't think anyone here really cares much about that universal jurisdiction law. It's more of an insult than anything else - the worst thing that could happen is that Sharon gets convicted of whatever it is he's blamed for, and won't be able to visit Belgium :-/

[copycat]

The Belgians just did what every other country did in their colonies, and that's exploit the colony's riches and its people.

And, there are some who say Belgium was involved in the assasination of its (first) prime minister not long after it was 'uncolonised', but that has never been proven (yet).

[Storm]

I found the following article on the subject:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Print/0,3858,4352642,00.html

It says there was an admitted Belgian involvement in that political murder.
Strange, I thought all the european countries gave up their colonies before or shortly after WW2...

[copycat]

Like I said, there was no 'smoking gun' but 'moral responsibility'. That doesn't mean Belgium played an active role in the assassination, it just means we feel responsible for the events leading to his death, but actually have nothing to do with it, other than letting them happen. It could well be Belgium civilians, or even military, were present at the execution, but no link to the Belgian government has been found.
You are forgetting the length of the reign of Baudouin, he was one of, if not the longest serving monarch. And he was strong under the influence under the former monarch, Leopold III, who couldn't return to the throne because of his involvement with the Germans. In that aspect, does it sound surprising Baudoin didn't give Congo its independence right away?

[Storm]

Originally posted by copycat

You are forgetting the length of the reign of Baudouin, he was one of, if not the longest serving monarch. And he was strong under the influence under the former monarch, Leopold III, who couldn't return to the throne because of his involvement with the Germans. In that aspect, does it sound surprising Baudoin didn't give Congo its independence right away?

I'm not forgetting, since I never knew about it.
I didn't realize Belgium has been a monarchy untill so recently. It does sound surprising that Belgium didn't leave the Congo right away - I would have thought after WW2 the european countries were too devastated to keep their grip on their colonies :-/

[copycat]

The Politics Thread

[Storm]

From what I know, both England and France couldn't hold on to their colonies... I don't believe they left them out of the kindness of their hearts.

[copycat]

Originally posted by Storm
From what I know, both England and France couldn't hold on to their colonies... I don't believe they left them out of the kindness of their hearts.

Has any country ever 'released' a colony out of the kindness of their heart I wonder?