To think the Daily Mail have totally surpassed themselves by calling the current German administration 'The Fourth Reich'

[LaurieFairyCake]

Isn't that appalling? I can't believe they are insinuating that Germany has an 'empire' or 'kingdon'.

TheQueenOfSparta I suggest you look 'genocide' up in your dictionary. Failing that, maybe try looking up 'perspective' as you clearly don't have any.

Germany itself has been a victim of its own horrific madness. An estimated 70.000 german adults and children with mental and physical disabilities were murdered from the late 1930s until roughly the end of the war. To which we need to add the German Jews, Communists, Socialists, any political opposer (even those who supported Hitler before his elections), priests, gypsies, you name them.

Karma - right, so what would you have had Churchill do? Make an enemy of the Russians and hand victory to the Germans? 20m people died on the Eastern Front, including plenty of British sailors on the Arctic convoys. No doubt the Russian troops were angry and savage. They had been given every cause. That doesn't excuse war crimes against civilians, of course, but it is asking for the impossible to expect Russian troops to feel sympathy for an enemy that was so brutal and sadistic.

I met some veterans of the Artic convoys on HMS Belfast last weekend. They were just 18 when they joined up - mere lads who were facing an extremely high likelihood of a horrible death.

edam, I would strongly dispute that the Russians were given 'every cause' to excuse them raping their way across Germany - there is no excuse to rape and murder people, whether it is the Nazis doing it or the Russians or anybody else. We rightly condemn the Nazis for their atrocious behaviour, while tolerating it from other regimes. It is not asking for the impossible to expect Russian troops not to commit war crimes - those women weren't brutal and sadistic. They were just ordinary people who had suffered just like us. The only people being sadistic and brutal there, were the Russian troops.

I'm not sure what Churchill could have done, but the Stalinist regime was just as bad as the Nazi one

I think that the crimes committed by the Russian troupes are awful. Of course the Stalinist regime has been cruel, millions died as a result and a whole country has been (and still is) traumatised by years of tyranny.

Many crimes committed by all the countries involved in ww2 haven't been properly dealt with.
The Nazi army, for instance, killed a 5.000 Italian civilians, mostly women, children and old people while being pushed up North by the Allies and the Partisans. And by killed I am using an euphemism, because they were burnt alive in churches, bombed in their farms etc, but the majority of these crimes have never been dealt with. Mainly because a new balance had to be found in Europe, and new alliances couldn't be compromised.

A little German boy at my kids school went home in tears one day and asked his mum "why didn't you tell me we are the baddies?'

I think it's about time people stopped equating modern day germany to the germany of the second world war.

It's easy to judge others through the prism of history.

Karma - no, I didn't say the Russians were entitled to carry out war crimes. I specifically said they were not. But I do think it's ridiculous to make them out to be the bad guys of WW2. It wasn't the Russians who set up the gas chambers.

I also think it's pathetic for those of us who are fortunate enough to be sitting in our cosy homes with our cosy lives to even attempt to sit in judgement on people who went through the hell of WW2.

But back on topic, it's ironic that the Mail keeps going on about Hitler, given the paper's shameful record of support for the Fascists in the 30s.

edam you said 'No doubt the Russian troops were angry and savage. They had been given every cause. That doesn't excuse war crimes against civilians, of course, but it is asking for the impossible to expect Russian troops to feel sympathy for an enemy that was so brutal and sadistic.'

Although you say you are not excusing war crimes against civilians, the words surrounding that statement rather sound as if you are.

I think there is no difference in the level of evil, between setting up gas chambers and systematically raping women. There are some things I will sit in judgement of, from my cosy home and raping women and children is one of them.

Stalin's policies in the early 1930's, although coming from a different idealogical viewpoint, were pretty much the same when it came to wiping out whole sections of society. I think we ought to remember that a lot of people behaved atrociously during this period of history - the Nazis weren't the only ones. I also wonder how much responsibility the USA and Britain ought to take for what happened to the Jews in Germany, because neither country exactly welcomed fleeing refugees with open arms.

Yes, the Germans committed terrible atrocities against the Russians, Belarussians, Ukrainians, Jews & others in their invasion of the USSR. They were taught that Slavs - especially Russians, as well as Jews & Roma, were subhuman.

1 out of every 3 citizens of Belarus died in WW2 during the occupation. Tens of millions of Red Army POWs were murdered or starved to death by the Germans; tens of millions of Soviet citizens were taken as slave labour & many died during their slavery; thousands of villages & towns were burnt & the occupants massacred or left to fend for themselves with no food or shelter. The atrocities led by the Einsatzgruppe are infamous - Babi Yar, Slonim, Berdichev, Odessa, Maly Trostenets etc etc.

BUT Karma is right in that Stalin & his regime were as evil as Hitler's; & that he caused the deaths of tens of millions of people.

Stalin's regime did not sit down & coldly create death factories like Treblinka, Belzec, Birkenau, Chelmno, Sobibor & Majdanek - the details of the burning pits, gas vans, bone crushing machines, crematoria & gas chambers being constantly improved upon by technicians & engineers to increase their killing capacity.

I think that is what stands out about the Holocaust: that the Nazis employed people to scientifically plan for the extermination of a race in such a rational & calculating manner.

But the USSR had the endless Gulag - work camps where millions of people were exiled & many died from exhaustion, cold, industrial accidents & disease. Millions more were shot by the NKVD or deliberately starved (as in 1930s Ukraine). Whole populations were deported thousands of miles where they were left to struggle to build new lives with minimal resources. They were declared 'enemies of the state' as Stalin wished - due to their nationality, ethnicity, religion, political views or social class.

Comparing the numbers of deaths is pointless - Stalin's regime survived far longer than Hitler's so it's inevitable that more died as a result of Stalin's policies.

As far as is known - the USSR had no Treblinkas complete with gas chambers; & many people survived the Gulag & their exile to return home when Stalin died or to leave the USSR.

The atrocities committed by the Germans (who pretended to be allies to the USSR until Operation Barbarossa) shocked even the most hardened Red Army soldiers. They did not understand why the Germans - who they had not regarded as enemies before - had thought of them as less than human & wanted them all dead or enslaved.
So those whose families had lived in the occupied areas had good reason to hate the Germans intensely.

But the evidence is that Red Army soldiers raped any women & girls they found - Polish, Jewish camp survivors, Hungarian, even Russian women liberated from slavery; as well as German women. The harsh fact is that the men of the Red Army were allowed to do exactly as they wanted in the areas they liberated or occupied - just as the German army had.

The sad & horrible truth is that tens of thousands of 'minor' Nazi war criminals received light sentences or escaped punishment.

Yet German women & children who themselves did not commit war crimes were raped by often drunk, undisciplined soldiers who used the German occupation of part of the USSR as an excuse to hurt them - & that is inexcusable.

On a lighter note - because that is all very depressing stuff - wonder what gems the Daily Mail has come up with today??
Maybe best not to look - it's like a car crash - you know you shouldn't read it but you can't help it.....!

i don't think that the soviet union and nazi germany were ever true allies. i think that the soviets knew what the nazis had in mind for them i.e. total extermination. the soviet union signed a pact with the germans to keep them off their backs while they built up their war machine. they moved all of their heavy industry far inland so that germans could not attack and destroy it they way they tried to in britain. i think that both sides knew that a 'fight to the death' would occur. luckily the germans attacked in the autumn/winter and so were partially impeded by the wintery conditions.

i do think that the germans are now leading europe and in a way partially have what the nazis wanted, without the murder, racism and mayhem.

The problem is that the whole Common Market (as it was then) project was designed to stop any future wars in Europe by binding the nations together - and especially Germany, given they'd started two World Wars. Now the Germans have power over the rest of Europe again, it's awakening all sorts of fears and resentments. Especially in Greece, which suffered terribly under the Nazis (and immediately post-war from the rest of Europe, tbh).

This is partly why much of the rest of Europe wasn't too keen on German re-unification. They feared it would see the rise of an extremely powerful Germany, making it the most powerful nation in Europe. Et voila.

The Germans have now got an incoherent mindset where they boss the rest of Europe about but won't take responsibility for it by getting their chequebooks out. Yet it is German and French banks that have caused this crisis by lending to Greece when they knew full well it was a basketcase, as much as Greek politicians and millionaires who don't pay their taxes.

The Germans have exercised their power as the largest economy to overthrow democratic governments in Greece and Italy and install puppets who will obey German economic orders. They are now allowing elections in Greece, but making it very clear that if the Greeks elect a government that pursues policies unacceptable to Germany, they will drop Greece even more in the shit. People in Greece are dying for want of healthcare.

If Germany wants the power to order other countries around it has to fund them as well. Then the people of Greece or Italy might wear it.

Edam, again with this story of the Germans overthrowing democratic govmts? The government in Italy fell because of its own pathetic inadequacy at even recognising there was an economic crisis. It lost its majority in the Parliament, and fell. It often happens here in Italy.
You can perhaps say that Merkel intransigence lead the markets to aggravate Italy's position, putting Berlusconi under pressure. But hei, even with the "puppet" Italy still is under pressure
I for one am incredibly happy that Berlusconi has gone.
Mario Monti is not a puppet, he is an estimated economist, albeit not a left wing one. But he is not a puppet and has been arguing with Merkel for a while now. We'll see what happens next.
We will have elections next year, btw.

Franca - and how about Greece, then? And remind me, is Mario Monti actually a member of parliament, elected by the Italian people? As you know, he isn't. And neither are many ministers in his government. Therefore it is not a democratic government. Neither was the Greek interim government.

Mario Monti was a European Commissioner for years - an unelected bureaucrat who is part of the coterie that caused the whole problem in the first place.

Very few people will weep for Berlusconi, I imagine, including me. But the answer to economic crisis is not to ditch democracy. Especially not in Greece, FFS, where the whole thing started.

Btw, him being an economist is hardly a recommendation either, given the damage members of that group have caused. And given the state of their discipline - if you can call it that. Economics as a discipline has clearly failed - not only failed to spot the biggest financial crisis of the past 80 years coming but actually made it happen. Economics is a fairy story, a pretend field of study that only works if you make all sorts of assumptions about the world and about human beings that demonstrably are not true.

I can't comment on Greece.
Mario Monti is a Senatore, ie. member of the Senato. A small number of Senatori are nominated by the Presidente della Repubblica.
Sorry if our Constitution doesn't encounter the tastes of the British public.
Nor do I consider European Commissioners "unelected bureaucrats", but then again, I have a different position towards the EU.

I consider Berlusconi and his government deeply responsible for the sorry position Italy is now standing in.
First of all, because Berlusconi has been totally absent from the foreign policy scene, a different prime minister (Prodi, for instance, at least he was able to speak english ) might have been more incisive with Merkel and Sarkozy, or at least might have recognized that we were deeply in the shit. Berlsuconi has been in denial for 3 yrs.

I agree with you re economics, but I honestly find Monti the best thing we have had in a long time. Perhaps you should have experimented as a decent citizen what it means to live in a country ruled by Berlusconi and his gang. Sometimes, trust me, even democracy works perfectly.

I am not worried about the state of our democracy. We've jsut had local elections in many regions. We'll have general elections next year. I am already worrying about them, trust me, the outlook is much worse than what we have now.

doesn't work

Edam - With all due respect, your posts read like you don't know much about economics.

"him being an economist is hardly a recommendation either, given the damage members of that group have caused"

What damage exactly have economists caused, in your opinion? As a group, no less.

"Yet it is German and French banks that have caused this crisis by lending to Greece when they knew full well it was a basket case"

Really, now?

How exactly were they to know that Greece was a basket case while Greece was lying about its economic figures?

The only reason why Greece is not a formally bankrupt banana republic right now is because EU heavyweights (yes, including Germany and France) have been pouring money in their direction and financing their debt obligations.

Seriously, a bit more gratitude would be in order. Borrowing beyond your means, lying about the state of your economy for years, then moaning about your benefactors is kind of rich.

Whatmeworry - re "Grasshoppers hating on [sic] the Ants for working and saving"

That is actually quite apt (if not politically correct) and a major reason why Merkel is getting such backlash from voters - Germans are not at all happy to be pouring so much of their resources and taxes into saving Greeks.

I don't think Germany should ever have been reunified after WW2. It should have remained split into 4 parts respectively controlled of France, the US, Russia and the UK.

It's amazing how people go on about current Germans not being responsible for the atrocities WW2, yet somehow current Britons are responsible for the atrocities of the British empire when it comes to immigration and foreign aid.

Is it your opinion, then, that future generations of Germans should forever pay retribution for WWII a la Hunger Games?

Josephine, that's a very dangerous route to go down. Where does it end? Pretty much all countries have things in their past which are shameful. Lots of nations have committed atrocities. Think about it - as mentioned above, the Russian army raped its way across Germany, the USA used a nuclear weapon against Japan, I believe Britain invented the concept of the concentration camps. Those are just isolated actions off the top of my head - there are thousands more. If we follow your logic, then few nations would be deemed fit to self rule.

I do agree with you, re immigration and foreign aid. I do not hold with this idea of collective guilt or the sins of the father being visited upon the children.

Wow, Josephine, i really do not agree at all.

History is interesting; can be depressing but never boring (to me anyway!).

But economics..... noooo i really don't understand that at all... shame cos history & economics tend to be linked. Possibly.