It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

German Rearmament

page: 2
0
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 21 2006 @ 06:59 PM
link   
What makes you think the EU could not defend itself?

There is the Uk, France and Germany, for starters, not to mention the Italians, the Spanish, the Greeks, the Dutch etc etc. All with modern, professional standing armies. The total standing manpower, including reserves, for the entire EU makes it the single largest military force on the planet. It may not be intergrated, but in times of crisis, a command structure would be quickly agreed upon (UK, French and Germans taking the lead).

By 2012-15, the UK and France will have at least 3 new carriers, on top of existing ones already in service by other EU nations.

Let's also not forget that the UK and France have sizeable nuclear deterrents.

What, pray tell, gives you this dilluded impression that the EU could be rolled over?

Only someone wishing a world of hurt on their own country, both physically and economically would actually attack the EU.

[edit on 21/12/06 by stumason]




posted on Dec, 21 2006 @ 07:07 PM
link   
Dont suppose you have any comments with regards to the rest of my response to you, or did you just read the first line and click "reply"?

[edit on 21/12/06 by stumason]


ape

posted on Dec, 21 2006 @ 07:46 PM
link   
en.wikipedia.org...

of course you can call it whatever you want according to you its just a bunch of right wing french propaganda.

i suggest you edit wikipedi to suit your opinion, watch it get changed promptly.

I also find it funny you saying germany would lead the for front for war when this threads topic is questioning the rearmament of germany and wether or not they would go nuclear( which you so obviously critisized) which they would have to, if you think russia and china are your friends well HAHAH.

i can also see france making a deal with the russians and chinese.


what is the EU going to do if china or russia start making power moves lets say in a world where the US collapsed and no longer held any sway in the world scene how would they act in the middle east? would they let iran get nukes and let the middle east have an islamic bomb? is the EU going to nuke russia with its nuclear deterrant if they start taking back their satellite states by force??? what if NK takes over south korea and then eventually moves on japan? what would the EU do? since they have the great ability to project force. without the US this world be a crapper.

[edit on 21-12-2006 by ape]

[edit on 21-12-2006 by ape]

[edit on 21-12-2006 by ape]



posted on Dec, 21 2006 @ 08:50 PM
link   
The very fact the world (not to mention France and Britain) represented here by those of those nationalities, do not trust the Germans with a full Nuclear Arsenal (not the cork poppers France and Britain deploy) is proof that the EU is unable to support and defend itself. Germany is fully capable of governing itself...sorry that it threatend Britain's and France's ability to rule the world...

Odd how you all turned down the refugee ships Hitler sent full of Jews...and yet you blame the holocaust on Germany with the ovens and not the nations who sent their jews to the fires.

The fact was made clear, for an effective deterrent and for a stronger EU if any EU at all, there must be a real Nuclear weapons infrastructure, Britain and France do not cut it...their barbarism in India and Indo-China should rule them out of any Nuclear Weapon's use, or at least hold their mouths when casting down Germany.

I am glad some systems were brought up, you rarely hear about any such things, to those not interested in getting their meagre opinions on Germany's soveriegnty in...do you think these delivery systems are a good start or new ones must be developed as Russia is doing?



posted on Dec, 21 2006 @ 08:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by ape
en.wikipedia.org...

of course you can call it whatever you want according to you its just a bunch of right wing french propaganda.

i suggest you edit wikipedi to suit your opinion, watch it get changed promptly.


I have no interest in editing the article, although it actually proves my point:



In France, rejection was considered a humiliation for president Jacques Chirac. The TCE was rejected both by right-wing proponents of national sovereignty, such as Charles Pasqua and Philippe de Villiers, and by the anti-globalization movement, gathered around Socialist Party MP Laurent Fabius, the Greens, the Communist Party, the Revolutionary Communist League and the Workers' Struggle party. The Socialist party split itself between Laurent Fabius and François Hollande.


As I said, those elements stole the wind from the French Government who, wrongly assuming the win was in the bag, made no effort to sell it to the people. On the back of the French no, the Dutch followed suit, under the exact same circumstances.


Originally posted by ape
I also find it funny you saying germany would lead the for front for war when this threads topic is questioning the rearmament of germany and wether or not they would go nuclear( which you so obviously critisized) which they would have to, if you think russia and china are your friends well HAHAH.


Hahaha. How little do you know. Do you honestly think Germany is unarmed? Really? They actually have an Army larger than the UKs'! I said this earlier. Try reading, it's great.



Originally posted by ape
i can also see france making a deal with the russians and chinese.


Ok, why, if they are under attack, would the French make a deal? They are actually one of the most Nationalistic of the EU countries and would fight. Also, Russia and China have 0 ability to project force themselves, so whats the problem?


Originally posted by ape
what is the EU going to do if china or russia start making power moves lets say in a world where the US collapsed and no longer held any sway in the world scene how would they act in the middle east? would they let iran get nukes and let the middle east have an islamic bomb?


Who is actually leading the negotiations to stop Iran getting the bomb? Funny that...

And what makes you think that Russia or China (assuming they actually managed to develop anywhere near a Blue water Fleet capable of threatening the EU, would attack? That is what a nuclear deterrent is for. If they attacked us, they could rest assured their country would glow. What makes you think differently?


Originally posted by ape
is the EU going to nuke russia with its nuclear deterrant if they start taking back their satellite states by force???


Why would Russia do that? They barely have the ability to stop the rebellion in Chechnya, much less the ability or will to subjegate multiple satellite's under their rule. Where do you get these little fantasies from?


Originally posted by ape
what if NK takes over south korea and then eventually moves on japan? what would the EU do? since they have the great ability to project force. without the US this world be a crapper.


Oh, the poor Japanese and Koreans don't have any ability to defend themselves, sorry I forgot. Jeez.

They are armed to the teeth!! Japan could turn out a nuclear weapon AND a delivery system in less than 6 months if they ever felt threatened by NK. In fact, that very thing is under discussion in Japan right now.

Alliances are one thing, but countries need to able to fend for themselves and trust one another. Poncing around like you own the place and telling everyone what to do has got the US in the situation it is now. Paranoid and looking for a bogeyman round every corner. The rest of us would rather just get along...



posted on Dec, 21 2006 @ 09:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by Stratrf_Rus
The very fact the world (not to mention France and Britain) represented here by those of those nationalities, do not trust the Germans with a full Nuclear Arsenal (not the cork poppers France and Britain deploy) is proof that the EU is unable to support and defend itself. Germany is fully capable of governing itself...sorry that it threatend Britain's and France's ability to rule the world...


I never said you cannot be trusted, I actually like germany and lived there for many years. what I said is you could not afford it in the current climate.

Cork Poppers? The French have some of the largest Nukes available to anyone in their arsenal. As for the UK, ours are dialable. We can also make bigger ones if you want them....Jeebus...


Originally posted by Stratrf_Rus
Odd how you all turned down the refugee ships Hitler sent full of Jews...and yet you blame the holocaust on Germany with the ovens and not the nations who sent their jews to the fires.


Yeah, shame that. But we're not the ones who actually put them in the ovens, are we?

Anyhoo, we digress... It's all in the past and I would rather move on, how about you?


Originally posted by Stratrf_Rus
The fact was made clear, for an effective deterrent and for a stronger EU if any EU at all, there must be a real Nuclear weapons infrastructure, Britain and France do not cut it...their barbarism in India and Indo-China should rule them out of any Nuclear Weapon's use, or at least hold their mouths when casting down Germany.


We do not cut it? How so? Please, I am all ears for this fantastic insight into the British and french nuclear weapons...

As for the "barbarism" comment. So what, as I said, all in the past. I, personally, would rather deal with the present.


Originally posted by Stratrf_Rus
I am glad some systems were brought up, you rarely hear about any such things, to those not interested in getting their meagre opinions on Germany's soveriegnty in...do you think these delivery systems are a good start or new ones must be developed as Russia is doing?


Again, for the record, I merely questioned your ability to afford to develop them. I am sure you could, if you really wanted, but at the expense of what? The first class health system you guys have? Or maybe the world class transport system?

In my opinion, Germany spends money where it is needed, right now. You don't need nukes and you could not afford them without cutting something else. What would you cut?



posted on Dec, 21 2006 @ 10:39 PM
link   
i don't mean to sway off-subject, but the russians still have one of the most formidable military in the world, read a thread called "russia's military strength(and compared to other nations" i think it's called, and one called "china's geopolitical strategy" and others, and you'll see that the russians have a very formidable military, and is very capable of projecting power, at least within the Eurasian continent. China also has a formidable military although not as much as russia. i'll bring up some more threads about russia's military.

anyhow as for the germans, Hitler was first thinking of just taking the jews and putting them outside Germany, he sent ships filled with jews to the US, to the UK, yet you guys turned the ships away with machine guns for god's sake, then he went for the "final solution." also the german military right now along with the Japanese miltary are the 7th and 8th strongest militaries in the world, hardly just a pushover, you can expect a major setback if your planning on invading Germany. plus you don't need to have nuclear weapons and such a milityayr as the US' to be able to defend yourself, look at the Swiss, they have a rather small miltary, yet a very professional and modern one, that if the US thought of Invading Switzerland, i bet the Pentagon would think about it and review it 50t imes times before the make a decision...



posted on Dec, 21 2006 @ 11:04 PM
link   
I think a larger push into investment in Eastern Europe would have a return benefit that would pay for a Nuclear deterrence and BMD.

Currently Germany is the world's largest creditor and this can be used to her advantage to help pay for a Nuclear Arsenal.

Likewise...a streamlining (removal of some bureaucracy) of the healthcare and etc could be very useful in paying for rearmament. Giving some burden of cost to the churches might also be a good source, maybe allieving millions of Euros in a year.



posted on Dec, 21 2006 @ 11:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by INc2006
i don't mean to sway off-subject, but the russians still have one of the most formidable military in the world, read a thread called "russia's military strength(and compared to other nations" i think it's called, and one called "china's geopolitical strategy" and others, and you'll see that the russians have a very formidable military, and is very capable of projecting power, at least within the Eurasian continent. China also has a formidable military although not as much as russia. i'll bring up some more threads about russia's military.


I'm saying the Russians are weak, but if they tried to invade Europe, they would suffer greatly. Even if they tried to take their sattelites, they would take the ground, but suffer from insurgency.

China is no threat to Europe and wont be in any position for at least a decade, if not more. They're also heavily reliant on the Eu for trade.


Originally posted by INc2006
anyhow as for the germans, Hitler was first thinking of just taking the jews and putting them outside Germany, he sent ships filled with jews to the US, to the UK, yet you guys turned the ships away with machine guns for god's sake, then he went for the "final solution."


Indeed. I know we turned away ships, but thats a bit OT here.


Originally posted by INc2006
also the german military right now along with the Japanese miltary are the 7th and 8th strongest militaries in the world, hardly just a pushover, you can expect a major setback if your planning on invading Germany.


Indeed. I agree.


Originally posted by INc2006
plus you don't need to have nuclear weapons and such a milityayr as the US' to be able to defend yourself, look at the Swiss, they have a rather small miltary, yet a very professional and modern one, that if the US thought of Invading Switzerland, i bet the Pentagon would think about it and review it 50t imes times before the make a decision...


Switzerland, technically, has one of the worlds largest Army's. Every military aged man is required to under go training and must have a Weapon at home. I do believe, technically, that their Army is the Worlds largest if mobilised.



posted on Dec, 22 2006 @ 01:59 AM
link   
Stratrf_Rus - To set the record straight on German Jews fleeing Germany and whether they were accepted or not. (Not quite on topic but I can't allow that steaming pile of ignorant excreta to stand unchallenged.)

Jews were only allowed to leave if they paid money to the Reich, the amount involved was such that many families could only afford to send their children and made that dreadful choice. So the idea that all the potential jewish victims of the holocaust could have left Germany but were denied a safe haven is false and misleading.

You seem to think it just the big bad brits who turned away the Jews and that we turned them all away, at the point of a gun



Britain took in approximately 70,000 Jewish refugees, and more were admitted to Palestine, which was under British control. But the Government had no refugee policy as such, and because it maintained very restrictive immigration controls it drastically limited the number of refugees who made it here. The Government preferred to accept fit and strong refugees who, after a brief while, would get employment in other countries. The old rarely got in; children were saved, but their parents were rejected. In 1938 the gates of Palestine were closed and more Jews were allowed into Britain, instead. Most were young and arrived in a chaotic rush.

At international meetings in Evian in 1938 and Bermuda in 1943 the British Government, like those of other countries, avoided taking in refugees. Throughout this period, Britain had no refugee policy. Except for a brief period in 1938-39, immigration policy was framed in terms of the national interest rather than humanitarianism.


hmd.org.uk...

But it wasn't just Britain that limited immigration



Western governments used the Evian Conference of 1938 to send an unmistakable message to Eastern European governments and the Jewish populations that Jewish immigrants and refugees would not be accepted by Britain, France or the US. The British delegation to Evian was told that it would be 'desirable that the results of the meeting should not act as an incentive to these [Central and Eastern European] governments to increase the pressure on their Jewish minorities.' There was to be no welcome for refugees. The Australian delegate, TW White, stated that, 'as we have no racial problem, we are not desirous of importing one.'

Britain was not alone in this policy. For the US, with the added barrier of the Atlantic Ocean, tight immigration policy between 1932 and 1938 led to a net outflow in migration. Immigration statistics reveal a dramatic change in policy in the 1930s. Between 1820 and 1933 more than 37 million immigrants entered the US. From 1933 to 1943 only 341,567 citizens (Jewish and non-Jewish) from Germany and its allies were permitted to enter.


www.pubs.socialistreviewindex.org.uk...

So Britain takes in 70,000 and the US takes 341,000 - given the relative sizes of the countries and the fact that we were gearing up for a war the US was expecting to miss I'd say our contribution was proportionally above and beyond the US's.

Yes SOME were refused but they were refused by all the 'western' countries not just UK, so you're wrong.

The holocaust was NOT the UK's fault, wrong again.

In fact but for the UK Hitler would have completed his final solution and I doubt we'd be able to have this conversation so you might just think about that before you accuse our country of 'allowing' the holocaust.






[edit on 22/12/2006 by Strangerous]



posted on Dec, 22 2006 @ 02:20 AM
link   
Back on topic.

1. Who in Germany wants this, apart from the OP and a few loony-tune neo-nazis? The vast majority of Germans are extremely anti-war and have absolutely no desire to go nuclear.

2. Germany is protected by NATO countries' nuclear forces - ie the US, France and UK - even if the US suddenly decided not to play the UK and France would not let Germany's borders be transgressed by an aggressor. The World is a lot, lot smaller than it was in '39

3. Would the US, NATO, EU, UK or France actually allow Germany to have Nukes - I'm not so sure. Logically you can be trusted, of course, but emotionally can we convince ourselves to trust you? I don't think so - it's less than 100 years since you killed millions of Europeans in the first World War .

I think we'd all politely suggest it's better if you don't have them


ape

posted on Dec, 22 2006 @ 04:00 AM
link   
'notice stumason i said 'in a world where the US collapsed and had no more sway or influence in the world' you do realise if the Us ever collasped hard that it would be chaos ( in the US ), depending on how it went down you can bet russia and china would only become stronger in the long run.

I only speculated on how they would go about projecting force, and that chinese and russian and iranian interests differ from europes, I think you have a reading comprehension problem of course i was being imaginative, the US isnt going anywhere ;-(.

[edit on 22-12-2006 by ape]



posted on Dec, 22 2006 @ 06:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by ape
'notice stumason i said 'in a world where the US collapsed and had no more sway or influence in the world' you do realise if the Us ever collasped hard that it would be chaos ( in the US ), depending on how it went down you can bet russia and china would only become stronger in the long run.

I only speculated on how they would go about projecting force, and that chinese and russian and iranian interests differ from europes, I think you have a reading comprehension problem of course i was being imaginative, the US isnt going anywhere ;-(.

[edit on 22-12-2006 by ape]


I think the US is collapsing - not in the way you mean, but there are strong indications that their economy is experiencing or about to experience a downturn, hence the strong £ over a very weak $.

Militarily speaking, the USA is the strongest nation on earth and IMO, will remain so.

Having said that, China has recently woken from a slumber and has embarked on a modernisation and building program that makes the industrial revolution look like a kiddies Meccano kit. In the next 10 or 15 years, China will emerge as the world's next great superpower.

[edit on 22-12-2006 by fritz]


ape

posted on Dec, 22 2006 @ 10:09 AM
link   
heh the US just has to make some replacements and adjust to remain competitve this century.

www.fairtax.org...

the fair tax would be a new start, it would keep the current investors here in the US and bring a flood of new ones in. you have to look at all aspects here, the american people are not just going to let their way of life collapse. =[



posted on Dec, 22 2006 @ 04:16 PM
link   
I have for you the following proposal to a friend in the Defense policy position as an analyst in english so anyway...to that one guy who goes off about Jews needing to pay to leave Germany...bull crap. Stop reading 10 page history books on the events of that time - had the international Jewish bankers not deprived Germany of money Germany would doubtfully have sought it by taking it from the Jews in the first place. Until the war - Jews were allowed to leave Germany with ALL their possessions.

And I'm pro-Israel.

HERE

I'm proud to present Germany's new force structure over the next 15 years...now if only I dictated German policy.

1.5 million man army mostly a ready reserve a military build-up to ensure enough MBTs artillery both self-propelled and not, anti-aircraft weapons etc to fight a protracted land war.

Approximately 500,000 Navy with a new structure in total.

1) At least 5 but more eventually, fleets. The fleet structure is as follows:
One Major Aircraft Carrier and accompanying frigates and missile cruisers for BPMD and force projection, marine detatchment, and according logistics ships. And da da da TADA....

A newly designed ICBM warship. I'm figuring something like 24 or more launch tubes of MIRV ICBMs designed to be the German survivable Nuclear deterrent.

Each fleet deployed may have several of these heavily armored cruisers which being surface ships would have the best of navigation equipment using a built German satellite constellation for military purposes so that these ICBMs would have absolute accuracy compared to a Ballistic Missile submarine.

Along with the new carrier class these ships would be nuclear powered. A new attack submarine also nuclear power would be developed. 3 or more such submarines would act as guardians for the fleet.

A fleet of maybe 25 of these ICBM ships would be deployed 3/4s at any such time.

25 Ballistic Missile Submarines would also be developed and 3/4s deployed at any time.

I'm thinking an attack sub fleet of about 50 is required for significant cost-effective protection of the fleets.

The Airforce would have no less than 25 Stealth bombers developed ... a goal of having a radar cross section no larger than. 0.0015 meters squared in any aspect. This would comprise a global strategic bombing wing...other conventional strategic bombers for continued war fighting capability would be developed.

Enough strategic materials would be gathered to be used in event of war to produce approximately 50,000 tanks, artilery pieces and one million other weapons and according munitions annually for 10 years.

A favorable region in the German Alps would be selected to become the new Underground High Command facility.

For management reasons I've hypothesised two such facilities, one for Global High Command and one for Continental High Command.

The German Army would be given more and better Artillery including a tactical nuclear and Chemical//Biological elements.

The German Air Forces would command the anti-air and SAMs with Nuclear warheads used as a Ballistic Missile Defense...installations would be entrenched across the country. Given basic point missile defense systems capable of challenging any missile or bomb.

Strategic Alliances would be built with South Africa (for strategic materials) Saudi Arabia (for fuel though the military would move away from petroleums) and Japan for economic security.

A proposed US standdown of garrissoning the asiatic would be given, a bi-polar treaty between Japan and Germany would be favorable.

Through emmigration alliances with Argentina and Brazil and South Africa would be stronger made I think.

Especially in South Africa where it may be preferable to remove the pro-US government by re-establishing the Afrikaaner governmnet more inclined to be pro-German.

This would deny the US complete control of those strategic materials and thus give Germany more leverage in the US-German alliance system.

Though German expansion would be encouraged by allowing Russia to expand more freely into their near-abroad, Germany's ultimate goal would be to cause unrest within Russia. Possibly bringing Eastern Europe closer to Germany by allowing the Russians more dominating position over Eastern Europe.

Closer relations with China would be built. By any means necessary.

The Growth of German economy is imperitive because this would be expensive, how to best do that is difficult to me, I think a combination of use of German force to make more stable African Governments with which to do one sided business is a good start but eventually Germany needs to maintain a strong connection to the rest of the developed world and that requires a steady hand, predictable intentions and favorable business.

Yeah...I'm a dreamer but I've always wanted to start my "Der Vaterlandsfreund" propaganda series to be distributed in Germany for supporting a stronger Germany...maybe now I have a good enough platform?

Of course it can't be blatantly exposed....but gradually...



posted on Dec, 22 2006 @ 06:06 PM
link   
So Stratrf_Rus, you long for the old days eh?

Well my friend, my family lost 5 of 7 sons fighting against German aggression in both world wars.

Do we really want to go back to, 'Alles fur Deutschland!', or 'Ein Reich, Ein Volke, Ein Fuhrer!', I do hope not.

Otherwise it could well be 'Nicht schissen, we're nacht Turkische!' and I'm pretty sure we don't want that!

Sorry about the spelling. I have not written German for years.

[edit on 22-12-2006 by fritz]



posted on Dec, 22 2006 @ 06:15 PM
link   
Would you, by any chance, be an Ossie?
Most thinking Germans I know would be completely ashamed to hear a fellow German spouting the fascist bile you're coming out with.

'Jewish bankers' - sounds like '33 all over again

You're clearly in denial about your country's past and you have delusionalist fantasies about German dominance.

Your dreamt up force levels are ridiculous - have you worked out how all this is going to be paid for. Maybe you're going to annex and enslave a few countries?

Do your fantasies also involve gassing anyone and building a new capital city by any chance?

And Yes the jews did have to pay to leave!!!!!



Flight Tax (Reichsfluchtsteur)-- Below are thumbnails of various documents pertaining to the Flight Tax (Reichsfluchtsteur) imposed on Jews emigrating from Germany and Austria. The first is the front and back of a Notification of Security from the Flight Tax Office in Austria dated September 27, 1939. This Notice indicates that the Steiners will be giving up their residence in Austria and therefore are required to post security for payment of the flight tax (25% of their remaining assets). The amount determined by the Flight Tax Office is RM 24,300, determined as follows:

Gross Assets as of January 1, 1938 RM 122,127
Less Atonement Payment 25,200

Net Assets 96,927

Flight Tax (25%) 24,231

Rounded to 24,300



www.edwardvictor.com... - this page has links to documents in case you claim it's all an 'invention by Jewish Bankers'

So much for '10 page histories' and 'bullcrap' - maybe you should read some books rather than just pamphlets or graffiti. That's OK no apology at all needed.

Next you'll be telling us the jews gassed themselves to implicate the entirely innocent German Nation


You, sir, are a neo-nazi and worse than that you're a stupid neo-nazi.

Get back under your evil little fascist fantasist stone.


ape

posted on Dec, 22 2006 @ 06:53 PM
link   
first of all if the EU is going to become the next big thing they are going to NEED germany to be a detterant against any kind of aggressive actions of foreign nations that would threaten their interests, this is how the world works.

its just outrageously funny how EU member countries completly mistrust one another it's really regressive in regards to progression for forming a stable bloc. here you got the brits getting all riled up talking crap just thinking about german innovation and military power, a clear sign of mistrust although the mistrust is justified please remember this is now a member country of a union you're apart of, your interests are now bound together something that never before existed.



[edit on 22-12-2006 by ape]



posted on Dec, 22 2006 @ 07:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by Strangerous
Would you, by any chance, be an Ossie?
Most thinking Germans I know would be completely ashamed to hear a fellow German spouting the fascist bile you're coming out with.

'Jewish bankers' - sounds like '33 all over again

You're clearly in denial about your country's past and you have delusionalist fantasies about German dominance.

Your dreamt up force levels are ridiculous - have you worked out how all this is going to be paid for. Maybe you're going to annex and enslave a few countries?

Do your fantasies also involve gassing anyone and building a new capital city by any chance?

And Yes the jews did have to pay to leave!!!!!



Flight Tax (Reichsfluchtsteur)-- Below are thumbnails of various documents pertaining to the Flight Tax (Reichsfluchtsteur) imposed on Jews emigrating from Germany and Austria. The first is the front and back of a Notification of Security from the Flight Tax Office in Austria dated September 27, 1939. This Notice indicates that the Steiners will be giving up their residence in Austria and therefore are required to post security for payment of the flight tax (25% of their remaining assets). The amount determined by the Flight Tax Office is RM 24,300, determined as follows:

Gross Assets as of January 1, 1938 RM 122,127
Less Atonement Payment 25,200

Net Assets 96,927

Flight Tax (25%) 24,231

Rounded to 24,300



www.edwardvictor.com... - this page has links to documents in case you claim it's all an 'invention by Jewish Bankers'

So much for '10 page histories' and 'bullcrap' - maybe you should read some books rather than just pamphlets or graffiti. That's OK no apology at all needed.

Next you'll be telling us the jews gassed themselves to implicate the entirely innocent German Nation


You, sir, are a neo-nazi and worse than that you're a stupid neo-nazi.

Get back under your evil little fascist fantasist stone.


You're the largest biggot I know. History is history and International Banks led by a Jewish community denied Germany the loans she wanted. As I'm sure you'd argue Prescott Bush certainly not a Jew had no problem doing business with Hitler...neither did many non-Jewish bankers.

Since Jews controlled most of Britain's banks and France's banks at the time, conflict was far more intensified than it probably would have been (since Hitler only wanted Jews out of Germany, it wasn't him who conceived Final Solution he was not present at the Wansee conference nor did he ever really give it approval...it was done entirely by subordinates of Himmler in the Einstaatzgruppen).

You're the classic example why many Germans now are no longer caring what you or the world has to say, and I feel sorry for the few Germans you do know who would rather be your slave.



posted on Dec, 22 2006 @ 07:10 PM
link   
And God Damn it I told you that Germany did NOT tax Jews leaving Germany before the war. The doccuments you provided are all a month or later after the war started.

You are an IDIOT...now get out of here.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join