I did not even know you could get additional chips or playing pieces other than from third parties @_@.
Test Play Setup
-
WWII was a struggle between two different brands of evil, at least on the eastern front. Some would say the capitalist west was not much better.
Granted, and the Russia vs. Germany example is especially valid. I suppose you could even call out America’s internment of Japanese as a brand of evil. I just find it hard to say the Nazi’s (gas chambers, ovens, genocide in general) and the Brits or the French are on the same level of “evil.”
I’m just saying that WWII was a little more clear cut (I mean, they had skulls on their caps! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hn1VxaMEjRU :lol:), whereas in WWI both sides tried to demonize the other, but in the end the motivations of the war were abstract politically (honoring treaties vs. trying to cleanse the world of non-Aryan scum).
-
WWII was a struggle between two different brands of evil, at least on the eastern front. Some would say the capitalist west was not much better.
Hear, hear! There’s great naivety in calling one side evil and the other (the victor) good. All nations at war try to make the war seem legit by calling the opponents evil.
Um. Yes, the USA had Japanese internment camps, but for the most part did abide by the Geneva convention as far we know (as well as the other Western Allies), and fought a way where they were attacked first. The alliance with Russia was more of a ‘enemy of my enemy is my friend.’
The Axis on the other hand were the aggressors, tortured & killed a large population all over the world. I suppose you could say that the firebombings and nuclear bombings were evil, but paled in comparison the the numbers of civilians the Axis put in the ground.
Not sure how anyone could say it was anything but a ‘just’ war and ‘good’ vs. ‘evil.’ Granted, not all Germans, Italians, and Japanese were evil, but enough were to start a world war.
Agreed that WWI isn’t the same type of war- Alliances spiraled out of control.
-
The Allies murdered more people in German death camps after the war than the Germans had killed there during it. The western Allies collaborated by sending “undesirables” back to Russian occupied zones knowing they were going to certain death. They chose not to know what happened at Katyn and elsewhere behind the Russian lines.
The biggest example of ethnic cleansing in the 20th century happened after WWII as a result of Churchill and Stalin redrawing the map of Europe and disposing of anyone who didn’t fit the picture, mainly Germans and Poles. Look at the map of Germany and Poland now compared to 1939. The differences represent entire populations being liquidated.
The only mitigation is that, probably, had the Axis won the picture would have been even more radically changed with corresponding human wastage.
-
The Allies murdered more people in German death camps after the war than the Germans had killed there during it. The western Allies collaborated by sending “undesirables” back to Russian occupied zones knowing they were going to certain death. They chose not to know what happened at Katyn and elsewhere behind the Russian lines.
The biggest example of ethnic cleansing in the 20th century happened after WWII as a result of Churchill and Stalin redrawing the map of Europe and disposing of anyone who didn’t fit the picture, mainly Germans and Poles. Look at the map of Germany and Poland now compared to 1939. The differences represent entire populations being liquidated.
The only mitigation is that, probably, had the Axis won the picture would have been even more radically changed with corresponding human wastage.
:?
Proof? -
-
The Allies murdered more people in German death camps after the war than the Germans had killed there during it. The western Allies collaborated by sending “undesirables” back to Russian occupied zones knowing they were going to certain death. They chose not to know what happened at Katyn and elsewhere behind the Russian lines.
The biggest example of ethnic cleansing in the 20th century happened after WWII as a result of Churchill and Stalin redrawing the map of Europe and disposing of anyone who didn’t fit the picture, mainly Germans and Poles. Look at the map of Germany and Poland now compared to 1939. The differences represent entire populations being liquidated.
The only mitigation is that, probably, had the Axis won the picture would have been even more radically changed with corresponding human wastage.
You need to separate the “Allies” between the “Western Allies” and “Russia/USSR.” I don’t think the Russians were all that much better than the Germans.
-
http://ia700402.us.archive.org/10/items/CrimesAndMercies/CrimesAndMercies.pdf
History is written by the victors.
It’s the same reason we have tanks named after that bastard Sherman and his army of rapists.
-
http://ia700402.us.archive.org/10/items/CrimesAndMercies/CrimesAndMercies.pdf
History is written by the victors.
It’s the same reason we have tanks named after that b��t��d Sherman and his army of rapists.
You’re just mad Sherman won :wink:
-
http://ia700402.us.archive.org/10/items/CrimesAndMercies/CrimesAndMercies.pdf
That is at best misleading and at worst, blatant lies. We did forcible boot 12 million Germans, but we were having our arm twisted by the Soviet Union. Politicians will say what they will, but allowing 1 million to die in the transfer was likely a savings in lives over going against the USSR
-
http://ia700402.us.archive.org/10/items/CrimesAndMercies/CrimesAndMercies.pdf
History is written by the victors.
It’s the same reason we have tanks named after that b��t��d Sherman and his army of rapists.
You’re just mad Sherman won :wink:
People from the Northern U.S. (Yankees) always ask me why people are still angry about the Civil War. “That was like 200 years ago, get over it!”
I just ask them, “How would you feel if your country was invaded and occupied?” -
http://ia700402.us.archive.org/10/items/CrimesAndMercies/CrimesAndMercies.pdf
History is written by the victors.
It’s the same reason we have tanks named after that b��t��d Sherman and his army of rapists.
You’re just mad Sherman won :wink:
People from the Northern U.S. (Yankees) always ask me why people are still angry about the Civil War. “That was like 200 years ago, get over it!”
I just ask them, “How would you feel if your country was invaded and occupied?”How dare the north win the war 148 years ago :mrgreen: anyway I would say this whole conversation about good vs evil is off topic.
-
http://ia700402.us.archive.org/10/items/CrimesAndMercies/CrimesAndMercies.pdf
History is written by the victors.
It’s the same reason we have tanks named after that b��t��d Sherman and his army of rapists.
You’re just mad Sherman won :wink:
People from the Northern U.S. (Yankees) always ask me why people are still angry about the Civil War. “That was like 200 years ago, get over it!”
I just ask them, “How would you feel if your country was invaded and occupied?”How dare the north win the war 148 years ago :mrgreen: anyway I would say this whole conversation about good vs evil is off topic.
It wasn’t a country. You are still as integral a part of America as anywhere. Your culture still lives. You don’t need a Country with a history of slavery to have a home. That’s the crap failed states are built on
-
It wasn’t a country. You are still as integral a part of America as anywhere. Your culture still lives. You don’t need a Country with a history of slavery to have a home. That’s the crap failed states are built on
It wasn’t a country
Had a government, capital, flag, president
Country with a history of slavery
U.S. :wink: -
*Country with slavery as a founding goal
Sure it was states rights, but states rights to what? Is it supposed to be a coincidence that y’all seceded after Lincoln (avowed abolitionist) was sworn in. C’mon, Slavery was central to the CSAA country isn’t a country if it can’t get international recognition
As for a Government, even Libya had a government that was pretty functional DURING the revolution. -
See #1.
Sure, the central issue of the war was slavery, I never said I was one of those “state’s rights” delusionists. And yes, slavery was horrible.
But we have the benefit of hindsight and modern perspective. Then, it was not only accepted and normal, it was the central pillar of the South’s economy.
And don’t even get me started on Lincoln. He’s been mythologized into some sort of proto-MLK. He wasn’t. He was a racist who used the Emancipation Proclamation as a political tool to cause unrest in areas where he didn’t even have jurisdiction, all while leaving slavery fully intact in areas where he did.
Anyway, I agree with DarthShizNit that this thread has gone a little off topic, mostly due to my ranting. I apologize.
-
See #1.
Sure, the central issue of the war was slavery, I never said I was one of those “state’s rights” delusionists. And yes, slavery was horrible.
But we have the benefit of hindsight and modern perspective. Then, it was not only accepted and normal, it was the central pillar of the South’s economy.
And don’t even get me started on Lincoln. He’s been mythologized into some sort of proto-MLK. He wasn’t. He was a racist who used the Emancipation Proclamation as a political tool to cause unrest in areas where he didn’t even have jurisdiction, all while leaving slavery fully intact in areas where he did.
Anyway, I agree with DarthShizNit that this thread has gone a little off topic, mostly due to my ranting. I apologize.
I’ll Stop, after this post.
Point number 1 is above all, a Symantec
Number 2 could as well be attributed to political lies
Number 4. Really? You mean the 13th amendment was simply passed without his say?
All that being said. Who cares about proto-MLK? He is a great president because he believed in unity, and carried the nation through our darkest hour. In any case Jefferson, Jackson, Washington, and Roosevelt #1 were all twice the president he was. Most of the others genuinely sucked. Sorry, Your playtest looks like its going well. Thank you for sharing! -
Off topic, stay on topic…
-
How was the Confederacy not a country? It SECEDED from the Union, and in case you don’t know what secede means here’s a definition- verb (used without object), se·ced·ed, se·ced·ing.
to withdraw formally from an alliance, federation, or association, as from a political union, a religious organization, etc.
They left from the Union and created a new nation, regardless of what the Northern historians say this is what happened, and to address the issue of slavery, the war wasn’t caused because the south wanted to keep slavery, why would you as a southern soldier risk your life for something you didn’t have? And most people in the south didn’t own slaves. The actual reasons are the high tariffs implemented by the federal government, they were around 15% before 1860 and after they rose to 37%, a growing federal government that wished to take all power away from the states, and if slavery had anything to do with it it was because it was unconstitutional for the government to do anything to prohibit slavery, while I do believe slavery was wrong and should have been abolished much earlier I don’t believe that the government should have the power to take away such a right, believe what you may but these are the true reasons for the War of Northern Agression. -
Wrong thread folks. Start another in Gen. Discussion
-
So… any actual news on how the test play is going/went?
Suggested Topics
