Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

I know this is quite the political thread, but I'm hoping I might get a few decent opinions on it before it gets closed. I'm sorry if anybody is offended by what I'm going to say.

The Holocaust, the period of time Hitler kept killing jews wherever he could get his hands on them, is probably, IMHO, one of the worlds greatest history manipulations, so to speak.

What I'm trying to say is that the jews have used the 'holocaust' as an excuse for obtaining countless advantages after WW2, despite it not being something out of the ordinary.

They are saying the 'holocaust' was a period of time when milions of jews died and the entire jewish nation was but wiped out..

That is not in the least true. The jews that were killed by hitler, in the camps or otherwise, are not even 10% of the victims of WW2 !

They have stated inhumane numbers of people (jews) dead in different countries all over europe in order to obtain political advantages as the 'victims', despite proven numbers not beeing anywhere close..

More recently we are supposed to study the damn thing (the 'holocaust') in school, despite the fact we are not jewish.

Add to this the fact that they used the holocaust to obtain modern Israel (formerly known as Palestina). People all over the world are condemning the arabs there for their attacks on jews... how would you feel if suddenly u'r country wouldn't be your's anymore ?

They say, well the jews were a single nation and they suffered so many casualties...but look at the russians...millions dead...or even the allies..

They say, they were killed horribly in the gas chambers... honestly now, I think it's worse to die because u've just had u'r guts spilled by a 50 calibre MG....

This is my opinion, please do not bash it, or post silly stuff...
Please keep this clean and only reply if u plan to do so in a civilized manner... thank you!

Geez, Rusky, you are on exceptionally dodgy ground here.

Can you explain the logic behind this:

"More recently we are supposed to study the damn thing (the 'holocaust') in school, despite the fact we are not jewish."

I am worried by the implication that you should only study something like that if you are Jewish- why do you think that? Even removing all humanity from the matter, which is not a good idea, it is a major piece of 20th century European history, much of which happened pretty close to you! Why not study it?

Neah, I'm saying they're planning on introducing the holocaust as a distinct case study...that is apart from the WW2 history....in more detail so to speak.. I disagree with that...

I'm ok with learning what it was and what happened, as part of history, but not to learn it separatly, as if it's just as important.

But you think if you were Jewish it WOULD be worth all that? I do not understand that; I believe history like that has an importance outside your own culture.

I also disapprove of your use of the word 'they', lumping all Jews into one group. That is how anti-Semitism started in the first place.

You also imply that 'they' used emotional blackmail to gain Israel. Did it occur to you that the UN simply thought it was the most constructive thing to do at the time, even though subsequent history can question that?

U may be right here, but I have my doubts..



I'm not trying to sound anti-semite, but how would u suggest I say it ?

When I talk about americans,romanians, whatever I say they, is that antisemitism ?

No. It's only that if we're talking about black peolpe, jews or other previously dicriminated against people..



I already stated, we're already learning about this, so I do not have ANY problem to do so.. but it's mostly their history, so I don't see why we should have another class, apart from the history one to deal 'exclusivly' with their history, just in greater detail.

I'm trying to say, they're acting like the holocaust was and event of world importance, I believe it was WW2 on the whole that was such, not the suffering of a particular people...so many have suffered it's not just to say some have suffered more and deserve compensation.

I kind of agree with some of it , that the Holocaust should be part of the history of ww II not a separate topic

If you told me 'all Americans did this' then yes, I would have an issue with it. Your use of the term 'they' seems to indicate that Jews act as one homogonous entity. When we say 'America' did this or that we mean the American authorities, but that's not possible when referring to race.

The fact is, no 'they' did anything. Nor do I see an event like the Holocaust (though that is a term invented in the US decades after the event) as 'their' history. It's everyone's history! In the same way as, to use your example, we all learn about the Russian front as well.

It is not impossible to argue that too much attention is paid to all this. Mind you, the same could be said about World War II in general. But I do not think it is appropriate to say it is something only important for some people and not others.

The anti-semitism thing asside..

We do, but we do so in history classes as part of WW2 history, not separatley.

This suggests it is considered MORE important than anything else in the war..

Another thing that bugs me is that they(The united jewish federation or whatever they are called, it is they that I refer to as 'they') have repeatedly blamed Romania for having aided the nazis in the killing of over 1 milion jews...which is so untrue...there were never that many bodies and/or records found...

it aint more important than other events of WW II

idd..

So why do you think this is being done? Do you think it is some shadowy Jewish agenda? Do you think it is the educational authorities pandering to a Jewish lobby?

Perhaps it is because studying the Holocaust as a seperate subject makes it easier to understand and pulls in people for whom studying the war as a whole does not interest.

There are many sections of World War II that could deserve seperate study on their own. That is not because they are more important, but because they are more complex. I would have no objection in general to any of them being taught so. So why the Holocaust in particular?

Same reason WWII is studied in such detail when there are equally important historical events that the average schoolboy knows nothing else- the Holocaust is simply a very visible and obvious piece of history, and so is always going to be in the front running for study, and for people to be interested in it.

As a matter of fact I do...don't laugh...

I just find it discriminating that, of all the people that have suffered in the war, we get to study about one in particular.

Do you have any evidence of the first?

You could not possibly study them all. So why NOT the victims of the concentration camps? It is the most obvious to study and hence in a basic education system the most likely to be taught.

Alas, I cannot, it is just a hunch and ofc it'll not be taken into consideration....

I find it weird that we have to study the victims of the concentration camps in the first place (what is there to teach anyway ? the sick torments they have undergone ?), let alone the fact that we're ONLY learning about the jews...

It is a mistake for people to be taught that Jews were his only victim, for sure. But it cannot be denied that they are the central point of any such experience.

I agree with the first part, and the part about how the Jews use the holocaust and their past "persection" by various nations as an excuse to take unnecessary pieces of land in the Middle East. However, I'm not going to argue about how many were killed because I honestly don't know.

I, too, find it a little odd that the Jews in Israel seem to demand "special treatment" because of the suffering of the German Jews. I don't know if you've ever read "To Kill a Mockingbird," but it talks about how the girl's schoolteacher (this takes place in the late '30's) is telling them all about all the horrible things that are being done to the Jews in Germany, which are, as it so happens, many of the same things that are being done to the blacks right under their own noses.

That is what I'm trying to say...if u teach history at least do it in a thorough manner, not by letting out what u deem is 'unnecesary' (and yes by 'u' I eman the secret jewish society )

I agree DR..

it wasnt German Jews, it was Jews in general regardless nationality

Again... look, for a start, the reaon they have land in the Middle East is because the UN gave it to them, THAT is how it is justified! One way or another, it is their country now, as determined by the world community at the time.

Secondly, nothing that was happening to the Blacks in the 30s- good though that book was in pointing out double standards- in any way compares to the events of the Holocaust. And why have you put persecution in quote marks?

Yes, but in the 30s, the relevant issue as regard the Nazis was in Germany.

Well actually that's not true, if you look at, for example, Poland, but in the context of the book it was only the Germans that were being talked about at the time.

But the UN gave it to them for a reason..

In the begining it was in germany but it spread to other countries around Europe so it wasnt only German jew who felt the heat. And after the German occupied countries the jews of that nation suffered the same fate that the jews had done in Germany years prior tp them

Yes, but that's not the point, the point is that people make out it is not justified to hang onto Israel on religious grounds. But that is irrelevant- it is there on solid political grounds.

That is not the point, Finti. In the 30s, it was only the Germans that other people were TALKING about, so in the book- set in the 30s- it would only be the Germans who were being alluded to. Who it was ACTUALLY happening to isn't relevant.

And those solid political grounds are ?

That the UN gave it to them, of course! They have a mandate from the very global authority responsible for handling such mandates. So whatever religious reasons went towards that are no longer relevant to the fact that their ownership of Israel is legally confirmed and set as solidly as any other nation.

oh the book, didnt read the post thoroughly enough sorry for that

Rusky, what do your school teach you of Romanias role of the WW II

Because, and correct me if I'm wrong, most of the Israelis aren't from Germany and never went through the Holocaust...

And the thing about Israel... Just because the UN gave it to them doesn't make it right for them to take it from the Palestinians--it belongs to the Palestinians, and has for thousands of years. Just because the Israelis believe it's The Promised Land (and maybe it is) doesn't mean it's alright for them to say "Ok, move over guys, we're moving in here". Plus, I don't see why they keep wanting to take more land... And furthermore, I see no reason why the Palestinians have to move off the land in order for them to live there...

Not much really...mostly what happened from our point of view ofc, not to forget those 'glorious battles'

It's a long story, sure u want to hear it ?

Ush, I don't know...the UN must've had a reason for doing that..

jews that went through holocaust were from all over Europe, a lot of Israelis today are direct descendant to those jews.

idd...and the weird thing is, before the un named the land israel, there still were jews there and they used to live in peace with the palestinians..

Well, you may disagree it is right, that is another debate, but that the UN gave it to them means they DO have the right to keep it- end of story, that is the law and the voice of the civilised world at a time when it spoke with a clear voice. Like I say, that decision by the UN may have been questionable- but it was also irrevocable. And it was the UN that took it from the Palestinians anyway.

And you probably should have put 'their' rather than 'persecution' in quotes, then. To put persecution in quotes implies there might not have been any.

Yes, because as I said, they saw it as the most fair and constructive solution to the problem.

what a hornets nest they created

As I said WD this is my opinion, feel free to disagree. I find it unfair to see that some peolpe suggest they were the ones who suffered most in a world-wide conflict...

And that problem being Ush ? That the jews had no land ? They had no land for hundreds of years and no-one ever complained..

Err, well, yes they DID, actually! I dunno where you got that idea from; the Jewish situation occupied much of early 20th century politics.

There were countless millions of refugees with no home to go to and the Allies could not look after them forever. Israel was the proposed and accepted solution.

We could spend the rest of time debating how that issue came about; from the British occupation of Palestine and the Jewish lobby in the US, but that won't help. It has already been done- they were given the legal mandate to that land.

Then I am missinformed...where did the jews reside prior to their relocation ?

I was idd not aware of this political interest in the jews in the 20th century..

The area once were jewish land

I edited my first post, but I was highly offended by your opinon. I cannot post my comments right now, because my emotions are too strong. I cannot have normal discussion in my current state of mind.

Maybe some other time I will post my opinions in a rational matter.

It was everywhere! They existed everywhere but had no home of their own, having been driven from it in history. There were Catholic states, Anglican states, Muslim, Hindu, Shinto, Buddhist states... but no Jewish state and many people thought there should be one- not least, of course, the majority of Jews themselves.

Certainly a lot of states wanted to deal with their own Jewish 'problem'; for a long time the idea of sending them all to Madagascar was mooted (this was used as a cover by the Germans for a long time).

After the Second World War when even their homes in their current countries had been destroyed, and they HAD to go somewhere but there seemed to be nowhere for them to go, the idea of the Jewish state was forced onto the top of the Agenda, and after dealing with Germany's future was the number one priority of issues settled after WWII.

I know, but AFAIK that was quite sooome time ago...my 'hunreds of years' expresion would then be corect..

There fore there was no actual jewish state, that was what I was saying.. and I am aware that some very influential jews wanted one...so the UN gave them one.

WD thank you for acting civilized.

I have to side with USH on the use of the word "they". This "us" vs. "them" is the root-cause of nationalistic idiocy, fanatacism and so on and so forth. I'm cofident not ALL Isralies have said what you claim. So you either find some references or pin-point the "they" you're referring to!

But Jews were not the only ones being killed in the nazi-camps. The first groups to be imprisoned that way were political opponenst (socialists and communists), romanis and other groups deemed "dangerous." While I DO think it is important to teach people about this crime against humanity, the nazi holocaust was not solely targeted at Jews - and this misconception bothers me. The word holocaust has almost become synonymous with "mass-slaughter of Jews", but what about the atrocities in Burundi/Rwanda and ex-jugoslavia (to mention a few)?


But, Rusky: Even supposing the school-board establishes a special holocaust against the Jews class. THAT would've then been done by the school-boad and not the Jews.

Here..





This is eactly what's bugging me..



I've heard about it in more countries so it sounds weird they all just suddenly decided this is good for kids...

Just to clear something out I didn't bash you or anything like that in my first post. Please don't think I use improper language in the forum. Just a shocking reaction that was all.




On what do you base this on? How have the Jews have use the excuse to obtaing advantages from post WWII?

It has been used to bash certain countries, that I can guarantee..
It has been used to obtain Israel, that I can guarantee too..

I did not consider what u said bashing WD..it's ok if u think what I said is wrong, and I'm sorry it has ofended u..

ok, come with it then

You make getting Israel sound like being part of a vast conspiracy- rather than the only option considered practical for millions of people without a home.

They ALL had homes... they were citizens of the countries they lived in...they lived like that for centuries why the sudden change ?

It is the reason behind the UN's decision, plain and simple..
The UN might have debated this for much longer had the holocaust not been an issue..

What ignorance is this?

The Germans and their supporters had destroyed their homes! There were MILLIONS homeless!

Need I remind u that so were the homes of milions of other people ? What about them ? Who gave them the money to rebuild their homes ?

They had homelands wheree they were welcome to go home to. The Jewish refugees did not. You really cannot equivocate the two. The efforts of the Germans actually destroyed the very concept of the old Jewish 'homelands'.

Seriously, if it was as simple as just being able to put everything back where it was- the UN would have done that.

Thank you, actually I should apologize more. I did over reacted to your comments. Your opinion is only yours, and I should have respected that.



From what I understand it was Britain idea. The British tried to work out an agreement acceptable to both Arabs and Jews, but their insistence on the former's approval guaranteed failure. They subsequently turned the issue over to the UN in February 1947. Then of course the UN made the proposal of the lands that the Jews should relocated to. The Jews of were not satisfied with the small territory allotted to them by the Commission, nor were they happy that Jerusalem was severed from the Jewish State; nevertheless, they welcomed the compromise. The Arabs rejected the UNSCOP's recommendations. The British left and both sides started to fight each other. Thus war broke again between the Jews and Arabs.

Israel of course received support by the US. The Arabs got support from Syria, Egypt, Saudi Arabia (I'm not too sure who the Arabs allies were correct me if I'm wrong). It came down to politics and land in the end, so I don't think the Jewish people or the Arabs are resposible for the wars and the recent violence in the Middle East.

It was not specifically a Brirish idea but it was an idea we supported and it was kinda what we had in mind when we asked the UN to take over.

Yeah I'm not saying it was a bad idea. Back then it seem to be the right idea. No one could have predicted the outcome of the Jewish relocation.

OFC WD, I never had anything with the jewish people... more so with their leaders/representatives...



Please explain to me this. Say a french person who lived in a village and had a french jewish neighbour, and they both lost their homes, but they both survived the war. Why would the french person be able to move to another village and the jewish french not so ?

Because the French person was going back to France and his countrymen. The surviving Jews had no such homely welcome anywhere. They had all been moved out of their homes into ghettos already, before being moved to camps, and in most cases the populace hated them anyway.

It was not feasible.

Ok then...point taken.... but what about the location ? U can't argue it was definitley based on religious history...

It was meant to be a place that felt culturally theirs and was practical to do so; the failure was on the second point.

I wonder why they don't compromise today ? Perhaps they could divide it between them so that they would stop fighting every chance they get..

They partitioned it at the time- why would it work any better now?

Think about this rusky....the relocation made sense. Can you imagine if the German Government had to pay back for all that destruction to the Jews??? They were broke, their leaders executed in the Nurenberg (sp?) trials, their image ruin. No way the Germans could have pay back to the Jewish for the destruction of their houses, and their lands.

To penalize the Germans for the causes of WWII would been the same mistake as in WWI. Back in WWI the Germans were heavy penalize for the causes of the war. All the nations blame Germany for the war, and thus the Nazi party blame it all on the Jews.

Yes..it prolly wouldn't Ush...especially not now with all the accumulated hatred..

U'r right WD, it just seems to me that it was a rather rushed decision in the first place....It should have been pretty clear another war would eventually break out if u deprive a people of it's land without their permission..which ofc they were never going to give..

Perhaps it was idd, a solution...

Well...thank you all for this conversation, it has been very interesting and I have learned a lot. I'm also glad we've proven that quite a touchy subject, can be discused in a civilized manner by people with opposing views. I can only hope that future subjects will be treated with in the same manner by participants. Thank you again !

This topic is too political.

Sorry, but closing.