5/29/2013 12:02pm, #41
- Join Date
- May 2011
you have much more macabre cases..Holocaust. Germans were experts at stumping out heroic acts...
Many cases of a few armed soldiers slowly starving to death hundreds of prisoners.
5/29/2013 12:07pm, #42
- Join Date
- May 2011
5/29/2013 12:11pm, #43
5/29/2013 12:20pm, #44
5/29/2013 12:47pm, #45
W.Rabbit, You're kinda joking right?
To answer your question, yes Nazis do have something to do in this thread, because they were good at stomping out heroics (i.e. destroy morale) of the people they had subjugated/kept under control in their concentration camps. The fact they could not defend against an organized offensive or stop a remarkable but isolated incident of mass escape comes nowhere near disproving that the Nazis were good at stomping out heroics. Actually, any organized military will be pretty good at stomping out heroics in any sort of detention setting.
And you knew damn well what Erezb meant.
5/29/2013 1:17pm, #46
5/29/2013 1:18pm, #47
Ask yourselves this:
The cunts who killed the soldier... They stood fast, clearly with secondary intent. It took the Police roughly 20 minutes to respond with armed personnel.
Literally as soon as the response car arrived, the pair rushed toward the police, one of the pair dropping a weapon as he did so.
What was their intent ? To force the police into killing them or... COULD it have been to detonate a bomb as a secondary act and in doing so achieving martyrdom.
Thankfully the latter wasn't the case however the Police didn't know that. I fail to understand why the Police didn't shoot to kill under the circumstances.
I realise the British Police do not routinely carry weapons, I also realise the Police don't routinely (thankfully) deal with this overt level of criminal activity however; I think they were fucking lucky in this instance because the tactics used in the London killing is quite typical of those who clearly have secondary intentions - often involving the ending of their own lives however, it is fucking rare that this process only involves themselves and not others, when clearly that opportunity existed for the killers.
This could have ended very differently and with mass casualties."To sin by silence when one should protest makes cowards out of men".
5/29/2013 1:22pm, #48
If the Nazis were so good at it, they'd still be around. The Nazi's reign of terror lasted barely a decade and ultimately failed because of lots and lots of tiny, individual heroic acts.
Ultimately there is no reason to Godwin this thread. So I ask that we not, for the sake of the dead veteran, engage in that sort of internet stierscheiße.
I will promise not to question the bravery of the shocked onlookers of terrorist acts on public streets, if you all promise to not bring up the fucking Nazis.
Last edited by W. Rabbit; 5/29/2013 1:30pm at .
5/29/2013 3:08pm, #49
We're talking about something very specific, and you take something that something entirely different and try to make arguments about it. I think you're going on this side-argument because you hate the nazis and don't want to credit them with anything, but don't make up bad arguments to justify your disposition. We all hate the nazis as much as you do. We aren't really crediting them with anything, because its something that any organized group of people who use force, for good or bad, knows how to do.
I don't think any one of us are in disagreement that it would have been nice if someone stepped up and tried something. The only thing we apparently disagree with, is that you think its unreasonable for unarmed but outnumbering people to try something about it. It sounds like you don't really understand the psychology of the whole thing.
Theoretically, people who outnumber a group of adversaries CAN emerge victorious. They need to be moving in a unit with cohesion, and be coordinated. That requires training and command. And they all need to have high morale, and be willing to be the first guy and first one probably to die. Nazis, US government, KGB, Mi6, local PDs, Terrorists, or whatever, know this and do things to remove as much as these elements so that you can control a larger number of people with fewer resources.
Do you think a random group of unarmed bypassers really have any of those elements? Even close to it? Do you think if one guy stepped up, it would have made a difference? Because if I were one of these terrorists, I'd have completely fucked up the first guy that tried something in the most horrible way I was willing to do it in, and make an example out of it. Anyone else care to try? You need to watch more 1980's action movie villians.
In other words, STFU about it and stop being sarcastic and condescending. I don't think you know anything about the subject. Nor much about the human mind in face of armed violence.
5/29/2013 3:26pm, #50