Is neo con America dumber than the Nazis?

[icymist]

I myself am not sure how to answer this. I mean, we, as citizens of neo con America, invaded and occupied Iraq. This was a, mostly, defenselessly country and it only took a few, well maybe, a couple of weeks. Now Germany, not now Germany, but of the early forties would invade a country, say France, and there would be no insurgency! In fact, except for a few fighting for the underground, the resistance was minimal. Iraq is different in as our forces seem to allow those who want to fight against the US from different countries. This could go on for a long time. This is my opinion. What do you think?

[havocmom]

1. Definitely more willfully ignorant. The people in Nazi Germany did not

have access to info like Americans today have. Yes, yes, I know the media is owned by the puppet masters, but relying solely on it for news when so much proves this to be foolish IS a willful act to avoid the truth.

Americans today just don't have anyone to blame but themselves. They allow the destruction of our democratic processes by not being a part of them.

[Dez]

4. Life is too easy for Americans

They just want to go shopping, go out to eat, go see a movie.. anything but become aware of what is really happening in this country. Part of my own family is like this, typical Americans .. it's really a challenge to have an intelligent conversation with them.

[icymist]

5. Did Nazi germany really have acess to free media....

or were they manipulaped by propaganda? Hmmm. I really don't know how to answer this. Bill O'Riely would say that 'news' is nothing more than BS from the left wing. Hmmm. I really don't know how to answer this.

[havocmom]

7. Didn't say they had access to media, said they DID NOT have it.

Said Americans have more access to info than the Germans had back then.

And yes, we have propaganda here now, but we also have access to ways around it. Americans are just too blase` to protect their own nation from enemies of the domestic variety.

"Go shopping" is not a good defense against tyranny.

[icymist]

10. Still though, the Nazis really knew how to handle a country....

once it was under their control!?! Our, neo-con country don't seem able to do that! What's the matter here?

[forgethell]

14. So, then, am I mistaken

in understanding that you want us to use the Nazis as our model? This seems a little, well, over the edge to me, but perhaps I am not quite seeing your point??

[icymist]

15. My 'point' is merely to compare the Nazis to our crazed situation...

in the present. A lot of my friends are comparing the neo-cons to the Nazis. In this thread I'm playing devil's advocate in taking 'both positions'. Personally, I really wish I didn't have to compare our current government to the Nazis, but, that's what I've got to work with. Oh well!

[forgethell]

16. Yes, well,

bad as they are, the current administration has a long way to go before they can legitimately be compared to Nazis. As you will no doubt realize if they, or nay body else, ever goes that far.

[icymist]

18. True. Shall we say, real true.

The current administration is lacking in, shall we say, brains for starters? They move upon the same paths as the Nazis, but fail to plan ahead (as the Nazis did) when occupying another country.

[Lone Pawn]

23. The State Department had brains.

The DoD believed that the State Department didn't really know what it was talking about, and that fears of a resistance were overhyped. All the exiles told them that there wouldn't be a resistance. The exiles, of course, didn't know anything compared to the State Department experts. But the DoD didn't listen. Hubris was the culprit.

[icymist]

26. Are the 'exiles' you're referring to are the ones favored by this...

current administration? (excuse my spelling) Challabi? And the State Department claiming accuracy upon a collage paper? Frankly, the State Department doesn't have that much sway anymore (in the rest of the world), I know that this administration don't care, but us 'Americans' do care. Please tell.

on edit for really bad spelling, and I don't mean forgien names either!

[Lone Pawn]

28. A few. Chalabi was one of them.

And you can discount either the State Department's findings in a $5 million study as a 'college paper' or claim that they don't have sway in the rest of the world, but both points are misguided and irrelevant to the fact that the US Government *did* know that an insurgency was coming, but chose to follow what political exiles told them instead.

http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/special_packages/iraq/7051031.htm

[icymist]

36. So proves my point. The Nazis were smarter.

(n/t)

[Lone Pawn]

42. YOU IGNORE THE FUCKING FREE FRENCH RESISTANCE!

n/t, by the way.

[forgethell]

49. The only possible way to

interpret your remarks is that being a genocidal maniac, a murdering thug, a racist pig, is smarter than being a non-murdering, non-racist, non-genocidal American.

I can see nothing in your comments but a validation of the Nazi style of war, and possibly other things. You are advocating that we slaughter Iraqis like cattle. This is the only way possible to interpret your remarks IMO.

Correct me if I'm wrong. But give me a reason to believe you know what you're talking about.

[deadcenter]

31. i read an article

written by a retired colonel where he'd interviewed one of the general's that planned the invasion. the professionals that planned the invasion original estimate was 250,000 to invade and occupy with minimal disruption by insurgents. I don't recall the professionals being arrogant enough to think that there would be no insurgent movement. Rumsfeld nickeled and dimed the number down to what he wanted, not the professionals that wrote the original plan, so while the SecDef is 100% responsible, I'd not paint the DoD with that broad brush. Hubris definitely, but all Rumsfeld's.

deadcenter

[icymist]

32. Very Interesting. Do you have a link?

Is there a link to that article? I'd like to read it.

[deadcenter]

39. couldn't find the link but,

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0414-02.htm

this one sums it up pretty well,

</snip>
But the critique reflects frustration among some active-duty and retired officers about how Rumsfeld and his top advisers seized control of planning for and execution of the invasion and occupation. Indeed, Echevarria said the reaction to his paper from within the Army "has been pretty positive."

Many officers still are rankled by the treatment of former Army Chief of Staff Gen. Eric Shinseki, who last spring was sharply criticized in public by Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz for suggesting the occupation would require significantly more troops than the initial war. At Rumsfeld's direction, the number was whittled back, with Rumsfeld and other senior officials arguing that "shock and awe" would collapse any opposition and the Iraqi people, as Vice President Dick Cheney said in a March 16, 2003 interview on NBC's "Meet the Press," would greet U.S. troops "as liberators."
</end snip>

deadcenter

[forgethell]

25. I don't think

that their motivations are as bad as the Nazis. Regardless of their mistakes, and they are numerous indeed, I think they were striving for the security of the American people, not aggression and conquest.

And, yep, those dumb ol' neo-cons and redneck peckerwood RW Christians still managed to beat us pretty badly in the last election. Either that or the pulled off the slickest felony theft of an election ever!!! So maybe we aren't as smart as all that??

As long as we fail to understand that conservatives are as intelligent, smart, and clever as we are, we will continually underestimate them and get our heads handed to us come election time. One way or another.

As long as we continue to think that their motivations are simply evil rather than the same as ours, i.e., trying to advance their view of a better world, we will continue to misjudge their actions and their reactions to current events. We will continue to lose.

We need some serious thinkers who can look at both sides without the blinders of ideology to determine a course of action for the Democratic party and the progressive movement. What it is, I don't pretend to know. I've got ideas, of course, but I think various viewpoints should be tested in free debate. Right here on DU. Without the name-calling and flaming that so frequently accompanies the voicing of a non-PC opinion.

Whatever it is, our ideas, our candidates, our organization, or the fact that the Republicans can cheat better than we can, the Democratic party is in serious trouble. Only free and serious inquiry will be able to diagnose and correct the problem, whatever it is, or they are.

[icymist]

8. There is a huge media access.

I believe most Americans to be lazy here. It does not cost much to purchase a good short wave radio receiver. (I bought one for under sixty dollars) There are many news broadcasts in english...DW news, BBC...etc... Americans don't have anyone to blame but themselves because they're lazy. They've grown too comfortable.

[Lone Pawn]

19. The Internet is cheaper and more effective.

I don't have a shortwave. I don't want one.

[Cleita]

34. The average Germans had the options of shortwave radio too

if they wanted to exercise it, and any number of underground journals. Also, unlike the Soviet Union, Germans were free to leave Germany and travel, which would have exposed them to other ideas.
But like the average American, they were too busy putting potatoes and bread on the table to delve deeper into what was going on.
Hitler knew this too. As long as Germans had jobs and reasonably comfortable circumstances they were willing to ignore the elephants rampaging through the streets.

Also, under the Nazis, even though he provided jobs, the wages were lower, the hours longer and the working conditions not always pleasant, but the average German workers who had been under dire economic pressure from the Weimar Republic, were just happy to be back working, even if it was for less and even with more government intrusion in every aspect of their lives.

[Panda1]

9. I like that..."more willfully"...it's true.

The sheep don't WANT to know.
If they did, the information is all here on the net.

Ignorance is bliss...as long as the SUV starts up and they can still buy "stuff" on their credit cards they are indeed willfully ignoring the facts.

[Bluebear]

41. "Willifully ignorant" is a gem

and exactly true.

[Jensen]

2. In ONE word.......

Yes!!!!!!

[forgethell]

3. The Nazis

had a much brisker way with 'resistance' than the Americans do. Helps to keep it at a minimum.

[icymist]

6. How come our occupation doesn't have such a 'brisker' way with...

resistance? Hey, like I mean our boys are being shot up! We took the country,....wyh the H**l don't we just TAKE the whole country? It'll save a whole he*l of a lot of American lives!??

[forgethell]

13. I guess because

we are not Nazis and have a respect even for brown-skinned lives. Why do you think not?

[Lone Pawn]

20. Because doing so, while potentially calming the situation,

would foster massive anti-American sentiment.

Which doesn't mean shit if you're like the Nazis and installing a puppet dictatorship, but really isn't what you want to do if you're going to be installing a representitive democracy. Because then, as soon as the troops leave, a hardline anti-American governement will immediately be voted in, and then things are worse than before the invasion.

[Frederik]

11. Yes and no

There was an insurgency in France! It was called the Maquis. It was small at first but grew steadily. There was also a significant, parallel Communist insurgency (in which, for instance, Jean-Paul Sartre fought). They had their Allawi too (Alain Pétain).

[icymist]

12. This insurgency in France during WWII was not that big, at first.

Nothing like we're experiencing now in Iraq. The France resistance grew from a true patriotic spirit while this insurgency grows from what? a fundamentalist religious spirit?

[Lone Pawn]

21. That's just not true.

The Free French *started* at about the level that our insurgency was a year into this shindig, and grew faster than ours is growing.

And the Iraqi resistances frow from several spirits, depending on who you're looking at. Some have a patriotic spirit. Some have a religious fervor. Some have tribal/factional/ethnic alignments. Some just want revenge. Some are paid.

[Lone Pawn]

17. No, we're not. And your point is outright wrong. Free French?

1. France and Iraq are extremely different situations. There is no French concept of Jihad.

2. Even so, there was a French insurgency. There was a hell of a French insurgency. By the end of the war, 400,000 people were part of it. That rather makes the 20,000 we're fighting look small-time by comparison.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_French_Forces

3. Finally, the word is neoconservative, shortened to neocon.

[icymist]

22. No. Not really. The big difference is that the Nazis had brains....

The neo-cons do not. Would the Nazis let such a big force into their occupied territory as they could 'join' or force a resistance? I say no. The Nazis were much smarter than the neo-cons.

[Lone Pawn]

24. So the Nazis are smarter than the Neocons, because

the Nazis ended up with a resistance 20 times the size of the neocons'? O...kay...you'll have to explain that one to me...

And the Neocons have different goals. Read my other posts.

[forgethell]

27. No brains??

No doubt that's why Bush is President and Kerry is washed-up. If we keep underestimating the Republicans, they will continue to beat the crap out of us, every election. And we will deserve it.

[deadcenter]

29. a bit more history

you need to remember, the Nazis were in France and most of the other European countries long before they invaded. They'd hang around and make themselves conspicuous so that people would get used to having them around, so that when they did invade the people were used to having them around and not much had changed between the time before and the time after the surrender.

Access to firearms. The insurgents have virtually unlimited access to firearms from small arms to heavy weapons. Most of the resistance fighters in Europe had virtually no access to firearms other than fowling pieces (think of a very large shotgun for hunting birds). In areas where the resistance had access to military grade weapons, resistance was determined. Look at the Warsaw getto for an example. It took the use of poison gas and virtually burning the getto to the ground for the Nazis to call it a victory.

Access to brutality. The Nazis thought nothing of summarily executing anyone, with or without cause. The abuses of Abu Graid notwithstanding, I'd like to think our troops are better than that.

deadcenter

[Lone Pawn]

30. Not to mention that the French did have a resistance... nt

[icymist]

38. One BIG difference to be noted here....

Nazis have 'hung around' France long before they invaded her. France is a neighboring country of Germany and, no doubt, German's had learned to 'live like the French'. I doubt that anything came close preceding the invasion of Iraq, or any other Arabic country upon the drawing-board!

[Lone Pawn]

43. And one BIGGER difference you REFUSE TO ADDRESS:

The Free French Forces! You don't admit that the Nazis faced a MUCH bigger resistance, and you don't address the dangers of using indiscriminate force when attempting to forge a friendly democracy!

[Cleita]

33. From what I read, the Nazis tapped into

the bigotry of rural German people, who were suspicious of anyone outside their villages. The Junker or German landowners used this suspicion to keep the peasants in a state of semi-feudalism. The fears of working class Germans of their jobs being taken by Jews and communists were taken advantage of. Oh, yes and then there was the Reichstag fire that put the fear of terrorist attacks by foreigners in their heads.

The invasions of neighboring countries were set up with staged events of Germans being attacked at the borders and they lied about it very well. WMD anyone? Constant war kept the economy rolling with jobs, not to mention the distraction of the German people fighting an enemy that if they didn't get them first, they would come and take what belonged to Germany and Germans.

It sounds pretty familiar to what is going on here in the USA today, doesn't it? The media was totally taken over by the Nazis and propaganda was printed in journals and newspapers, as well as aired over the radio so that the average German became less and less informed except with what the Nazis wanted them to believe.

[icymist]

35. To put your first paragraph in 'other words'....

The bigotry of rural (and city dwelling) American people, who were suspicious of anyone outside of their country (or way of thinking and sexual orientation) The corporate landowners and corporate owners of all jobs big and small used this suspicion to keep all the neo-peasants in a state of semi-peasantry. The fears of working-class Americans of their jobs being taken away by gays and Imigrants, and oh yes,then there was the eternal fire threatened by the Homeland Defense Secretary.

Close enough for a comparison?

[Cleita]

37. Close enough. n/t

Some things are written in human nature. This is why we should learn from history and not repeat it.

[Lone Pawn]

44. Self-delete

[chlamor]

40. Don't focus

on intelligence or lack thereof. Focus on the viciousness.

[Lone Pawn]

45. Please address the French Resistance.

Since you're obviously aware of the Free French Forces, there's a wiki link somewhere above. You have absolutely no point unless you can explain how a French resistance of 400,000 is insignificant compared to an Iraqi resistance of 20,000.

[Just Me]

46. Assuming you are talking about the American people being manipulated,

it's not at all a question about intelligence but rather a question about trust and pride, IMHO. Our people NEED to believe that they are "good" and they NEED to TRUST that the neoCONs (or any leadership for that matter)are performing consistent with our fundamental values.

Of course, the neoCONs are betraying the loyality and trust of the American people,....every single day. The neoCONs believe it's okay to mislead,...even in a so-called democracy.

[leftofthedial]

47. far dumber

[Lone Pawn]

48. What reason do you have for that?

The neocons have managed to stay in full power without having to DECLARE a dictatorship. That takes intelligence.

[forgethell]

50. Exactly, and

they will continue to stay in power as long as we continue to underestimate them. The constant comparisons to nazis wear a little thin, too.

[leftofthedial]

51. the question was about neocon America

a very small group of neocons are controlling a large number of citizens (neocon America).

The large number of those who are the neocon minions are far dumber than Germans in the 20s and 30s. Not even close. Murkans are aggressively ignorant and the more of them I talk to, the more I realize they are also not very bright.