• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

If

If it was Nazi Germany all over again, America should

  • Butt in

    Votes: 36 73.5%
  • Butt out

    Votes: 4 8.2%
  • Specifically ......

    Votes: 6 12.2%
  • No clue

    Votes: 3 6.1%

  • Total voters
    49

BDBoop

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 17, 2010
Messages
9,800
Reaction score
2,719
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Other
If events were unfolding in a foreign land exactly as they unfolded in Nazi Germany, what would you recommend?
 
If events were unfolding in a foreign land exactly as they unfolded in Nazi Germany, what would you recommend?

With the same technological sophistication as the nazis or something similar to the technology in a modern european army?
 
With the same technological sophistication as the nazis or something similar to the technology in a modern european army?

What works for you? I'm really just wondering about if we knew a nation was attempting what Hitler attempted, - okay, so given today's technology. Would we attempt to intercede.
 
If events were unfolding in a foreign land exactly as they unfolded in Nazi Germany, what would you recommend?

Assasination. War is for kings and tycoons.
 
Wait until the last second and then save everybody again leaving them unable to balance against us and create a regional hegemon for several decades.
 
What works for you? I'm really just wondering about if we knew a nation was attempting what Hitler attempted, - okay, so given today's technology. Would we attempt to intercede.

I would support a combination of hardware/funding for the guys fighting and cruise missiles/bombing. No troops on the ground unless genocide starts happening.
 
Let it happen. Unless they're doing it to us-- or our allies-- then we don't have a dog in the fight.
 
Let it happen. Unless they're doing it to us-- or our allies-- then we don't have a dog in the fight.

So America should not have interceded in Nazi Germany? There's probably a fair amount of people who feel the same. Does it really boil down to "we don't have a dog in the fight", regardless of what atrocities are taking place?
 
So America should not have interceded in Nazi Germany? There's probably a fair amount of people who feel the same. Does it really boil down to "we don't have a dog in the fight", regardless of what atrocities are taking place?

I disagree. If such a regime were to exist again and steadily gain power, it would be easy to believe that they would one day week to gain dominance over us.
 
Well, Germany destroyed half of Europe and would have surely spread outward had it continued. In modern times we would have to intervene, if only for economic reasons.
 
Why didn't they do that the first go-round?

International law forbids assasination.

Fancy that.

Allied snipers wanted to take advantage of the capabilities of sniper technology, but were forbidden to do so. There's a little scene in Saving Private Ryan that references this, but I've heard the same thing from veterans of the war.

I've heard the reasons for it, but when its all said and done, leaders need to be safe from each other. Dying is for the peasantry. Deciding where and when they die is the job of kings.
 
I like this thread. It's got all manner of thought to follow.
 
We should obviously get involved, but not alone.
 
So America should not have interceded in Nazi Germany?

The British and French were allies, which is the only reason we interceded. Frankly, I think we were on the wrong side in WW2.

Does it really boil down to "we don't have a dog in the fight", regardless of what atrocities are taking place?

As far as I am concerned, yes. If it's not our problem to start with, there's no reason to make it our problem.
 
The British and French were allies, which is the only reason we interceded. Frankly, I think we were on the wrong side in WW2.



As far as I am concerned, yes. If it's not our problem to start with, there's no reason to make it our problem.

So you find no moral obligation to your fellow human beings to stop the merciless slaughter of millions of innocent people?
 
The British and French were allies, which is the only reason we interceded. Frankly, I think we were on the wrong side in WW2.

How so? Is this a mindset where population is 'naturally' reduced by war?
 
So you find no moral obligation to your fellow human beings to stop the merciless slaughter of millions of innocent people?

No. Why would I? Any obligation I might feel toward millions of innocent aliens would be completely overwhelmed by my obligation to the thousands of our own people it would take to stop it.

How so? Is this a mindset where population is 'naturally' reduced by war?

It's a matter of the Soviets being worse, and the ensuing Cold War being an existential threat not only to the United States, but to all of humanity.
 
Last edited:
No. Why would I? Any obligation I might feel toward millions of innocent aliens would be completely overwhelmed by my obligation to the thousands of our own people it would take to stop it.

I guess I just see them as innocent people, and don't consider nationalism when doing that kind of math.
 
If events were unfolding in a foreign land exactly as they unfolded in Nazi Germany, what would you recommend?

If they posed a realistic threat to the US, then yes.
 
I guess I just see them as innocent people, and don't consider nationalism when doing that kind of math.

That is the difference between us. I can't not consider nationalism when considering the outcome of a policy.
 
That is the difference between us. I can't not consider nationalism when considering the outcome of a policy.

I guess so, I just find nationalism causes more harm then good.
 
Back
Top Bottom