Welcome to Gaia! ::

The Herald of Death's avatar

Malevolent Firestarter

3,400 Points
  • Survivor 150
  • PvP 200
  • Risky Lifestyle 100
Michael Noire
N3bu
Amusingly enough you didn't even answer your own god-damn rhetorical question.

What would have happened had the Jews been armed? They still would have been slaughtered. The difference being they would of taken some Nazis with them and there probably wouldn't have been any left to free from camps by 1945.


No, I answered it pretty clearly, when addressing the few jews who didn't surrender their weapons. As a minority surrounded by people who hated them, they would have had to have first converged and then left as a mobile army to a foreign land. Many would die but more of them would have survived in the long run. Many of them didn't leave though, because they grew too comfortable where they were and they believed things wouldn't get as bad as they became. While keeping their arms meant many were certain to die, you MUST think about the logistics. The majority of captured happened not with tanks, but with armed men. If they had killed some of the people who came to capture, imprison, and execute them, then those dead could not participate in the capture and execution of others. The infrastructure for genocide would have also been disrupted.

The reason the slaughter was so high was because of the lack of resistance. Where there is resistance to genocide, the total casualties are reduced.


Left as a mobile army to a foreign land? You need to stop pitching your movie ideas to Gaia.
Shakespearean Quotations's avatar

Original Wrangler

8,650 Points
  • Friendly 100
  • Bunny Spotter 50
Godwin's law has been evoked.
Have yourself a jolly day, then, you colossal troll, you.
Shakespearean Quotations's avatar

Original Wrangler

8,650 Points
  • Friendly 100
  • Bunny Spotter 50
Well, allow me to feed you for a moment.
As having sort of an inside knowledge on what the mindset of the Hebrews of Germany was at the time, I can assure you, it wasn't because their firearms were confiscated. (In fact, your claim alone is very questionable.) People like my grandparents were unable to comprehend the atrocity that they would suffer. Even whilst in the gulag, the Jewish people were hesitant to suspect that the Nazi party could even commit such genocide. Some even felt a bit trusting, still, of their oppressors. They didn't have a history of mass-genocide displayed for all to see in some media to understand what it was that they were really stepping into when they boarded trains to work camps. There was no parallel that could be called upon for reference by the common man. In many journals and interviews, survivors admitted of how blind-sided they were by what happened.
The whole world was.

The very thought that there was some kind of hint, some kind of warning that anyone during the time could have recognized is presumptuous. You know nothing of the struggles or the people, so stop exploiting their plight as a means to spread your absolute bullshit. Pardon my language, but this is a travesty.
Shakespearean Quotations
Well, allow me to feed you for a moment.
As having sort of an inside knowledge on what the mindset of the Hebrews of Germany was at the time, I can assure you, it wasn't because their firearms were confiscated. (In fact, your claim alone is very questionable.) People like my grandparents were unable to comprehend the atrocity that they would suffer. Even whilst in the gulag, the Jewish people were hesitant to suspect that the Nazi party could even commit such genocide. Some even felt a bit trusting, still, of their oppressors. They didn't have a history of mass-genocide displayed for all to see in some media to understand what it was that they were really stepping into when they boarded trains to work camps. There was no parallel that could be called upon for reference by the common man. In many journals and interviews, survivors admitted of how blind-sided they were by what happened.
The whole world was.

The very thought that there was some kind of hint, some kind of warning that anyone during the time could have recognized is presumptuous. You know nothing of the struggles or the people, so stop exploiting their plight as a means to spread your absolute bullshit. Pardon my language, but this is a travesty.


I spent several years studying religious oppression professionally under someone who worked for a Genocide museum. Now kindly go ******** yourself you inane twit.
Michael Noire
N3bu
Amusingly enough you didn't even answer your own god-damn rhetorical question.

What would have happened had the Jews been armed? They still would have been slaughtered. The difference being they would of taken some Nazis with them and there probably wouldn't have been any left to free from camps by 1945.


No, I answered it pretty clearly, when addressing the few jews who didn't surrender their weapons. As a minority surrounded by people who hated them, they would have had to have first converged and then left as a mobile army to a foreign land. Many would die but more of them would have survived in the long run. Many of them didn't leave though, because they grew too comfortable where they were and they believed things wouldn't get as bad as they became. While keeping their arms meant many were certain to die, you MUST think about the logistics. The majority of captured happened not with tanks, but with armed men. If they had killed some of the people who came to capture, imprison, and execute them, then those dead could not participate in the capture and execution of others. The infrastructure for genocide would have also been disrupted.

The reason the slaughter was so high was because of the lack of resistance. Where there is resistance to genocide, the total casualties are reduced.

The problem is that a citizen cannot hold their ground against a military. And inB4 you quote the Revolution, they had help from France and they had a standing military. A soldier is trained, a citizen rarely is. When you have a jew with a gun and they are being hunted down by a group of secret police who are skilled in ways that almost Rival Jason Bourne, then they are in trouble.
Wendigo's avatar

Manly Explorer

8,750 Points
  • Invisibility 100
  • Money Never Sleeps 200
  • Super Tipsy 200
God Emperor Akhenaton
Michael Noire
N3bu
Amusingly enough you didn't even answer your own god-damn rhetorical question.

What would have happened had the Jews been armed? They still would have been slaughtered. The difference being they would of taken some Nazis with them and there probably wouldn't have been any left to free from camps by 1945.


No, I answered it pretty clearly, when addressing the few jews who didn't surrender their weapons. As a minority surrounded by people who hated them, they would have had to have first converged and then left as a mobile army to a foreign land. Many would die but more of them would have survived in the long run. Many of them didn't leave though, because they grew too comfortable where they were and they believed things wouldn't get as bad as they became. While keeping their arms meant many were certain to die, you MUST think about the logistics. The majority of captured happened not with tanks, but with armed men. If they had killed some of the people who came to capture, imprison, and execute them, then those dead could not participate in the capture and execution of others. The infrastructure for genocide would have also been disrupted.

The reason the slaughter was so high was because of the lack of resistance. Where there is resistance to genocide, the total casualties are reduced.

The problem is that a citizen cannot hold their ground against a military. And inB4 you quote the Revolution, they had help from France and they had a standing military. A soldier is trained, a citizen rarely is. When you have a jew with a gun and they are being hunted down by a group of secret police who are skilled in ways that almost Rival Jason Bourne, then they are in trouble.


Here's the basic math. If you are a Jew in Nazi Germany and you don't turn into a rat for the Dark Side, you are basically looking at a 100% chance of fatality, secured by armed persons.We know this because that's what happened. Now, if you can shoot back, or shoot them as they arrive, you can buy time for yourself, and for others. Every single Nazi you kill is one less Nazi killing dozens. Even if you get fatally shot, you still have several seconds to shoot as many Nazis as are within Range. Each of those Nazis may have several seconds to in turn, shoot back at you, but you are already dying. The real advantage is within a few seconds several dead Nazis multiplied by each of the subtotals they would have killed are no longer victimized as easily. Suppose a half dozen secret police show up. You kill them, they kill you, but your daughters and wife escape. Some of them don't, and get shot. Now the alternative scenario. You turn in your weapons. You, your wife, and your children are all killed. The total number of Nazis is not reduced. Why this is lost on people must have something to do with the general reduction in IQ. I'm saying that 6 million may have been reduced to something less, perhaps 600,000, perhaps even less. Much of the infrastructure for the death camps was built by Jews. If they resisted, it would have taken longer. of course, we have to wonder whether or not the events of war and invasion would have moved the same way. That we may never know. But what we do know, is historically, people who resist suffer less casualties than people who willingly march to their own deaths.
Wendigo
Classy.


When cooler Heads prevail, so do bureaucratic regimes that blindly support genocide. It's one of the basic unspoken principles you will come to understand when studying the writings of Raphael Lemkin.
Michael Noire
God Emperor Akhenaton
Michael Noire
N3bu
Amusingly enough you didn't even answer your own god-damn rhetorical question.

What would have happened had the Jews been armed? They still would have been slaughtered. The difference being they would of taken some Nazis with them and there probably wouldn't have been any left to free from camps by 1945.


No, I answered it pretty clearly, when addressing the few jews who didn't surrender their weapons. As a minority surrounded by people who hated them, they would have had to have first converged and then left as a mobile army to a foreign land. Many would die but more of them would have survived in the long run. Many of them didn't leave though, because they grew too comfortable where they were and they believed things wouldn't get as bad as they became. While keeping their arms meant many were certain to die, you MUST think about the logistics. The majority of captured happened not with tanks, but with armed men. If they had killed some of the people who came to capture, imprison, and execute them, then those dead could not participate in the capture and execution of others. The infrastructure for genocide would have also been disrupted.

The reason the slaughter was so high was because of the lack of resistance. Where there is resistance to genocide, the total casualties are reduced.

The problem is that a citizen cannot hold their ground against a military. And inB4 you quote the Revolution, they had help from France and they had a standing military. A soldier is trained, a citizen rarely is. When you have a jew with a gun and they are being hunted down by a group of secret police who are skilled in ways that almost Rival Jason Bourne, then they are in trouble.


Here's the basic math. If you are a Jew in Nazi Germany and you don't turn into a rat for the Dark Side, you are basically looking at a 100% chance of fatality, secured by armed persons.We know this because that's what happened. Now, if you can shoot back, or shoot them as they arrive, you can buy time for yourself, and for others. Every single Nazi you kill is one less Nazi killing dozens. Even if you get fatally shot, you still have several seconds to shoot as many Nazis as are within Range. Each of those Nazis may have several seconds to in turn, shoot back at you, but you are already dying. The real advantage is within a few seconds several dead Nazis multiplied by each of the subtotals they would have killed are no longer victimized as easily. Suppose a half dozen secret police show up. You kill them, they kill you, but your daughters and wife escape. Some of them don't, and get shot. Now the alternative scenario. You turn in your weapons. You, your wife, and your children are all killed. The total number of Nazis is not reduced. Why this is lost on people must have something to do with the general reduction in IQ. I'm saying that 6 million may have been reduced to something less, perhaps 600,000, perhaps even less. Much of the infrastructure for the death camps was built by Jews. If they resisted, it would have taken longer. of course, we have to wonder whether or not the events of war and invasion would have moved the same way. That we may never know. But what we do know, is historically, people who resist suffer less casualties than people who willingly march to their own deaths.

They would suffer the same casualties. Resisting against them would give you a zero percent chance of survival. These aren't incompetent people. They are the Gestapo. Elites that are better fighters than most of today's special forces.
Wendigo's avatar

Manly Explorer

8,750 Points
  • Invisibility 100
  • Money Never Sleeps 200
  • Super Tipsy 200
Michael Noire
Now, if you can shoot back, or shoot them as they arrive, you can buy time for yourself, and for others.
If armed policemen (or military) come to your house and you shoot them, you will be dead shortly thereafter.

Primarily, you have a limited quantity of men, firearms and rounds of ammunition to employ in the endeavor, and (for all intents and purposes, so far as you're concerned) the police (or military) do not. They can call in reinforcements and lay siege to your nearest known bolt-hole until you have to come up for air. The more men, guns and bullets you try to lay by, the easier that becomes, because they can't be easily acquired, easily hid or easily moved when necessary. Even black market trading leaves a footprint.

Plus, people who would otherwise sympathize and hide you (as the victim of unprovoked aggression) are much less interested in your plight when you've been shooting their police or soldiers. Remember that poor conflicted Nazi recruit from Sound of Music who winds up trying to turn them in at the end? That's who they're imagining you killing.
Wendigo
Michael Noire
Now, if you can shoot back, or shoot them as they arrive, you can buy time for yourself, and for others.
If armed policemen (or military) come to your house and you shoot them, you will be dead shortly thereafter.

Primarily, you have a limited quantity of men, firearms and rounds of ammunition to employ in the endeavor, and (for all intents and purposes, so far as you're concerned) the police (or military) do not. They can call in reinforcements and lay siege to your nearest known bolt-hole until you have to come up for air. The more men, guns and bullets you try to lay by, the easier that becomes, because they can't be easily acquired, easily hid or easily moved when necessary. Even black market trading leaves a footprint.

Plus, people who would otherwise sympathize and hide you (as the victim of unprovoked aggression) are much less interested in your plight when you've been shooting their police or soldiers. Remember that poor conflicted Nazi recruit from Sound of Music who winds up trying to turn them in at the end? That's who they're imagining you killing.


i never implied the person who shot back would live. I even stated several times they would die. What I implied is that the TOTAL casualties might be lower. I don't think the Nazis could have increased their hatred for jews even if they shot back. It is also true they would not have received the same level of sympathy that they did, and highly plausible that Israel would have never been created. G.E.A's statement that the numbers would be the same is the only logical counter argument, as that would be hard to prove. Fact is, if the Jews kept their guns Diaspora would still have occurred, but they may have had to become arsonists in order to compensate for being outnumbered and out gunned. It isn't a war they could possible win, but it is, tactically speaking, more plausible that more could have escaped in armed clusters in the night. Which, yes, would probably make a better movie than this one.

Omnileech's avatar

Omnipresent Warlord

Michael Noire
Wendigo
Classy.


When cooler Heads prevail, so do bureaucratic regimes that blindly support genocide. It's one of the basic unspoken principles you will come to understand when studying the writings of Raphael Lemkin.


The defense of you being a jerk because if you're not a rabid anti-government jerk then the bureaucrats will somehow win just sounds nonsensical.

So what, when were the Jews supposed to collectively use their Jew hivemind to obtain knowledge of how to conduct guerrilla warfare as well as weapons once non-aryans were barred from civil service or earlier?
Omnileech
Michael Noire
Wendigo
Classy.


When cooler Heads prevail, so do bureaucratic regimes that blindly support genocide. It's one of the basic unspoken principles you will come to understand when studying the writings of Raphael Lemkin.


The defense of you being a jerk because if you're not a rabid anti-government jerk then the bureaucrats will somehow win just sounds nonsensical.

So what, when were the Jews supposed to collectively use their Jew hivemind to obtain knowledge of how to conduct guerrilla warfare as well as weapons once non-aryans were barred from civil service or earlier?


your statements sound antisemetic. Do you hate Jews?
Lychee Bae's avatar

Unforgiving Warlord

12,700 Points
  • Senpai's Notice 100
  • Jack-pot 100
  • Love Machine 150
Well I think it depends on how the jews/everyone could get arms...

Iets say they were planning to kill off guards/destroy some buildings/rebel against the gov...They would have to somehow get guns somehow then hide them. If the troops/soliders somehow found out by a rumor or searching someone's house...they would be thrown in jail or killed.

I think the option of having guns would be far better than just waiting around though.

I also think that these people who learned how to suggle and hide people ...were taking risks already... they were taking risks just waiting around to see if they were next.
x_DivineDesire_x
Well I think it depends on how the jews/everyone could get arms...

Iets say they were planning to kill off guards/destroy some buildings/rebel against the gov...They would have to somehow get guns somehow then hide them. If the troops/soliders somehow found out by a rumor or searching someone's house...they would be thrown in jail or killed.

I think the option of having guns would be far better than just waiting around though.

I also think that these people who learned how to suggle and hide people ...were taking risks already... they were taking risks just waiting around to see if they were next.


you got me thinking....

the techniques and pathways used for hiding and smuggling guns could double to hide and smuggle jews. While there's some differences, like being able to bury a small number of firearms, the idea of tunnels and large numbers of hidden chambers and trade routes seems consistent.

Quick Reply

Submit
Manage Your Items
Other Stuff
Get GCash
Offers
Get Items
More Items
Where Everyone Hangs Out
Other Community Areas
Virtual Spaces
Fun Stuff
Gaia's Games