|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Wed Feb 27, 2008 10:36 am
Ace Paladin Oh, and about the whole "OMG111 TEXTBOOK1 I DIDZ RESER`CH111" comment:
And where in the ******** did I say anything about textbooks? I spoke out against them according to my recollection. I never once said anything that my research has come from any text book. Quite the contrary in fact.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Feb 27, 2008 10:45 am
Part-Time Viking Ace Paladin Oh, and about the whole "OMG111 TEXTBOOK1 I DIDZ RESER`CH111" comment:
And where in the ******** did I say anything about textbooks? I spoke out against them according to my recollection. I never once said anything that my research has come from any text book. Quite the contrary in fact.
I was referring to when you were like "WHER DIDZ U GET THA11/? A 10TH GRAD TXTBOOK11?"
Never said your "research" came from a book.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Feb 27, 2008 10:49 am
Part-Time Viking As for the monarchy thing, LOOK AT WHAT REPLACED THEM! Can you honestly say that Communism, and the power-struggle that ultimately lead to National Socialism are better than a monarchical rule? "That Czar Nicolas, what a ******** p***k, Lenin and Stalin after him make him look like a baby eating heathen who fancies himself a rapist." Don't get me started on the fall of the Ottoman Empire.
Communism, no (though it works for China).
But it sure as hell isn't better than democracy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Feb 27, 2008 10:59 am
Ace Paladin Part-Time Viking As for the monarchy thing, LOOK AT WHAT REPLACED THEM! Can you honestly say that Communism, and the power-struggle that ultimately lead to National Socialism are better than a monarchical rule? "That Czar Nicolas, what a ******** p***k, Lenin and Stalin after him make him look like a baby eating heathen who fancies himself a rapist." Don't get me started on the fall of the Ottoman Empire.
Communism, no (though it works for China).
But it sure as hell isn't better than democracy.I'm not saying that it is, I said that the world would have been better off if the monarchies survived. We would not have had Hitler, Stalin, Mussolini, or any of those monsters of the 20th century if the German Monarchy and the Russian Monarchy survived, ideally, to become like Japan and England where they have elected officials running the country but have the monarchy in place as a figurehead. As for the text books, why the hell rag on me then about them?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Feb 27, 2008 11:34 am
Viking, who's to say that the monarch's that would have succeeded Wilhelm, Charles I and Nicholas II wouldn't have been and better than Hitler, Stalin, or Mussolini? There have been some ruthless monarchs in History. We can't assume that every monarch would be better than Hitler, Stalin, or Mussolini. We could have gotten someone much worse for all we know.
I personally believe that Germany should have been treated like France after the Napoleonic Wars.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Feb 27, 2008 11:58 am
HistoryWak Viking, who's to say that the monarch's that would have succeeded Wilhelm, Charles I and Nicholas II wouldn't have been and better than Hitler, Stalin, or Mussolini? There have been some ruthless monarchs in History. We can't assume that every monarch would be better than Hitler, Stalin, or Mussolini. We could have gotten someone much worse for all we know. I personally believe that Germany should have been treated like France after the Napoleonic Wars. I'm well aware that there have been some horrific monarchies in history, Ivan the Terrible, and Henry VIII come to mind immediately. However, when those happened, there wasn't such a strong international relationship as there was before WWI. We must remember that the three major powers in that war were related through blood. International involvement would have been expected. Why Hitler was able to get away with as much as he did for as long as he did was because Europe for the most part turned a blind eye to him until he finally overstepped into Poland. Stalin was able to get away with so much because the Russians were (and still are) fiercely nationalistic. The Versailles Treaty was a cruel mistreatment to the German people though. Germany didn't start that war, they took a side due to alliance and was the main push for it, but by all means they did not deserve the punishment they were charged with. Overall though, we can't say what the world ultimately would have been like. But as the facts stand now, I believe that the world would have been a better place if the European Monarchies endured after the war. With the exception of maybe Czar Nicolas due to the sway that Rasputin had over him and his family.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Feb 27, 2008 12:27 pm
tangocat777 Zombicide tangocat777 Zombicide tangocat777 You can't fool me. I saw how you used an extra return at the end of your post. Page stretcher. Everybody, Zombicide used white text on page 23Um, what are you talking about? =/ b*****d. xD Just kidding, man. Wait, no one will notice this post either.On one of your posts you pressed the return key. Haha. I'll bet someone is staying silent and watching.You saw nothing, tango. It's called "sarcasm". I wonder what Wak and Raine will do if they find out what I said.......maybe this time I will get an internet slap from Raine. xDI'm telling you, there's an extra space there. On page 23. I understand that. I'm simply, nvm. We can only hope XDAnd I'm telling you that you saw nothing. I don't think anyone is noticing our white-text conversation. Ah, the joy of white text. xD
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Feb 27, 2008 12:50 pm
Part-Time Viking HistoryWak Viking, who's to say that the monarch's that would have succeeded Wilhelm, Charles I and Nicholas II wouldn't have been and better than Hitler, Stalin, or Mussolini? There have been some ruthless monarchs in History. We can't assume that every monarch would be better than Hitler, Stalin, or Mussolini. We could have gotten someone much worse for all we know. I personally believe that Germany should have been treated like France after the Napoleonic Wars. I'm well aware that there have been some horrific monarchies in history, Ivan the Terrible, and Henry VIII come to mind immediately. However, when those happened, there wasn't such a strong international relationship as there was before WWI. We must remember that the three major powers in that war were related through blood. International involvement would have been expected. Why Hitler was able to get away with as much as he did for as long as he did was because Europe for the most part turned a blind eye to him until he finally overstepped into Poland. Stalin was able to get away with so much because the Russians were (and still are) fiercely nationalistic. The Versailles Treaty was a cruel mistreatment to the German people though. Germany didn't start that war, they took a side due to alliance and was the main push for it, but by all means they did not deserve the punishment they were charged with. Overall though, we can't say what the world ultimately would have been like. But as the facts stand now, I believe that the world would have been a better place if the European Monarchies endured after the war. With the exception of maybe Czar Nicolas due to the sway that Rasputin had over him and his family. Regardless of personal opinion or belief, it's useless (and small-minded) to blame whole races and ethnicities for the atrocities brough about by a handful of political and religious leaders.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Feb 27, 2008 12:58 pm
Arvis_Jaggamar Part-Time Viking HistoryWak Viking, who's to say that the monarch's that would have succeeded Wilhelm, Charles I and Nicholas II wouldn't have been and better than Hitler, Stalin, or Mussolini? There have been some ruthless monarchs in History. We can't assume that every monarch would be better than Hitler, Stalin, or Mussolini. We could have gotten someone much worse for all we know. I personally believe that Germany should have been treated like France after the Napoleonic Wars. I'm well aware that there have been some horrific monarchies in history, Ivan the Terrible, and Henry VIII come to mind immediately. However, when those happened, there wasn't such a strong international relationship as there was before WWI. We must remember that the three major powers in that war were related through blood. International involvement would have been expected. Why Hitler was able to get away with as much as he did for as long as he did was because Europe for the most part turned a blind eye to him until he finally overstepped into Poland. Stalin was able to get away with so much because the Russians were (and still are) fiercely nationalistic. The Versailles Treaty was a cruel mistreatment to the German people though. Germany didn't start that war, they took a side due to alliance and was the main push for it, but by all means they did not deserve the punishment they were charged with. Overall though, we can't say what the world ultimately would have been like. But as the facts stand now, I believe that the world would have been a better place if the European Monarchies endured after the war. With the exception of maybe Czar Nicolas due to the sway that Rasputin had over him and his family. Regardless of personal opinion or belief, it's useless (and small-minded) to blame whole races and ethnicities for the atrocities brough about by a handful of political and religious leaders. That nation isn't even around anymore for ******** sake, people tend to take what I say when I argue for the sake of arguing way to seriously.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Feb 27, 2008 1:03 pm
Part-Time Viking HistoryWak Viking, who's to say that the monarch's that would have succeeded Wilhelm, Charles I and Nicholas II wouldn't have been and better than Hitler, Stalin, or Mussolini? There have been some ruthless monarchs in History. We can't assume that every monarch would be better than Hitler, Stalin, or Mussolini. We could have gotten someone much worse for all we know. I personally believe that Germany should have been treated like France after the Napoleonic Wars. I'm well aware that there have been some horrific monarchies in history, Ivan the Terrible, and Henry VIII come to mind immediately. However, when those happened, there wasn't such a strong international relationship as there was before WWI. We must remember that the three major powers in that war were related through blood. International involvement would have been expected. Why Hitler was able to get away with as much as he did for as long as he did was because Europe for the most part turned a blind eye to him until he finally overstepped into Poland. Stalin was able to get away with so much because the Russians were (and still are) fiercely nationalistic. The Versailles Treaty was a cruel mistreatment to the German people though. Germany didn't start that war, they took a side due to alliance and was the main push for it, but by all means they did not deserve the punishment they were charged with. Overall though, we can't say what the world ultimately would have been like. But as the facts stand now, I believe that the world would have been a better place if the European Monarchies endured after the war. With the exception of maybe Czar Nicolas due to the sway that Rasputin had over him and his family. One problem with the versils treaty that ended the Napoleonic Wars, was that France which was an empire had to return back into a monarcy. You think that it would have been better if Germany was ruled by a king.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Feb 27, 2008 1:10 pm
Griggle990 Part-Time Viking HistoryWak Viking, who's to say that the monarch's that would have succeeded Wilhelm, Charles I and Nicholas II wouldn't have been and better than Hitler, Stalin, or Mussolini? There have been some ruthless monarchs in History. We can't assume that every monarch would be better than Hitler, Stalin, or Mussolini. We could have gotten someone much worse for all we know. I personally believe that Germany should have been treated like France after the Napoleonic Wars. I'm well aware that there have been some horrific monarchies in history, Ivan the Terrible, and Henry VIII come to mind immediately. However, when those happened, there wasn't such a strong international relationship as there was before WWI. We must remember that the three major powers in that war were related through blood. International involvement would have been expected. Why Hitler was able to get away with as much as he did for as long as he did was because Europe for the most part turned a blind eye to him until he finally overstepped into Poland. Stalin was able to get away with so much because the Russians were (and still are) fiercely nationalistic. The Versailles Treaty was a cruel mistreatment to the German people though. Germany didn't start that war, they took a side due to alliance and was the main push for it, but by all means they did not deserve the punishment they were charged with. Overall though, we can't say what the world ultimately would have been like. But as the facts stand now, I believe that the world would have been a better place if the European Monarchies endured after the war. With the exception of maybe Czar Nicolas due to the sway that Rasputin had over him and his family. One problem with the versils treaty that ended the Napoleonic Wars, was that France which was an empire had to return back into a monarcy. You think that it would have been better if Germany was ruled by a king. In comparison to Hitler, Germany would have been better off with a king, but now that they've got their s**t back together, they are doing well as a nation. It took long enough, but it happened.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Feb 27, 2008 1:39 pm
Part-Time Viking Griggle990 Part-Time Viking HistoryWak Viking, who's to say that the monarch's that would have succeeded Wilhelm, Charles I and Nicholas II wouldn't have been and better than Hitler, Stalin, or Mussolini? There have been some ruthless monarchs in History. We can't assume that every monarch would be better than Hitler, Stalin, or Mussolini. We could have gotten someone much worse for all we know. I personally believe that Germany should have been treated like France after the Napoleonic Wars. I'm well aware that there have been some horrific monarchies in history, Ivan the Terrible, and Henry VIII come to mind immediately. However, when those happened, there wasn't such a strong international relationship as there was before WWI. We must remember that the three major powers in that war were related through blood. International involvement would have been expected. Why Hitler was able to get away with as much as he did for as long as he did was because Europe for the most part turned a blind eye to him until he finally overstepped into Poland. Stalin was able to get away with so much because the Russians were (and still are) fiercely nationalistic. The Versailles Treaty was a cruel mistreatment to the German people though. Germany didn't start that war, they took a side due to alliance and was the main push for it, but by all means they did not deserve the punishment they were charged with. Overall though, we can't say what the world ultimately would have been like. But as the facts stand now, I believe that the world would have been a better place if the European Monarchies endured after the war. With the exception of maybe Czar Nicolas due to the sway that Rasputin had over him and his family. One problem with the versils treaty that ended the Napoleonic Wars, was that France which was an empire had to return back into a monarcy. You think that it would have been better if Germany was ruled by a king. In comparison to Hitler, Germany would have been better off with a king, but now that they've got their s**t back together, they are doing well as a nation. It took long enough, but it happened. Well the US side of germany was doing just fine during the cold war.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Feb 27, 2008 1:45 pm
Griggle990 Part-Time Viking Griggle990 Part-Time Viking HistoryWak Viking, who's to say that the monarch's that would have succeeded Wilhelm, Charles I and Nicholas II wouldn't have been and better than Hitler, Stalin, or Mussolini? There have been some ruthless monarchs in History. We can't assume that every monarch would be better than Hitler, Stalin, or Mussolini. We could have gotten someone much worse for all we know. I personally believe that Germany should have been treated like France after the Napoleonic Wars. I'm well aware that there have been some horrific monarchies in history, Ivan the Terrible, and Henry VIII come to mind immediately. However, when those happened, there wasn't such a strong international relationship as there was before WWI. We must remember that the three major powers in that war were related through blood. International involvement would have been expected. Why Hitler was able to get away with as much as he did for as long as he did was because Europe for the most part turned a blind eye to him until he finally overstepped into Poland. Stalin was able to get away with so much because the Russians were (and still are) fiercely nationalistic. The Versailles Treaty was a cruel mistreatment to the German people though. Germany didn't start that war, they took a side due to alliance and was the main push for it, but by all means they did not deserve the punishment they were charged with. Overall though, we can't say what the world ultimately would have been like. But as the facts stand now, I believe that the world would have been a better place if the European Monarchies endured after the war. With the exception of maybe Czar Nicolas due to the sway that Rasputin had over him and his family. One problem with the versils treaty that ended the Napoleonic Wars, was that France which was an empire had to return back into a monarcy. You think that it would have been better if Germany was ruled by a king. In comparison to Hitler, Germany would have been better off with a king, but now that they've got their s**t back together, they are doing well as a nation. It took long enough, but it happened. Well the US side of germany was doing just fine during the cold war. Dude, I'm sorry, but no part of Germany was doing "just fine" during the Cold War... It was wrong to divide that country up like that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Feb 27, 2008 1:57 pm
Zombicide tangocat777 Zombicide tangocat777 Zombicide tangocat777 You can't fool me. I saw how you used an extra return at the end of your post. Page stretcher. Everybody, Zombicide used white text on page 23Um, what are you talking about? =/ b*****d. xD Just kidding, man. Wait, no one will notice this post either.On one of your posts you pressed the return key. Haha. I'll bet someone is staying silent and watching.You saw nothing, tango. It's called "sarcasm". I wonder what Wak and Raine will do if they find out what I said.......maybe this time I will get an internet slap from Raine. xDI'm telling you, there's an extra space there. On page 23. I understand that. I'm simply, nvm. We can only hope XDAnd I'm telling you that you saw nothing. I don't think anyone is noticing our white-text conversation. Ah, the joy of white text. xDFine. Obviously page strecthing is nothing to you. Isn't it great? I could totally say something of major pervitude and nobody would notice. For example, I could say that I roll around in pictures of FE girls, and get no response.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Feb 27, 2008 2:00 pm
Part-Time Viking Griggle990 Part-Time Viking Griggle990 Part-Time Viking HistoryWak Viking, who's to say that the monarch's that would have succeeded Wilhelm, Charles I and Nicholas II wouldn't have been and better than Hitler, Stalin, or Mussolini? There have been some ruthless monarchs in History. We can't assume that every monarch would be better than Hitler, Stalin, or Mussolini. We could have gotten someone much worse for all we know. I personally believe that Germany should have been treated like France after the Napoleonic Wars. I'm well aware that there have been some horrific monarchies in history, Ivan the Terrible, and Henry VIII come to mind immediately. However, when those happened, there wasn't such a strong international relationship as there was before WWI. We must remember that the three major powers in that war were related through blood. International involvement would have been expected. Why Hitler was able to get away with as much as he did for as long as he did was because Europe for the most part turned a blind eye to him until he finally overstepped into Poland. Stalin was able to get away with so much because the Russians were (and still are) fiercely nationalistic. The Versailles Treaty was a cruel mistreatment to the German people though. Germany didn't start that war, they took a side due to alliance and was the main push for it, but by all means they did not deserve the punishment they were charged with. Overall though, we can't say what the world ultimately would have been like. But as the facts stand now, I believe that the world would have been a better place if the European Monarchies endured after the war. With the exception of maybe Czar Nicolas due to the sway that Rasputin had over him and his family. One problem with the versils treaty that ended the Napoleonic Wars, was that France which was an empire had to return back into a monarcy. You think that it would have been better if Germany was ruled by a king. In comparison to Hitler, Germany would have been better off with a king, but now that they've got their s**t back together, they are doing well as a nation. It took long enough, but it happened. Well the US side of germany was doing just fine during the cold war. Dude, I'm sorry, but no part of Germany was doing "just fine" during the Cold War... It was wrong to divide that country up like that. Dude, Quoted for Aphorism. Now that I've thrown my two bits into this highly controversial conversation. *eats popcorn*
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
