No such thing as a 'war criminal', it is BS made up after WWII to decapitate the leadership of the defeated nations after the war was over

Finally, on the subject of Iraq, ask yourself why the Americans, who were welcomed as liberators, have lost the battle for hearts and minds

That's the wrong battle to fight! 'hearts and minds' aren't a prize to be one, they are where you aim at

Iraqi children do not throw stones at Australian patrols and the resistance appears to have little interest in engaging them.
It has a lot to do with treating the Iraqis decently.

If more of the little shitbags were shot, they'd stop throwing rocks real soon.

No such thing as a 'war criminal', it is BS made up after WWII to decapitate the leadership of the defeated nations after the war was over

That's the wrong battle to fight! 'hearts and minds' aren't a prize to be one, they are where you aim at

If more of the little shitbags were shot, they'd stop throwing rocks real soon.

Therein lies the problem.
One would have thought that the German mistreatment of the Russians would have taught people in this place a few things, but apparently not.
Perhaps you are not a student of history.
You are offering the wrong solution to the wrong question.
The question that you should ask is WHY the children are throwing the stones.
Why have the Iraqi population gone from cheering the Americans to harbouring the resistance?
The answer is massive brutality and criminality by the occupying troops.
The Americans have killed more Iraqi civilians during their three-year occupation than Saddam killed during the 20 or so years of his reign.
Add to that the roughly 600,000 Iraqi children who died because of American sanctions (International Red Cross figure) before the invasion.
If I was an Iraqi, I would hate the Americans too. They have good reason to do so.
I find it desperately sad that American soldiers are obeying orders to murder Iraqi civilians and to torture prisoners.
It is even sadder that the rape and murder of Iraqi civilians by American soldiers seems to be considered almost normal.
If this does not show the world who truly represents the forces of darkness, then I do not know what will.
I seem to remember that someone called Jesus of Nazareth once said: "By their actions, you will know them."
As for war criminals, I believe that there is such a thing. It is a soldier who behaves dishonourably, or violates agreed rules of war.
In the case of World War Two, the wrong side was in the dock at Nuremberg.

One would have thought that the German mistreatment of the Russians would have taught people in this place a few things, but apparently not.

Germany didn't have any other choice than to act the way they did, at least in the way they treated the Russians. Also the way the Russians treated the Germans far worse. This wasn't the result of anything the Germans did though, the Germans fought hard because they knew what would happen to them no matter how they treated the Russians

good stuff again......!......this bloke obviously 'knows his onions' re: military matters!

the Brits seem to have a similar prblm to the Yanks in Iraq....although: perhaps: on not quite so large a scale....their problem, from memory, is that their officer class is mostly drawn from too narrow a social spectrum......STILL....in the 21st century..........'class bigotry' exists: clearly: the Brits are well over-due for a truly National Socialist government!

'Kwans are more catholic in their tates: re: officer recruiting but: as 'AR' notes: their basic, NCO & officer training is pretty much shite: hence: their current difficulties......

thus: this

and: this

"there is no such thing as bad soldiers....just bad officers!" (Napoleon)

(jimbo!)

I agree with your posts over on this other thread, I am wondering why you don't apply the same standard in this case? To the white soldiers anyways, there are essentially no jews in the US military ground forces, since they fight in the Israeli army instead.

http://vnnforum.com/showpost.php?p=428939&postcount=9

there's only one criteria here: "if it ain`t white, then it ain't right!"

Prussian, I'm curious. Are you under the age of 42?

Germany didn't have any other choice than to act the way they did, at least in the way they treated the Russians. Also the way the Russians treated the Germans far worse. This wasn't the result of anything the Germans did though, the Germans fought hard because they knew what would happen to them no matter how they treated the Russians

You need to look into the history a bit more deeply that you appear to have done to date.
I am a hard-core National Socialist, but even I have to admit that the German treatment of the civilian populations in Eastern Europe was bloody stupid.
They were greeted as liberators, then Einzatzgruppen followed the Wehrmacht and began to commit all manner of appalling acts, largely because Himmler had a mindset against Eastern Europeans and considered them all to be sub-human.
Loyal Heinrich was very, very wrong.
Thousands of Russians actually tried to join the German army to fight the communists. That changed once the Germans began to steal the food out of their children's mouths and carry out appalling reprisals.
Within a short period of time, the native populations went from cheering the Germans as liberators to forming resistance cells.
Sound familiar?
That is exactly what has happened in Iraq.
The American soldiers have been the architects of their own misery.
Those who refuse to learn from history have only themselves to blame when the sky falls upon them.
If you read a book called Other Losses, you will find that horrifying war crimes on a monumental scale are nothing new for the American military.
I would also recommend Adolf Galland's book The First And The Last. Pay particular attention to what Galland wrote about war crimes committed by American fighter pilots, which were so frequent that such acts were considered 'normal'.
I bet that those dishonourable and cowardly acts were not something those pilots told their grandchildren about when they asked their grandfather what he did in the war.

He'll always be a hero to me. I think he did the most honorable thing a man in his position could do.

I think it was actually Rosenberg that screwed it up for Hitler in the East. His not stopping that fool ultimately lays the blame at his doorstep, however.

To the white soldiers anyways, there are essentially no jews in the US military ground forces, since they fight in the Israeli army instead.

The US military IS the Israeli military -- or at least an extension of it. Any US soldier currently fighting in Iraq is fighting for Jewish interests, whether he knows it or not. And the "War on Terror" is nothing but a war against Muslims who actively resist Jewish supremacism.

That's why the US military can be seen to be adopting Jewish tactics such as prisoner torture and the killing of civilians. The Jews use such methods because they're weak by nature and need to rely on dishonorable and desperately evil means of dealing with their enemies. Cruelty is a sign of weakness, not strength.

You need to look into the history a bit more deeply that you appear to have done to date.
I am a hard-core National Socialist, but even I have to admit that the German treatment of the civilian populations in Eastern Europe was bloody stupid.
They were greeted as liberators, then Einzatzgruppen followed the Wehrmacht and began to commit all manner of appalling acts, largely because Himmler had a mindset against Eastern Europeans and considered them all to be sub-human.
Loyal Heinrich was very, very wrong.
Thousands of Russians actually tried to join the German army to fight the communists. That changed once the Germans began to steal the food out of their children's mouths and carry out appalling reprisals.
Within a short period of time, the native populations went from cheering the Germans as liberators to forming resistance cells.....<snipped!>

i'm going to have to 'take issue' with the above: despite "AR" 's other sterling efforts here!

firstly: Hitler was fully justified in invading the JewSSR for two reasons: i/Stalin was amassing a mammoth force to over-run Germany & the rest of Western Europe. This force had been built up courtesy of un-limited funds courtesy of the same Wall Street bankers[we know what their ethnicity was!] who had financed the Bolsheviks in 1917(rfrnc: Suvorov, Irving et al!)....whether, with 20/20 hind-sight, Hitler was wise in so doing: is: of course: debatable.....even Hitler quailed at the amount of matérial the Russians had amassed: thousands of tanks, 'planes and artillery pieces and something like 750 divisions all poised to rip the heart out of Western civilisation!

and

ii/Hitler's 'Operation Barbarossa' gave the White Race a 'breathing space' of some 50+odd years: thereby allowing the formation of White Power groups and the invention of powerful alternative media like the Internet....both of these innovations are an on-going thorn in the side of ZOG: which: despite frantic efforts: it has NOT been able to stymie or neutralise!
(it would not even be drawing 'too long a bow' to say that most White people alive to-day would NOT BE if Hitler hadn't 'risked all' on the Eastern Front!)

secondly: weren't most of the partisan groups that afflicted the Wehrmact &c mainly jews?

thirdly: what actual evidence do we have of 'reprisals' by the Germans? we have to be careful not to cite 'main-stream' historians: who can trust a source that trots out the 'party line' re: the HollowHoax & numerous other WWII myths?.....such as 'Babi Yar', for instance: a kike fairy-tale!
also: re: 'atrocities': it would certainly be possible that the lion's share of such 'atrocities' were committed by kikes and then blamed on the Germans like the current situation in Iraq.....many of the bombings of helpless and innocent Iraqi women & kids are quite possibly being done by either the CIA or MOSSAD[same bloke: different hair-cut!]....and then blamed on either the Shias or Sunnis......
for an atrocity account to be believed re: Eastern Front 1942-1944: the absolute minimum evidence required would be: the location, the date & time of the alleged atrocity, the unit(s) of the Wehrmact or SS involved, names/descriptions of senior NCOs and/or officers &c
(although the Germans certainly executed many partisans...it is my under-standing that that was the primary function of the Einsatzgruppen: viz: they were 'partisan hunters'....the boys @ finalsolution88 can correct me if i'm wrong!.....how-ever: the execution of partisans is permissible even under current International Law.....in a war-time situation......)

lastly: is it not the case that the white Russians fought fiercely against the Germans not because of German 'atrocities' but because each unit had its own jewish political commisar which pretty much forced those men in to battle @ gun point and probably also held their families hostage back home?

(jimbo!)