search results matching tag: british

» channel: nordic

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.004 seconds

    Videos (1000)     Sift Talk (73)     Blogs (73)     Comments (1000)   

Land of Mine Trailer

newtboy says...

Big assumption. Many Hitler youth made the choice to fight for Germany, and joined on their own before children were being drafted.

As for those that were conscripted, is it your position that draftees are somehow immune from responsibility for murdering their neighbors, women, children, rapes, burning towns, or planting millions of landmines on foreign soil, etc? How convenient for them. I don't believe that's a popular or legal position.

I take responsibility for my actions. If their fate was mine, I would be eternally grateful I was treated so much better than I would have treated them if the tables were turned. I would be part of an invading Nazi army, trying to undo just a tiny bit of the damage we had caused, doing so at the direction of my superiors just like when I caused the situation. I would deserve execution, not release. This assumes I wouldn't have the spine to refuse to be a Nazi and be imprisoned or executed.

If the majority of Germans weren't complicit, the Nazis would have never come to power. You give them far too much credit. From the holocaust encyclopedia- "Opposition to the Nazi regime also arose among a very small number of German youth, some of whom resented mandatory membership in the Hitler Youth." Same with adults, the opposition was a minority by far, not the majority of Germans. Who told you that?

"Survived the fighting"? "Here"? "They"? Please finish your thoughts so they have meaning. You seem to be equating Nazi soldiers with the Jews they tried to eradicate. What?!?

The Geneva convention we know today was ratified in 1949. The accords of 1929 were found to be totally insufficient to protect POWs, civilians, infrastructure, etc. Yes, Germany did appear violate it's vague provisions....so did the allies. That's why it was strengthened in 49.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geneva_Conventions

What provision of the 1929 version do you claim this violates?

Articles 20, 21, 22, and 23 states that officers and persons of equivalent status who are prisoners of war shall be treated with the regard due their rank and age and provide more details on what that treatment should be.
Or
Articles 27 to 34 covers labour by prisoners of war. Work must fit the rank and health of the prisoners. The work must not be war-related and must be safe work. ("Safe" and "war related" being intentionally vague and unenforceable).
Please explain the specific violation that makes mine removal a "war crime". It's not war related, the war was over, and it's "safe" if done properly.
Since this was done at the direction of German officers, the convention as written then doesn't apply.

Death camp!!! LOL. Now I know you aren't serious.
"The removal was part of a controversial agreement between the German Commander General Georg Lindemann, the Danish Government and the British Armed Forces, under which German soldiers with experience in defusing mines would be in charge of clearing the mine fields.
This makes it a case of German soldiers under German officers and NCOs clearing mines under the agreement of the German commander in Denmark who remained at his post for a month after the surrender - this means Germany accepted that they had responsibility to remove the mines - they just had far too few experienced mine clearance experts and far too many “drafted” mine clearers with no real experience in doing so." So, if it's a war crime, it's one the Germans committed against themselves.

I'm happy to say that anything done to a Nazi soldier is ethical, age notwithstanding. Many Nazi youth were more zealous and violent than their adult counterparts. Removing their DNA from the gene pool would have been ethical, but illegal. Taking their country to create Israel would have been ethical, but didn't happen.

At the time, there were few mechanical means of mine removal, they didn't work on wet ground, they required a tank and that the area be pre-cleared of anti tank mines, they often get stuck on beaches, and had just over a 50% clearance rate, cost $300-$1000 per mine removed, and they were in extremely short supply after the war. The Germans volunteered in this instance. Now, the Mine Ban Treaty gives each state the primary responsibility to clear its own mines, just like this agreement did.

So you know, the film is fiction, not history. Maybe read up on the real history before attacking countries over a fictional story. History isn't nearly as cut and dry as it's presented, neither are war crimes.

psycop said:

These boys neither chose the age of conscription nor to go to war. Given their age and the time in the war, they would have been forcably made to fight. If you had the misfortune to be born then and there, thier fate could be yours.

Being in the German army did not imply being a Nazi, the majority of the German population were victims as well, pointlessly lead to slaughter by monsters.

Those of them that would have survived the fighting ended up here. They didn't feed them. They worked until they died. They expected them to die. They wanted them to die.

The Geneva Conventions were signed in 1929 making this an official war crime if that's important to you. I'd say the law does not define ethics, and I'd be happy to say this is wrong regardless of the treaty.

As for alternatives for mine clearance. I'm not a military expert, but I believe there are techniques, equipment, tools or vehicles that can be used to reduce the risk to operators. Frankly it's besides the point. Just because someone cannot think of a solution they prefer over running a death camp, does not mean they are not free to do so.

If you have the time, I'd recommend watching the film. It's excellent. And as with most things, particularly in times of war, it's complicated.

The UK's last aerial ropeway

The UK's last aerial ropeway

Indian and British Doctors React to US Medical Bills

Before Are "Friends" Electric?

vil says...

My dad has this attachment to 50s rock and roll and he rightly believes everything in pop music was invented in the 50s and possibly the 60s.

I remember most of these songs (the british ones) coming out and me being fascinated by what could be done differently to what was then the mainstream. However pop quickly devolved through the 80s and I found myself meandering back in time, from late to early Talking Heads, from late to early Genesis and Floyd and Yes and Jethro Tull and Mike Oldfield and Fleetwood Mac, discovering the Beatles and the Beach Boys were actually good at some point, finding out Frank Zappa was a thing and discovering that yes, the guy who made late 20th century pop music up in his garage, with his searches for new sounds and writing his own music and lyrics was indeed one Buddy Holly in the 50s.

Anyway I found myself listening to a rather childish track by Basement Jaxx years later and could not quite put my finger on what made that one track work for me. All these bands that only have one really good track... Anyway what was going on was a Gary Numan sample.

So I went back and listened to some of this old stuff and I was really surpised that some of it still works.

But back in 1980 if you heard Numan, early Midge Ure Ultravox minus the ubiquitous title track of the album, Visage, or a couple of years later the Eurythmics you would hear a sound that was strikingly new and different.

Thinking back Peter Gabriels 3rd solo album (although itself very electronic) took me out of the electronic pop bandcamp and more into alternative rock. That and lucking into a friend who had an older brother who had all the old Genesis records also as sheet music including lyrics. That or David Byrne.

The main point is the music you like is the music you liked when you were 13.

Getting the most out of factory downtime

SFOGuy says...

Had buddy who was a chemical engineer with a petroleum background---After the British Petroleum blow out in the Gulf, he told me that he knew it was going to happen; that it was always going to happen--because BP had always underspent on maintenance. He explained it like owning a boat. If you aren't spending 10% of the cost of the boat on maintaining it every year, you're doing it wrong. That includes maintenance, downtime, and prevention/OSHA/Worker safety.

deathcow said:

*promote

newtboy (Member Profile)

siftbot says...

Congratulations! Your video, RC Ornithopter "Serenity", has reached the #1 spot in the current Top 15 New Videos listing. This is a very difficult thing to accomplish but you managed to pull it off. For your contribution you have been awarded 2 Power Points.

This achievement has earned you your "Golden One" Level 263 Badge!

London Snow Day w/ CGP Grey

London Snow Day w/ CGP Grey

One last look back

newtboy says...

No, but I like him. A British brother from another mother? Quite the loquacious perspicacity without a hint of my usual pedantic sesquipedalianism. ;-)

Disappointed that, when he brought up the "no true supporter of mine would ever resort to violence." he didn't remind us of Trump promising to pay the legal fees for anyone that would beat up reporters or liberal protesters at his rallies 5 years ago and never stopped supporting and calling for violence from his supporters.

BSR said:

Watching that was like trying to hop onto a moving train while running along side with one hand on the handle and not being able to jump on or let go of the handle. Whew! Loved it!


newtisthatyou?

Lawyer trying to defend man who took Speaker's lectern

newtboy says...

You sir, are a moron and traitor to the US.

Patriots don’t violently attack their own government and representatives because they lost an election. That is the opposite of patriotism. It’s called insurgence.

Democratic tyranny? Is that what you ass hats are calling elections now? Only when you lose them. Interesting you had no problem when the minority, the party that received fewer votes and was representing far less than 1/2 the population was tyrannical. Clearly you support being treasonous, anti constitutional and despotic if it’s your guy.

Redcoats? So real American patriots, you know, the kind that stands WITH the US and election results even when they lose, not against it, are now considered invading British monarchists and those that wish to dispose of elections to install an unelected monarch for life by force are the defenders of democracy? You need a history lesson, buddy. You would fail a 6th grade civics quiz. You’re arguing at or below Bob level.

Edit : Perhaps I misunderstand you....by patriots do you mean those who stood against the Trump insurrection, and by democratic tyranny are you referencing the treasonous Trumpsters and the Republicans who legislated as if on a vendetta against over 1/2 the country? In that case you’re right....and many were wearing their red MAGA coats and hats to prove the point.

TangledThorns said:

People who hate the patriots for taking a stand against Democrat tyranny on Jan 6th are modern day redcoats.

geo321 (Member Profile)

moonsammy (Member Profile)

Naval Assault Suit Trials

Naval Assault Suit Trials



Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists

Beggar's Canyon