Hey I am really into WW2 History, specifically on the Eastern Front from 39-45. How about yourself?
In my opinion, if we could go into an educated discussion, I would like to state a few simple opinions.
1.) WW1, WW2, Korea, Vietnam, Desert Storm, Enduring Freedom, and Iraqi Freedom (to name the most relevant combat situations according to time); they are labeled as separate wars for chronological ease, but in my reality they are all one war. A war dating back to the times of Moses.
2.) I think, and here is where I really differ from my compatriots, that Hitler was a 1 in a 1,000,000,000,000 anomaly, and had he succeeded, the world would be more at peace today than is currently.
3.) There is a German saying which goes, "He who wins is right, but he who loses is wrong." This is aimed at the popular History surrounding Germany's role during WW2 and their eventual defeat be it capitulation to the Americans and Soviets. But further research into the events surrounding the war reveal much more than what is easily and generally accepted. Nazism wasn't a policy to exterminate Jews, but a war against Bolshevism which in were Jews political adversaries for the government of The Socialist Nazi Party and therefore one of many groups which were targeted and labeled as enemies of the current system. It is no different than any other war, there are soldiers, partisans, and civilians, and all are treated equally in total war.
Nazi Germany is an easy target. An easy dog to kick; targeted by a selective American education system which teaches both youths and adults through Elementary School onward to higher institutions to include public museums that Nazi Germany was led by a dictator who is comparable to the worst of mass murders and adored by a nation of temporarily insane people agreeably hell bent on the total extermination of the Jewish population. And therefore the Allied combat action against Germany was waged against them justly, and has even been labeled "The Good War" by Americans, perhaps because by many Americans who have learned the History of the War, they have then subsequently measured their own moral opinions with hindsight against that of what was occurring in real time, and knowing the full impact of the concentration camps, have judged the Americans involvement as not for being aimed at material gain but for moral purposes. However accurate this opinion may appear, this simply is not the total History because this view does not take into account the measure of the entire gravity of the situation as it was unfolding in real-time; and therefore since any purposeful intent to destroy History through the embellishment of certain aspects and then combined with simultaneous premeditated negligence of other aspects constitutes a partial picture, then the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth is not presented, and therefore one may say that it is a lie.
Fact and fiction, and opinion, are to be negated with the factual statements which are very well known surrounding the death count, high-up names of Wehrmacht (specifically SS General Staff) all coupled with the Concentration Camps. However to say that it is fiction and a lie because it is not the complete History would not surmount the statistics of death and the policies of Adolph Hitler regarding Jews, certainly thought. However I can say that the (...)<--that History being presented is perfidious.
If it turns out that the same simple minded rhetoric surrounding racism is the subject of discussion, than I will correct. If discussion evolves into Devils Advocate arguments and natural opinions of people which they are entitled to, it would be very exciting. I support and condone racism as I support and condone all forms of free thought, speech, and art. I don't agree with all opinions, and facts even less as they are convenient for the application to laws for the use of solving problems, (some of which, for !convenience! are first solved and the problem will arise out of a solution [and since good business is where you find it] to the gain of a dollar!)...are not absolute but general acceptance of what is most commonly known to be law according to era, ie: medicine ( http://www.history.com/news/a-brief-history-of-bloodletting ).
Therefore it is wise to presume that in the year 4016 they will say that we in 2016 were wrong in our facts concerning the medical treatment of cancer using radiation. Richard Dreyfuss once said that today doctors say one thousand years ago we knew nothing about medicine, and in one thousand years from today, doctors will say one thousand years ago we knew nothing about medicine. I like this statement, which he was referring to in the context of mental health regarding an unspecified mental condition which he merely described as from the words of his doctor "your mind is like a leaky faucet, and the issue is sometimes it's a slow drip while other times it's a full on rush, we need to regulate the flow." Make of the ailment what you will from the description. My opinion today is that since no two fingerprints are the same, than how can two brains be the same? It is not popular to be in a sad state, and the diagnosis for two weeks of continual sadness is depression. Some treatments include medicine that can alter the chemistry of dopamine, serotonin, norepinephrine, and GABA to list four, with the target of eradicating systems of depression. It is my opinion that if once we were to rule out first the following variables than depression may be a natural condition meant to be had. 1. Illicit drug use 2. Poor diet 3. Lack of exercise 4. Lack of social interaction /
This list is not complete and not applicable to anyone but myself, since everyone's chemistry is different, what tastes good and is good for the body to one may be foul poison for the other and therefore it is only known to myself and then gained through they exponential stretch of this fact by statistical analysis of populations that one may formulate such opinions into facts. In conclusion I can say that weather is a fact, how the weather is received is an opinion. Some like it cold, others hot. I don't believe that it would be wise to alter the weather according to want, as Kurt Cobain stated "Weather changes moods", so why is it foul for us also. Are we not just a part of the system. The negative impacts we experience via climate change is in my opinion a sign of the earths healthy immune system capable of maintaining homeostasis. A fever eradicates virus at a cost (no intention to make analogous the latter statement to climate change specially in the study of global warming). If humankind were not using fossil fuels for energy than it can be argued that climate change would not be as dramatic, and therefore the solution to climate change is to eradicate the use of fossil fuels.
But it makes little sense to address a symptom instead of the problem itself, which is the nature of humans which cannot be argued; as we are today. Hence I can go onto state that since climate change may or may not be affected by humans, humans are though affected by climate change and ergo the earth does not need saving, humankind needs saving. If it is likely that this planet was orbiting the Sun within an accepted time of the stars coming to be, and the Sun was formed 7 billion years ago, and will "live" for another 7 billion years, than the human race is only a fraction of this timeline. I find it to be very pretentious for those who are willing to save the earth but preserve themselves. The most ready solution to preserve the planet would be for a mass suicide of our race to remove ourselves from the equation and thus solve the small problem of our variable in the equation of the earths homeostasis, but that would be if our goal was to save the planet from ourselves, which is where I will leave off my train of thought. The statement "Save the Planet" is incomplete and must either read "Save our race from our planet" or "Save the planet from the expense of our race." Either way, the planet will not suffer our existence.
Romans 8:13 NIV "If God is for us, who could be against us?" On the belt of Wehrmacht infantry embossed buckles read "Gott mit uns" Translated literally as "God with us." To say this is fact and fiction is accurate if one does not target specifically, such buckshot approach is common when dollars are on the line. It is fact that Romans 8:13 NIV states "If God is for us, who could be against us?" It is fact that the belt buckles also read "Gott mit uns" it is fact that Wehrmacht soldiers wearing this buckle were Protestants who if not some believed with faith the size of a mustard seed were in the least knowledgeable of this verse. It is fact that the American Bible also contained this verse as well, and opinion begin to supersede facts. No certainty of God exists, so an argument built upon facts can be broken into fiction.
Therefore if the entire truth is not discovered than one cannot say that it is fact, but opinion. I believe it to be impossible for one to examine the entire truth of the events surrounding WW2, as nobody can look into the soul of each person involved. Therefore I must only approach such opinions to be taken with a grain of salt and placed a mustard seed of faith into them can move such opinions into fact, as mountains are moved through faith.
I am going to paradise, so all is meaningless, Like Ecclesiastes, now it is time to enjoy some Herrs Honey Cheez Doodles because my keyboard arm slogging is complete.