Why don't we just say it plainly? (Armed people don't get massacred)

Status
Not open for further replies.
The Yugoslav resistance was significant as was partisan activity in Russia.

The Warsaw ghetto resistance was not by an armed populace but by a few weakly armed but brave folks.

That is quite different from hundreds of thousand of potentially armed folks.

Manta, you cannot prove your counterfactual in any sense. Historical research indicates that genocides do not happen to populations that can defend themselves. You might get civil wars which is a different story.

The idea of the armed populace is to short circuit the idea of an easy round up and genocide. If the Germans thought that they would have to fight a significant civil war in their own territory before invading France and Russia - that would probably impact planning. You have no idea how that would have played out.
 
If the Germans thought that they would have to fight a significant civil war in their own territory before invading France and Russia - that would probably impact planning. You have no idea how that would have played out.
Click to expand...

If you want to believe that fair enough. The Nazi party had near total control over every aspect of German life. And mostly supported by the population at the time. Most had unquestioned loyalty to Hitler the children were brainwashed at school. Thinking that if the Jews were armed would have made any difference to their fate i think is wrong the below statement is what i was replying to.

If every adult male Jew had a rifle, it wouldn't have happened.
Click to expand...

There has not being any further gun control after the shooting incident in America and might not be. Do people really think that this is some big conspiracy to disarm Americans and than carry out some sort of genocide or control the population. I have seen similar posts on other forums but didn't expect to see them in this forum.
 
The resistance fighters were a inconvenience to the Germain's during ww2. They did not effect the finial outcome of the war one way or the other.
Click to expand...

In Norway, the resistance worked alongside SOE to carry out Operations Grouse, Freshman, and Gunnerside which may have very well prevented the Nazi's from building an atomic bomb.

The Nazi party had near total control over every aspect of German life. And mostly supported by the population at the time. Most had unquestioned loyalty to Hitler the children were brainwashed at school. Thinking that if the Jews were armed would have made any difference to their fate i think is wrong the below statement is what i was replying to.
Click to expand...

Loyalty to a leader only runs so far. By the time the war ended, Hitler had created enough hardship for the German people that there was more than one attempt on his life. A more effective resistance movement, especially within Germany itself, would have only increased and accelerated the cost and hardship upon the German people and thus eroded Hitler's support more quickly. The key to a successful resistance movement is not to break the army or the leader, but the will of the people supporting them.
 
Had the inhabitants of the Warsaw Ghetto been better armed the results would have been quite different. Think April 19, 1775.
 
Had the inhabitants of the Warsaw Ghetto been better armed the results would have been quite different. Think April 19, 1775
Click to expand...

No the result would have being the same. The German army was able to defeat the french army chase the British army out of Europe defeat the polish army not to mention the other countries they invaded. And you think some armed civilians in Warsaw could of stoped them think again.
 
Last edited:
Perhaps, killing a lot more Nazis would have been a good thing for civilization.

I suppose that if Germany had the shipping to invade England and instead of turning towards Russia, you would have proposed not to fight them on the beaches. The Wehrmacht, if it could have gotten across the Channel after the Fall of France, would have gone through the UK like a knife through butter.

So why would the British bother to fight then? Give it up. The occupation goverment was already in the planning stages. Wave goodbye to your Jews also.

Why were there resistance movements in occupied countries? Useless, it would seem.
 
I suppose that if Germany had the shipping to invade England and instead of turning towards Russia, you would have proposed not to fight them on the beaches. The Wehrmacht, if it could have gotten across the Channel after the Fall of France, would have gone through the UK like a knife through butter
Click to expand...

Don't think so, the gun laws in the UK were not as strict at that time. The armed civilians would have stoped the German army. Remember 1775. :rolleyes:
 
Don't think so, the gun laws in the UK were not as strict at that time. The armed civilians would have stoped the German army. Remember 1775.
Click to expand...

Not a chance. England was practically disarmed by that time. Tens of thousands of guns were "lent" to the UK by the US for home guard use during the war. Many of them from US civilians. Not only were they never returned they were destroyed after the war.

ETA- Just as a side note I am pretty sure the UK lost that other war.

No the result would have being the same. The German army was able to defeat the french army chase the British army out of Europe defeat the polish army not to mention the other countries they invaded. And you think some armed civilians in Warsaw could of stoped them think again.
Click to expand...

I find this line of reasoning even more interesting given your locale.
 
Last edited:
There a hell of a lot of difference between massed conscript armies fighting in the field and surrendering in mass, especially given some of the blundering idiots that populated French and English high command in 1940 versuses a group of determined people with there back against the wall.
 
The English would have bravely fought to the end. But they would have lost. Edward would have returned to be the Quisling King.

One cannot have it both ways - the Jews or a minority cannot defend themselves or inflict significant losses on an oppressor when significantly armed but the English without significant armor at the times or civilian arms would hold up against the Wehrmacht.

What a silly tailspin someone has gotten into.
 
I would say England did fight it out to the end. Dunkirk is the quintessential example a fighting withdrawal under heavy air and sea assualt.

I believe the phrase used MG Sir Julian Thompson in "Retreat to Victory" was the "...the remants of the BEF retired in good order under intense enemy fire."

Which I do believe is Limey speak for "we didn't get with the bug out fever like the French did." :D

But there are no parallels between the initial sucess of Blitzkrieg and the Warsaw Ghetto uprising.

Hell, the Warsaw Jews weren't soldiers. No body told them that fighting would be useless and that they would loose.
 
There a hell of a lot of difference between massed conscript armies fighting in the field and surrendering in mass, especially given some of the blundering idiots that populated French and English high command in 1940 versuses a group of determined people with there back against the wall.
Click to expand...
Do you thing a bunch of armed civilians would have done better. PS The British Expeditionary Force were professional soldiers not conscripts.

The English would have bravely fought to the end. But they would have lost
Click to expand...
Exactly and no bunch of armed civilians would have made any difference.

Below are the original posts i was replying to.

If every adult male Jew had a rifle, it wouldn't have happened."
Click to expand...



Had the inhabitants of the Warsaw Ghetto been better armed the results would have been quite different. Think April 19, 1775.
Click to expand...

Any one that believes this is i am sorry just wrong.
 
Last edited:
The Germans backed off a bit at Dunkirk but we are off topic.

The claim is that the RKBA is irrelevant to protecting folks from genocide.

The example chosen was the a few poorly armed Jews at the last moment did not stop the Wehrmacht.

The Jews later did defend the state of Israel without the best of weapons at its founding.

One can chose to get on the bus or the train to go to the camps without a peep. You can say it won't happen here (no one is saying that it is planned). But if it comes to that - now people know better. Given that, the RKBA is paramount to preventing planning for such a horror happening again.
 
Your premise is wrong. Armed citizens & sworn LE officers get shot or killed all the time.
An armed off duty police officer(with over 20 years service) was killed in a ATM robbery.
No one, even a armed citizen has a absolute ability to survive a lethal force event.

Clyde
__________________
Click to expand...

Ah, but you failed to recognize his premise: It takes a government to put the "mass" in massacre.

Individuals kill at a retail level- one here, maybe a couple there. The most prolific indvidual mass murderers in history have never killed more than Vasili Blohkin did in a single night (and he did so for 28 straight nights!

It takes a Government to kill on a wholesale level ...... first by disarming the victims, and them by systematicly killing them. Armed people with a will to resist can NOT be lined up in front of a ditch and machinegunned, marched into a gas chamber to be asphyxiated, or herded into a church to be burned alive.
 
One can chose to get on the bus or the train to go to the camps without a peep. You can say it won't happen here (no one is saying that it is planned). But if it comes to that - now people know better.
Click to expand...

Yet Srebenica happened. The UN said, "Put down your weapons and we'll protect you."

We knew better. They knew better. Everybody knew better, yet thousands of people were put on trucks, lined up in front of ditches, and machinegunned. More than 1/2 a Century after Babba Yar, and it's the same lesson...... everybody just fails to learn it.
 
Exactly - you are your own last line.

Playing with words about the Warsaw ghetto is irrelevant to the core issue. The Jews weren't ready to defend themselves. Historical precedent suggests that easy genocides don't happen if the minority or target group can resist efficaciously. Can you lose the civil war - sure but that's a different game.

The claim that if a large percent of the 3.5 million Jews in Poland could reasonably defend themselves if they were prepared would not have impacted the Wehrmacht is stupid.

That's it.
 
If the German Army had to pull Divisions off the front lines to put down an armed uprising by the Jews, who numbered several million, then yes it would have affected the German War effort. Did the Viet Cong affect the out come in SE Asia, seems so?
The other part of the question is, whose side will the Military be on? They sworn to defend and support the Constitution. We'll see.
 
You can say it won't happen here (no one is saying that it is planned).
Click to expand...

I have seen (online) calls for forcible "re-education" of TEA Party members .... the arrest of NRA members and violence to Wayne LaPierre ...thes last two just recently.

...NEVER underestimate the danger of large groups of stupid creatures with a herd mentality.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top