IF I accept that THEN I must conclude both Britain and France marshalled their armies for the purpose of sending them to their certain deaths. Talk about inhuman savages, that describes the governments of both countries. 

It also puts the average IQ of their citizens well below room temperature, roughly at the same level as anyone who accepts that nonsense assertion.

It is the height of deliberate evasion of facts to pretend not to know Germany did not respond until AFTER Britain and France began the attack on Germany by invading Belgium. Now tell me Germany should have done nothing until the invasion force actually set foot on German soil. So we have the invasion of neutral Belgium starting it all. For the record I have run across some perhaps apocryphal notes on Belgium assisting the Germans after the invasion started.

Give me some more anonymous citations from wikepedia when you have the time. You continue to demonstrate your non-existent standards of scholarship.

Yea, I was only 12 back then...

Well, I can think of a number of possible reasons why:

1. US politicians pay very little attention to US intelligence-gathering agencies.

2. They only pay attention when the information gathered agrees with their preconceptions.

3. They pay attention but have ulterior motives which they deem more important.

The reasons are likely different for each politician, but my best guess would be a combination of 2 and 3: they pay attention but tend to denounce evidence contradictory to their preconceptions because they're convinced they are right and/or they stand to benefit somehow if the US invades Iran.

What I find strange is that even people who most deem "evil" almost always have a justification for their actions that they see as legitimate.

Everything on the Internet is a conspiracy against Germany and wiki is a total lie. You again chose to ignore evidence that undermines your claim to intellectual hegemony. Your position that Germany was best by the aggression of the western allies marks you out as a person for whom evidence has no actual meaning at all - unless it's some gratuitous cherry picking that supports your pathetic argument there were no mass murders undertaken by Germany during World War 2. Your claims Germany had invented some new form of warfare are proven utterly false. 

The only form of aggression you accept is a declaration of war - I'm assuming you also consider Japan was innocent with regards to its attack on Pearl Harbour. After all, they did not declare war until after the attack had started. Gee, that makes all sorts of sense. Even Germans aren't silly enough to argue their nation was innocent of aggression in the 1930s. There seems nothing you will not twist or completely ignore to support your peculiar positions. 

Wait, what? The fact that the Nazi regime was, at first, able to annex the countries around it with little opposition does not make said regime passive--it just means Germany had clever diplomats. I mean, if you're trying to build an empire, it makes sense to first take the land you can get with little effort and little risk of retaliation. The Nazi regime was not trying to improve the lives of the people it conquered--it was trying to build an empire.

You are incredibly ignorant. The Brits called it Blitzkrieg even though the term did not exist in Germany. Are you now claiming you never heard of Blitzkrieg? Of course you are you ignorant clod.

And your conspiratorial delusions give credibility to anonymous sources?

I regret you are the horrible example of a failed educational system.

An education is supposed to teach the ability to reason based upon facts not to indoctrinate opinions regardless of facts.

To know the facts and then use the word retaliation is one of the following, unfamiliar with English, stupid or lying.

Given your constant attacks upon things I have not said, I tend to assume you have yet to develop a working knowledge of English. Should you deny that there are only the other two options.

You might need to read a lot of the facts I have previously posted if you want to save me repeating them. After WWI Poland was expanded from a small, land-locked country to what it was in 1939 by giving it control over millions of Germans and Russians. It was a military dictatorship. In 1939 both Russia and Germany reclaimed the territory lost after WWI via the Brest-Litvosk treaty.

The funny thing here is the Germans relieved of their Polish dictators did get a better life. Those reclaimed by Russia came to live under a worse dictatorship. As a consequence of the war all of the Poles and parts of eastern Germany came under the worse dictatorship of communism.

The worst empire Germany could have been accused of intending was reconstituting the Austro-Hungarian empire out of business for roughly 20 years. As to empires the good guys, Brits, French and Russians had empires which in 1939 enslaved about 1/3 of the world's population. It was bad to conquer the Poles because the Poles were white.

In any event I know of no excuse to use force even if it is to "improve" their lives. As I have posted if empire and conquest is a problem with Germany Britain should be reminded of the "he who is without sin" and "the mote in thy brother's eye" before pretending to find fault with Germany.

And in line with Iraq, if the US should not be policeman to the world today, why should Britain have been policeman to Europe back then and declare war on Germany for maybe intending what Britain had accomplished many times over at the time?

I would find it amazing if you have yet found the time to look into the facts of WWII. I was much older when I found the time to look into the factual basis for what I had been told about WWII. I have found essentially no facts supporting the opinions I was taught.

I was not attempting to explain what they are doing but why they are doing it. In your initial statement, you already informed me of what is happening now with Iran, what happened in the past with Iraq, and how the two are linked. Based on the statement "[look] at the politicians who are doing it right now and try to explain it", I assumed you wanted me to attempt to explain exactly why they are fomenting war.

I suppose I should ask first. A_Nony_Mouse, do you and/or did you make the claim that "there were no mass murders undertaken by Germany during World War 2"?

If yes, I am certain you are making a distinction between "killing" and "murder", and I'd like to know what it is.

I agree, empire and conquest is a problem, regardless of the country doing it. However, the fact that Britain and France had huge empires that caused lots of suffering does not mean Germany should have the same. But yes, you're correct: for an empire to condemn another nation for empire-building is incredibly hypocritical.

As for Britain being the "policeman to Europe", I was taught that the countries Germany annexed asked for assistance. Of course, I could have been taught wrongly.

You're correct, I have not verified much of what I've been told about WWII. However, I assume the following things that I was taught are valid: the names of the countries on each side, the dates on which these countries declared war and/or surrendered, the dates of the major battles, the listed number of vehicles and troops each country possessed, the listed numbers of dead and wounded, that what is commonly described as "the Holocaust" did happen, that the facist governments of Italy and Germany treated their citizens very poorly, that the Russian government under Joseph Stalin also treated its citizens very poorly, that the "Allies" turned a blind eye to the atrocities committed by Stalin because he was on their side, that the United States dropped atomic bombs on the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and probably a few other things I haven't thought of yet.

Nony does say there were no mass murders in Germany during World War 2. He insists there is no material evidence such things ever took place. The mass murders in Poland he says were perpetrated by the Russians - I assume he only recognises the murder of those unfortunate Polish officers in the woods at Katyn. The 2.6 million polish jews capable researchers like Raul Hilberg chronicle on the basis of the best possible evidence - including the names of the victims taken from Germany's own Hollerith census system - don't count because these people were burned to ashes and so they do not constitute material evidence. Hilberg was jewish so he's a nothing but a liar and can be entirely discounted, anyway.

Nony's position of denial applies to all the Jews who died in WW2. None of it ever happened. I assume the same applies to gay people, the disabled, communists, pacifists, brave churchmen, the Roma...the people of Oradour-Sur-Glane...oops, sorry. These folks were French, so the fact all the men were machine gunned and the women and children burned to death in the church is the fault of the British for forcing the French into declaring war in the first place. Though in point of fact, you'd have to prove the numbers of french people declined globally for Nony to accept such an atrocity ever took place. And even if you proved it, the atrocity would be offset by some RAF carpet bombing or other so that at no time would German war crimes ever actually exist. 

Clearly, Nony says, World War Two was caused by British aggression. Britain wanted to establish total control over Europe and cast the continent into a new darkness lit by endless re-runs of Jam and Jerusalem. The fact its empire was disbanded without a fight in the 10 years after the war, India gaining independence in 1947, and that all its empire's constituents still remain willing and engaged parts of the British Commonwealth of Nations, except perhaps, Zimbabwe, is irrelevant to our Nony.

All these empire subjects were actually slaves, says he, despite the fact Britain outlawed slavery one hundred years before anyone else did and prosecuted war against slavery's proponents. Workers hired by British businesses or landowners were ill-paid, manipulated and mis-managed resulting in deaths through famine but they were demonstrably not enslaved. Paradoxically, Nony is unlikely to admit any jews were enslaved in Germany during WW2. In fact it's probably fair to say Nony thinks Germany never actually had any jews living in it, given there were virtually none after the war and he says none had been killed, which casts Hitler's juden paranoia in a decidedly peculiar light. How could Hitler have railed fiercely so against a non existent threat?

And of course, everything I say here amounts to a fabrication because Nony has never said any of these things, ever. He's just cross about the relentless massacres in Palestine where jews are constantly shooting locals in the backs of their heads, driving them around in mercedes benz buses with hoses through the windows while the bitter smoke of burning palestinian corpses rises over Jerusalem. 

I probably worded the above statement badly; I'll try to clarify:

When I asked "Is he serious?", I was asking Atheistextremist if A_Nony_Mouse actually made the claim that Germany was innocent of mass murder during World War 2. It seemed like a ridiculous assertion, since, after all, the armies of both sides killed huge numbers of people. Since I've never heard of anyone denying that vast numbers of people were killed during WWII, I reasoned that A_Nony_Mouse was likely making some distinction between "killing" and "murder".

Well, I don't say religious people are idiots. I may think their belief in god is in error, but I do not think they're stupid. Even for the hardcore fundamentalists, I think "deluded" is a far more accurate term.

I have a very difficult time believing anyone would make such a claim; can you show me where he makes it?

It's weird that someone can be intelligent and a Holocaust denier...  Of course, the fair number of intelligent and well-educated Christian apologists shows that education and intelligence don't make one safe from error or delusion...

Wait, what's "Christian Identity"?

I said CORRECTLY that there is no evidence of a decline in the world Jewish population over the war years. I note for the umpteenth time you have produced NONE. I note again you continue to believe without physical evidence. That is what theists do.

But if you wish to cite Hilberg who does not produce world population figures either how does it differ from citing thousands of Christian theologians to establish the existence of their god?

One can only marvel at believers in a loving god who explain away all the evidence their god is anything but loving. But it is no greater marvel that people like Hiberg can declare 15 - 2.6 = 15 and find so many willing idiots to believe him. The willing suspension of rational thought particularly when it is a matter of learned science is one thing. When it is a matter of arithmetic it is something else entirely. Believers need only take off one shoe and cut off two and a half toes to discover there is a problem walking.

Why would you write someone off unless you could produce the pre and post war world population figures to show he was error? You HAD TO HAVE that physical evidence else you had no reason to disagree. If you still disagree with him then you MUST TODAY HAVE the world population data to show what you believe happened.

As you HAVE it I ask you to produce the URL(s) to the world population data which established the -6M number at the time it was first adopted.

If you do not have it, why do you believe contrary to the physical evidence?

Calling people names does not produce physical evidence any more than calling evolutionists godless atheists produce physical evidence for creationism.

The guy in the ski mask is frothing and name-calling because he has no physical evidence.

World population statistics are not the only valid evidence for what is known as "the Holocaust". What about all the pictures of the concentration camps and of the people held there?

Besides, it wasn't just Jews that were exterminated: the Nazi regime also targeted homosexuals and the physically and/or mentally handicapped.

I am very interested in seeing this world population data, could you tell me where you found it?

They exist. I am rarely unkind to anyone.

You say Israelis all deserve to die. You must believe Jews concocted the holocaust as part of some strange plan to attain or strengthen their alleged control of the world. You are an avowed holocaust denier who insists none of the evidence of the mass murder of European Jewry can be considered legitimate. None of these observations involves name calling on my part, just the application of factual observations based entirely on the things you say you believe. Personally, I don't think either of us is much given to frothing. Generally, we both make our points without hysteria. I do feel, however, that you have a magnetic attraction to fallacious ad hominem as the statement you make above quite clearly attests. 

The existing physical evidence makes the claims absurd. The population data shows an INCREASE in world population of Jews over the war years. How does a 40% reduction, which was KNOWN in late 1945, not show up in 1948 world population data? Where is the 1945 world population data upon which the 6 million HAD TO have been based?  Without significant deaths what is meant by Holocaust other than the title of a TV miniseries and the FIRST application of the word to The Disaster? Google The Holocaust Industry by Norman Finkelstein if you have the time. It's a money maker for a lot of Jews. Letting go of it would be a financial disaster.

I know, why do governments talk about it if it is nonsense? The same reason they talk about god. It is useful to do so.

How can you tell the cause of death and religion of bodies? How can you tell when and where and by who pictures were taken? Do you believe creative captioning or what is intrinsic to the picture?

Some day some one is going to have to give me a definition of "exterminated" which includes the exterminated being around to whine about it. Something like, just a little bit exterminated. "She turned me into a newt!" "Hmmm, I got better." Monty Python, Holy Grail Hyperbole makes for good comedy and religion.

I have posted the images of the newspaper reports of the data which contains the sources several times. That is why holohuggers are so desperate to introduce something other than world population data. Their faith is on the line.

Cynics have learned it is never requited.

Now what would you suggest they be called?

How about Yahu yahoos?

Who and what is a nizkook and why do you choose to believe it? Since you are such an ignorant little shit I will enlighten you.

For the record Nizkook Zentral is financed by Larry Shiff of Canada, the pissant Jew who phoned death threats to my son. 

Ken McVay who at one time claimed to run the nizkooks phoned a death threat to my parents.

Canadians think they can get away with anything. Are you on Shiff's payroll too? Should I tell me son to expect the phone calls to start again? Should I have the FBI back on the case? Schiff was last questioned by the FBI about his death threats in Hawaii.

One has to be on the payroll to believe animals like those two.