Quote:
Originally Posted by Shnabdabber
Im pretty sure Europe at that time was more concerned with keeping their butt in the corner than rounding up global support for the extermination that was happening in Germany. The Jews, regardless of whether or not they were armed, wouldnt have lost one iota of victim status as their entire race was targeted based on nothing more than blind discrimination and hate. How would fighting back make them any less of a victim?
|
Sure they would have. It would have been viewed more as a civil war. Look at Israel as an example. Palestinians received far more international sympathy when they are attacked as civilians. As soon as they were given guns, they become soldiers and are fair game. It hasn't helped the peace process much.
Quote:
|
How does this have anything to do with the validity of being able to fight certain death giventhe chance to do so with a firearm? Do you think the Jews facing the gas chamber/group furnace cared about their popularity in Europe?
|
What does this have to do with the argument of whether or not they stood a chance against the Nazis? From a romantic point of view, sure, it would have been cool if they went out in a blaze of glory I guess... but I hardly think history would be dramatically altered.
Quote:
|
Give me one example of gov't led, systematic genocide against a different, specific race where said gov't had no gun control laws. Noone is trying to revise history, people are pointing out that the universally recognized man of upmost evil in human history pioneered gun control.
|
Kurds in Iraq were fairly well armed. They had a pretty big arsenal of weapons courtesy of the Iranians... Saddam Hussein's answer to that was poison gas attacks (with logistic support from allies). Kurds still lost despite being a heavily armed faction within Iraq.
(Last post on the matter because I have a lousy hotel internet connection and I keep losing my posts - so agree to disagree)