[QatzelOk]

Terrorists blew up a major landmark in the biggest city. And this lead a relatively incompetent but charismatic leader to declare war on... some evil entity that can never be identified.

In the case of the American empire, this entity is sometimes referred to as Al Qaeda. Other times, it is just generally referred to as "radical Islam" or "terrorism."

The Nazis also fought "terrorism" and went after a particular religion. But what did they call the evil shadow organization that they were "trying to eliminate?" Did it have a catchy name?

[GandalfTheGrey]

A few things to keep in mind -

1. The European population at the time were much less averse to acts of imperialist aggression. The concept of "aggressive war" as a crime against humanity didn't really come about until the Nuremburg trials.
2. Nazi Germany was a police state, so while it is true propaganda was a key facilitator of nazi aggression, there was also the near complete inability for people to speak out against the actions of their government - which is not the case in the US.
3. Nazi propaganda was almost entirely state run and motivated by a very specific political ideology - whereas US propaganda is essentially privately run (with any state run propaganda driven by its commercial sponsors), and driven by the almighty dollar (which also is a type of ideology)

To answer your question, besides the usual suspects - bolshevist/jewish conspiracies - which was probably used more to repress their own population, I think the nazis put more emphasis on the greatness of Germany and grabbing more land as part of its rightful 'destiny' as the superior race/country. But mostly they were able to push through their aggression because of points 1 and 2 above. Unfortunately for the US they have this inconvenient thing called freedom of speech, so the propaganda machine has to be a lot more sophisticated and subtle.

[William_H_Dougherty]

Terrorists blew up a major landmark in the biggest city. And this lead a relatively incompetent but charismatic leader to declare war on... some evil entity that can never be identified.

The Reichstag. Communists? I wouldn't put them in the same category as Al Qaeda. The Communists were a strong political force in Germany, believe it or not, and controlled the country with the largest army and air force in all of Europe.

Although you are quite correct that the Reichstag fire was a seminal event from the point of view of turning Germany into a dictatorship.

In the case of the American empire, this entity is sometimes referred to as Al Qaeda. Other times, it is just generally referred to as "radical Islam" or "terrorism."

Well, to be fair, Al Qaeda and other "Radical Islamists" are hardly without blame in all this. Even if you are one of these people who think 9/11 is an inside job (which I think is ludicrous), there were a series of terrorist acts leading up to it.

The Nazis also fought "terrorism" and went after a particular religion. But what did they call the evil shadow organization that they were "trying to eliminate?" Did it have a catchy name?

International Judaism.

However, I won't equate the Americans to Nazis until they start-up death camps.

- WHD

[Zyx]

At the time of Hitler's ascendancy, the Germans would fight over politics in the street. "Al Qaeda" could have simply been the parties that wouldn't join the coalition with the Nazis.

[DanDaMan]

I thought Obama's "American Empire" enemy de jour was the "Fat Cats"?

[Nandi]

I thought Obama's "American Empire" enemy de jour was the "Fat Cats"?

Look how cuddly!

[Smilin' Dave]

Terrorists blew up a major landmark in the biggest city. And this lead a relatively incompetent but charismatic leader to declare war on... some evil entity that can never be identified.

Not quite. I'm assuming your referring to the Reichstag fire for your terrorist incident.
- The Reichstag fire was blamed on the Communists, which wasn't an ambiguous group at all... given that they had their own political party/parties in the country in question.
- Indeed, all the defendants in the fire trial were linked with a specific Communist party. Van Der Lubbe was a one time member of the Dutch Communist Party, Torgler was a KPD member, Dimitrov and Popov appear to have been in the Bulgarian Party.
- AFAIK no attempt was made to tie Communists to Jews during the propaganda made from this event. This was somewhat seperate.
- Hitler wasn't actually seen as incompetant by 1933, he had demonstrated a fair bit of political acumen which was the only reason he was in power.
- Hitler had a fairly clear agenda prior to the fire about his desire to get rid of Communists and Jews. Prior to his seizure of power the Communists were quite publically targetted (including with violence) by his party. It is not quite as cut and dried with the neo-conservatives.

Your broader implication is also lacking, because we now know with a fair degree of certainty that Van Der Lubbe acted alone. On the other hand, there has never been any serious doubt (although much rubbish was generated anyway) about Al Qaeda's role in the 9/11 attacks. These attacks dwarf the Reichstag fire by any scale you care to name.

And that picture of the fat cat freaks me out.

[DanDaMan]

Who was the Nazi's "Al Qaeda?"
13th Waffen Mountain Division of the SS Handschar (1st Croatian)

[QatzelOk]

Even if you are one of these people who think 9/11 is an inside job (which I think is ludicrous)

Good German people would never have suspected that the Nazis would blow up their own building either. So you haven't really taken anything away from my comparison. Remember, the Nazis were all exposed to Nazi propaganda, and we are all exposed to major amounts of our own oligarch's propaganda.

If we "don't believe" our government would commit an act of terror on its own people in order to become more powerful, it isn't because this is illogical. It's because we have been conditioned to trust our oligarchs by the propaganda/entertainment that they produce for us.

I wouldn't put them in the same category as Al Qaeda. The Communists were a strong political force in Germany, believe it or not, and controlled the country with the largest army and air force in all of Europe.

Yes, but like "Al Qaeda," they were also a vague movement of liberation from financial slavery from international oligarchs. Muslims are a well-defined group, as are a communist party, but treating the sympathizers of each of these clearly-defined groups as a vaguely defined "enemy" that's "out there" provides each empire with an endless target for aggression.

Al Qaeda - like communism - can be said to be everywhere and nowhere. So there is never a shortage of targets for the military to conquer in a heroic "struggle" to save the Nazi/American empire from vague foreign evil.

So I think "Jewish Communists" is the closest thing the Nazis had to the USA's "Al Qaeda" target.

[Smilin' Dave]

Good German people would never have suspected that the Nazis would blow up their own building either. So you haven't really taken anything away from my comparison. Remember, the Nazis were all exposed to Nazi propaganda, and we are all exposed to major amounts of our own oligarch's propaganda.

If we "don't believe" our government would commit an act of terror on its own people in order to become more powerful, it isn't because this is illogical. It's because we have been conditioned to trust our oligarchs by the propaganda/entertainment that they produce for us.

Can you back up your claim that Nazi Germany burnt the Reichstag themselves? Because we're heading into conspiracy theory territory here.

Muslims are a well-defined group, as are a communist party

Muslims are a fairly diverse and difficult to define group, and your analogy with Communists is a poor one. Who ever heard of a non-practicing Communist? Does converting to Islam require documentation? Because becoming a member of a Communist party certainly did.

Al Qaeda - like communism - can be said to be everywhere and nowhere. So there is never a shortage of targets for the military to conquer in a heroic "struggle" to save the Nazi/American empire from vague foreign evil.

Again the analogy falls over. Communism wasn't really used as a casus belli for invasion by the Nazis, particularly in their earliest conquests (Czechoslovakia, Poland and France). Even in the case of an explicitly Communist state, the Soviet Union, the Nazis went to some effort to claim they were simply pre-empting a military threat.

So I think "Jewish Communists" is the closest thing the Nazis had to the USA's "Al Qaeda" target.

If one ignores all evidence to the contray, sure.

[killim]

How about some facts:

The Reichstag burned down 02/27/1933. But the "Machtergreifung" was at this time nearly completed and the laws from 02/28/1933 were written long before the burning and only completed the abolishment of core rights as another facet of the dictatorship.

01/30/1933 - Hitler is appointed as chancellor despite the minority of 33.1%
02/01/1933 - The parliament is dissolved
02/04/1933 - Abolishment of the freedom of assembly and freedom of speech on the level of the minister of interior on the basis of acts
02/04/1933 - The municipal parliaments and administrations get dissolved

28/04/1933 - Abolishemnt of the freedom of assembly, freedom of speech, freedom of communication now on lower and more formalized general level to avoid permanent acts.

03/05/1933 - NSDAP gets 43.9% despite the fact that they put the SPD and KPD members into the freshly created concentration camps and "protected" the polling places and the KPD is dissolved and with her her seats.
03/21/1933 - "Tag von Potsdam" the parliament meets for the first session and the SPD and KPD are debarred.
03/23/1933 - Under the "protection" of the armed SS and SA the parliament votes for the "Ermächtigungsgesetz" -> Full legislative rights for the administration for four years
03/31/1933 - "Gleichschaltung" The state parliaments are dissolved and the appointed state administrations get full legislative rights for the states.
07/14/1933 - To avoid the former practice of single bans for parties, unions and similar organizations, now only the NSDAP and her organiszations are allowed unless they are explicitly allowed per act.
11/12/1933 - A one-party election. Guess who has won....
01/20/1934 - The "Führerprinzip" is introduced into the economy.
01/30/1934 - The federal system is now officially abolished. The states lose all rights.
06/30/1934 - "Röhm-Putsch" and the NSDAP internal night of the long knifes.
08/02/1934 - Paul von Hindenburg dies -> Hitler appointes himself to chancellor and president and the army is sworn to his person
04/01/1935 - The municipal right is abolished and transfered to....

-------------------------

It is highly questionable who burned the Reichstag down, but we know today that the story of the NSDAP was not true .

[QatzelOk]

the Nazis went to some effort to claim they were simply pre-empting a military threat.

They used this as an ADDITIONAL reason to invade and colonize other nations. Along with the "evil Jewish Communism" reason.

This is identical to the way the US has used Saddam's WMDs and the Iranian Nukes (and Afghan training camps) to add more propaganda ammunition (to target several demographics) to their racism-based primary mission.

So if Muslim Terror is the equivalent of Jewish Communism, I'm thinking that the Taliban is very similar to the terror gangs who formed Israel. In other words, America may have its biggest war ahead of it.

[Smilin' Dave]

No justification for your Reichstag fire theory I see Qatz.

They used this as an ADDITIONAL reason to invade and colonize other nations. Along with the "evil Jewish Communism" reason.

Since you're clearly well versed in Nazi propaganda and its usage as a casus belli in its invasion, perhaps you can point to examples of Jewish Communism being used to justify the following invasions/annexations
- Austria
- The Czech state (Slovakia becoming its own country IIRC)
- Poland
- Denmark and Norway
- France
- Greece
- Yugoslavia

to their racism-based primary mission.

Race was not used as a primary reason for aggression against any state by the Bush administration. It doesn't even appear to be a 'secret' reason, as you would be away if you really read the PNAC documentation. Once again we find your comparison based on false assumptions.

So if Muslim Terror is the equivalent of Jewish Communism, I'm thinking that the Taliban is very similar to the terror gangs who formed Israel.

I suppose if you continue to pile false analogy onto another, you'll eventually get the result to want. For example: If Qatz is the equivilent of Sayyid Qutb, I'm thinking that people who like Qatz's posts are like the Muslim Brotherhood splinters who murdered Anwar Sadat.

[Mazhi]

Did it have a catchy name?

In Yugoslavia, Liberation Front, Partizani, or according to the Germans "red bandits":

[youtube]slhweCHweKQ[/youtube]

[youtube]l7AEvrzwjO8[/youtube]





The "terrorists" used this sort of propaganda:



This was their "Osama bin Laden":



But unlike Osama, these "terrorists" had worldwide support from the Allies, and ultimately won the war. Also, they fought to liberate their country, unlike Osama who fights for..what already?

[redcarpet]

Easy question. Anti-fascist partisans.