Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

tneva82 wrote:
Don't recall exact sum but it was low 6 digits a year if even that.

Finland's debt is about 60% of GDP, so you'd probably have to take the entire incomes of the top 25% of income earners of thereabouts, so yeah, probably about 100k.

But then there's the issue of why would you put up the standard of wiping the debt out in a year. That's a lot like pointing out that if you put all your pay in to your mortgage you won't wipe it out in a year, so why bother? The answer is that you do these things in increments, over many years.

That said, I don't want to make it sound like I'm arguing in favour of raising taxes on the rich in Finland. I don't know even know why Finland became part of the conversation. That country has the least inequality of income in all of Europe. The arguments for why we need taxes on the rich in other countries don't really apply to Finland.

Did we just have a "Hitler had some good ideas" post?

 d-usa wrote:
Did we just have a "Hitler had some good ideas" post?

Why not, we've had some "I hope American's get killed' posts in here as well. This has all just gone to hell in a hand basket.

 d-usa wrote:
Did we just have a "Hitler had some good ideas" post?

Hey Hitler had great ideas. For becoming a megalomaniac who threw millions of people into death camps, started a world war, doomed his own country, and cementing his legacy as the universal symbol of evil to everyone who isn't a raging bigot.

All in all it was mission accomplished

 LordofHats wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
Not really. The German economy was thoroughly fethed, before the war stated, and while it was going. He made it a bit better, but it was still fethed. He literally invaded countries as to not default on debt. And there were massive shortages of goods, from military to civilian, even before the war started. The whole structure of the economy was also a fething mess. It wasn't until after the war that the German economy was rebuilt (because the allied powers realized that reparations just created this conflict in the first place).

History expansion; Germany's economy actually didn't improve much under Hitler. Kristallnacht is famous as an act of racist oppression, but it was also an economic attack. It helped forced non-Germans out of the economy, leaving German businesses to pick up the slack and start making more money (similar things happened in the US with the Atlanta Race Riot and during Japanese Internment). When you start taking possession of people's homes, valuables, and their teeth fillings, and you can make your economy look a lot better than it actually is. Then you just invade a few neighbors and start defrauding their people for your own people's benefit. Not that it makes your people much better of, but it lets you maintain the illusion to the rest of the world.

Yup. It's basically the bs "He made the trains run on time" argument.

There's a lot of weird pro-nazi revisionism that has become ingrained in our psyke, like the whole tiger-worship. Now the early German light tanks were actually pretty good, but stuff like the Porche Tiger were expensive, over-engineered, breakdown-prone, overheating nightmares. And the quality of German steel at the time was so bad, that the armour didn't have anywhere near the defensive capabilities of the equivalent amour of American or Russian steel, and when punctured could catastrophically shatter. And it didn't even use sloped armour, something that both the T-34 and M4 used. But you also hear about "Oh the Sherman was so bad", when it was a great tank. It's anti-tank round easily punctured the tiger's armour. And you only every hear about some sort of soviet human wave, when they had the best tank in the world, the t-34. It was so good, the Germans straight up said that they had nothing of a similar size to match it.

Prestor Jon wrote:
Vigilante murder is never excusable if we're going to live in a society with rule of law.

This is where we disagree then. When your position is "hey, maybe industrialized slaughter of this group I hate is a good idea" I'm not going to have any sympathy at all if someone decides to take matters into their own hands and remove you as a threat. Remember, everything Nazi Germany did was 100% legal by their own laws. And yet I think most people would agree that the right thing to do would have been to ignore the rule of law and kill Hitler (and all of his top supporters) before they could murder millions of innocents and kill countless more in a senseless war.

The preponderance of people thinking/saying good things keeps the bad things at bay. Education and exposure to different people and ideas humanize people and makes it difficult to turn people on each other.

And when that fails you kill Nazis.

If people really honestly equate Trump with Hitler then we need to keep the Electoral College.

That's not the comparison I'm making. I don't think Trump is equivalent to Hitler at all. Trump seems willing to pander to all kinds of awful people if it gets him into power, but he isn't the kind of true believe zealot that Hitler was. He's much more comparable to that awkward family member who keeps making racist jokes at thanksgiving dinner and doesn't get why people are upset about it ("It's just a joke! Don't be so serious!"). But we can not ignore the fact that there are actual Nazis in the US, and groups like the KKK that are on that same level of evil. And the "alt right" is uncomfortably close to that territory.

Some dude from politico running a doxxing attack is unacceptable, even if the target was a nazi. But given the guy was immediately fired I think it's really just a case of one idiot stepping out of line, and can't be used to discredit the greater left wing.

What disappoints me is the number of dakka members who are defending the release of the nazi's details. When we allow an environment where free speech brings with it risk of personal threat, then we don't really have free speech. I saw an interesting argument comparing it to Nazi Germany, asking if people who claim they would have worked to stop Hitler can also argue that this Nazi can't be resisted. But to turn that argument around - if we create a political dialogue where stepping out and saying something political can lead to the release of home addresses and threats against a person and their family, how many of you would still be willing to speak openly?

 cuda1179 wrote:
Not to sound too weird, but before the REALLY bad stuff happened Hitler did pull his country out of an economic mess, improve their infrastructure, make them a world power, and make them united.

This largely mythical. The economy recovered under Hitler, but not because of anything Hitler did. The massive roadworks, for instance, began under previous administrations. Hitler just turned up at the right time, as the country was pulling itself out of business downturn.

Hitler didn't make made Germany a world power in any economic or or political sense. They were already one of the great industrial powers, second only to the US. And in international politics he turned Germany in to an outcast.

I don't even know where you got the idea that he made Germany united. Running a campaign on vilification of other ethnic and political groups is pretty much the opposite of unification. His election led to considerable violence and unrest, which only died down when he began directly persecuting his opponents - this is not a kind of unification anyone should be praised for. He did manage to forge a kind of uneasy alliance between the new, radical worker's right wing, and the old conservative right wing (as in the old European meaning of aristocratic). But Hitler is hardly unique in managing that alliance.

So we're inciting violence now? Thats a new low, even for Off Topic. If somebody does something bad, like advocate violence against X group, then they should be dealt with within the bounds of the law, prosecuted and convicted (and possibly executed but only if the crime is serious enough to warrant it).

NEVER set a precedent for something you don't want to be used against you one day. If you decide its OK for vigilantes to murder Nazi's because "Nazi's are bad!", then one day those Nazi's will use that same vigilante violence against you because "Marxist liberal SJW's are bad!".

sirlynchmob wrote:
In other news, Gerrymandering has been deemed unconstitutional in Wisconsin...

In other news... I posted that about 10 posts above yours. Probably 60% of the posts after that were discussing it

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:
So we're inciting violence now? Thats a new low, even for Off Topic. If somebody does something bad, like advocate violence against X group, then they should be dealt with within the bounds of the law, prosecuted and convicted (and possibly executed but only if the crime is serious enough to warrant it).

And, again, murdering millions of people was entirely within the bounds of the law in Nazi Germany. Are you honestly saying that it would have been wrong to break the law to stop the slaughter, if you had the opportunity to kill those responsible for it?

There's a lot of weird pro-nazi revisionism that has become ingrained in our psyke

It's not even really revisionism (on the Hitler fixed the economy bit that is). It's just old (badly sourced) news and propaganda that's been passed down through the generations and repeated so much people think it's true. I was looking at Pennsylvania Newspapers just a few weeks ago for the Holocaust Museum's History Unfolded Project, and you'll see lots of stuff like that. Also lots of stuff o the Eastern Front cause apparently people in 1940s South Central PA really cared a lot about what was going on in the Red Army XD

There's a number of other myths like that. One of my favorites is the story that Germans/Japanese soldiers could hear the ping of the M8 Garand when it ejected a clip, and would then kill US soldiers because the ping told them the soldier was reloading. It's a pretty senseless myth (like anyone could hear 1 guys Garand ping in the middle of a firefight with artillery, machine guns, and men screaming all around them), but you'll find people repeating it like it was common event. I saw a history professor from Dickenson College repeat it to a class once as the United States Army Heritage and Education center.

 sebster wrote:
When we allow an environment where free speech brings with it risk of personal threat, then we don't really have free speech.

I'm not concerned by this. "Hitler had the right idea, let's start mass executions" is not speech that needs to be protected.

I saw an interesting argument comparing it to Nazi Germany, asking if people who claim they would have worked to stop Hitler can also argue that this Nazi can't be resisted. But to turn that argument around - if we create a political dialogue where stepping out and saying something political can lead to the release of home addresses and threats against a person and their family, how many of you would still be willing to speak openly?

That's not really a fair comparison, because nobody here is advocating the idea of threats against political rivals over normal political disagreements. There's a huge difference between getting death threats over a difference of opinion on tax policy and getting death threats because you're a Nazi/KKK member/etc. I do not want a society where people who advocate genocide and would work to turn their beliefs into reality if given the chance feel safe in holding those beliefs.

 sebster wrote:


[
This largely mythical. The economy recovered under Hitler, but not because of anything Hitler did. The massive roadworks, for instance, began under previous administrations. Hitler just turned up at the right time, as the country was pulling itself out of business downturn.

Hitler didn't make made Germany a world power in any economic or or political sense. They were already one of the great industrial powers, second only to the US. And in international politics he turned Germany in to an outcast.

I don't even know where you got the idea that he made Germany united. Running a campaign on vilification of other ethnic and political groups is pretty much the opposite of unification. His election led to considerable violence and unrest, which only died down when he began directly persecuting his opponents - this is not a kind of unification anyone should be praised for. He did manage to forge a kind of uneasy alliance between the new, radical worker's right wing, and the old conservative right wing (as in the old European meaning of aristocratic). But Hitler is hardly unique in managing that alliance.

Germany may have been slowly on the road to recovery without Hitler, but they were far from it. The German Mark was still horribly inflated, the Great Depression was still in full swing after the run on U.S. banks (that had loans with the post-World War One German government) in 1933, unemployment was still high, there was still political/labor unrest due to a weak Weimar Republic, the military was still forced to maintain a weakened state of readiness, and Germany was still under crippling war reparation payments.

Hitler putting the country on a war footing and revitalizing industries needed for his future war plans accelerated the economic recovery of Germany. Of course, the war ended up smashing it all down by 1945.

Violence is the supreme authority from which all authority is derived.

 LordofHats wrote:

There's a lot of weird pro-nazi revisionism that has become ingrained in our psyke

It's not even really revisionism (on the Hitler fixed the economy bit that is). It's just old (badly sourced) news and propaganda that's been passed down through the generations and repeated so much people think it's true. I was looking at Pennsylvania Newspapers just a few weeks ago for the Holocaust Museum's History Unfolded Project, and you'll see lots of stuff like that. Also lots of stuff o the Eastern Front cause apparently people in 1940s South Central PA really cared a lot about what was going on in the Red Army XD

There's a number of other myths like that. One of my favorites is the story that Germans/Japanese soldiers could hear the ping of the M8 Garand when it ejected a clip, and would then kill US soldiers because the ping told them the soldier was reloading. It's a pretty senseless myth (like anyone could hear 1 guys Garand ping in the middle of a firefight with artillery, machine guns, and men screaming all around them), but you'll find people repeating it like it was common event. I saw a history professor from Dickenson College repeat it to a class once as the United States Army Heritage and Education center.

Actually, while the effects of the M1 "ping" was overblown and overhyped, it wasn't a complete myth. This has come from the recollections of WWII veterans over the years.

 Peregrine wrote:

Prestor Jon wrote:
Vigilante murder is never excusable if we're going to live in a society with rule of law.

This is where we disagree then. When your position is "hey, maybe industrialized slaughter of this group I hate is a good idea" I'm not going to have any sympathy at all if someone decides to take matters into their own hands and remove you as a threat. Remember, everything Nazi Germany did was 100% legal by their own laws. And yet I think most people would agree that the right thing to do would have been to ignore the rule of law and kill Hitler (and all of his top supporters) before they could murder millions of innocents and kill countless more in a senseless war.

The preponderance of people thinking/saying good things keeps the bad things at bay. Education and exposure to different people and ideas humanize people and makes it difficult to turn people on each other.

And when that fails you kill Nazis.

If people really honestly equate Trump with Hitler then we need to keep the Electoral College.

That's not the comparison I'm making. I don't think Trump is equivalent to Hitler at all. Trump seems willing to pander to all kinds of awful people if it gets him into power, but he isn't the kind of true believe zealot that Hitler was. He's much more comparable to that awkward family member who keeps making racist jokes at thanksgiving dinner and doesn't get why people are upset about it ("It's just a joke! Don't be so serious!"). But we can not ignore the fact that there are actual Nazis in the US, and groups like the KKK that are on that same level of evil. And the "alt right" is uncomfortably close to that territory.

No it's not ok to murder people because they espouse the wrong idea. The wrongness of an idea is subjective once you set the standard that murder is ok for people with "wrong" ideas then any idea can be "wrong" and anyone can be murdered. You keep nazis and bad people out of the govt and you keep the govts power limited you don't murder them if you can't convince them to not be nazis. Some number of people will always have bad ideas and we don't have to murder them we just need to ensure that most people can recognize a bad idea when they encounter one.

 oldravenman3025 wrote:

 LordofHats wrote:

There's a lot of weird pro-nazi revisionism that has become ingrained in our psyke

It's not even really revisionism (on the Hitler fixed the economy bit that is). It's just old (badly sourced) news and propaganda that's been passed down through the generations and repeated so much people think it's true. I was looking at Pennsylvania Newspapers just a few weeks ago for the Holocaust Museum's History Unfolded Project, and you'll see lots of stuff like that. Also lots of stuff o the Eastern Front cause apparently people in 1940s South Central PA really cared a lot about what was going on in the Red Army XD

There's a number of other myths like that. One of my favorites is the story that Germans/Japanese soldiers could hear the ping of the M8 Garand when it ejected a clip, and would then kill US soldiers because the ping told them the soldier was reloading. It's a pretty senseless myth (like anyone could hear 1 guys Garand ping in the middle of a firefight with artillery, machine guns, and men screaming all around them), but you'll find people repeating it like it was common event. I saw a history professor from Dickenson College repeat it to a class once as the United States Army Heritage and Education center.

Actually, while the effects of the M1 "ping" was overblown and overhyped, it wasn't a complete myth. This has come from the recollections of WWII veterans over the years.

I have heard of soldiers hitting spent clips (the little thing that held the bullet, not sure if that it the right word) on their helmets to make it seem like the are out of ammunition. Not sure how accurate it is, but it's an interesting idea nevertheless.

Prestor Jon wrote:
You keep nazis and bad people out of the govt and you keep the govts power limited you don't murder them if you can't convince them to not be nazis.

And if that fails you kill Nazis. You don't shrug and say "well, the law says that genocide is legal, maybe someday we'll pass a new law and change this".

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

 LordofHats wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
Not really. The German economy was thoroughly fethed, before the war stated, and while it was going. He made it a bit better, but it was still fethed. He literally invaded countries as to not default on debt. And there were massive shortages of goods, from military to civilian, even before the war started. The whole structure of the economy was also a fething mess. It wasn't until after the war that the German economy was rebuilt (because the allied powers realized that reparations just created this conflict in the first place).

History expansion; Germany's economy actually didn't improve much under Hitler. Kristallnacht is famous as an act of racist oppression, but it was also an economic attack. It helped forced non-Germans out of the economy, leaving German businesses to pick up the slack and start making more money (similar things happened in the US with the Atlanta Race Riot and during Japanese Internment). When you start taking possession of people's homes, valuables, and their teeth fillings, and you can make your economy look a lot better than it actually is. Then you just invade a few neighbors and start defrauding their people for your own people's benefit. Not that it makes your people much better of, but it lets you maintain the illusion to the rest of the world.

Yup. It's basically the bs "He made the trains run on time" argument.

There's a lot of weird pro-nazi revisionism that has become ingrained in our psyke, like the whole tiger-worship. Now the early German light tanks were actually pretty good, but stuff like the Porche Tiger were expensive, over-engineered, breakdown-prone, overheating nightmares. And the quality of German steel at the time was so bad, that the armour didn't have anywhere near the defensive capabilities of the equivalent amour of American or Russian steel, and when punctured could catastrophically shatter. And it didn't even use sloped armour, something that both the T-34 and M4 used. But you also hear about "Oh the Sherman was so bad", when it was a great tank. It's anti-tank round easily punctured the tiger's armour. And you only every hear about some sort of soviet human wave, when they had the best tank in the world, the t-34. It was so good, the Germans straight up said that they had nothing of a similar size to match it.

To be fair, the Porsche Tiger never went into mass production, they just used the few hulls Porsche pre-emptively did make primarily for Ferdinand/Elefant tank destroyers, IIRC like only ~80 or so. The german steel got bad later in many cases, but wasn't bad for all the Tiger and Panther production, and the Russians had lots of issues of their own with steel quality and especially weld quality on tanks. The earlier Shermans did have major issues in 1943/44, which in fairness were mostly solved as time went on, but initial versions were unable to defeat a Tigers armor (and in fact weren't designed with the intention of tank on tank fighting in the first place, that was what Tank Destroyers with bigger guns were for), it wasn't until they upgunned it and brought in better AP ammo in wider availability that this changed. Sure, the Russians had the T-34, but it also took them several years of bloody combat to learn to employ it effectively. There are myths and exaggerations from all sides on these things, Tigers weren't as invincible as they are sometimes made out to be and Shermans weren't inexcusable toy tanks either (they were unquestionably superior when compared to PzIII/IV models in service when it was designed in 1941), but by the same token a there's truth in all sides, Tiger tanks did prove to be highly capable in battle, wracking up very high kill counts even while breaking down or running out of fuel or being blown up when trying to move in daylight by marauding fighter-bombers and yes even being killed through the frontal armor by later T-34's and Shermans

Prestor Jon wrote:
The wrongness of an idea is subjective once you set the standard that murder is ok for people with "wrong" ideas then any idea can be "wrong" and anyone can be murdered.

The wrongness of genocide is about as far from subjective as you can get. That is why it is regarded as a crime against humanity, not humans, but the whole of humanity.

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

 oldravenman3025 wrote:

 LordofHats wrote:

There's a lot of weird pro-nazi revisionism that has become ingrained in our psyke

It's not even really revisionism (on the Hitler fixed the economy bit that is). It's just old (badly sourced) news and propaganda that's been passed down through the generations and repeated so much people think it's true. I was looking at Pennsylvania Newspapers just a few weeks ago for the Holocaust Museum's History Unfolded Project, and you'll see lots of stuff like that. Also lots of stuff o the Eastern Front cause apparently people in 1940s South Central PA really cared a lot about what was going on in the Red Army XD

There's a number of other myths like that. One of my favorites is the story that Germans/Japanese soldiers could hear the ping of the M8 Garand when it ejected a clip, and would then kill US soldiers because the ping told them the soldier was reloading. It's a pretty senseless myth (like anyone could hear 1 guys Garand ping in the middle of a firefight with artillery, machine guns, and men screaming all around them), but you'll find people repeating it like it was common event. I saw a history professor from Dickenson College repeat it to a class once as the United States Army Heritage and Education center.

Actually, while the effects of the M1 "ping" was overblown and overhyped, it wasn't a complete myth. This has come from the recollections of WWII veterans over the years.

I have heard of soldiers hitting spent clips (the little thing that held the bullet, not sure if that it the right word) on their helmets to make it seem like the are out of ammunition. Not sure how accurate it is, but it's an interesting idea nevertheless.

I've heard about that too. Including from a couple of vets who served in the Pacific Theatre (who are both, sadly, no longer with us.)

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
Yup. It's basically the bs "He made the trains run on time" argument.

To be fair, there is a clear upswing in the economy under Hitler. It's just that the upswing was a more a product of lucky timing for Hitler, rather than things he actually did. This is a problem we have with many political leaders, who are praised (or condemned) for the events already in place when they came to power.

There's a lot of weird pro-nazi revisionism that has become ingrained in our psyke, like the whole tiger-worship. Now the early German light tanks were actually pretty good, but stuff like the Porche Tiger were expensive, over-engineered, breakdown-prone, overheating nightmares. And the quality of German steel at the time was so bad, that the armour didn't have anywhere near the defensive capabilities of the equivalent amour of American or Russian steel, and when punctured could catastrophically shatter. And it didn't even use sloped armour, something that both the T-34 and M4 used. But you also hear about "Oh the Sherman was so bad", when it was a great tank. It's anti-tank round easily punctured the tiger's armour. And you only every hear about some sort of soviet human wave, when they had the best tank in the world, the t-34. It was so good, the Germans straight up said that they had nothing of a similar size to match it.

To be fair, the Tiger was a 1930s designed tank that was originally rejected, then dusted off and put in to production as the Germans looked for something that could carry the excellent 88mm gun. The quality of that gun did offset a lot of the problem of the chassis. And when they learned about the quality of the T-34 they did build the Panther, which took on many of the best features of the T-34 such as the sloping armour and wide tracks (but also took on many of the failings of German tank design, over complex, poorly suited to industrial production etc).

But I agree on your point that there are a lot of myths about the skills and effectiveness of Nazi Germany. It is quite interesting when the other famous tyranny, Soviet Russia, actually did manage an incredible industrial transformation alongside their long list of atrocities, and yet that stuff is paid little attention. It's a weird phenomenon.

LordofHats wrote:

There's a lot of weird pro-nazi revisionism that has become ingrained in our psyke

It's not even really revisionism (on the Hitler fixed the economy bit that is). It's just old (badly sourced) news and propaganda that's been passed down through the generations and repeated so much people think it's true. I was looking at Pennsylvania Newspapers just a few weeks ago for the Holocaust Museum's History Unfolded Project, and you'll see lots of stuff like that. Also lots of stuff o the Eastern Front cause apparently people in 1940s South Central PA really cared a lot about what was going on in the Red Army XD

There's a number of other myths like that. One of my favorites is the story that Germans/Japanese soldiers could hear the ping of the M8 Garand when it ejected a clip, and would then kill US soldiers because the ping told them the soldier was reloading. It's a pretty senseless myth (like anyone could hear 1 guys Garand ping in the middle of a firefight with artillery, machine guns, and men screaming all around them), but you'll find people repeating it like it was common event. I saw a history professor from Dickenson College repeat it to a class once as the United States Army Heritage and Education center.

Yeah, not exactly a myth, and the sound of the clip is fairly loud. Also, have you been IN a firefight? You'd be surprised what you can still hear, especially if it's something out of place. Like a grenade hitting dirt within 10-15 feet of you. You'd think that wouldn't be able to be picked out, but it indeed can be.

Oh, it's the M1 Garand...

oldravenman3025 wrote:Actually, while the effects of the M1 "ping" was overblown and overhyped, it wasn't a complete myth. This has come from the recollections of WWII veterans over the years.

Damn it, ninja'd.

Co'tor Shas wrote:I have heard of soldiers hitting spent clips (the little thing that held the bullet, not sure if that it the right word) on their helmets to make it seem like the are out of ammunition. Not sure how accurate it is, but it's an interesting idea nevertheless.

I've heard it from people I've served with who used them, and from vets in the VA hospital I get treatment at who have said the same thing. I doubt that many people would be putting someone on a snipe hunt.

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

 oldravenman3025 wrote:

 LordofHats wrote:

There's a lot of weird pro-nazi revisionism that has become ingrained in our psyke

It's not even really revisionism (on the Hitler fixed the economy bit that is). It's just old (badly sourced) news and propaganda that's been passed down through the generations and repeated so much people think it's true. I was looking at Pennsylvania Newspapers just a few weeks ago for the Holocaust Museum's History Unfolded Project, and you'll see lots of stuff like that. Also lots of stuff o the Eastern Front cause apparently people in 1940s South Central PA really cared a lot about what was going on in the Red Army XD

There's a number of other myths like that. One of my favorites is the story that Germans/Japanese soldiers could hear the ping of the M8 Garand when it ejected a clip, and would then kill US soldiers because the ping told them the soldier was reloading. It's a pretty senseless myth (like anyone could hear 1 guys Garand ping in the middle of a firefight with artillery, machine guns, and men screaming all around them), but you'll find people repeating it like it was common event. I saw a history professor from Dickenson College repeat it to a class once as the United States Army Heritage and Education center.

Actually, while the effects of the M1 "ping" was overblown and overhyped, it wasn't a complete myth. This has come from the recollections of WWII veterans over the years.

I have heard of soldiers hitting spent clips (the little thing that held the bullet, not sure if that it the right word) on their helmets to make it seem like the are out of ammunition. Not sure how accurate it is, but it's an interesting idea nevertheless.

Back in the dark days of the 1940s, magazines (which I believe is the technically correct term) like those used in the BAR, Thompson, and the M1 were still kind of a new technology. With all the hiking a soldier did, the bullets sometimes got loose, and the primer end (the back end) wouldn't always be resting against the back of the magazine. This could cause the round not fire when shooting, because it wouldn't load into the chamber right and cause a jam or be too forward for the firing pin to strike it. Hitting the cartridge against your helmet jostled the bullets and forced them into the back so they'd be in the right place.

The explanation from the non-gun person XD

 Peregrine wrote:

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:
So we're inciting violence now? Thats a new low, even for Off Topic. If somebody does something bad, like advocate violence against X group, then they should be dealt with within the bounds of the law, prosecuted and convicted (and possibly executed but only if the crime is serious enough to warrant it).

And, again, murdering millions of people was entirely within the bounds of the law in Nazi Germany. Are you honestly saying that it would have been wrong to break the law to stop the slaughter, if you had the opportunity to kill those responsible for it?

First of all, you'd have needed a Crystal Ball to know that at the time. You're pontificating with the benefit of hindsight.

Second, such a violent crackdown would only fuel the extremists and strengthen their narrative. Remember that Hitler blamed the Reichstag arson fire on Communists, and used it to crack down on Communism, civil liberties, and to help justify his push for totalitarian power. How much more political capitol do you Nazi's both then and today would have gained out of a assassination attempt, particularly a succcessful one?

We've seen from modern day radical Islam that you can't kill an idea. Trying to only creates a martyr, and a new head of the Hydra. You have to discredit the idea outright.

Third, Richard Spencer is not Hitler. Thats ridiculously hyperbolic. He's a sad little wannabe. But kill him, and you risk propelling someone worse into power - an actual Hitler. If Richard Spencer has broken the law, if he has incited violence, committed racial hatred offences (thats a thing in the UK) or otherwise crossed the line of acceptable free speech and strayed into criminal speech, then he should be arrested, prosecuted and convicted with all due process.

Not fething murdered.

Once you open that Pandora's box, of politically motivated murder, theres no closing it again and it will be used against you in future. Do not set that precedent.

Actually, we do that with M4 mags to this day. The spring system will have the tips of the rounds against the inside front of the magazine, so when someone loads a mag, they hit it against their helmet. One of the many reasons I feel we need to switch to the FN FAL

 sebster wrote:
But I agree on your point that there are a lot of myths about the skills and effectiveness of Nazi Germany. It is quite interesting when the other famous tyranny, Soviet Russia, actually did manage an incredible industrial transformation alongside their long list of atrocities, and yet that stuff is paid little attention. It's a weird phenomenon.

Well, we were in a cold war with them for the next 30 years or whatever, so that might have something to do with it.

 Just Tony wrote:
Actually, we do that with M4 mags to this day. The spring system will have the tips of the rounds against the inside front of the magazine, so when someone loads a mag, they hit it against their helmet. One of the many reasons I feel we need to switch to the FN FAL

Yeah I was pretty sure we still did that (cause I know I saw soldiers doing that at the range on Fort Bragg), but I wasn't sure.

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:


Once you open that Pandora's box, of politically motivated murder, theres no closing it again.

It's kinda cute the way you say it, as if that box still had a single micrometer unexplored.

 Kovnik Obama wrote:

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:


Once you open that Pandora's box, of politically motivated murder, theres no closing it again.

It's kinda cute the way you say it, as if that box still had a single micrometer unexplored.

So I'm repeating what many others have seen in this thread, so fething what? Do I not have the right to respond to someone who was speaking directly to me?