JackHandy said:
SvennoJ said:
What it means is that we have let his sacrifice be for nothing as we're well underway to new fascist oppression. It doesn't mean that he wanted Nazism to steamroll the world in the 1940s, it means that its happening again. It means we haven't learned from history and are repeating the same mistakes that led to Nazi Germany.
Yes he can make that assessment. |
No, he can't because it's wholly-flawed logic. If he hadn't fought, if no one had fought, there wouldn't be a country to lament about. There wouldn't be a world he doesn't care for. There would be nothing. No interview for him, no opinion for you and no reply from me. If the three of us had been born into that world, and that is a big if considering... we'd all be living in some sort of Tolkien nightmare where Frodo doesn't save the day. The man was dead wrong. Period. |
I disagree. If he and his friends had not fought that does not mean other Brits would not have and that the overall outcome would change. I believe you think he is saying that the British should not have fought at all. I took it as he and his mates fought and lost lives and in the end, the country is less free (my guess is speech and what seems to be an invasion under the guise migration).
To me his words seemed very personal and not talking about just letting the Nazi's and their allies win. I don't know that even had GB fallen, that Japan would no longer bomb Hawaii drawing the American Logistics Monster into the fray. I have only seen snippets of the interview but do not recall him saying they should not have fought, only thinking it was not worth it.
Here is a shit analogy: Some a-hole grabs your girl's ass in front of you. You take a poke at him and end up getting your ass kicked and your nose broke. Two weeks later she dumps you. Should you have just tucked tail and let it slide? No. in the end was it worth the broken nose that is still healing since you no longer even have the girl? You might think not ... some situations are just lose lose
