"Gilligan" wrote in message
ink.net...
That's only to start a war. What about finishing one?
One you didn't start?

Gilligan

WTF? You reading something into this statement? It was merely a quote, if
you are seeing parallels, then maybe it's just you.

BTW, in case you've forgotten your history, the Nazis never attacked Poland,
they were merely "defending" themselves against an attack by Poland, or
maybe they were just "finishing" one.

http://fcit.coedu.usf.edu/holocaust/...nt/HITLER1.htm

John Cairns


"John Cairns" wrote in message
. com...
The quote cited above does not appear in transcripts of the Nuremberg
trials
because although Goering spoke these words during the course of the
proceedings, he did not offer them at his trial. His comments were made
privately to Gustave Gilbert, a German-speaking intelligence officer and
psychologist who was granted free access by the Allies to all the
prisoners
held in the Nuremberg jail. Gilbert kept a journal of his observations of
the proceedings and his conversations with the prisoners, which he later
published in the book Nuremberg Diary. The quote offered above was part
of
a
conversation Gilbert held with a dejected Hermann Goering in his cell on
the
evening of 18 April 1946, as the trials were halted for a three-day
Easter
recess:


Sweating in his cell in the evening, Goering was defensive and deflated
and not very happy over the turn the trial was taking. He said that he
had
no control over the actions or the defense of the others, and that he had
never been anti-Semitic himself, had not believed these atrocities, and
that
several Jews had offered to testify in his behalf. If [Hans] Frank
[Governor-General of occupied Poland] had known about atrocities in 1943,
he
should have come to him and he would have tried to do something about it.
He
might not have had enough power to change things in 1943, but if somebody
had come to him in 1941 or 1942 he could have forced a showdown. (I still
did not have the desire at this point to tell him what [SS General Otto]
Ohlendorf had said to this: that Goering had been written off as an
effective "moderating" influence, because of his drug addiction and
corruption.) I pointed out that with his "temperamental utterances," such
as
preferring the killing of 200 Jews to the destruction of property, he had
hardly set himself up as champion of minority rights. Goering protested
that
too much weight was being put on these temperamental utterances.
Furthermore, he made it clear that he was not defending or glorifying
Hitler.
Later in the conversation, Gilbert recorded Goering's observations that
the
common people can always be manipulated into supporting and fighting wars
by
their political leaders:


We got around to the subject of war again and I said that, contrary to
his
attitude, I did not think that the common people are very thankful for
leaders who bring them war and destruction.
"Why, of course, the people don't want war," Goering shrugged. "Why
would
some poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best
that
he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece. Naturally,
the common people don't want war; neither in Russia nor in England nor in
America, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But, after
all,
it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is
always
a
simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy or a
fascist dictatorship or a Parliament or a Communist dictatorship."

"There is one difference," I pointed out. "In a democracy the people
have
some say in the matter through their elected representatives, and in the
United States only Congress can declare wars."

"Oh, that is all well and good, but, voice or no voice, the people can
always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you
have
to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for
lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same
way
in any country."

A bit cynical?

John Cairns