The Nanking Massacre and Iris Chang's Book The Rape of Nanking

[Unkotare]

Of course, we have known for many years that FDR had several advisers who were Soviet agents or operatives. He berated anti-communist Japan for every real and imagined sin but excused or ignored Soviet brutality and aggression. He also routinely parroted Soviet and Chinese propaganda about Japanese actions in the war in China.
...

And he threw over 100,000 AMERICANS into his concentration camps.

 

[JoeB131]

Of course, we have known for many years that FDR had several advisers who were Soviet agents or operatives. He berated anti-communist Japan for every real and imagined sin but excused or ignored Soviet brutality and aggression. He also routinely parroted Soviet and Chinese propaganda about Japanese actions in the war in China.

Holy shit, you are repeating McCarthyism? FDR's advisors were all Card-Carrying Communists! He had a list he never showed anyone.

The Japanese were engaged in a war of aggression in China, period. They had been engaged in it since 1931 when they invaded Manchuria. They had been committing aggression against China for 10 years before they were "forced" to bomb Pearl Harbor. (Yes, it's never Japan's fault in Axis Mikey's world.)

For example, when the Japanese took China’s largest city, Shanghai, the Soviets and FDR and his allies in the American press condemned Japan for its supposed “aggression.” However, the Japanese were not the aggressors in that battle.

The Japanese did not want to attack Shanghai. The Japanese had been trying to defuse the tense situation in Shanghai when the Nationalists attacked a small Japanese garrison because they thought they could easily overrun the garrison before the Japanese could get reinforcements to the area. But, the 2,000-man garrison fought with unbelievable courage and held off the 30,000-man Chinese army that attacked it just long enough for reinforcements to arrive.

Here's the point. Shanghai was China's largest city.

But, this situation changed when Chiang Kai-Shek, commanding general of the Chinese forces, decided to attack the Japanese section of Shanghai with two elite divisions. The Japanese brought in more reinforcements and an enormous battle ensued, ending with the Nationalist forces being expelled from Shanghai and the Japanese taking control of the city.

Chiang Kai-Shek’s reasons for picking a fight with the Japanese at Shanghai remain a subject of debate. Peter Harmsen:

Wow, Axis Mikey, do you go down to the Rape Crisis Center and tell them they were showing too much ankle?

Seriously, what the fuck?

Yet, FDR and his allies in the press, parroting the Soviet line, blamed the Japanese and cited their capture of Shanghai as another alleged example of Japanese "aggression."

Yes, anyone who can read a map could see the Japanese were the aggressors.

 

[JoeB131]

And he threw over 100,000 AMERICANS into his concentration camps.

And? Hey read about what Stalin did with the Volga Germans.

Frankly, relocating 100,000 Japanese Americans out of a potential war zone seems relatively tame.

 

[mikegriffith1]

Unkotard, still nothing to add to the conversation.

And what do you add to the conversation? Nothing. You ignore evidence you can't explain. When you do feel compelled to address evidence, you offer nothing but lame dismissals and amateurish, uneducated polemic in response.

But, hey, at least you make it clear that your repetition of the Chinese Communist/FDR version of the Pacific War is based on your admiration of Mao Tse-Tung and on your anti-Japanese bigotry.

And if readers peruse your posts in other threads, they'll discover you are also a proud anti-Semite and Israel hater who parrots neo-Nazi/Hamas/ISIS/Iranian propaganda about Jews and Israel, who posits an international Jewish/Zionist conspiracy, who says this vast Jewish plot has controlled the U.S. Government for decades, who says Israel purposely attacked the USS Liberty in 1967 in order to get America to enter the Six-Day War, who says the Soviet Union saved the West during WWII, who says Mao was less oppressive than Chiang Kai-Shek, who says Red China was freer and less oppressive than Free China, who says Jews never pass up a chance to earn money, who says the Israelis were "anxious" to give up the Sinai at the Camp David negotiations, who says all the wars in the Middle East since 1948 have been Israel's fault, and on and on and on with your nuttiness we could go.

 

[JoeB131]

Squeal like a pig, Axis Mikey.

And what do you add to the conversation? Nothing. You ignore evidence you can't explain. When you do feel compelled to address evidence, you offer nothing but lame dismissals and amateurish, uneducated polemic in response.

You haven't presented any evidence. The problem with conspiracy loons is that no matter how many times you prove it's a weather balloon, they'll insist it's a flying saucer.

But, hey, at least you make it clear that your repetition of the Chinese Communist/FDR version of the Pacific War is based on your admiration of Mao Tse-Tung and on your anti-Japanese bigotry.

Uh, guy, there's no argument about the Pacific War. The Japanese engaged in a war of aggression. The Chinese were the victims. FDR tried to use economic means to end the war, and we got attacked at Pearl Harbor for our troubles.

As for the Japanese, there's a lot about them I admire. I even dated a Japanese girl for a while. (I'm now married to a Chinese woman. What can I say, I have a type.) What they did during World War II was unacceptable. Just like what Germany did during World War II was unacceptable, and I'm of German ancestry.

Even the Japanese don't try to defend what they did during the war, they just like to pretend it didn't happen and teach their kids as little about it as they can.

And if readers peruse your posts in other threads, they'll discover you are also a proud anti-Semite and Israel hater who parrots neo-Nazi/Hamas/ISIS/Iranian propaganda about Jews and Israel, who posits an international Jewish/Zionist conspiracy, who says this vast Jewish plot has controlled the U.S. Government for decades, who says Israel purposely attacked the USS Liberty in 1967 in order to get America to enter the Six-Day War,

And all of that stuff is true. Seriously, you'd think some of these politicians (both parties) are on the Zionist payroll. The rest of the world sees the Gaza conflict for what it is... Genocide. We live in blissful ignorance, thanks to our politicians and media.

the Soviet Union saved the West during WWII,

Again, study WWII. There were single battles on the Eastern Front that were bigger than the entire Western Front. 85% of the Wehrmacht was deployed against the USSR. Russia did most of the heavy lifting in WWII.

That said, Stalin was a bastard and Putin is a bastard.

who says Mao was less oppressive than Chiang Kai-Shek, who says Red China was freer and less oppressive than Free China,

Um, no, Chinese say that. Perhaps if you spoke with some of them, you would know this.

The fact that you call Chiang's regime "Free" China is laughable. The man never stood for an election, he was a fascist military dictator who was supported by local warlords who did horrible things to the people they ruled. Then he let the Japanese take half the country. When the War was over, the Chinese people had quite enough of his shit, which is why Mao won.

who says Jews never pass up a chance to earn money,

Have you met Jews? They are actually kind of proud of this.

 

[mikegriffith1]

Holy ..., you are repeating McCarthyism? FDR's advisors were all Card-Carrying Communists! He had a list he never showed anyone.

Once again, we see your juvenile tactic of distorting exaggerating what was said to you to avoid dealing with evidence you can't explain.

The Japanese were engaged in a war of aggression in China, period. They had been engaged in it since 1931 when they invaded Manchuria. They had been committing aggression against China for 10 years before they were "forced" to bomb Pearl Harbor. (Yes, it's never Japan's fault in Axis Mikey's world.)

More juvenile antics to avoid dealing with evidence you can't explain.

Here's the point. Shanghai was China's largest city.

Actually, no, that's not the point. The point is that it was the Chinese who were the aggressors and who forced a large-scale battle at Shanghai, not the Japanese.

Wow, Axis Mikey, do you go down to the Rape Crisis Center and tell them they were showing too much ankle? Seriously, ...?

"Wow" what? Your juvenile nonsense is no answer for the evidence I presented. Is historian Peter Harmsen also "pro-Axis"? Was Chinese General Zhang Fakui, one of the top field commanders during the struggle for the city, another "pro-Axis" guy because he admitted that "Japan had no wish to fight at Shanghai and that “It should be simple to see that we [the Chinese] took the initiative”?

Yes, anyone who can read a map could see the Japanese were the aggressors.

Then you can't read a map. The Chinese attacked the treaty-protected Japanese section of Shanghai with two divisions. You see, the Japanese, as many scholars have documented, did not want to fight over Shanghai, so they worked out a compromise with the Chinese, even though the Chinese had started the fighting by attacking the 2,000-man Japanese garrison in the city. But then the Chinese ignored the deal and attacked again.

I guess General Fakui couldn't read a map either, hey, since he admitted after the war that the Japanese did not want to fight in Shanghai and that the Chinese were the ones who started the fighting in Shanghai?

You're such a blind pro-Red China idealogue that you can't admit contrary facts even though a Chinese general admitted them after the war.

 

[JoeB131]

Actually, no, that's not the point. The point is that it was the Chinese who were the aggressors and who forced a large-scale battle at Shanghai, not the Japanese.

Uh, no. Shanghai is part of China. The Chinese had soveriengty there, not the Japanese Empire.

"Wow" what? Your juvenile nonsense is no answer for the evidence I presented. Is historian Peter Harmsen also "pro-Axis"? Was Chinese General Zhang Fakui, one of the top field commanders during the struggle for the city, another "pro-Axis" guy because he admitted that "Japan had no wish to fight at Shanghai and that “It should be simple to see that we [the Chinese] took the initiative”?

I had to actually look up Zhang Fakui. Turns out that several times during the period before the war, he sided with noted quisling Wang Jiewei over Chiang Kaishek.

Then you can't read a map. The Chinese attacked the treaty-protected Japanese section of Shanghai with two divisions.

Um, guy, would this be one of those unequal treaties that were imposed on China?

Guy, you need to stop being an apologist for imperialism. Imperialism is bad. Everyone knows that now.

You see, the Japanese, as many scholars have documented, did not want to fight over Shanghai, so they worked out a compromise with the Chinese, even though the Chinese had started the fighting by attacking the 2,000-man Japanese garrison in the city. But then the Chinese ignored the deal and attacked again.

Oh, they didn't want to fight over Shanghai... or the Marco Polo Bridge... Or Manchuria.... or Pearl Harbor.

It's always someone else's fault.

 

[JoeB131]

Just to simplify Axis MIkey's claim that the Japanese were the "Victims" in the battle of Shanghai.

Japan illegally invaded Manchuria in 1931.
In 1932, Japanese military men instigated the January 28th Incident in Shanghai to force China to end their boycott of Japanese goods.
The Marco Polo Bridge Incident, where they started invading the rest of China, happened on July 7th, 1937.
The Battle of Shanghai happened on August 13th, 1937.
The Rape Inappropriate Touching of Nanjing started on December 13th, 1937 and continued into February 1938.

Now, in Axis Mikey's world, you can invade another country and then expect to leave an enclave with 2000 troops in their largest city within 300KM of your Capital City.

I point this out because Axis Mikey claims to be an expert in Military Intelligence.

Now, Axis Mikey will no doubt find some crank Historian who is pro-Japanese and try to claim that this made sense, somehow.

 

[mikegriffith1]

Uh, no. Shanghai is part of China. The Chinese had soveriengty there, not the Japanese Empire.

I had to actually look up Zhang Fakui. Turns out that several times during the period before the war, he sided with noted quisling Wang Jiewei over Chiang Kaishek.

Um, guy, would this be one of those unequal treaties that were imposed on China?

Guy, you need to stop being an apologist for imperialism. Imperialism is bad. Everyone knows that now.

Oh, they didn't want to fight over Shanghai... or the Marco Polo Bridge... Or Manchuria.... or Pearl Harbor.

It's always someone else's fault.

You dodged every fact that I presented and simply repeated your previous talking points, with only one exception, and that one exception is a whopper that shows just how dishonest you are.

The exception is your attack on General Fakui. Your attack on Fakui is a primo example of your dishonesty, shallowness, and pro-Chinese Communist bias. Unfortunately for you, I happen to know a fair amount of about General Fakui.

For starters, you failed to mention that when Fakui sided with Wang Jiewei (Jingwei), the Chinese were not even fighting the Japanese yet, and that he and Chiang reconciled before the war started! You tried to make it seem like Fakui sided with Wang Jingwei after Jingwei sided with the Japanese, when in fact his brief alliance with Jingwei occurred well before the Sino-Japanese War started.

It gets worse. You also failed to mention that when Chiang began to fight the Japanese, he gave Fakui command of the 8th Army Group, which fought in the Battle of Shanghai, which is how Fakui knew that the Chinese had started the fighting in Shanghai!

Gee, funny how you didn't mention any of these facts. Were you hoping that I would not know better? I hate to put it this way, but if you haven't learned by now that I know at least four times more than you do about the Sino-Japanese War and Japan's actions in China before the war, you're a rather slow learner.

Moreover, just to further expose your dishonest portrayal of Fakui, after the Battle of Shanghai, Chiang put Fakui in command of the 2nd Army Corps in the Battle of Wuhan in 1938. Chiang then put Fakui in command of the War Area 4 from 1939-1944, during which he successfully defended Guangdong and Guangxi against Japanese assaults and won the Battle of South Guangxi. After that, Chiang put Fakui in charge of the Guilin War Zone during the Japanese army's Operation Ichigo assault. Finally, Chiang made Fakui the commander of the 2nd Front Army, in which role he accepted the surrender of the Japanese 23rd Army in Guangdong at the end of the war.

I find it impossible to believe that you did not know these facts about General Fakui. No reputable, mainstream source on Fakui fails to mention these facts. Indeed, I've never read a source on Fakui that omits these facts.

This time you can't use your silly juvenile argument that all the scholars who contradict your Communist Chinese/FDR version of Japan's actions in China must be "cranks" and/or "pro-Japanese." Very few of the scholars I've cited could even be suspected of being "pro-Japanese" by any rational person, and all of them are recognized scholars on the Sino-Japanese War.

You've once again been caught red handed lying through your teeth, deliberately trying to mislead readers. This is one more case in point for why you have no credibility.

 

[JoeB131]

You dodged every fact that I presented and simply repeated your previous talking points, with only one exception, and that one exception is a whopper that shows just how dishonest you are.

The exception is your attack on General Fakui. Your attack on Fakui is a primo example of your dishonesty, shallowness, and pro-Chinese Communist bias. Unfortunately for you, I happen to know a fair amount of about General Fakui.

Yup, I'm sure you are one of those people who think the Guomindang were all saints and really good at their jobs.

First, and foremost, you are referring to him as General Fakui. He would be addressed appropriately as General Zhang. In the Chinese culture, the family name comes before the given name.

For starters, you failed to mention that when Fakui sided with Wang Jiewei (Jingwei), the Chinese were not even fighting the Japanese yet, and that he and Chiang reconciled before the war started! You tried to make it seem like Fakui sided with Wang Jingwei after Jingwei sided with the Japanese, when in fact his brief alliance with Jingwei occurred well before the Sino-Japanese War started.

No, I just point it out that Chiang probably never should have trusted this guy. He seems like the kind of guy who would turn on you and sell out in an instant.

Moreover, just to further expose your dishonest portrayal of Fakui, after the Battle of Shanghai, Chiang put Fakui in command of the 2nd Army Corps in the Battle of Wuhan in 1938. Chiang then put Fakui in command of the War Area 4 from 1939-1944, during which he successfully defended Guangdong and Guangxi against Japanese assaults and won the Battle of South Guangxi. After that, Chiang put Fakui in charge of the Guilin War Zone during the Japanese army's Operation Ichigo assault. Finally, Chiang made Fakui the commander of the 2nd Front Army, in which role he accepted the surrender of the Japanese 23rd Army in Guangdong at the end of the war.

Given the piss-poor performance of the Nationalist Armies during the War, I'm not sure why you think this is high praise.

The only Front on which the Axis was still making gains after 1942 was against China.

 

[mikegriffith1]

Yup, I'm sure you are one of those people who think the Guomindang were all saints and really good at their jobs.

First, and foremost, you are referring to him as General Fakui. He would be addressed appropriately as General Zhang. In the Chinese culture, the family name comes before the given name.

No, I just point it out that Chiang probably never should have trusted this guy. He seems like the kind of guy who would turn on you and sell out in an instant.

Given the piss-poor performance of the Nationalist Armies during the War, I'm not sure why you think this is high praise.

The only Front on which the Axis was still making gains after 1942 was against China.

Nope, Juvenile Joe, this ain't gonna work. You're only digging your hole deeper.

Even when you're caught red handed and beyond any semblance of plausible denial, you still can't admit your dishonesty. None of your ducking and dodging and diversion changes the fact that you knowingly misrepresented General Fakui.

You falsely tried to lead readers to believe (1) that Fakui sided with Wang Jingwei when Jingwei was siding with the Japanese and (2) that Fakui therefore opposed Chiang Kai-Shek. You had to know this was false, egregiously false.

BTW, in your attack on General Fakui, you wrote his name as "Zhang Fakui." A whole bunch of Asia scholars refer to him as "General Zhang Fakui" and "General Fakui." But now, trying to divert attention from your deliberate deception, you claim that, oh, he should be referred to as "General Zhang."

Google the word "busted." That's what you are. Again.

 

[JoeB131]

Nope, Juvenile Joe, this ain't gonna work. You're only digging your hole deeper.

Even when you're caught red handed and beyond any semblance of plausible denial, you still can't admit your dishonesty. None of your ducking and dodging and diversion changes the fact that you knowingly misrepresented General Fakui.

You falsely tried to lead readers to believe (1) that Fakui sided with Wang Jingwei when Jingwei was siding with the Japanese and (2) that Fakui therefore opposed Chiang Kai-Shek. You had to know this was false, egregiously false.

BTW, in your attack on General Fakui, you wrote his name as "Zhang Fakui." A whole bunch of Asia scholars refer to him as "General Zhang Fakui" and "General Fakui." But now, trying to divert attention from your deliberate deception, you claim that, oh, he should be referred to as "General Zhang."

Google the word "busted." That's what you are. Again.

Guy, the fact that you are so ignorant of Chinese culture that you don't understand how Chinese names are structured says a lot.

Asia Scholars - i.e., the same smug, racist white people who don't understand Asian culture, or why Mao eventually won.

So let's go back to the point you originally skipped.

Your claim was that the poor, innocent Japanese were in Shanghai, minding their own business, when mean old Chiang ordered Zhang to attack the garrison. Except Zhang was about as reliable as Fredo Corleone.

Except...

The Marco Polo Bridge invasion started in July.

The Battle of Shanghai was in August.

Only a complete idiot would leave an enemy force in charge of a major port city in your rear while you are marching your army up to meet them on the border.

 

[mikegriffith1]

Guy, the fact that you are so ignorant of Chinese culture that you don't understand how Chinese names are structured says a lot.
Asia Scholars - i.e., the same smug, racist white people who don't understand Asian culture, or why Mao eventually won.
So let's go back to the point you originally skipped. Your claim was that the poor, innocent Japanese were in Shanghai, minding their own business, when mean old Chiang ordered Zhang to attack the garrison. Except Zhang was about as reliable as Fredo Corleone. Except... The Marco Polo Bridge invasion started in July. The Battle of Shanghai was in August. Only a complete idiot would leave an enemy force in charge of a major port city in your rear while you are marching your army up to meet them on the border.

Still refusing to man-up and admit you lied. It would be one thing if you claimed that you made an honest mistake, that you read your source on General Fakui too quickly and didn't catch the part that explained that he only briefly sided with Wang Jingwei, that he only did so before the war started, and that Chiang Kai-Shek entrusted him with numerous important commands during the war.

But you're still refusing to even address your false statements about Fakui. Instead, you're blowing all kinds of diversionary smoke and trying to change subject.

Well, Juvenile Jihad Mao-Loving Joe, it ain't gonna work. Your lies are recorded in black and white for all to see, and I'm not about to take your diversionary bait and let you slither away from your caught-red-handed dishonesty.

I suspect you'll just keep digging your hole deeper and deeper, because you don't have the character and integrity to admit what you did, and because you didn't have the brains to claim you made a mistake. And I'll be right here to remind readers of your attempt to mislead them.

 

[JoeB131]

Still refusing to man-up and admit you lied. It would be one thing if you claimed that you made an honest mistake, that you read your source on General Fakui too quickly and didn't catch the part that explained that he only briefly sided with Wang Jingwei, that he only did so before the war started, and that Chiang Kai-Shek entrusted him with numerous important commands during the war.

Wow, not sure why you think this is relevant.

General Zhang (or as I like to call him, Fredo) was kind of a knob. Only a knob would have a 10-1 advantage over the Japanese and STILL lose. And that he sided with a traitor like Wang Jingwei just says a lot about his character, competence and judgement.

Not that Peanut did much better in this story. He kept appointing a guy who vacilated between betraying him and fucking things up. No wonder Mao won.

But you're still refusing to even address your false statements about Fakui. Instead, you're blowing all kinds of diversionary smoke and trying to change subject.

Not at all. The point was never as impressive as you thought it was, that a boob who couldn't beat a small garrison welped and whined that he never wanted to do the mission assigned to him.

Well, Juvenile Jihad Mao-Loving Joe, it ain't gonna work. Your lies are recorded in black and white for all to see, and I'm not about to take your diversionary bait and let you slither away from your caught-red-handed dishonesty.

Oh, Axis Mikey, the problem is you keep defending History's losers... Chaing, Zhang, the whole corrupt-ass Japanese military, George "Where the Fuck did all those Indians Come From" Custer, Joseph Smith.

I suspect you'll just keep digging your hole deeper and deeper, because you don't have the character and integrity to admit what you did, and because you didn't have the brains to claim you made a mistake. And I'll be right here to remind readers of your attempt to mislead them.

Naw, man, I'm having way to much fun making you sputter.

Tormenting Mormons is like my hobby.

Now, I'm still waiting for you to explain why Chiang and Fredo Zhang were in the wrong for trying to take out a garrison in the rear AFTER the Japanese invaded.

 

[mikegriffith1]

Wow, not sure why you think this is relevant.

General Zhang (or as I like to call him, Fredo) was kind of a knob. Only a knob would have a 10-1 advantage over the Japanese and STILL lose. And that he sided with a traitor like Wang Jingwei just says a lot about his character, competence and judgement.

Not that Peanut did much better in this story. He kept appointing a guy who vacilated between betraying him and &^%^% things up. No wonder Mao won.

Not at all. The point was never as impressive as you thought it was, that a boob who couldn't beat a small garrison welped and whined that he never wanted to do the mission assigned to him.

Oh, Axis Mikey, the problem is you keep defending History's losers... Chaing, Zhang, the whole corrupt-ass Japanese military, George "Where the &*&^%^ did all those Indians Come From" Custer, Joseph Smith.

Naw, man, I'm having way to much fun making you sputter.

Tormenting Mormons is like my hobby.

Now, I'm still waiting for you to explain why Chiang and Fredo Zhang were in the wrong for trying to take out a garrison in the rear AFTER the Japanese invaded.

Still blowing juvenile diversionary smoke and refusing to man-up and admit you lied.

Just to repeat: You claimed that Fakui sided with Jingwei during the war with the Japanese and pretended that he never reconciled with Chiang Kaishek and that this was why Fakui said the Chinese started the fighting in Shanghai. But Fakui only sided with Jingwei for a brief time and did so well before the war started. He remained loyal to Chiang throughout the war, and Chiang entrusted him with important commands during the war.

For any newcomers, JoeB131 has resorted to calling me "Axis Mikey" to divert attention from his neo-Nazi views. In the thread on the USS Liberty, this anti-Semitic wingnut recently actually said that the Jews provoked Hitler to murder them because they wrecked Germany and most of the rest of Europe (just as Hitler claimed they did). He's also repeatedly said there would have been no wars in the Middle East since 1948 if the Jews had not established the state of Israel in 1948.

 

[JoeB131]

Just to repeat: You claimed that Fakui sided with Jingwei during the war with the Japanese

No, I pointed out that Zhang sided with Wang the first few times he turned on Chi'ang. If Chi'ang had a pair of balls, he would have shot the pair of them. Instead Wang became a Japanese puppet and Zhang was so fucking incompetent you'd think he was on the Japanese payroll.

(It's actually considered impolite to refer to a Chinese person by their personal name)

He remained loyal to Chiang throughout the war, and Chiang entrusted him with important commands during the war.

Yup, he was the Fredo Corleone of the Kuomintang Crime Family. What's your point? Meanwhile, the generals who were involved in the Xi'an incident, where they told Chi'ang to stop trying to hunt down Mao and actually pay attention to the Japanese ravaging their countryside, were stripped of their commands.

For any newcomers, JoeB131 has resorted to calling me "Axis Mikey" to divert attention from his neo-Nazi views. In the thread on the USS Liberty, this anti-Semitic wingnut recently actually said that the Jews provoked Hitler to murder them because they wrecked Germany and most of the rest of Europe (just as Hitler claimed they did).

Naw, I call you Axis Mikey because you keep making excuses for Japanese aggression and genocide.

Not what I said at all. I pointed out that the Jews played a key role in the turmoil of the Weimar period, which is why Hitler didn't have to try all that hard to scapegoat them.

Then again, you are fine with what Trump is doing to Hispanics...

If you've watched your life-savings become worthless and eaten the family pet, you will be looking for someone to be mad at. Welcome to 1920's Germany. Not a moot point for me, my grandparents left the Rhineland in 1925 after the Treaty of Versailles allowed it to be occupied by the French until 1929. Not surprisingly, my Grandfather's brother joined the NSDAP.

Now, of course, it's never one thing. The Jews also had the problem is that for 2000 years, Christians blamed them for killing Jesus. Martin Luther, the father of the German National Church, wrote a book called Von den Jüden und iren Lügen

Roughly translated, it was "On the Jews and their Lies" - a 65000 word treatise on why the Jews were evil.

He's also repeatedly said there would have been no wars in the Middle East since 1948 if the Jews had not established the state of Israel in 1948.

Well, there would have been wars, but they wouldn't have been our problem.