My history prof really has outdone himself today. I won't bother you with all the horrific little details(well, at least not most of you), so here is just the most outstanding little pearl of historic insight that I got to listen to on this beautiful Tuesday afternoon:

"What is the lesson we've learned from World War I?"

Silence.

"We've learned from WWI that when you defeat a nation, you have to flatten them, and pummel them right back to the stone age. Otherwise they're going to have an attitude after they lose, and that gives rise to people like Hitler."

Put that one on your bun and chew it. Or something.

4 Comments:

Konrad wrote: [2:55 AM, October 26, 2005]: Das ist schon ein starker Tobak. Da hätten sich mir aber auch die Nackenhaare aufgestellt.
Konrad wrote: [2:42 AM, October 27, 2005]: Interessant Ralf, aber die Definition der Zustände die wir dann hätten (die Steinzeit also) wäre auch interessant. Soll eigentlich der Irak wieder in die Steinzeit versetzt werden? Die hingenommene Zerstörung der Kultur spricht zumindest dafür.
Anonymous wrote: [10:26 PM, October 27, 2005]: "What is the lesson we've learned from World War I?"

"Uh... if you get attacked by chlorine gas, you should pee in a sock and breathe through it?"
"Steve Smith" wrote: [2:39 AM, October 30, 2005]: Actually, Roman, it is quite entirely, stunningly wrong. The Germans had an "attitude" precisely because the terms of the Treaty of Versailles were (correctly) viewed to be oppressive and punitive to Germany (even though Germany was probably no more responsible for World War I than was any other European power), which was a feeling that Hitler was able to exploit in his rise to power. Basically, both Catrin's prof and you have taken exactly the opposite lesson from that which history quite blatantly offers. It is highly fortunate that you're generally too drunk to reach a position where this misinterpretation will hurt humanity.

Punda Malidadi

Tuesday, October 25, 2005

My nails are bleeding.

4 Comments: