Posted on 06/05/2006 8:21:11 AM PDT by PRePublic
You are mistaken. During WWII, the "Baathist" parties of Syria and Iraq were very much pro-Nazi. The Palestinians and their Grand Mufti, Hussein, actively cooperated with the Nazis and encouraged Hitler to reach the "final solution" for the Jews. Nasser and Sadat in Egypt were very much pro-Nazi as well.
Correct. But Turks aren't Arabs. You said the Arabs were supported by the Germans (actually you said Nazis) in the First World War, which is simply not correct.
That's not true, the Ba'ath Party wasn't founded until April 7, 1945, when the Soviet Red Army was in the suburbs of Berlin and the Nazis were far from a relevant presence in the Middle East. Anyway, I was actually taking exception to her remarks regarding World War I, not World War II.
Yeah, I was wrong. I was lumping the Turk in with the Arabs. I was just thinking radical:Middle East and said Arabs. There were some Arabs, in countries allied with the US & Britain, who shared the ideas of the Third Reich when it came to killing Jews, they just never got traction in their countries. All that nastiness came out in spades when those countries were freed from British rule.
I mis-spoke. I was talking about the Turks who allied with the Germans in WWI, then others in the Middle East supported the Nazis in WWII.
Not all Middle Eastern countries were as enamored of Britain and the US as others. Some countries sat out WWII, and didn't help either side, though there were plenty of Nazi sympathizers in those countries. They were angry at Britain for keeping control of Syria and Palestine after WWI, and kind of liked the idea of the Nazi 'final solution' of the Jewish problem. They're probably grandfathers of the men in Hamas in Israel, Hezbollah in Lebanon, and the Baathists in Syria.
Nazis and Jihadist make a perfect bedfellow. Many Nazis war criminals fled to the Middle East, which was just as popular as South America. They went to either Egypt, Syria, Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, and Palestine.
Hitler had to placate Christians, and his rhetoric was all "jobs and peace and soil," but it is my understanding that he wanted to replace Christianity with some sort of reversion to paganism. He certainly had no problem killing Christians, but always because of sedition, spreading discontent, aiding degenerates, or some other lovely pretext. In a word, he was a slick one.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.