Skip to comments.Democrat Spokesman Warns Of 'Real Bullets' Against Arnold; Opponents Race To Find 'Grope Tapes'
Posted on 08/10/2003 4:31:13 PM PDT by John Jorsett
California Democratic Party Spokesman Bob Mulholland this weekend warned Arnold Schwarzenegger that "real bullets" will be coming his way during his campaign to be governor, just as opponants race to find alleged videos which claim to show the movie star groping women... Developing...
I'm sure Davis and Mulholland never had an issue with General John M. Shalikashvili, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff under Clinton (19931997). The fact his father had served in a German army unit commanded by the Waffen SS didn't seem to affect his career.
...when General Shalikashvili visited the land of his father and asked Georgian leader Eduard Shevardnadze if he could re-bury his father in the Caucasus (AP, 24 May 1995), it was reported as being emotional and touching. Shalikashvili's father was in Hitler's brutal Waffen SS and later emigrated to the United States in 1946 where he later died as an American citizen...
For Fair Use Only (AP, 24 May 1995). Born in Georgia but raised in Poland, Shalikashvili's father, Dmitri, joined the Georgian Legion in 1943, serving with other Georgian expatriats under the command of Hitler's brutal Waffen SS. Young John and his brother, Othar attended school in wartime Berlin while their father fought in Normandy and Italy against the U.S.-led Allies. Dmitri Shalikashvili was arrested in 1945 by British forces. Released in 1946, the family emigrated to the United States.
He even survived the stomach-dropping experience of discovering that his family's war experience was darker than he had realized. In 1993, while he awaited Senate confirmation for the top military job, historical documents were uncovered showing that his deceased father, Dmitri Shalikashvili, had served in a German army unit commanded by the Waffen SS.
"To me, he was a kind and gentle man, and I loved him very much," the general told the Senate panel on the day of his confirmation hearing. "I'm deeply saddened that my father had this tragic association."
SEPARATELY A RABBI SPECIALIZING IN HOLOCAUST RESEARCH SAID THAT THE FATHER OF THE NOMINEE TO BE CHAIRMAN OF THE JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF WAS A NAZI COLLABORATOR DURING WORLD WAR II
RABBI MARVIN HIER FOUNDER OF THE SIMON WIESENTHAL CENTER IN LOS ANGELES SAID THAT DMITRI SHALIKASHVILI THE FATHER OF ARMY GEN JOHN SHALIKASHVILI WORKED WITH THE GERMAN OCCUPIERS OF POLAND EARLY IN THE WAR AND LATER SERVED AS A MAJOR IN THE WAFFEN SS
BUT OTHAR SHALIKASHVILI THE GENERAL'S OLDER BROTHER DISPUTED THE RABBI'SALLEGATIONS I DON'T THINK HE WAS A NAZI COLLABORATOR MR SHALIKASHVILI SAID HE SAID HIS FATHER WAS DEDICATED TO THE CAUSE OF LIBERATING HIS NATIVE GEORGIA FROM THE SOVIET UNION AND JOINED FORCES WITH THE GERMANS TO FURTHER THAT AIM MY CLEAR PERCEPTION IS THAT HE DIED WITH A CLEAR CONSCIENCE IN 1978 HE SAID
DEFENSE SECRETARY LES ASPIN SAID THAT GEN SHALIKASHVILI'S SUPERB RECORD SPEAKS FOR ITSELF AND THAT ALLEGATIONS ABOUT HIS FATHER'S HISTORY AREN'T RELEVANT THE ALLEGATIONS WERE REPORTED IN DEFENSE DAILY A TRADE PUBLICATION
Its fiscally conservative and socially liberal. Thats why Arnold owns the middle and he is way ahead in the polls. Super name recognition and his views match well with the middle.
Simon had his chance and lost.
Actually the final vote was much closer then the polls were predicting and he almost surprised a lot of people. And Davis had to run numerous TV ads every night just to pull out a squeaker. If it was not for the Dimwits being able to temporarily blame Davis's power screwups on Enron, Simon may have won.
The Sonderkommandos and Einsatzgruppen that carried out atrocities against the civilian population were small volunteer-only units.
Throughout modern history it has been recognised by all military commanders and theorists that permitting or encouraging the troops to commit atrocities is bad for discipline, morale, and overall fighting quality. And the corrolary is that it is usually the very poor quality troops who commit atrocities. For example, much of the rapine committed by the Soviets during their advance through the Reich was the fault of inferior, rear-echelon troops, NOT of the front-line Red Army. Or at least this is what I have heard. And I am generally willing to give the Russians the benefit of a doubt.
In addition to "genuine" atrocities against civilians, there is a make-believe class of atrocity -- the type for which Kurt Waldheim stood accused, if I recall correctly. That is anti-partisan warfare, now called "asymmetrical warfare." There were SS units involved in this, often recruited from the local population. This meant that pre-existing local feuds were incorporated into the "war currently in progress." So the Germans supplied one side, and the Russians/British/Americans supplied the other side. And both sides employed the same brutality that they always had. But since the Germans lost, they got to play the role of war criminal during the show trials afterwards.
The U.S. got a taste of asymmetrical warfare in Vietnam. And England did in Ulster. And Russia in Chechnya. All of these victors of World War 2.0 committed acts that would have been criminal if subjected to the same criteria used at Nuremberg. I would also point out that the IDF is now engaged in anti-partisan warfare that entails frequent collateral damage among the civilian population.
One would think that these more recent lessons might lead people to understand that the line between anti-partisan warfare and atrocity is quite blurred. But it apparently isn't, because there is no end of people who are willing to mount the PC soapbox to hold soldiers of the Third Reich to a moral standard straight out of King Arthur's Court, while nonetheless making every possible allowance and admitting every conceivable extenuating circumstance for "our boys." Even more "troubling" (to borrow a term from Abe Foxman) is that we are now expected to hold the children responsible for the crimes of their fathers. I will limit myself to pointing out that this is not a particularly "Christian" attitude in an ostensibly "Christian" country. But perhaps our traditional ethics have been supplanted by something quite different.
Now, getting back to my first statement . . .
In certain circles, to even suggest that the majority of the Waffen-SS (and, it goes without saying, virtually the entire Luftwaffe, Kriegsmarine, and Heer) were innocent of warcrimes is to make one a neo-Nazi. This opinion, however, is prevalent among ALL military historians, and is still to be found among serious military books and articles, as opposed to the "Why We Fight" mentality that has been revived in the popular media.