Posted on 08/07/2006 6:30:32 AM PDT by spartagroup
Another in Conservative Humor Net’s sporadic series on how today’s media would have covered previous wars and other crises.
NAZIS ASK FOR 3-DAY HUMANITARIAN CEASEFIRE:
WORLD OPINION ATTACKS U.S. REFUSAL
Propaganda Minister Joseph Goebbels, above, made the Nazi official call for the three-day humanitarian cease-fire, warning that Hitler would get very, very, very angry if refused. Hitler, below, caresses some of the school children who recently volunteered for the army, 12-year old boys recruited to attack Russian, British and American tanks with handheld weapons. What love the Furher shows! Who can doubt he will not keep his promise to use the respite to resupply his armed forces?
Joseph Goebbels, German Minister for Public Enlightenment and Propaganda, yesterday called for a three-day cease fire from American and British bombings of German cities and a halt to the Allied offensive in order to move in food and medical supplies to non-combatants trapped on war zones.
“The innocent German civilians in dozens of cities, along with those who find themselves caught in the line of Allied advance, are having trouble finding fresh food, pork sausages and medical supplies,” Goebbels announced in a nationwide radio address. German newsreels in movie houses showed extensive film clips of the bodies of children and women being carried out from demolished buildings.
Nick Tobertson, Cuddly News Network war correspondent in Berlin, sent back a harrowing report of conditions among German civilians.
“Hundreds of civilian men, women and children have been killed by what seems to be indiscriminate Allied bombing,” Tobertson reported. “Nazi officials took me on an exclusive tour of some of the worst bombed zones and I could see little evidence of any military targets.”
German officials denied they placed military factories or anti-aircraft defenses in civilian zones. “Didn’t we scrupulously keep every agreement we signed in the 1930s?” asked Martin Borman, Hitler’s closest confidante. “Why would anyone think we would take advantage of a ceasefire to improve our military positions, especially in the East where millions of Soviet soldiers are advancing.”
Chris Natthews, commentator for Hyper Hysteric News Network, believes the ceasefire could help the Allies recuperate from what he called their recent “drubbing” by German forces.
“The Nazis caught the American Army flatfooted at the Battle of the Bulge,” Natthews screamed into the camera. “Most military observers call this the biggest blunder in American military history. President Roosevelt’s poll ratings are plummeting. We call in now retired Admiral Kimmel, who headed up U.S. forces in the Pacific until Pearl Harbor, to offer his views on this debacle.”
“Admiral Kimmel, is the war now stalemated in Europe, given the German rout of American forces in the Ardennes forces?” Natthews asked. “Should Washington and London now sue for peace, try to end the war as soon as possible before they lose more land.”
“I don’t think it’s that bad, Chris,” the admiral said. “I think—“
“You haven’t been seeing the same news reports from Germany that I have,” Natthews cut him off. “Hitler has been making speech after speech about new generations of miracle weapons that the Nazis will soon roll out to destroy Allied forces, and the German determination to never surrender is seen in all the newscasts of 12 year old boys and 60 year old men rushing to join the Werhmacht and kill Americans. Let me bring in now Charles Lindberg, the American air hero who long warned against hostilities with a Germany reinvigorated by Adolf Hitler.”
“Yes, Chris, after Pearl Harbor, I thought I had a change of heart, but after seeing the unexpected German resistance in Europe and the stunning Japanese valor in the Pacific, I know we can never win this war. Can you imagine trying to invade the Japanese home islands after all the causalities we took invading those piles of rock and volcanic and in the Pacific. We ought to just give China and the Philippines to the Japanese and beg them for peace. We’d lose millions of men. We should extend the cease-fire offer to Japan, which should lead to peace talks that will allow us to withdraw our troops back to America.”
“What do you think about the B-29 firebombing campaigns that Gen. Curtis Lemay is planning for Japan after he finishes with Europe?” Nathews asked.
“It would be completely immoral,” Lindbergh said.
“We believe that the Americans and the British have taken a totally disproportionate reaction to Nazi attempts to expand their living space,” says Ifok Nanna, Secretary General of the League of Nations in Geneva. The League was dissolved when the Second World War began, but its bureaucrats refused to give up their offices, high salaries and other perks, such as first class train travel and 90 day vacations. “The German army hardly killed a single Frenchman, they surrendered so rapidly. The excesses in Poland and the Soviet Union may be only rumors. What is certain is that American and British bombers are blowing up huge sections of dozens of German cities, often with questionable military targets.”
The German Army has issued a valid plea for a three-day truce to enable the Nazi Government to rush supplies to trap civilians and to withdraw wounded women and children,” Nanna said. “I put all responsibility on civilian causalities on the Allies if they refuse this cease-fire.”
“There is no indication that the German army would use the troop to rush reinforcements to the battlefront, impossible now because of total Allied air superiority,” Nanna said.
Heinrich Himmler, head of the Schutzstaffel (SS,) also said that the cease-fire would allow the Germans to transfer more Jews to their state rest camps. 
Nazis point to spotless Jewish rest camp entrance with greeting, "Work Makes You Free." Goebbels points to happy camp residents to demonstrate what great shape they are not, not a single person overweight, unlike in lumpy America, "where every third person is as big as a hippo," Goebbels said.
“As everyone knows, the Fuehrer doomed the Russian campaign by re-routing thousands of scarce rail cars to carry ever more Jews to the rest camps, rather than rushing reinforcements to the Eastern Front, in order to resettle them in comfort” Himmler said. “Thousands of spaces have unexpectedly opened up in these rest camps, and the Fuehrer desires to transfer every possible Jew in Europe to these pleasant spas, no matter what. Allied bombing has made this transfer more inconvenient, so that we would take advantage of a ceasefire to move as many Jews as possible to their new homes.”
Barry King interviewed Himmler on his Cuddly News Network nighttime interview show and agreed that a ceasefire seemed the only humane alternative.
“It makes perfect sense to me,” King, wearing his trademark suspenders said. “The entire world is aghast of the thousands of children and women corpses taken out of the rubble.”
The prime ministers of both neutral countries Switzerland and Sweden joined the League of Nations in the cease-fire demands. The Japanese Government said their code of Bushido did not allow them to seek a similar cease-fire but they always considered the Germans a bit weak, like all Europeans, and therefore backed their demand.
“This slaughter has gone on long enough,” Oaf Palme, Swedish prime minister said. “The brutal American air war is devastating one magnificent city after another. Why can’t they leave we Europeans alone? Did the French object to the German takeover of their country? French soldiers did their best to keep the roads open for the German tanks and it was only those damn English, Anglo Saxons again, who actually tried to stop the Germans.” 
City of Dresden, Germany
"This is Western barbarism," Goebbels says. "Can you see any military targets among these apartment buildings?"
Some Western media embedded with German forces have sent back harrowing pictures of dead German women and children, and in the new "media of feelings," added their voices to the calls for a permanent cease-fire and the imposition of a peace treaty along present borders.
From: htt;//conservativehumor.net
Don’t forget to go to site to read our new daily commentary, not always as sardonic as stories. The new one, featuring the blow heart Tom Friedman. A conservativehumor.net published edited Friedman when he was a young UPI reporter based in Beirut and he was a flaming pro-Arab, anti-Israel writer back then. He has learned how to couch his writing and TV pontificating to try to appear neutral, especially by always identifying himself as an American Jew, but when analyzed, his statements remain mainly pro-Arab, anti-Jewish.
What about the "Werewolves" the Nazi resistance which operated for a few years after the war ended?
By all acounts, they were nothing more than a nusance to the occupying forces. When compared to the "resistence" movements, and defiance from the general population, we face in Iraq they were a relatively small and infenctual group.
I guess it depends on your definition of "accurate." Most of these bombs were considered "on target" if they hit within one-half mile of where they were supposed to hit.
FMCDH(BITS)
My point is that the Allies chose to intentionally attack cities as such rather than military targets within those cities. The civilian casualties that resulted were not collateral damage that was a byproduct of attacks on military targets, which were inevitable given the highly limited accuracy of the munitions of the time.
Causing the maximum number of civilian casualties was the purpose of this particular strategy. America has largely chosen to forget about this aspect of our past.
My point is that the Hezbollah rocket attacks on Israel, intended to cause civilian casualties, are not different in type from tactics we used ourselves in WWII. IOW, we cannot credibly denounce this method unless we are willing to admit that we ourselves used terroristic methods in the past and denounce them equally.
It is entirely possible to make a case, one that I happen to agree with, that the cause in which such methods are employed makes sufficient difference that our methods were at least partially justified, whereas those of Hezbollah are not.
But that is an argument about goals, not about methods.
A work of art! If it wasn't so accurate, it would be funny.
This is Restorer's point, not that other crap he's spewing.
bttt
Absolutely that is one of my points.
We can comfort ourselves by self-righteously denouncing our enemies methods, while ignoring the inconvenient fact that we have ourselves used similar methods in the past.
Unfortunately this is unlikely to convince our enemies or neutrals, as they are all perfectly well aware of our past history and how it clashes with our present position that such methods are never acceptable.
Or we can recognize the facts of our past and attempt to demonstrate why our use of somewhat similar methods was appropriate, give the situation at the time, and those of our enemies today are not acceptable. This alternative has at least some chance of changing other's minds.
The alternative has no chance of doing so. Pretending that everything America has done is beyond criticism may make us feel better about ourselves, but it will certainly not convince anyone else that what we are doing now is right.
What I am talking about is that most Americans today seem to fall into one of two camps: 1. America is and always has been wrong in everything it does; 2. America is and always has been right in everything it does.
Since that is the position, nobody seems to want to discuss particular policies, as minds are already made up in advance.
I am attempting to argue for a middle position. America has been on net a very positive influence in the world. Which does not mean that many of our policies and the methods we have used were not wrong, on occasion.
I believe the most effective approach to making us an even more positive influence is to recognize our past missteps and misdeeds as the most efficient way to avoid making similar mistakes in the future. This approach is a balancing act, and carried too far it leads directly into the Clinton approach of traveling all over the world and apologizing for everything we have ever done (or not done).
Thanks for the thoughtful reply.
However, we live in a time when putting ladies underwear on a terrorist's head is considered an "atrocity." With a media that is all to happy to accentuate the bad things America may have done it is unlikely any of the "nuetrals" are going to see the positives of the U.S.
Your assertion that our enemies or neutrals are "well aware of our past history and how it clashes with our present position" is very wrong. What they know is what their socialist/liberal media tell them. To be an apoligist for things that happened 6 decades ago when real terrorists are cutting off heads of innocent civilians now is rather insensitive of you imo.
My point is this. Americans are sick and tired of changing minds and convincing others that "what we are doing now is right." War is hell. You screw with America (flying planes into buildings), you threaten the world (Saddam), your going to get your ass kicked. Longing for some of us to be sorrowful over bombing civilians 60 years ago is just living in the past. It happened, it is regretful, it isn't happening now, but the media and the enemy are only too happy to see people like you dredging it up as if it happened yesterday. These are different times my friend.
You should study history a little bit more. The Nazis had not been training the Hitler Youth to be a Drill and Ceremony unit. Some of them needed killin' too. Many Germans were not Nazis, but a vast number of them were. Nazi holdouts continued to fight and kill just like the Iraqi terrorists for months after the end of the war. Look into the history of a town in Germany that had its entire local government executed by the Nazis for coopterating too soon with the Allies.
http://wilk.wpk.p.lodz.pl/~whatfor/volkssturm/volks_5.jpg
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.