Komentari

vaseljena.blog.hr

Dodaj komentar (20)

Marketing

  • prijatelj

    dragi nemanja, za početak, užasno je smiješno koristiti nacional kao izvor informacija.
    drugo, matija babić nije smijenjen zbog naslovnice sa sanaderom, nego zbog nečeg sasvim drugog, dva tjedna ranije.
    treće, otkud ti ideja da su sanader i pašalić u protimbi? od hrvatskih medija mnogo je pouzdaniji izvor informiranja - gruntovnica. gruntovnica kaže da su milan, ivo i ivić dio istog tima, odnosno projekta hoto vile i grablje 2.
    ako sanader kontrolira styriju i eph, zašto su ga oni srušili? od štete nanešene aferom satovi (objavljene prvo u jutarnjem) on se neće i ne može oporaviti. a kao što znamo iz slučaja pašalić, jebeš ti arkanske veze ako ne možeš pobijediti na izborima.

    avatar

    04.03.2007. (13:54)    -   -   -   -  

  • prijatelj

    uostalom, kako ivić i ivo mogu biti konkurenti kad sisaju istu majku? a ti znaš kao i ja koja je to.

    avatar

    04.03.2007. (13:55)    -   -   -   -  

  • NEMANJA

    Prijatelju, dok se smijemo uz informacije iz Nacionala, daj molim te objasni ti meni, barem emajlom, zašto je smijenen Matija Babić!
    Što se gruntovnice i Bodulića tiče, jebomepas, imaš pravo, no to ni ne sporim, dapače, čini mi se da o tome pišem - i to crvenom tintom - u tekstu ponad tvoga komentara.
    Čuj, tko je srušio Sanadera? Kasno sam ustao. Kad to? Pa ti nisi pročitao moj tekst do kraja: ja mislim da Sanader lakoćom osvaja nove izbore! Hoćemo li se ti i ja kladiti u pašku čipku ili barem sir?
    Što se tiče drugog upisa, mogli bi se praviti da baš sve razumijemo, ali, možda mislimo na različite gospođe. Ima tu više sisa. Jedna sliči čak i na hipopotama!

    avatar

    04.03.2007. (14:02)    -   -   -   -  

  • NEMANJA

    ZAGREB - Tvrtka AGGEMO, koja je dr. Iviću Pašaliću prodala zemlju u Odranskoj zavrtnici nakon što je Vidoje Bulum, tajnik Gradskog poglavarstva, spriječio da je kupi Grad Zagreb, u vlasništvu je supruge njegova najbližeg suradnika!

    Kako smo otkrili, vlasnica te tvrtke je Bosiljka Bodulić, supruga Vladimira Bodulića, savjetnika pročelnika Gradskog ureda za imovinskopravne odnose i imovinu Grada Zagreba, a o prodaji zemlje u Odranskoj zavrtnici ni jedan od supružnika danas nije htio razgovarati.

    Stoga smo se uputili tajniku Bulumu koji je, kada mu je tajnica rekla da ga čeka novinar, odmah napustio “važan” sastanak koji je upravo trajao. Na hodniku zgrade Poglavarstva upitali smo ga zna li da je tvrtka u vlasništvu supruge njegova najbližeg suradnika prodala zemlju namijenjenu braniteljima tvrtki dr. Pašalića. Bulum je slegnuo ramenima i rekao:

    - Ne znam.

    Budući da je Bulum u četvrtak tvrdio da je prodaja zemlje koju je Grad trebao kupiti za branitelje prodana privatnom poduzeću čista slučajnost, a danas smo otkrili da je zemlju prodavala tvrtka njegova najbližeg suradnika, upitali smo ga što će učiniti.

    - Ako je to što vi tvrdite istina, onda ćemo morati napraviti nekakvu istragu - rekao je Bulum, koji bi se i sam mogao naći pod istragom jer je upravo on stopirao kupnju.

    Istraga bi trebala utvrditi zašto je prijedlog zaključka s kompletno pripremljenom dokumentacijom ostao neriješen u njegovu uredu, zašto zaključak nikad nije došao na izglasavanje te tko je informaciju o zemljištu u Odranskoj zavrtnici odao tvrtki AGGEMO.

    Ako istraga otkrije službenika koji je odao poslovnu tajnu privatnoj tvrtki, prema Zakonu o državnim službenicima i namještenicima, zbog teške povrede službene dužnosti taj će službenik biti dužan nadoknaditi štetu koju je u službi ili u vezi sa službom namjerno ili iz krajnje nepažnje nanio državnom tijelu, a mogao bi dobiti i otkaz.

    ZAGREB - Vladimir Bodulić, savjetnik za upravljanje imovinom Grada Zagreba, čija je supruga vlasnica tvrtke Aggemo d.o.o. prodala zemljište koje je Grad Zagreb htio kupiti za gradnju stanova hrvatskim braniteljima u Odranskoj zavrtnici tvrtki Capital consulting u vlasništvu dr. Ivića Pašalića, vlasnik je tvrtke registrirane za posredovanje nekretnina Neptun net d.o.o., osnovane 1997. godine.

    Iako mu Zakon o državnim službenicima i namještenicima brani članstvo u trgovačkim društvima iste djelatnosti kao što je i njegovo radno mjesto u državnoj upravi, a istragu o cijelom slučaju najavio je i tajnik zagrebačkog Poglavarstva Vidoje Bulum, gradonačelnik Milan Bandić još uvijek nije pokrenuo istragu o Bodulićevom sukobu interesa.

    Da podsjetimo, kada je Jutarnji list otkrio da je tvrtka Aggemo u vlasništvu Bodulićeve supruge Biserke prodala terene u Odranskoj zavrtnici koje je Grad Zagreb trebao otkupiti, Bulum je najavio promptnu istragu i sankcije ako se te informacije pokažu točnima. Korištenje povlaštenih informacija za stjecanje osobne koristi, naime, brani Zakon o državnim službenicima i namještenicima. No, sljedećeg je dana tajnik Bulum na sjednici Poglavarstva pred novinarima rekao da u cijeloj situaciji nema “nikakvog sukoba interesa jer tvrtka nije u vlasništvu njihova zaposlenika nego njegove supruge”.

    No, Bodulić, prema podacima Trgovačkog suda, također je vlasnik tvrtke za posredovanje nekretninama, što mu Zakon izričito brani. Bodulić bi za to, naime, morao imati odobrenje gradonačelnika Zagreba. Provjerom u Poglavarstvu utvrdili smo da Boduliću nije izdana dozvola niti ju je ikada zatražio, ali i to da nisu upoznati s njegovim vlasništvom Neptun neta.

    avatar

    04.03.2007. (14:34)    -   -   -   -  

  • cveba

    dragi neso, poucan bricolage - hvala :-)
    ..a isto bi mozda bilo interesantno napisati rijec, dvije o tome kako je drazen matosec odletio proslog ljeta iz slobodne zato sto se usudio varirati na temu zadra kao najmracnije hrvatske urbane sredine.

    avatar

    05.03.2007. (07:31)    -   -   -   -  

  • inhibitor

    Sve je to kurac i zato bi se trebao kandidirati da ostvarimo monarhijsku ideju (dijelimo plijen). Na patologji govorim o potpuno istim stvarima (mediji/politika/biznis) samo što ti koristiš evidence-based metodu dok se ja služim intuicijom. Drago mi je da smo ušli u "bosansku fazu" jer ću kao Hercegovac konačno moći odahnuti.

    avatar

    05.03.2007. (09:16)    -   -   -   -  

  • inhibitor

    Sve je to kurac i zato bi se trebao kandidirati da ostvarimo monarhijsku ideju (dijelimo plijen). Na patologiji govorim o potpuno istim stvarima (mediji/politika/biznis) samo što ti koristiš evidence-based metodu dok se ja služim intuicijom. Drago mi je da smo ušli u "bosansku fazu" jer ću kao Hercegovac konačno moći odahnuti.

    avatar

    05.03.2007. (09:18)    -   -   -   -  

  • NEMANJA

    Kizo, pa kako se ne bi slagao: ako je točno ovo iz prve rečenice, onda je druga savim logična posljedica: budući da sve to i jest kurac, jasno da se bavimo istim stvarima. Nisam znao da si Hercegovac, ali sad kad znam još si mi draži! Nije lako s takvom popudbinom napraviti sve što si ti u Zagrebu napravio! Znam ja, Nemanja.

    avatar

    05.03.2007. (10:17)    -   -   -   -  

  • nonick

    hmmm, ima nesto u tome.
    Iako bi bilo dobro saznati vezu Ivo-EPH... u Slavoniji fantasticno funkcioniraju. Navodno je Ivo preko Nine oprao dosta novca u novinama Slavonski Dom (nastale od Osjeckog doma). Izlaze svaki dan na 44 stranice a mjesecna pretplata kosta 25 kuna!? Novine ce izlaziti do izbora sigurno, a poslije ih je plan ugasiti i pokupiti opranu lovu.
    Slicno su napravili prije nekoliko godina sa "Slavonijom danas", samo je druga ekipa djelila lovu (novinari se jos tuze za neisplacene place).

    U medjuvremenu u Slavonskom Domu rade na tome da skinu Brmbu i ekipu - nije da ga ne treba skinuti, ali mogli su to malo bolje zamaskirati... Opet se u cijeloj prici spominju neki gore navedeni protagonisti...

    avatar

    05.03.2007. (13:54)    -   -   -   -  

  • prijatelj

    ? otkud ti da je pretplata 25 kuna? slavonski dom u pretplati košta 3 kune, što se daleko više isplati od prodaje uz 44% rabata na tiskovim kioscima. to je jedina novina koja donosi doista lokalne informacije, od kojih žive novine u SAD i njemački govorećem svijetu. prodaju se u 3.000 na kioscima i 9.000 u pretplati, što je oko 30% više od ukupnog tiraža glasa slavonije... da imam love, prije bih uložio u njih nego u tradicionalne dnevne novine.

    avatar

    05.03.2007. (16:19)    -   -   -   -  

  • prijatelj

    naime, u tradicionalnim dnevnim novinama ti na privih 20 stranica bunta čitaš tko su good guys a tko su bad guys.. što je ok u doba tuđmana i državnih kriza, ali ne i inače. a u slavonskom domu imaš 12 lokalnih stranica iz najmanjih mjesta - imaju npr. izdanje za valpovo ili dardu. kao u mađarskoj ili u austriji, otkud su i prekopirali koncepti. dakle, imaš stvari koje ljude doista zanimaju jer ih se direktno tiču.

    avatar

    05.03.2007. (16:26)    -   -   -   -  

  • NEMANJA

    Prijatelju, kako je tvoj svijet jednostavan! Tuđman je bad guy, jer je Pavić good guy. Sad kad nema Tuđmana, ne zna se tko je tko!?
    Tuđman je moža bed guy za Pavić's guys, ali, dok ja i kod Pavića vidim dobrih strana, vi nikako ne možete Tuđmanu oprostiti Kroejšiju, što li? Kako možeš stari za prvog predsjednika RH kazati da je bed gaj, a današnji gajs su pokrali više nego cijela Tuđmanova kamarila zajedno!? Čekaj, pizda mu materina, pa Pavić je još 1988. držao govore o potebi očuvanja Jugoslavije - dakle, on s ovom zemljom nema ništa! Potom, Pavić je izravno uzork najvećeg iskaza neposredne spontane demokracije, skupa na Trgu u znak podrške Radiju 101, dakle takav čovjek ni u jednoj demokratskoj zemlji više ne bi mogao voditi ovaj tvoj tvornički slavnoski bilten! Konačno, on je protagonist i epicentar afere 'Gruppo', i vani je samo i jedino zbog tadašnjega američkog ambasadora Montgomeryja! Što je onda sumarum: čovjek koji bi trebao biti u zatvoru, duboko nedemokratična osoba, antihrvatskog raspoloženja, po tebi je good guy! Ma je moj kurac! To što je malo lovice dao i novinarima, sve je to OK, ali ne treba zato puštiti kurac čika Ninu i falsificirati tako evidentne činjenice!
    Ako dakle uzmemo najapstraktinije, najviše odredbe jedne zajednice, Nino se ogrješio o sve njih: ako je ovo nacionalna, građanska, demokratska i pravna država Hrvatska, on nije ni za tu slobodnu i samostalnu državu Hrvata, niti je demokrat, kao bivši Šuvarev adlatus sve građansko je prezirao i progonio, a s pravnom državom bi imao posla, da je Hrvatska pravna država! Nemoj me zajebavati, prijatelju! Još ćeš me uvjeravati da Ivana voli Gavina!

    avatar

    05.03.2007. (19:16)    -   -   -   -  

  • cveba

    ..zaboravila sam gratuljerati, ova ilustracija gore kod tebe u uvodu sa teatrom, ginjolima, pajaclinima, marionetama i ostalim puku dragim podvalama je izvrstna, castim te dolje u nas kad dospijem / dospijes, od srca...

    avatar

    05.03.2007. (19:38)    -   -   -   -  

  • prijatelj

    nemanja, nisam rekao da je tuđman bad guy, nego da je u njegovo doba bilo važno tko je bad guy a tko good guy jer je krv još bila svježa a pretvorba u tijeku; zato su i novine imale visoke tiraže po osnovu naslovnica koje su denuncirale tko je tko, u realnosti ili u fantaziji. a to tko je držao i kakve tribine, ipak blijedi pred činjenicom da je tuđman bio partizanski oficir; on je takve kao što je bio moj djed, koji se borio za hrvatsku, u drugom svjetskom ratu ubijao, nemanja, ubijao, što je ipak neuporedivo sa tribinama u studentskom centru ili gdje već. no pustimo tuđmana na miru da rješava svoje probleme sa svetim petrom. htio sam samo reći da je u civilno doba nekim ljudima ipak važno što se događa u njihovom kvartu ili selu, što u ovom trenutku ne mogu doznati niti iz jednog medija (osim, donekle, slavonskog doma). sve novine imitiraju stari globus ili st, čak i lokalne, i privlače čitatelje isforsiranim senzacionalizmom, dok u SAD, njemačkoj, austriji i tamo gdje springer ima novine čitatelji vole čitati stvarnosno novinarstvo, što njima bliže, to bolje. ako pročitaju svoje ime u novinama, onda najbolje.

    avatar

    05.03.2007. (21:21)    -   -   -   -  

  • prijatelj

    nego evo ti jedan fin tekst:

    FRESNO -- Everybody's mad because Eastwood's Iwo Jima movie, Flags of Our Fathers, bombed. I read this one review that said every citizen ought to go pay to sit through it even if it is a bad movie, like it's some kind of patriotic duty for me to put $25 in Clint Eastwood's offshore account. (And yeah, I know movies don't cost $25 but I can't sit down in a darkened room unless I've got a Humpback-size diet coke in one hand, a Maxi-tub popcorn in the other, and a spare clip of Milk Duds in my ammo pocket.)

    I've got my own theory about why all these WW II movies went down in flames like Zeros in the Marianas Turkey Shoot: because WW II is way overrated. Next to the guy who directed Pearl Harbor, the men who set that war in motion and made all the decisions from 1939-1945 were the biggest idiots in history. And that's why all the lessons of WW II, everything it's supposed to teach us, is either dead wrong or as obvious as a ballpeen hammer in your face, so obvious that even Barney could teach it to his diaper demographic between commercial breaks.

    The biggest lie about WW II is that it was a war between good and evil. Bullshit, because there were no good European countries.

    Fact No1: They Were ALL Fascists. At a military level, let's face a nasty fact: WW II was Stalin vs. Hitler. The rest was window dressing. Stalin won because--because what, he was a nicer guy? Nope, he won because his brand of fascism was actually way more ruthless and bloody and effective than Hitler's smalltime snobbery, and because Stalin had the whole US industrial machine backing him. There's no moral lesson in that that I can see.

    Of course, most of these WW II fans try real hard not to think about Stalin, so they prefer to think about Britain and the rest of Western Europe. Those are officially the good guys. Well, got some bad news for you: they were all fascists too, just weaker than Stalin and Hitler, more sly and suckup-y. The only lesson they've got to offer is that if you want to survive, start out as a raving fascist and when that becomes uncool, turn coward and start pretending you were always in favor of niceness.

    Europe before Stalingrad was an alien planet, as crazy and bloodthirsty as any Aztec priest. Nobody realizes the complete flip-flop Europe did in 1945. Before that, it was a continent full of insane fascists. Some were braver, better soldiers, or smarter; those are the only real differences.

    And when I say "smarter," I don't want to overdo it, because the Greatest Generation was a bunch of morons. Hitler was the stupidest of all, I grant you that, but he was just the standout in graduating class full of mongoloids in fedoras. Take Churchill, who's supposed to be a God of courage and decency and smarts. Wrong, wrong, wrong. Churchill was a buffoon. He was the moron who got Allied armies into useless Mediterranean campaigns in both World Wars. Gallipoli had Churchill's autograph all over it, and he was so stupid he tried the same crap 25 years later with the Italian adventure. He had this obsession with the "soft underbelly of Europe" which conveniently forgot about these things called "mountain ranges," like the Alps and the Apennines.

    There's another inconvenient fact about Churchill: he was a fascist too, every bit as much as Hitler. Only thing is, you can't blame him much for that, because, and I want y'all to listen up here, everybody in Europe was a fascist until 1943--if they were quick on the uptake enough to see the Wehrmacht was doomed--or 1944, by which time it was obvious even to the moron majority that fascism was now officially taboo. I repeat: everybody in Europe. Fascist to the core.

    Churchill's one and only reason for fighting Hitler was that he didn't want Germany challenging England for world domination. In 1936, Churchill told a British general, "Germany is getting too strong; we must smash her." That was his only objection to the Nazis. No way he could have minded their brutality, because Churchill was always in favor of violence against anybody who opposed British interests. Long before the war, he supported using concentration camps for the Boer women and kids, strafing Indian villages--and here's his enlightened democratic quote on how to deal with the Iraqi Kurds, everybody's favorite persecuted minority, from a 1919 memo: "I am strongly in favour of using poisoned [sic] gas against uncivilized tribes."

    That doesn't make him a bad guy; it just makes him a standard European, pre-1945. They were all like that, only more so. You can go down the list of European countries and come up with a list of homegrown fascist parties, all totally popular and democratic, that make the Nazis look like squeamish moderates. Some of them, like the Iron Guard in Romania, make even me flinch.

    And if we rotate the globe, voila!: the Asian theatre also turns out to be a classic battle of fascism vs...more fascism. The Imperial Japanese military caste was beyond fascist. Serio

    avatar

    05.03.2007. (21:37)    -   -   -   -  

  • prijatelj

    Seriously, they were so hardcore that it was taboo even to suggest the possibility of anything going wrong with the grand plan for total victory, which is why nobody dared to develop anything resembling a strategic plan. That was a good way to get yourself hacked into Kobe beef. The Japanese brass responded like Travis Bickle to questions like that: "You talkin' to us? You askin' us that question? Cuz we don't see any other Japanese brass around here..." Cut to: arterial sprays where the insolent questioner used to be.

    And in the opposite corner: Chiang Kai Shek, the Asian Churchill: a totally incompetent military leader and lifelong fascist who saw how the wind was blowing and repackaged himself as a crusader for democracy in order to get aid from the gullible Americans. Chiang only valued one thing: obedience. And he only trusted one guy: himself. That's why he personally held 82 official positions in China, including head of all the armed services. He picked his generals for their incompetence, because he suspected that talented men might turn against him. Any sign of independent thinking, never mind criticism, meant the chop, and I mean that literally. Chiang even had himself declared the head of the Chinese Boy Scouts, that breeding ground of coups. That was the Good Guy of the Asian theatre. Oh wait, I'm forgetting Mao, another champion of human rights.

    Even the noncombatant states were fascist before the Marshall Plan showed dictators that there was more profit in talking nice. Countries tried to copy the big, bad fascists with little comedy monsters of their own, like Trujillo in the Dominican Republic or Peron in Argentina. And in their humble way, all these guys did their best to do their worst. Trujillo actually tried to prove that the Dominicans were the lost tribe of Aryanism, and ordered something like 30,000 Haitian immigrants hacked to death with machetes for being "black." Even the Mexicans tried to do the Fascist two-step, only being Mexican they went for the gaudiest color they could find, so while Germany had the brownshirts and Mussolini had the blackshirts, Mexico came up with...the Gold Shirts! "And put some frilly cuffs on that while you're at it!"

    After Stalingrad, the world's fascists just figured out that if you wanted to win, you needed US backing like Stalin got, and that meant you needed a cleaner line of patter than the Nazis and Japanese used. Those hick Jerries and Japs talked death, skulls, slaughter, suicide--tsk tsk, way uncool. Stalin, on the other hand, talked peace, friendship between peoples, justice for the working class...and not only killed far more civvies than Hitler did but got funded for it by the American taxpayer. It was the original no-brainer--which was lucky because this was the Dumbest Generation since the Thirty Years War.

    Fact No2: The Holocaust is a One-Shot Exception; Genocide DOES Pay.

    The Holocaust is the next-biggest non-lesson of WW II. Everybody loves to talk about this particular case of genocide because it failed, or so we're told. The Germans paid a terrible price for what they did to the Jews. Nope; the Germans paid a terrible price for invading Russia. If they'd stuck to holding their half of Eurasia, Stalin would have continued his love affair with Hitler, the only human being he ever liked, and the European Jews would have been a shared buffet, divvied up between concentration camps flying the swastika or the red star.

    What made the Holocaust totally unlike most genocides is that we remember the victims; and the only reason we do is, once again, the USA. The European Jews were totally vulnerable and despised over there, but their kin in America were doing fine and cared enough to remember their relatives who died. Compare this to almost any other example of genocide, and there are literally thousands of examples, and you'll see the difference: most of the time (I mean DUH!) the tribe that gets genocided is the most despised, weak and helpless tribe in the region. That means nobody remembers them at all, or if they do they consider the genocide an example of Progress, or just one of those things. If you doubt that, then tell me quick what tribe lived 400 years ago in the city where you're reading this now. I still, after years of trying to find out, don't know what tribe lived around Fresno. Nobody even mentions them on the web--that's how most genocides work. The tribe vanishes forever. That's why they call it genocide, for God's sake! And once it's gone--Duh!--nobody remembers it or cares.

    The reason people love to talk about Nazis killing Jews is that, thanks to the Jews in America, there were people who insisted on remembering the victims. If people thought about the genocide of, say, the tribe that lived where you lived, they'd get bummed. They'd realize the world is a slaughterhouse and there are no moral lessons. That's why they'd rather talk about Auschwitz than...Fresno.

    Fact No3: There Are NO Military Lessons to Be Learned

    avatar

    05.03.2007. (21:40)    -   -   -   -  

  • prijatelj

    Fact No3: There Are NO Military Lessons to Be Learned from WW II

    This is my real pet peeve about WW II, because frankly I care way more about bad military history than all that moral bla-bla. Every military lesson people WANT to take away from WW II is wrong, and the one they COULD learn is the one they don't want to learn.

    So for starters, here's the real lesson of the war: military superiority in the narrow sense isn't nearly as important as economic strength and propaganda working in tandem.

    Now that is a real depressing lesson for all military buffs, and one that took me years to accept, but we have to face it. If military superiority settled things, the Germans and Japanese would have won because they were by far, and I mean by FAR, the best soldiers. A military historian with the unlucky name of Nutter has done a really good job of demolishing the hometown writers who try to assert that allied troops came close to Wehrmacht soldiers in combat power. I'll leave it to him to deal with diehard Greatest Generation fans: http://www.militaryhistoryonline.com/wwii/armies/introduction.aspx

    Until Hitler poured its strength out on the Russian wasteland the Wehrmacht had total supremacy. Once you realize that you can drop a lot of myths, such as the crap that the French were cowards and the Brits brave heroes. The French lost because they had a land border with Germany, period. The British Army did as badly or worse than the French in combat with the Wehrmacht during the invasion of France, and survived for one reason: Hitler, the moron, had this idea that Britain would stand with him against Bolshevism when the Brits came to their senses, so he cancelled the invasion, codenamed Operation Sea Lion. If the invasion had gone ahead, Churchill's speech about fighting them on the beaches, etc., would have had a sequel: "We shall fight them on the beaches...for about ten minutes. We shall fight them in the hills...for about a week," and so on.

    The key military struggle of the war was on the plains of Russia, and Hitler lost not because he was evil--what, Stalin wasn't just as evil?--but because he was too much of a snobby hick idiot to look for allies. If he'd courted the Belorussians, Ukrainians, Poles, the peasant landholders forced onto kolkhozes and all the other anti-Commie groups in Eastern Europe he'd have won hands down. And if Stalin had been one smidgen LESS evil, he'd have lost anyway. Stalin won because his soldiers were way more afraid of the NKVD than the Nazis. If a Russian soldier was captured, he was considered a traitor. If he retreated, the commissars were waiting to shoot him. If he bitched, he'd have his fingernails removed and end up begging to be shot.

    So the real legacy of this shitty war was a Soviet world, where the way to win is to mix propaganda about love and peace for grabbing US tax dollars with a new kind of violence, a mean cowardly kind that happened in Moscow basement interrogation cells, with 70-year sentences to Office World as the alternative for us lucky Fresno-ites.

    Everything they told you is wrong. Everything you believe is wrong, and worse than that--it's dull, too. At least the fascists tried to make it interesting for us non-execs, non-surfers, non-golfers. They were brutal scum, sure...but I have to ask, "compared to who--YOU assholes?"

    avatar

    05.03.2007. (21:41)    -   -   -   -  

  • prijatelj

    Fact No3: There Are NO Military Lessons to Be Learned from WW II

    This is my real pet peeve about WW II, because frankly I care way more about bad military history than all that moral bla-bla. Every military lesson people WANT to take away from WW II is wrong, and the one they COULD learn is the one they don't want to learn.

    So for starters, here's the real lesson of the war: military superiority in the narrow sense isn't nearly as important as economic strength and propaganda working in tandem.

    Now that is a real depressing lesson for all military buffs, and one that took me years to accept, but we have to face it. If military superiority settled things, the Germans and Japanese would have won because they were by far, and I mean by FAR, the best soldiers. A military historian with the unlucky name of Nutter has done a really good job of demolishing the hometown writers who try to assert that allied troops came close to Wehrmacht soldiers in combat power. I'll leave it to him to deal with diehard Greatest Generation fans: http://www.militaryhistoryonline.com/wwii/armies/introduction.aspx

    Until Hitler poured its strength out on the Russian wasteland the Wehrmacht had total supremacy. Once you realize that you can drop a lot of myths, such as the crap that the French were cowards and the Brits brave heroes. The French lost because they had a land border with Germany, period. The British Army did as badly or worse than the French in combat with the Wehrmacht during the invasion of France, and survived for one reason: Hitler, the moron, had this idea that Britain would stand with him against Bolshevism when the Brits came to their senses, so he cancelled the invasion, codenamed Operation Sea Lion. If the invasion had gone ahead, Churchill's speech about fighting them on the beaches, etc., would have had a sequel: "We shall fight them on the beaches...for about ten minutes. We shall fight them in the hills...for about a week," and so on.

    The key military struggle of the war was on the plains of Russia, and Hitler lost not because he was evil--what, Stalin wasn't just as evil?--but because he was too much of a snobby hick idiot to look for allies. If he'd courted the Belorussians, Ukrainians, Poles, the peasant landholders forced onto kolkhozes and all the other anti-Commie groups in Eastern Europe he'd have won hands down. And if Stalin had been one smidgen LESS evil, he'd have lost anyway. Stalin won because his soldiers were way more afraid of the NKVD than the Nazis. If a Russian soldier was captured, he was considered a traitor. If he retreated, the commissars were waiting to shoot him. If he bitched, he'd have his fingernails removed and end up begging to be shot.

    So the real legacy of this shitty war was a Soviet world, where the way to win is to mix propaganda about love and peace for grabbing US tax dollars with a new kind of violence, a mean cowardly kind that happened in Moscow basement interrogation cells, with 70-year sentences to Office World as the alternative for us lucky Fresno-ites.

    Everything they told you is wrong. Everything you believe is wrong, and worse than that--it's dull, too. At least the fascists tried to make it interesting for us non-execs, non-surfers, non-golfers. They were brutal scum, sure...but I have to ask, "compared to who--YOU assholes?"

    avatar

    05.03.2007. (21:48)    -   -   -   -  

  • NEMANJA

    A sada mi još reci kako si, molim te, zalutao na the eXile?

    avatar

    05.03.2007. (21:56)    -   -   -   -  

  • prijatelj

    stalno sam tamo
    privlači me ideja expatizma
    ona je uostalom dio obiteljske tradicije
    većim sam dijelom porijeklom hrvat
    a manjim englez, mađar, talijan i rom

    avatar

    06.03.2007. (00:02)    -   -   -   -  

  •  
učitavam...