The former president said only a “psycho” or a “very stupid person” would’ve made such statements.

Trump Demands Biden Remove Ad of Him Calling Dead Soldiers ‘Suckers’ and ‘Losers’ - The former president said only a “psycho” or a “very stupid person” would’ve made such statements.

    • @[email protected]
      6•5 months ago

      World War II was not what? About making rich people richer?

      You don’t think the Nazis did it for money and power? Where do you think the killed jews property, businesses, money went? Real eastate, priceless artwork, jewellery, savings, some pretty prominent businesses. Hell, they even ripped out their gold teeth.

      Ever seen pictures of the mountains of wedding rings and gold teeth ready to be melted they found in the camps?

      The leading Nazis lived in wealth and luxury. This whole war was about power and superiority over others, which only come with MONEY.

        • @[email protected]
          6•5 months ago

          The people in any of these soldier/veteran cemeteries were never the ones profiting of War. That doesn’t change the fact that wars are fought because of money. Including WWII.

          • @[email protected]
            11•5 months ago

            I’m not who you were talking to, but I think you and I can agree that war is primarily a means to increase the power of the aggressor. Money is one form of this, perhaps the main one - though I’d argue things like direct control over other territories and their populace is another (connected to money re: control of resources, sure, but that’s just one aspect).

            That said, the American WWII dead buried at Arlington, or the Canadians and Brits buried in Dieppe for that matter, or heck, even the Soviets buried in Warsaw (regardless of how you may feel about the former USSR in general) - would you say that their lives were given, primarily, in the name of money/power? Or in defence of that being stripped from others by force?

            I’m not going to pretend there isn’t an argument to be made for the former, but I am legitimately curious about your thoughts here. Is it ever just to take up arms?

            • @[email protected]
              2•5 months ago

              There are always more than one side in any conflict and most of the time they are not as clear as in WW II, but I argue that wars are always started because of material gain besides other factors.

              Look at the British empire, they exploited their colonies to the max taking all the resourses for themselves. They didnt invade india just to have power over it. They did so for the wealth of their own country. So did every other colonizer. The US wages wars over oil or to to keep the world as capitalist as possible. Russa is waging war in Ukraine not because Putin wants to holiday in Kiev. Israel wages war over the question who is allowed to prosper on that land.

              Not every act of aggression is about money, but I do believe that one of the root causes for every war is material gain.