The Nazis were not racist (or they were racist against white Nordics)

Christopher, I take back the things I said to you yesterday. I was just annoyed. I'm sorry for that. Thanks for showing me friendliness and courtesy, friend. Now, let's get to business.Here are some refutalsThis is not a picture of Jesse Owens and Luz Long. It appears to be a picture of Owens and several other athletes saluting something or somebody.Yes, however, I was making a point. Had this been in Britain (southern Scotland and northern England), Denmark or Sweden, or the US, (1) it would have been segregated (in this picture a German, a black man, and a Japanese man were celebrating the win together, and the audience cheered with strength). In those three countries I mentioned, it was common to throw bananas at blacks.You didn't provide a picture here, you just moved on with your argument.My apologies. I meant to refer to the first.Here's a more personal picture of the two to make it more convincing That was an error on my part. Here are the pics I forgot to show.http://www.aph.gov.au...http://static.alessandrobenetton.com...http://media-cache-ec0.pinimg.com...;(a bit of brotherly love).My opponent seems to be arguing that since there is in existence a picture of a Nazi and a black man, that all Nazis are not racist. Since he mentions the United States, I'd like to present him with this picture: https://www.google.com......;, which is clearly a picture of an African American baseball player, Hank Aaron, with two white baseball players. By their uniforms, it can be judged that they are on the same team, which likely means that they had some form of a friendship. Now, does this prove that racism was nonexistant in the United States? Of course not!Absolutely. I'll also be glad to say that not all whites were lynching blacks or other races. But racial hatred was a big problem in all of the 50 states.At no point in that quote is race mentioned as a reason Hitler decided to invade Denmark. In fact, as you yourself stated in your own argument, Nazi Germany invaded Denmark because they were an ally of Britain, which had declared war on Germany after the Nazi invasion of Poland in 1939. By your logic, however, no nation would ever go to war with a nation unless they hated them for their race. In this case, please explain the following: the American Revolution, the Spanish-American War, the War of 1812, World War I, the Crimean War, the Napoleonic Wars, the Franco-Prussian War, the War of the Spanish Succession, the Vietnam War, the Iraq War, the War in Afghanistan, the Korean War, and the majority of other wars.Yes, I did say that Hitler hated Nordics. I never race was the cause of wars. Wars do happen. I understand that. However, there are two motives for war. The first is an older, more despecible combination of reasons -- to steal and in some cases enslave (Scotland, Denmark and Sweden did this). With Hitler and Mussolini, as party of the grand fascist movements that occured in the 20th century, it was done out of revenge. I can honestly say that the second of the two is less despicable honestly. I can understand what trigged the Axis' anger. Now, as for race, I never said race was necessarily a factor, but I defintely believe revenge was. Remember, the revenge conquest of Denmark is part of a German-Danish conflict that goes back centuries. In the 17th century, Denmark colonized a part of Germany that belonged to them, thus starting a very brutal war between the two nations. This was the Schwelig War (Schwelig which was originally German, but today Denmark). There was the first. Then there was the second, which was Germany trying to claim back what was their's originally, in 1864. Then, in an attempt to cheat Germany and add insult to injury, Denmark wants to steal it back, and was awarded this in Versailles. It was Denmark's way of saying "I don't care, you krauts."The Nazis viewed several races, including Africans, Jews, and Slavs as subhuman and inferior. Now, Adam, I acknowledge the fact that you do not consider Jews to be a race.To be fair you bring up a good point that I should have said earlier. The reason there's all this confusion about Jews and their race is because the Israeli people once were a major nation in the world in the times of antiquity. But here's where it gets tricky. Judiasm and Israel for most of its histories were not synomous terms. The Bible talks about Israel being the chosen ones, however, it was later on in the Old Testament. Before then, there was no Israel. Also Judaism was actually a heretical religion in the land. As the story of the Bible goes, Moses' commandments were being broken by the people in the town. They were twisting God's words (in many cases this is where the heresy of Judaism began). All the ridiculous rules in Orthodox Judaism that were never God's orders. Also, perhaps coincidently, God told the Israelis to keep their tribe pure (I know that sounds racist, but if you read the Bible, you'll understand what I mean). There were different races in all of the regions. Some could have been Nordics, some ancient Spaniards, etc. Many of the ones who created Judaism were the same ones who disobeyed God's commandments. What's the point I'm making Israel and Judiasm were not synomous with each other. The word "Jew" doesn't really appear until the New Testament (God forgive me if I'm wrong). However, this is something that is obviously untrue. However, seeing as I doubt that will change your opinion, I have thought of two other races that the Nazis believed were subhuman and inferior. Here are some Hitler quotes about Slavs:"The Slav peoples are not destined to live a cleanly life. They know it, and we would be wrong to persuade them of the contrary. It was we who, in 1918, created the Baltic countries and the Ukraine. But nowadays we have no interest in maintaining Baltic States, any more than in creating an independent Ukraine. We must likewise prevent them from returning to Christianity. That would be a grave fault, for it would be giving them a form of organisation. If left to himself, the Slav would never have emerged from the narrowest of family communities."This one is a bit hard to refute as I would have to look into deep. I will state that I believe this is one of the many stupid statements in our history books today. I can't help but think that this is more a KKK belief (which I'll get into more later).Germans are, obviously, a Germanic race, as are the Norse. Actually no. Germans are not a Germanic people, at least not completely or even for the most part. They're mixed with many bloodlines. You have the Romans who settled there. The slavs from the west. The area encompassing Germany was once Germanic but those people have now settled in what is now southern Scotland, the Scandinavian countries (Norway is more Celtic though). The Germans might be closer to the Norse, however, there's good reason to believe that Norway is a Celtic country, moreso than Germanic. Many spellings in Norway seem to give the impression that it's more Celtic. Norway is also very similar to the Highlands of Scotland and Ireland.If you don't believe me, let's hear what Hitler has to say about it."In old times Europe was confined to the southern part of the Greek peninsula. Then Europe became confused with the borders of the Roman Empire. If Russia goes under in this war, Europe will stretch eastwards to the limits of Germanic colonisation. The Germanic race created the notion of the State. It incarnated this notion in reality, by compelling the individual to be a part of a whole. It's our duty continually to arouse the forces that slumber in our people's blood." If you can't believe me about Nazis, at least believe Hitler about them.With all due respect, Chris, I find that statement complete BS. Whoever said that Hitler said this had to be stupid. This is not one of the things I've ever seen said in his speech films (and I've seen a lot of them, though not, and none ever have said this). I dare you to find me a video of Hitler's speech in which he some something about that. Cause I've never seen one where it's translated to say those things. Most of the videos I've seen praise Italy, and in some cases the Roman Empire. And, Hitler could not have been that dumb. Hitler was a smart man (much like Mussolini). He would have to know that Germany as well as Austria was a mixed country, ethnicity wise, part Slavic, part Roman, part Celtic.Here are some things.Like I said before, the KKK and Nazis are unfortunately so mixed up in our society that we don't really have facts any more. It was the KKK that believed in Germanic ideals not the Nazis. One thing that shows this for instance, is the fact that one ethnic group, the Swedes, dominated Klan politics in Massachusetts during the 19th to 20th centuries. They hated the fact that Germans and Irish were coming in big numbers, and did everything they could to stop them. Plus Nazism is naturally the antithesis of the Germanic Protestant KKK. Nazism is a Catholic ideology, in which many of the Catholics sided with. Anglicanism was the second biggest supporter of Nazism, with Henry Ford and Chamberlain, prime minister of England, being its supporters (Churchill was never really religious). Lutherans were heavily against Nazism from the get. Be a Lutheran who supported Nazi views and you could consider yourself banished from the community of believiers.