Who should resign in Canada over the Waffen SS standing ovation?

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

I don't understand.

It would be even worse if you did.

[Benjamin Frank]

I don't understand.

It would be even worse if you did.

Well, I certainly understand that some people have a desire to feel morally superior to other people even if it means engaging in simplistic false binaries.

I certainly think that is what you are doing rather than trying to understanding the horrible situation this person was in (if he only fought Soviets.)

If this guy was in a French SS unit, there would be no moral ambiguity, but that isn't the case.

And I understand even more than many partisans are insincere and dishonest in claiming to care about things that they actually don't. (Not saying that about you personally here.)

The best example i can think of that relates to the Republican reaction of OUTRAGE! to Senator Bob Kerrey's admission that he took part in the Mai Lai massacre (Bob Kerrey is a mass murderer!) versus the defence of the troops in Mai Lai and in Abu Ghraib that Republicans always reflexively argue otherwise.

According to Republicans, the only person who is guilty in Mai Lai is Senator Bob Kerrey.

So, I look at partisans on these sorts of things as being more interested in the politics than anything else.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

There were unaligned Ukrainian partisans, you realize.

[Benjamin Frank]

There were unaligned Ukrainian partisans, your realize.

Sure.

That doesn't make Ukrainians fighting Soviets in World War II in defence of Ukraine clearly wrong, just as it doesn't make Finns fighting Soviets in World War II in defence of Finland clearly wrong. Stalin was as evil as Hitler and, less we forget, was an ally of Hitler from 1939-1941.

"So between 1939 and 1941, Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union are allies. And Stalin actually provides very substantial support to Nazi Germany. So when Germany invaded the Soviet Union in June of 1941, this time it was Stalin who is taken by surprise."

At best, you are engaging in the Historian's fallacy.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

There were unaligned Ukrainian partisans, your realize.

Sure.

That doesn't make Ukrainians fighting Soviets in World War II in defence of Ukraine clearly wrong, just as it doesn't make Finns fighting Soviets in World War II in defence of Finland clearly wrong. Stalin was as evil as Hitler and, less we forget, was an ally of Hitler from 1939-1941.

"So between 1939 and 1941, Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union are allies. And Stalin actually provides very substantial support to Nazi Germany. So when Germany invaded the Soviet Union in June of 1941, this time it was Stalin who is taken by surprise."

At best, you are engaging in the Historian's fallacy.

It might be time for you to consider that I know all this already and nevertheless disagree with you on the appropriateness of giving standing ovations to SS veterans and lying about Grandpa's Nazi past, Frank.

[Benjamin Frank]

There were unaligned Ukrainian partisans, your realize.

Sure.

That doesn't make Ukrainians fighting Soviets in World War II in defence of Ukraine clearly wrong, just as it doesn't make Finns fighting Soviets in World War II in defence of Finland clearly wrong. Stalin was as evil as Hitler and, less we forget, was an ally of Hitler from 1939-1941.

"So between 1939 and 1941, Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union are allies. And Stalin actually provides very substantial support to Nazi Germany. So when Germany invaded the Soviet Union in June of 1941, this time it was Stalin who is taken by surprise."

At best, you are engaging in the Historian's fallacy.

It might be time for you to consider that I know all this already and nevertheless disagree with you on the appropriateness of giving standing ovations to SS veterans and lying about Grandpa's Nazi past, Frank.

I am aware of that. That's why I said that I thought you might be engaging in claimed moral superiority through using false simple binaries.

That's fine, we can disagree. But, there are valid positions to take that involve not claiming moral superiority, as I believe I've shown.

[KaiserDave]

There were unaligned Ukrainian partisans, your realize.

Sure.

That doesn't make Ukrainians fighting Soviets in World War II in defence of Ukraine clearly wrong, just as it doesn't make Finns fighting Soviets in World War II in defence of Finland clearly wrong. Stalin was as evil as Hitler and, less we forget, was an ally of Hitler from 1939-1941.

"So between 1939 and 1941, Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union are allies. And Stalin actually provides very substantial support to Nazi Germany. So when Germany invaded the Soviet Union in June of 1941, this time it was Stalin who is taken by surprise."

At best, you are engaging in the Historian's fallacy.

Ukraine was under attack by the Nazi war machine intent on dismantling Ukrainian statehood and turning the Ukrainian population into a permanent slave class. I don't think they were defending Ukraine at all.

[Benjamin Frank]

There were unaligned Ukrainian partisans, your realize.

Sure.

That doesn't make Ukrainians fighting Soviets in World War II in defence of Ukraine clearly wrong, just as it doesn't make Finns fighting Soviets in World War II in defence of Finland clearly wrong. Stalin was as evil as Hitler and, less we forget, was an ally of Hitler from 1939-1941.

"So between 1939 and 1941, Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union are allies. And Stalin actually provides very substantial support to Nazi Germany. So when Germany invaded the Soviet Union in June of 1941, this time it was Stalin who is taken by surprise."

At best, you are engaging in the Historian's fallacy.

Ukraine was under attack by the Nazi war machine intent on dismantling Ukrainian statehood and turning the Ukrainian population into a permanent slave class. I don't think they were defending Ukraine at all.

Yes, a tough position for anybody there, since Stalin had already done that and was intent on maintaining it. But, it's probably impossible to know what this guy believed at the time. It's called 'the fog of war' for a reason. (Clarity is easy when not in real time, but it's also clearly true that the context gets forgotten and things get simplified.)

[KaiserDave]

There were unaligned Ukrainian partisans, your realize.

Sure.

That doesn't make Ukrainians fighting Soviets in World War II in defence of Ukraine clearly wrong, just as it doesn't make Finns fighting Soviets in World War II in defence of Finland clearly wrong. Stalin was as evil as Hitler and, less we forget, was an ally of Hitler from 1939-1941.

"So between 1939 and 1941, Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union are allies. And Stalin actually provides very substantial support to Nazi Germany. So when Germany invaded the Soviet Union in June of 1941, this time it was Stalin who is taken by surprise."

At best, you are engaging in the Historian's fallacy.

Ukraine was under attack by the Nazi war machine intent on dismantling Ukrainian statehood and turning the Ukrainian population into a permanent slave class. I don't think they were defending Ukraine at all.

Yes, a tough position for anybody there, since Stalin had already done that and was intent on maintaining it. But, it's probably impossible to know what this guy believed at the time. It's called 'the fog of war' for a reason.

Well he voluntarily joined a Waffen-SS regiment, so my inclination is not to be charitable.

[Benjamin Frank]

There were unaligned Ukrainian partisans, your realize.

Sure.

That doesn't make Ukrainians fighting Soviets in World War II in defence of Ukraine clearly wrong, just as it doesn't make Finns fighting Soviets in World War II in defence of Finland clearly wrong. Stalin was as evil as Hitler and, less we forget, was an ally of Hitler from 1939-1941.

"So between 1939 and 1941, Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union are allies. And Stalin actually provides very substantial support to Nazi Germany. So when Germany invaded the Soviet Union in June of 1941, this time it was Stalin who is taken by surprise."

At best, you are engaging in the Historian's fallacy.

Ukraine was under attack by the Nazi war machine intent on dismantling Ukrainian statehood and turning the Ukrainian population into a permanent slave class. I don't think they were defending Ukraine at all.

Yes, a tough position for anybody there, since Stalin had already done that and was intent on maintaining it. But, it's probably impossible to know what this guy believed at the time. It's called 'the fog of war' for a reason.

Well he voluntarily joined a Waffen-SS regiment, so my inclination is not to be charitable.

Yes, and as I said before, my inclination is to have the view 'there but for the grace of God go I.'

There have been other situations in history just as bad for groups of people, but it can't get worse than Stalin and Hitler.

And I've expressed this view on other things elsewhere at times. This has nothing to do with defending any Canadian from me, just to defend against simplistic binaries from people who either aren't aware of the history (especially when they believe they are) or who have simplified the history.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

The fog has cleared. Hunka can see the Waffen-SS clearly now and is still proud of his time with them.

[Benjamin Frank]

The fog has cleared. Hunka can see the Waffen-SS clearly now and is still proud of his time with them.

Were you in his situation at that time?

I don't mean to equate the two, but you could also take a neutral position and not judge Hunka rather than feel the need to be morally superior.

[KaiserDave]

There were unaligned Ukrainian partisans, your realize.

Sure.

That doesn't make Ukrainians fighting Soviets in World War II in defence of Ukraine clearly wrong, just as it doesn't make Finns fighting Soviets in World War II in defence of Finland clearly wrong. Stalin was as evil as Hitler and, less we forget, was an ally of Hitler from 1939-1941.

"So between 1939 and 1941, Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union are allies. And Stalin actually provides very substantial support to Nazi Germany. So when Germany invaded the Soviet Union in June of 1941, this time it was Stalin who is taken by surprise."

At best, you are engaging in the Historian's fallacy.

Ukraine was under attack by the Nazi war machine intent on dismantling Ukrainian statehood and turning the Ukrainian population into a permanent slave class. I don't think they were defending Ukraine at all.

Yes, a tough position for anybody there, since Stalin had already done that and was intent on maintaining it. But, it's probably impossible to know what this guy believed at the time. It's called 'the fog of war' for a reason.

Well he voluntarily joined a Waffen-SS regiment, so my inclination is not to be charitable.

Yes, and as I said before, my inclination is to have the view 'there but for the grace of God go I.'

There have been other situations in history just as bad for groups of people, but it can't get worse than Stalin and Hitler.

And I've expressed this view on other things elsewhere at times. This has nothing to do with defending any Canadian from me, just to defend against simplistic binaries from people who either aren't aware of the history (especially when they believe they are) or who have simplified the history.

I feel like I know the history pretty well, and I feel pretty comfortable condemning the SS.

[Benjamin Frank]

There were unaligned Ukrainian partisans, your realize.

Sure.

That doesn't make Ukrainians fighting Soviets in World War II in defence of Ukraine clearly wrong, just as it doesn't make Finns fighting Soviets in World War II in defence of Finland clearly wrong. Stalin was as evil as Hitler and, less we forget, was an ally of Hitler from 1939-1941.

"So between 1939 and 1941, Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union are allies. And Stalin actually provides very substantial support to Nazi Germany. So when Germany invaded the Soviet Union in June of 1941, this time it was Stalin who is taken by surprise."

At best, you are engaging in the Historian's fallacy.

Ukraine was under attack by the Nazi war machine intent on dismantling Ukrainian statehood and turning the Ukrainian population into a permanent slave class. I don't think they were defending Ukraine at all.

Yes, a tough position for anybody there, since Stalin had already done that and was intent on maintaining it. But, it's probably impossible to know what this guy believed at the time. It's called 'the fog of war' for a reason.

Well he voluntarily joined a Waffen-SS regiment, so my inclination is not to be charitable.

Yes, and as I said before, my inclination is to have the view 'there but for the grace of God go I.'

There have been other situations in history just as bad for groups of people, but it can't get worse than Stalin and Hitler.

And I've expressed this view on other things elsewhere at times. This has nothing to do with defending any Canadian from me, just to defend against simplistic binaries from people who either aren't aware of the history (especially when they believe they are) or who have simplified the history.

I feel like I know the history pretty well, and I feel pretty comfortable condemning the SS.

So, you are aware, as I've posted here, the Allies themselves didn't condemn non Germans who were in the SS in parts of Eastern Europe?

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

There were unaligned Ukrainian partisans, your realize.

Sure.

That doesn't make Ukrainians fighting Soviets in World War II in defence of Ukraine clearly wrong, just as it doesn't make Finns fighting Soviets in World War II in defence of Finland clearly wrong. Stalin was as evil as Hitler and, less we forget, was an ally of Hitler from 1939-1941.

"So between 1939 and 1941, Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union are allies. And Stalin actually provides very substantial support to Nazi Germany. So when Germany invaded the Soviet Union in June of 1941, this time it was Stalin who is taken by surprise."

At best, you are engaging in the Historian's fallacy.

Ukraine was under attack by the Nazi war machine intent on dismantling Ukrainian statehood and turning the Ukrainian population into a permanent slave class. I don't think they were defending Ukraine at all.

Yes, a tough position for anybody there, since Stalin had already done that and was intent on maintaining it. But, it's probably impossible to know what this guy believed at the time. It's called 'the fog of war' for a reason.

Well he voluntarily joined a Waffen-SS regiment, so my inclination is not to be charitable.

Yes, and as I said before, my inclination is to have the view 'there but for the grace of God go I.'

There have been other situations in history just as bad for groups of people, but it can't get worse than Stalin and Hitler.

And I've expressed this view on other things elsewhere at times. This has nothing to do with defending any Canadian from me, just to defend against simplistic binaries from people who either aren't aware of the history (especially when they believe they are) or who have simplified the history.

I feel like I know the history pretty well, and I feel pretty comfortable condemning the SS.

So, you are aware, as I've posted here, the Allies themselves didn't condemn non Germans who were in the SS in parts of Eastern Europe?

Unit 731 got off scot-free too but I sure wouldn't want Congress doing a standing ovation for them!

[KaiserDave]

There were unaligned Ukrainian partisans, your realize.

Sure.

That doesn't make Ukrainians fighting Soviets in World War II in defence of Ukraine clearly wrong, just as it doesn't make Finns fighting Soviets in World War II in defence of Finland clearly wrong. Stalin was as evil as Hitler and, less we forget, was an ally of Hitler from 1939-1941.

"So between 1939 and 1941, Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union are allies. And Stalin actually provides very substantial support to Nazi Germany. So when Germany invaded the Soviet Union in June of 1941, this time it was Stalin who is taken by surprise."

At best, you are engaging in the Historian's fallacy.

Ukraine was under attack by the Nazi war machine intent on dismantling Ukrainian statehood and turning the Ukrainian population into a permanent slave class. I don't think they were defending Ukraine at all.

Yes, a tough position for anybody there, since Stalin had already done that and was intent on maintaining it. But, it's probably impossible to know what this guy believed at the time. It's called 'the fog of war' for a reason.

Well he voluntarily joined a Waffen-SS regiment, so my inclination is not to be charitable.

Yes, and as I said before, my inclination is to have the view 'there but for the grace of God go I.'

There have been other situations in history just as bad for groups of people, but it can't get worse than Stalin and Hitler.

And I've expressed this view on other things elsewhere at times. This has nothing to do with defending any Canadian from me, just to defend against simplistic binaries from people who either aren't aware of the history (especially when they believe they are) or who have simplified the history.

I feel like I know the history pretty well, and I feel pretty comfortable condemning the SS.

So, you are aware, as I've posted here, the Allies themselves didn't condemn non Germans who were in the SS in parts of Eastern Europe?

Yeah I am. I'm not sure why that matters right now. I'm not arguing Yaroslav Hunka belongs in a cell or should have been punished after the war, I don't know enough about him, but he doesn't deserve even the faintest praise, he was on the side of evil in the most important war.

[Benjamin Frank]

There were unaligned Ukrainian partisans, your realize.

Sure.

That doesn't make Ukrainians fighting Soviets in World War II in defence of Ukraine clearly wrong, just as it doesn't make Finns fighting Soviets in World War II in defence of Finland clearly wrong. Stalin was as evil as Hitler and, less we forget, was an ally of Hitler from 1939-1941.

"So between 1939 and 1941, Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union are allies. And Stalin actually provides very substantial support to Nazi Germany. So when Germany invaded the Soviet Union in June of 1941, this time it was Stalin who is taken by surprise."

At best, you are engaging in the Historian's fallacy.

Ukraine was under attack by the Nazi war machine intent on dismantling Ukrainian statehood and turning the Ukrainian population into a permanent slave class. I don't think they were defending Ukraine at all.

Yes, a tough position for anybody there, since Stalin had already done that and was intent on maintaining it. But, it's probably impossible to know what this guy believed at the time. It's called 'the fog of war' for a reason.

Well he voluntarily joined a Waffen-SS regiment, so my inclination is not to be charitable.

Yes, and as I said before, my inclination is to have the view 'there but for the grace of God go I.'

There have been other situations in history just as bad for groups of people, but it can't get worse than Stalin and Hitler.

And I've expressed this view on other things elsewhere at times. This has nothing to do with defending any Canadian from me, just to defend against simplistic binaries from people who either aren't aware of the history (especially when they believe they are) or who have simplified the history.

I feel like I know the history pretty well, and I feel pretty comfortable condemning the SS.

So, you are aware, as I've posted here, the Allies themselves didn't condemn non Germans who were in the SS in parts of Eastern Europe?

Yeah I am. I'm not sure why that matters right now. I'm not arguing Yaroslav Hunka belongs in a cell or should have been punished after the war, I don't know enough about him, but he doesn't deserve even the faintest praise, he was on the side of evil in the most important war.

As was Stalin until Hitler invaded.

I agree he doesn't deserve praise, but the only people who should be condemned for the choices made in those Eastern European nations during World War II are those who seeked to personally profit or to murder other innocents. For people in those nations (and in Finland) both the Nazis and the Soviets were evil.

I do find it a bit odd, since people usually expect other people to behave with some degree of self interest and don't expect others to take a global view. I don't like people who solo drive SUVs but I don't condemn them for it despite the impact on global warming, and people who do condemn people for doing things like that are generally regarded as extremists. And, I certainly do equate the harm done by Nazis (and that would have been done had they won the war) and the harm done by global warming (and that will be done.)

[Benjamin Frank]

There were unaligned Ukrainian partisans, your realize.

Sure.

That doesn't make Ukrainians fighting Soviets in World War II in defence of Ukraine clearly wrong, just as it doesn't make Finns fighting Soviets in World War II in defence of Finland clearly wrong. Stalin was as evil as Hitler and, less we forget, was an ally of Hitler from 1939-1941.

"So between 1939 and 1941, Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union are allies. And Stalin actually provides very substantial support to Nazi Germany. So when Germany invaded the Soviet Union in June of 1941, this time it was Stalin who is taken by surprise."

At best, you are engaging in the Historian's fallacy.

Ukraine was under attack by the Nazi war machine intent on dismantling Ukrainian statehood and turning the Ukrainian population into a permanent slave class. I don't think they were defending Ukraine at all.

Yes, a tough position for anybody there, since Stalin had already done that and was intent on maintaining it. But, it's probably impossible to know what this guy believed at the time. It's called 'the fog of war' for a reason.

Well he voluntarily joined a Waffen-SS regiment, so my inclination is not to be charitable.

Yes, and as I said before, my inclination is to have the view 'there but for the grace of God go I.'

There have been other situations in history just as bad for groups of people, but it can't get worse than Stalin and Hitler.

And I've expressed this view on other things elsewhere at times. This has nothing to do with defending any Canadian from me, just to defend against simplistic binaries from people who either aren't aware of the history (especially when they believe they are) or who have simplified the history.

I feel like I know the history pretty well, and I feel pretty comfortable condemning the SS.

So, you are aware, as I've posted here, the Allies themselves didn't condemn non Germans who were in the SS in parts of Eastern Europe?

Unit 731 got off scot-free too but I sure wouldn't want Congress doing a standing ovation for them!

Did Unit 731 guard Nazis (or Japanese leaders) after World War II?

The Allies fully recognized the impossible position people in these nations were in and realized they couldn't condemn them for the choices they made.

Anyway, I'm not going to change the views of people who have a need to feel morally superior and we've covered the history in a fuller context. I have other things to do and I'm done with this discussion.

[ꙮ]

Stop embarrassing yourself by attempting to defend honoring literal Nazis, good lord. We aren't talking about some poor German conscript here, the guy willingly chose to join the SS.

[Benjamin Frank]

Stop embarrassing yourself by attempting to defend honoring literal Nazis, good lord. We aren't talking about some poor German conscript here, the guy willingly chose to join the SS.

Stop embarrassing yourself by expressing ignorant simple binaries. Again, I've explained the morally ambiguous situation, if you feel the need to feel morally superior, go ahead, but you're not.

Or, as I've also said here previously, I will if the United States stops honoring the literal Nazi Wehrner Von Braun (who was also an SS member) and was much higher ranking than this guy.

[ꙮ]

Stop embarrassing yourself by attempting to defend honoring literal Nazis, good lord. We aren't talking about some poor German conscript here, the guy willingly chose to join the SS.

Stop embarrassing yourself by expressing ignorant simple binaries. Again, I've explained the complicated situation, if you feel the need to feel morally superior, go ahead, but you're not.

Not embarrassed at all actually, but thank you for your concern.

I am, in fact, morally superior to SS grandpa here, and I say that without having any high opinion of my own morality. I say it with absolute confidence and no shame whatsoever. I have never raped or murdered civilians in Eastern Europe nor sent Jews away to be mass-murdered in the Holocaust, so I feel perfectly comfortable in that assertion. No amount of faux-intellectual rambling is going to change the fact that this guy willingly chose to join the SS, and that the SS is responsible for the actions which have quite literally defined the concept of "crimes against humanity".

[Benjamin Frank]

Stop embarrassing yourself by attempting to defend honoring literal Nazis, good lord. We aren't talking about some poor German conscript here, the guy willingly chose to join the SS.

Stop embarrassing yourself by expressing ignorant simple binaries. Again, I've explained the complicated situation, if you feel the need to feel morally superior, go ahead, but you're not.

Not embarrassed at all actually, but thank you for your concern.

I am, in fact, morally superior to SS grandpa here, and I say that without having any high opinion of my own morality. I have never raped or murdered civilians in Eastern Europe nor sent Jews away to be mass-murdered in the Holocaust, so I feel perfectly comfortable in that assertion. No amount of faux-intellectual rambling is going to change the fact that this guy willingly chose to join the SS, and that the SS is responsible for disgustingly immoral actions.

Read the whole thread before commenting, I have nothing to add. It isn't known for certain what Hunka did and there is no claim that he participated in the Holocaust.

We are also going down a dark road when rejecting binary thinking is called 'faux intellectual rambling.'

Whether I'm being faux intellectual or not does not excuse mindless binaries.

Idiocracy here we come...

[Хahar 🤔]

The Liberal Party position here, I guess, is that moral knowledge does not exist. That's not a unique position but it's a pretty bold one to be taking.

[ꙮ]

Stop embarrassing yourself by attempting to defend honoring literal Nazis, good lord. We aren't talking about some poor German conscript here, the guy willingly chose to join the SS.

Stop embarrassing yourself by expressing ignorant simple binaries. Again, I've explained the complicated situation, if you feel the need to feel morally superior, go ahead, but you're not.

Not embarrassed at all actually, but thank you for your concern.

I am, in fact, morally superior to SS grandpa here, and I say that without having any high opinion of my own morality. I have never raped or murdered civilians in Eastern Europe nor sent Jews away to be mass-murdered in the Holocaust, so I feel perfectly comfortable in that assertion. No amount of faux-intellectual rambling is going to change the fact that this guy willingly chose to join the SS, and that the SS is responsible for disgustingly immoral actions.

Read the whole thread before commenting, I have nothing to add. It isn't known for certain what Hunka did and there is no claim that he participated in the Holocaust.

We are also going down a dark road when rejecting binary thinking is called 'faux intellectual rambling.'

Whether I'm being faux intellectual or not does not excuse mindless binaries.

Idiocracy here we come...

Declaring that any statement which imparts a moral judgement on an action is "mindless binary thinking" is its own form of mindless thinking. Not everything is black and white, but not everything is completely grey either. Morality may be non-binary and fuzzy, but not so fuzzy that the guys who committed some of the worst atrocities in recorded history can be let off with a shrug and an "it was complicated".

Also congrats on coming up with the worst invocation of "Idiocracy" I've ever read. "Idiocracy is when people think the perpetrators of the Holocaust are bad" is one I've never seen before!

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

Stop embarrassing yourself by attempting to defend honoring literal Nazis, good lord. We aren't talking about some poor German conscript here, the guy willingly chose to join the SS.

Stop embarrassing yourself by expressing ignorant simple binaries. Again, I've explained the complicated situation, if you feel the need to feel morally superior, go ahead, but you're not.

Not embarrassed at all actually, but thank you for your concern.

I am, in fact, morally superior to SS grandpa here, and I say that without having any high opinion of my own morality. I have never raped or murdered civilians in Eastern Europe nor sent Jews away to be mass-murdered in the Holocaust, so I feel perfectly comfortable in that assertion. No amount of faux-intellectual rambling is going to change the fact that this guy willingly chose to join the SS, and that the SS is responsible for disgustingly immoral actions.

Read the whole thread before commenting, I have nothing to add. It isn't known for certain what Hunka did and there is no claim that he participated in the Holocaust.

We are also going down a dark road when rejecting binary thinking is called 'faux intellectual rambling.'

Whether I'm being faux intellectual or not does not excuse mindless binaries.

Idiocracy here we come...

"Dude. What if, like...there was no difference between good things and bad things, maaaan?"

Seriously, is condemning Stalin going to be your version of the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem routine? Is that what you want? Because I'm happy to condemn Stalin for Katyn, the destruction of Polish and Galician intellectual and religious life, the mass rapes in 1945, etc. etc. etc.--there's enough there to fill history books, and it has!--but somehow I don't feel like that's really the point you're trying to make here.