uncommondenominator wrote:
Even if it is individuals "just using the nazi symbols to shock and scare people", they're still willing to use, and chose to use, specifically nazi symbols, and were sufficiently ok with that choice to carry out the action. At that point, the only difference I see between them and any other nazi is a matter of degree.
Sooner or later someone is gonna play the "they're just trying to make people THINK nazis exist" card, which inherently carries with it the implication that nazis DON'T exist - otherwise why would people be trying to "create the illusion" that they exist.
Its wild how the same people that claim the word "nazi" is overused, also bend over backwards nearly full-circle to treat every instance of the word nazi like it's fake or disingenuous, even when it's being used to describe actual real nazis. You could say you watched a historical documentary on actual nazis in world war two, and someone would pop up to pretentiously point out "not all germans were nazis you know...", even though they didn't say anything of the sort.
Given that nazis DO exist, and ARE still around, in various forms, it seems negligent to simply shrug this off and not at least attempt to take it even remotely seriously.
The Germans and Japanese had formidable soldiers during the War. The Italians on the other hand, We'll make a note of their bravery. Their machine guns, tanks were trash. The Carcano was fine, The Breda-30 was a POS weapon. Japan's Pistols were crap, their tanks were outdated and their Arisaka rifles were actually pretty good. And the US had solid guns overall. The British's PIAT was junk against the late-war tanks, and fine against early models. The Soviet's took on most of the German Army.