PDA

View Full Version : german aircraft markings



gravyski
03-31-2006, 03:30 PM
i have a friend who will be going online in the next few months who is into authenticity. he is wondering why the german aircraft carry no swastikas. would it offend anyone online if he was to include this on the tail of a plane? all feedback on this would be greatly appreciated, as i said, he loves authenticity but does not wish to upset anyone.

Capt.LoneRanger
03-31-2006, 03:32 PM
Swatiskas (Hakenkreuze) are forbidden in Germany. As the European version is also sold in Germany, the Swatiskas are switched off by default. You can enable them, though, by using IL2Manager or similar programs.

TX-Zen
03-31-2006, 04:59 PM
I think this will only matter if skin download is on, but for what it's worth most of the historical skins include them.

slipBall
03-31-2006, 05:03 PM
I think all (I could be wrong) on-line server's want you to use the default skin minus the Haken. I feel the same way as your friend. It's a part of history, seen all the time on tv, and in book's. It would be nice to be able to use the Haken. It's just a symbol, that was used in that era. We live in a politicly correct world right now http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

WTE_Ibis
04-01-2006, 03:04 AM
To be politicly correct is to deny the truth.

.

Waldo.Pepper
04-01-2006, 03:32 AM
To be politicly correct is to deny the truth.
Wow good quote.

Tully__
04-01-2006, 03:44 AM
Unless the server's website or briefing instructions indicate otherwise, having them on is not generally an issue. As someone mentioned above the game will do them but had them off by default for legal reasons. Both IL2Manager and a dedicated utility will turn them on, the utility is available at www.airwarfare.com (http://www.airwarfare.com)

Pirschjaeger
04-01-2006, 04:23 AM
I was at a model boat show last year in Bad Staffelstein. These models were scratch build and simply amazing with one exception, any swastikas were covered with tape.

Can anyone say "ridiculous"? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

Tully__
04-01-2006, 06:19 AM
Originally posted by Pirschjaeger:
I was at a model boat show last year in Bad Staffelstein. These models were scratch build and simply amazing with one exception, any swastikas were covered with tape.

Can anyone say "ridiculous"? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif
Can anyone say "Legally obliged"... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

djetz
04-01-2006, 07:54 AM
I don't think the term "politically correct" really applies here.

From the point of view of ubisoft, they have to delete the swastikas or risk prosecution in several countries. Simple as that. They're not taking out the swastikas to avoid offending anyone, they're taking them out to avoid breaking the law.

From the point of view of the countries that ban the display of swastikas, it's a little more complex. The idea is theoretically "politically correct" in that it's meant to avoid giving offense to people who suffered under the Nazis, which would include people who are descendants of same and people who are part of the religious or racial communities that were targeted by the Nazis.

I personally am deeply offended by morons who think the Nazis were in any way admirable. If I saw a bunch of neo-nazis waving swastika flags I'd pretty much want to shoot first and not ask questions at all.

And as far as I can tell, this is the real - and completely politically uncorrect - motivation behind the banning of Nazi symbols - it gives authorities a weapon to use against neo-nazis and their ilk.

Which is fine by me. As for the idea of "persecuting people for an opinion" - it simply isn't just an opinion. Nazis, and their apologists, want to KILL people like me. They want to KILL people like my friends who are of the "wrong" races, or sexuality, or religious background. The Nazis would KILL my friend who is disabled and in a wheelchair.

That makes them my enemy. So if someone wants to prosecute them or harrass them, it's OK by me.

The chances of any innocent person being prosecuted for displaying Nazi symbols is insignificant: as long as you're not wearing swastikas on your clothes or waving Nazi flags in the streets or painting Nazi symbols on walls or something similarly stupid, you're fine.

BUT, that does cause a little difficulty for those of us that like things to be historically correct. The law has to be enforced to make it effective, which means that anyone innocently representing WW2 in an accurate way is liable to run afoul of the anti-Nazi laws. That causes a problem for books, films, computer games, and so on. That's a pity, and there should be exemptions, but that's the way it is.

There are a number of programs that restore the correct markings to Axis planes, and it's easy to find them. I use Il-2 Stab myself. So, with a slight amount of effort, it's not really a problem.

vocatx
04-01-2006, 08:24 AM
No matter what you think of the swastika, it is still a part of history. To deny that it exists is the epitome of ignorance. It has been said that those who don't know history are doomed to repeat it. Those words are almost as wise as Ibis's.

slipBall
04-01-2006, 08:30 AM
I have no problem with various country's banning that symbol. I suppose that they think it is necessary. I also feel that since Il-2 allow's for it's use, and that I can enable it when I please, is good enough for me. When off-line I alway's have it enabled, it just add's to the realism of the game. Like it or not it is history, and history should not be white washed. Man has had thousand's of year's of brutal behavior to look back on. I think that the Harken may be the single one symbol of that behavor that still disgust people to the point that they just can't look

Grue_
04-01-2006, 10:55 AM
Here is wisdom.

Don't walk into a Leeds pub wearing a Millwall shirt.

djetz
04-01-2006, 10:58 AM
Originally posted by vocatx:
No matter what you think of the swastika, it is still a part of history. To deny that it exists is the epitome of ignorance. It has been said that those who don't know history are doomed to repeat it. Those words are almost as wise as Ibis's.

I don't think anybody IS denying history. Quite the opposite. Nobody is trying to pretend the Nazis never happened - well, nobody but a few twisted "historical revisionists" - the reason for the ban on Nazi symbols is because people remember all too clearly what those symbols represent.

And, unlike the Italian Fasces or the Japanese Kyokujitsu-ki (the sun-with rays-flag), people HERE and NOW use those symbols to promote fascist ideologies.

Nobody is trying to supress history, they're simply trying to prevent a repeat of it.

As I said in my long post - it's easy to enable the swastika in this game, I do it myself. I even fly as a German myself on occasion, "wearing" the swastika on my plane. Which makes me a mite uncomfortable, but is historically correct. It doesn't make me any the less an anti-fascist.

Obviously Ubi legally can't enable the swastika, but it's no big deal to enable it yourself, so why worry about it?

EDIT: actually, I believe that right-wing groups in Japan do use the Kyokujitsu-ki flag, and for all I know Italian neo-fascists use the Fasces as their symbol, but both groups are insignificant internationally, unlike the world-wide spread of neo-nazi idiots. Most people outside WW2 buffs would not even be able to recognise, let alone put a name to, the symbols of Italian or Japanese right-wing parties. But EVERYONE knows what a swastika means.

csThor
04-01-2006, 11:34 AM
The bottom line is:

Germany has a certain 86 in its criminal code prohibiting any display of the swastika. This includes exceptions - historical documentation, education, wartime artifacts (medals received in WW2 have to be purged of the swastika for public display, though) and art. Games are considered toys and cannot display the swastika.

Since Ubisoft chose not to have several versions for the international market the version has to be legally OK for all countries - meaning the german law concerning the swastika applies here.

WTE_Galway
04-06-2006, 06:04 PM
now if you want something really silly about the legal stuff how about this (from a discusion a while back in Oleg's ready room) ....

something like 80% of WWII gun teams and general transport was horse drawn but we do not have horses in the game because the game would get a 18+ rating for violence


so .. we can shoot people .. even people hanging in parachutes .. but shooting horses is just way to violent, even for a war game !!!

RommelsMind
04-06-2006, 10:55 PM
Its quite funny too how the swastika was actually stolen by Hitler to represent the party.
The swastika has been used for over 3,000 years.
Before Hitler used it for his representation, the swastika was a symbol of life, power, sun, strength and good luck. Its was used with positive connotations. Now because of Hitler, its has become a symbol of hatred.

djetz
04-07-2006, 08:15 AM
Originally posted by RommelsMind:
Its quite funny too how the swastika was actually stolen by Hitler to represent the party.
The swastika has been used for over 3,000 years.
Before Hitler used it for his representation, the swastika was a symbol of life, power, sun, strength and good luck. Its was used with positive connotations. Now because of Hitler, its has become a symbol of hatred.

Well, there are plenty of other ancient symbols out there that don't bother anyone.

I find that people (and don't anyone take this personally - I'm just making a general observation here) who complain that the Nazis "ruined" the swastika for people who like the symbol are invariably people who don't genuinely give a damn about the symbol anyway, they're just too cowardly to admit that they're attracted to Nazi symbology.

It's like the people who complain about how you can't use the word "gay" in its original meaning anymore: who cares? There are plenty of other words that mean the same thing. Get a thesaurus.
It's just another way to queer-bash without appearing to do it obviously.

MLudner
04-07-2006, 05:30 PM
Originally, in European, Middle and Far Eastern cultures the symbol always faced left. In American Indian use it faced both directions as it pleased the individual using it.

The National Socialists inverted it (Going, as they were, on ancient and classical European usage). Since facing left it is a symbol of good luck and victory once inverted it becomes a symbol of misfortune and defeat.

Yet another factor Almost Schickelgruber failed to consider.....no wonder he lost. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

panther3485
04-08-2006, 10:17 AM
Hi there, djetz

Quote:
"It's like the people who complain about how you can't use the word "gay" in its original meaning anymore: who cares? There are plenty of other words that mean the same thing. Get a thesaurus.
It's just another way to queer-bash without appearing to do it obviously."

I do, for a start. Thanks for helping me to 'realize' that I must be a 'queer-basher'. Of course, that's the only possible reason why anyone could ever object, right?

I also feel angry that scale modellers and others with legitimate historical pursuits could be forced to remove or cover up swastikas just to satisfy the provisions of a law that might be poorly written or over-zealously applied. (Even if it is happening on the other side of the World).

Hope that doesn't make me a Nazi. Being a 'queer-basher' is bad enough on its own.


Best regards,
panther3485

F6_Ace
04-08-2006, 11:15 AM
Like csThor said.

Here is a wartime artifact, in a German museum, with correct markings:

http://www.luftfahrtmuseum.com/img/620/dsa/12237.gif

panther3485
04-08-2006, 11:34 AM
Hi, F6_Ace

Yeah, I got that bit. Just too bad that scale models made at least partly for educational purposes as a serious historical hobby, cannot be similarly exempt. Or so I assume, based on Pirschjaeger's post, where he said:

Quote:
"I was at a model boat show last year in Bad Staffelstein. These models were scratch build and simply amazing with one exception, any swastikas were covered with tape."

I understand why some countries feel the necessity to have such laws and I couldn't disagree with the basic principle and intent of those laws, under the circumstances prevailing in said countries, but this appears to be an instance of consequences that were neither intended nor, in all probability, forseen.

People who are members of such clubs, and others with legitimate and harmless pursuits like this, should be able to successfully lobby for an amendment or exemption that would cover activities such as these. As long as they are not making a public spectacle of Nazi symbology, they should not have to 'cover up' or 'modify'. Models presented in this way at shows are usually, in effect IMHO, a sort of de-facto 'museum' type exhibit and should be treated accordingly.


Best regards,
panther3485

djetz
04-08-2006, 11:42 AM
Originally posted by panther3485:
I do, for a start. Thanks for helping me to 'realize' that I must be a 'queer-basher'. Of course, that's the only possible reason why anyone could ever object, right?


You seriously claim that you can't easily substitute the words "happy" or "joyful" or any of the other words that mean the same thing?

A quick trip to the aforementioned thesaurus gives us:

Blithe, blithesome, bouncy, brash, carefree, cheerful, cheery, chipper, chirpy, confident, convivial, devil-may-care, festive, forward, frivolous, frolicsome, fun-loving, gamesome, glad, gleeful, hilarious, insouciant, jocund, jolly, jovial, joyful, joyous, keen, light-hearted, lively, merry, mirthful, playful, pleasure-seeking, presuming, pushy, rollicking, self-assertive, sparkling, spirited, sportive, sprightly, sunny, vivacious, wild, zippy.

Please explain why you believe that is not possible for you to substitute one of these words. Because, yes, I can't see any other reason why it would be an issue for anyone.

I do not wish to start a fight here, but saying that gay people have "ruined" a word that has many synonyms is inexplicable as anything other than a way to attack gays without obviously appearing to do so.

On the other hand, I do agree with you that the anti Nazi-symbols laws go too far - it should be obvious who is using the symbol in a neo-Nazi way and who is simply displaying a part of history correctly.

panther3485
04-08-2006, 01:11 PM
Hi again, djetz


Quote 1:
"You seriously claim that you can't easily substitute the words "happy" or "joyful" or any of the other words that mean the same thing?"


I make no such claim. Indeed, there is nothing in my post that indicates I would make such a stupid claim. Of course, anyone who wants to convey this concept has always been free to use other words if they want to . What I don't like is that we have reached the situation where now, for fear of ridicule or misunderstanding, you can no longer use the word 'gay' in its original and, as far as I'm concerned, still correct meaning. Effectively, this forces people either to use the word for it's 'new' (and in my opinion, corrupted) meaning or they are unable to use it at all. The word has been effectively hi-jacked away from its proper use.

Don't misunderstand me, it's not going to keep me awake at night, but I still feel it is wrong and should have been more vigorously resisted when it started looking like becoming 'trendy'. In another generation or so, there will be nobody left who can remember 'gay' being used in its original way. Of course, we must accept that English is an evolving and changing language but this does not mean we necessarily have to agree that all changes are OK. Even if a person finds himself powerless to prevent a change he disagrees with, there is no law that says he has to like it.


Quote 2:
"A quick trip to the aforementioned thesaurus gives us:
Blithe, blithesome, bouncy, brash, carefree, cheerful, cheery, chipper, chirpy, confident, convivial, devil-may-care, festive, forward, frivolous, frolicsome, fun-loving, gamesome, glad, gleeful, hilarious, insouciant, jocund, jolly, jovial, joyful, joyous, keen, light-hearted, lively, merry, mirthful, playful, pleasure-seeking, presuming, pushy, rollicking, self-assertive, sparkling, spirited, sportive, sprightly, sunny, vivacious, wild, zippy.

Many of these words are not direct synonyms for 'gay' and are only loosely associated with the original concept. Their presentation in a thesaurus allows the individual to choose from a range of words that deal with related concepts, as well as the core concept for the original word. Also, others have alternative meanings that could not be connected with the word 'gay' in any way whatsoever. Direct and precise synonyms for 'gay', in the way ordinary people most often used to use the word, are far fewer than this list would suggest but...
that's really not the point anyway. Whether there are one or two alternatives, or a dozen plus, is not the point as far as I'm concerned.
Incidentally, thanks for the trip but I do not require further education in this area - at least, not from you , in your arrogantly mistaken assumptions about my motives.


Quote 3:
"Please explain why you believe that is not possible for you to substitute one of these words. Because, yes, I can't see any other reason why it would be an issue for anyone."

I have already made it clear that I hold no such belief. Yes, it is possible for me to substitute other words. I just dont believe I should be effectively forced to do so.


Quote 4:
"I do not wish to start a fight here, but saying that gay people have "ruined" a word that has many synonyms is inexplicable as anything other than a way to attack gays without obviously appearing to do so."

I am not saying that homosexuals have ruined the word. I'm saying that it has been effectively ruined, yes, but that's not the same thing. I do not hold homosexuals responsible for ruining the word, even if the idea came from the homosexual community. I'm not sure if it originated that way and even if it did, that would be irrelevant to me.

It is the widespread acceptance and apparent validation of the corrupted meaning that I object to. I don't care who started it, or why. Green men could have come down from Mars and started it, for all I care, and I would object just the same.

As another example, I have similar objections to the popular misuse of the word 'wicked', which has acquired a 'new alternative meaning' that is almost the antithesis of the original. I can't stop it happening but I don't have to f***ing well approve of it either!


Quote 5:
"On the other hand, I do agree with you that the anti Nazi-symbols laws go too far - it should be obvious who is using the symbol in a neo-Nazi way and who is simply displaying a part of history correctly."

After what you've been saying about me, am I supposed to be grateful for this?


panther3485

djetz
04-08-2006, 02:00 PM
Originally posted by panther3485:

After what you've been saying about me, am I supposed to be grateful for this?

panther3485

No. I'm simply aknowledging that a person can be wrong about one thing and right about another.

Words, like symbols, do change. Historically, given what gays have suffered throughout history, I think we can be generous and give them a word that we don't really need, can't we?

The reason that word came to be used - and I'm no expert, so I'm just guessing here - is that there were no positive words for homosexuals. All the words that were in use were disparaging, like "queer."

Someone came up with the idea of co-opting "gay" and it stuck. Again I say - so what? There are plenty of other words to use. English is so successful - despite being absurdly complex - because it's adaptable.

If you want to be angry about words, why not be angry at Americans for using nouns and adjectives as verbs? I mean, "impacted" does not mean "crashed into" at all. And "gifted" does not mean "gave to" either. Don't get me started on nonsense like "prioritised" or the habit of putting "z" (that's pronounced "zed" and not "zee" by the way) into words where it doesn't belong.

Heck, we're on the internet, where the majority of people can't tell the difference between "advice" and "advise" or "principal" and "principle" - and people insert possessive apostrophes into plurals more often than not. There are plenty of things that deserve attention much more than whether you can use "gay" in the obsolete sense or not.

JSG72
04-08-2006, 02:15 PM
Just to add fuel to the fire! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/784.gif

Political correctness is of course the issue!
Otherwise why don't we ban the STARS and BARS as that was what was carried by the planes that Dropped the bomb that started our whole subsevience to everything said by the country that carried them.
Issues such as "Queers/Gays are small beer in the quest for"CORRECTNESS".It's apparently what makes for a BETTER/PROSPEROUS/EVERYONES A WINNER World.
BTW. F6_Ace I have never seen an authentic period German plane in those markings!

Jaws2002
04-08-2006, 02:27 PM
We all know what the nazis did. We all know they were evil and caused a lot of suffering.

Being born in Eastern Europe I hate the communism as much as I hate Fascism. In my opinion the communism was as evil as the nazis.

But to me the communist emblems are right in their place on a Yak, Il-2, or a T-34, Just how zwastica is on a Stuka or a Messerschmitt.

I think the game should have left an option for the historical markings with a nice disclaimer.
Something that you could be change during install or after that.

SithSpeeder
04-08-2006, 02:43 PM
I kinda agree with Jaws.

But regardless, here is an interesting Wiki link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swastika

Personally, no matter how much I like the German planes (especially the 190 http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/heart.gif), I have a philosophical difficulty flying them and shooting at Allied interests (just feels...not right--for me).

To each his own. This is a great community in general.

* _54th_Speeder *

RCAF_Irish_403
04-08-2006, 03:04 PM
yet another thread about the cult of the individual?

there is a program that allows you to enable the swastika...use it if you want the correct markings.

if this gets framed as a free speech issue i'm gonna puke

JSG72
04-08-2006, 03:31 PM
Originally posted by RCAF_Irish_403:
yet another thread about the cult of the individual?

there is a program that allows you to enable the swastika...use it if you want the correct markings.

if this gets framed as a free speech issue i'm gonna puke

A Hee! Hee! Hee!.
Yes there is a program. It's called IL2 MAT MANAGER. (Use it all the time.)

It's the fact that you have to tell Folks about it, thats the problem.(Hence the Post).
Is it so much bad news. To have real markings and then have folks asking how to get rid of the Hakenkreuz!
Course it wouldn't be .(But then if you are trying to be Politically correct and ignoring History to your own ends. Well I guess it makes sense http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Interminate
04-08-2006, 04:37 PM
Originally posted by csThor:
The bottom line is:

Germany has a certain 86 in its criminal code prohibiting any display of the swastika. This includes exceptions - historical documentation, education, wartime artifacts (medals received in WW2 have to be purged of the swastika for public display, though) and art. Games are considered toys and cannot display the swastika.

Since Ubisoft chose not to have several versions for the international market the version has to be legally OK for all countries - meaning the german law concerning the swastika applies here.

Yeah yeah we all know this, but most of us think its a stupid law.

csThor
04-08-2006, 10:43 PM
Not stupid - not from my POV. I'd bet a month's salary that the very same folks ranting about this "stupid law" would be the first to post riots once the right-wing idiots here in Germany would be allowed to march with their full regalia through our streets.

Quite frankly much of the Western World is pretty hypocritical in their view on Germany. On the one hand they say banning the swastika is a cut of Freedom of Speech but on the other hand they're also bringing the topic of NS rule and WW2 into pretty much any discussion/conversation wherever appropriate or even inappropriate, rubbing it under our noses quite constantly.
Plain and simple we Germans don't want to see these right-wing morons marching through our streets. It's bad enough they do it with the Imperial flags and insignias, but them showing the swastika and the other emblems would be way too much.

panther3485
04-08-2006, 10:49 PM
Hello again, djetz


Quote 1:
"I'm simply aknowledging that a person can be wrong about one thing and right about another."

I'm neither 'right' nor 'wrong' on either issue. In both cases, it is simply my opinion . It is not for you to say my opinion is 'wrong' any more than it is for me to say that yours is 'wrong'. We merely agree or disagree. Obviously, we disagree on the first point but agree on the second.


Quote 2:
"Words, like symbols, do change. Historically, given what gays have suffered throughout history, I think we can be generous and give them a word that we don't really need, can't we?"

(a) I've already acknowledged that we must accept English as an evolving, changing language. But that does not mean as individuals, we should necessarily be compelled to agree with each and every single change that happens.
(b) The 'generosity' you speak of has already been afforded to the homosexual community. The new use of the word 'gay' is now almost universally accepted in the English speaking world. It is included in modern dictionaries. My personal position on the issue can have no effect on this.


Quote 3:
"The reason that word came to be used - and I'm no expert, so I'm just guessing here - is that there were no positive words for homosexuals. All the words that were in use were disparaging, like "queer."
Someone came up with the idea of co-opting "gay" and it stuck.

Your explanation of origin seems feasible enough to me.


Quote 4:
"There are plenty of other words to use. English is so successful - despite being absurdly complex - because it's adaptable."

Yes, English seems to 'survive' changes very well and yes, there are some alternatives. But I think I have already explained that this is not the point for me.


Quote 5:
"If you want to be angry about words, why not be angry at Americans for using nouns and adjectives as verbs? I mean, "impacted" does not mean "crashed into" at all. And "gifted" does not mean "gave to" either. Don't get me started on nonsense like "prioritised" or the habit of putting "z" (that's pronounced "zed" and not "zee" by the way) into words where it doesn't belong. Heck, we're on the internet, where the majority of people can't tell the difference between "advice" and "advise" or "principal" and "principle" - and people insert possessive apostrophes into plurals more often than not."

Really, it's more a case of being irritated or annoyed, though I would agree that both these things are mild forms of anger. Some of the examples you have quoted here - and others I can think of - irritate me just as much as (what I believe is) the misuse of 'gay' or 'wicked'. Some annoy me more . Some don't bother me much at all. This is my personal perspective on each one, taken as I see it. I firmly believe I have a right to my own opinion on each.

Certainly, I would agree that 'gay' is far from being the worst thing that's happened to English! It's OT for this thread, but I can think of some classics that annoy me a whole lot more than 'gay' or 'wicked'. No problem there!


Quote 6:
"....whether you can use "gay" in the obsolete sense or not."

Not exactly obsolete just yet but it is definitely falling into disuse. The latest edition of the Australian Macquarie Dictionary still lists 'traditional' meanings from No's 1 to 3. Meaning No. 4 says, "(especially of a male) homosexual" and No. 6 says "a homosexual, especially male". Following this, the usage note states, "Some people still take objection to the meaning 'homosexual' which has become current in mainstream English, but there is no denying the currency of the word with this meaning. In the sense 'homosexual', gay has been claimed by the gay community and has lost much of its earlier derogatory connotations."

One day no doubt, meanings 1 to 3 will be moved down the list and classified as 'archaic' in our dictionaries. My guess is, it'll take at least 30 to 50 years for this to happen.


Best regards,
panther3485

RCAF_Irish_403
04-09-2006, 06:31 AM
Originally posted by csThor:
Not stupid - not from my POV. I'd bet a month's salary that the very same folks ranting about this "stupid law" would be the first to post riots once the right-wing idiots here in Germany would be allowed to march with their full regalia through our streets.

Quite frankly much of the Western World is pretty hypocritical in their view on Germany. On the one hand they say banning the swastika is a cut of Freedom of Speech but on the other hand they're also bringing the topic of NS rule and WW2 into pretty much any discussion/conversation wherever appropriate or even inappropriate, rubbing it under our noses quite constantly.
Plain and simple we Germans don't want to see these right-wing morons marching through our streets. It's bad enough they do it with the Imperial flags and insignias, but them showing the swastika and the other emblems would be way too much.

BRAVO!! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

Interminate
04-10-2006, 08:02 PM
Originally posted by csThor:
Not stupid - not from my POV. I'd bet a month's salary that the very same folks ranting about this "stupid law" would be the first to post riots once the right-wing idiots here in Germany would be allowed to march with their full regalia through our streets.



Yeah and so what if they want to walk around in their full regalia- big deal. What is it your business what they wear and what they think. It really isn't your business. The quicker you learn that, the quicker you'll know what real liberty is.

blakduk
04-10-2006, 11:17 PM
[/QUOTE]

Yeah and so what if they want to walk around in their full regalia- big deal. What is it your business what they wear and what they think. It really isn't your business. The quicker you learn that, the quicker you'll know what real liberty is.[/QUOTE]

Real liberty is the knowledge that you can stand up thugs who would prefer to trample on everyone elses rights and kill whom they choose. Nazis marching is everyones business- what they think is their own. You have every right in the world to be an ignorant **** but you shouldn't be allowed to intimidate others by dressing up and parading in the regalia of mass-murderers.
The question always comes back to 'How much should you fight for the rights of those who would take yours from you?'

Interminate
04-12-2006, 09:19 PM
Originally posted by blakduk:


Yeah and so what if they want to walk around in their full regalia- big deal. What is it your business what they wear and what they think. It really isn't your business. The quicker you learn that, the quicker you'll know what real liberty is.[/QUOTE]

Real liberty is the knowledge that you can stand up thugs who would prefer to trample on everyone elses rights and kill whom they choose. Nazis marching is everyones business- what they think is their own. You have every right in the world to be an ignorant **** but you shouldn't be allowed to intimidate others by dressing up and parading in the regalia of mass-murderers.
The question always comes back to 'How much should you fight for the rights of those who would take yours from you?'[/QUOTE]

Noone has the legal right to tell anyone what they can wear. Whether you like it or not. "mass-murderer" is just a loaded word to make yourself sound important and morally superior. Further, wearing Nazi-gear does not make one a mass-murderer. Obviously, you think someone gave you the right to tell everyone what they can wear. You will get a fight on that front. Or in contradistinction, they won't fight for your right to tell them what do. How much should I fight for you? Perhaps one will take your rights as you take theirs.

Copperhead310th
04-13-2006, 10:15 AM
Originally posted by slipBall:
I have no problem with various country's banning that symbol. I suppose that they think it is necessary. I also feel that since Il-2 allow's for it's use, and that I can enable it when I please, is good enough for me. When off-line I alway's have it enabled, it just add's to the realism of the game. Like it or not it is history, and history should not be white washed. Man has had thousand's of year's of brutal behavior to look back on. I think that the Harken may be the single one symbol of that behavor that still disgust people to the point that they just can't look

Haven€t seen any Confederate flags lately have you?
A sadly mistaken symbol of hate. While offensive to some it brings feeling of anscestrestral pride and deep emotions in others.
Once the supremist skin head types started using it along with the Hakencross to premote thier twsited & sick agendas its true meaning got skewered. What was once a symbol of men fighting to defend their homes & families from invasion from a tyrannical foreign government & economic opprestion.....has now become a symbol of hate near equal that of the Hakencross.

trekkie951
04-14-2006, 10:10 PM
im not sure what point im making by saying this, but look at the iron cross. that was also a symbol used by the nazis, and look what it represents today. independence i think? i dont even know but its used by west coast choppers, and u dont see that symbol being censored and argued about. i guess thats cuz it stands for other things other than the german military.

if its for historacl accuracy, i think the swastika is ok. but when its used by skinheads who dont know what they are saying when they say that they are loyal to adolf hitler, its wrong. and wrong when they say they hate jewish people and all that.

the swastika is a problem for ppl cuz, as seen today, stand for one thing. the symbol of a government that promoted hatred and mass murder. but realize that these people believed in their cause, and people who believe in a cause will die for them. the nazi ideology sounds good to nazis, and the swastika looks good to nazis. its all a matter of ones point of view

csThor
04-15-2006, 06:27 AM
Minor correction, trekkie. The official military insignia of the german Luftwaffe was a combination of Balkenkreuz and Hakenkreuz (swastika). The Iron Cross was the insignia of WW1 aircraft and dates back to the beginning of the 19th Century and the wars against Napoleon.

The Iron Cross was created as a general order of bravery in combat and could be awarded to all ranks. Before orders and medals were reserved for the Officer's Corps (the nobility), but for the War of Freedom against Napoleon the Prussian MoD wanted to rouse the people's will to fight.
The Iron Cross was used in all wars since (1866, 1870/71, WW1 and WW2) as award for combat bravery and is now the official military insignia of the german Bundeswehr.

polak5
04-15-2006, 07:33 AM
Originally posted by WTE_Galway:
now if you want something really silly about the legal stuff how about this (from a discusion a while back in Oleg's ready room) ....

something like 80% of WWII gun teams and general transport was horse drawn but we do not have horses in the game because the game would get a 18+ rating for violence


so .. we can shoot people .. even people hanging in parachutes .. but shooting horses is just way to violent, even for a war game !!!

Lol thx for sharing that http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

Interminate
04-22-2006, 12:25 AM
What kind of pilot strafes horses. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/784.gif

tagTaken2
04-22-2006, 12:39 AM
Originally posted by Interminate:
What kind of pilot strafes horses. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/784.gif

Me.

F19_Orheim
04-22-2006, 04:58 AM
This indeed a very interesting thread which rises questions of which I really do not have answers to, but can only reflect on. I guess it's about the true dilemma of democracy and free speech. Can we allow organisations, who's agenda is to crush democracy and free speech, to use these rights as "weapons" against us?

The question in Germany is to what extent should (or should not) the rights of present-day neo-Nazis or other such extremists be cut back in an interest (1) not to profane the memory of the millions killed by the Nazi Holocaust as well as German civilians who were the collateral damage necessary to break Hitler, and (2) to prevent a neo-Nazi rise to power that could threaten the peace and/or the safety of minorities?

All things Nazi are already outlawed in Germany, such as the swastika, the Heil Hitler, the first verse of von Fallersleben's Hymn to Germany, and other Nazi marching songs and regalia. But neo-Nazis use the Imperial Flag rather than the swastika flag to mean the same thing, and likewise avoid the other illegal Nazi things in public. The questions is (in this case), do disallowing the swastika have any "real" political power and effect?

The German Parliament is debating constantly to what extent neo-Nazi-related demonstrations and ideology, even if devoid of direct and illegal Nazi references and symbols, should be illegalized. They wish to do so without unconstitutionally abrogating free speech and freedom of expression rights. It is a tricky question.

I myself am conflicted; on the one hand, it is repugnant to me that these people, however despicable their views, be disallowed from expressing their views while others with nearly as despicable views (others with questionable social agendas) are allowed or even encouraged to express their views. On the other hand, I personally don't want neo-Nazis to have a bully pulpit every time there is a celebration or commemoration of the victory over Nazi aggression and atrocity.

However given the Germans' unique history and needs, such a restriction on free speech might be perfectly acceptable in Germany's situation, where, I believe, it would not be acceptable under e.g the US First Amendment framework (remember the march in Skokie, Illinois (http://www.skokiehistory.info/chrono/nazis.html)?).
Even if I am personally uncomfortable with denying one group their freedom of speech, even though I might be personally opposed to that groups' message, the German democratic polity does not have the same situation and needs as the other countrie democratic polity. That is why these questions are appropriately decided by locally democratically elected legislatures--because localities have different needs and values based on history and development, etc.

Take the American prohibition of "obscene" speech. Title 18 of the United States Code, Section 1464, prohibits the utterance of €œany obscene, indecent or profane language by means of radio communication.€ Obscene speech generally has no protection under the First Amendment, and ss a Swede, this sounds idiotic and hypocritical, and in comparison to the German "situation" ridiculous, but then again, I am not an American - it is not for me to judge, just to have an opinion ofhttp://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif


Originally posted by csThor:
Not stupid - not from my POV. I'd bet a month's salary that the very same folks ranting about this "stupid law" would be the first to post riots once the right-wing idiots here in Germany would be allowed to march with their full regalia through our streets.

Quite frankly much of the Western World is pretty hypocritical in their view on Germany. On the one hand they say banning the swastika is a cut of Freedom of Speech but on the other hand they're also bringing the topic of NS rule and WW2 into pretty much any discussion/conversation wherever appropriate or even inappropriate, rubbing it under our noses quite constantly.
Plain and simple we Germans don't want to see these right-wing morons marching through our streets. It's bad enough they do it with the Imperial flags and insignias, but them showing the swastika and the other emblems would be way too much.

I totally understand you mate, and as I said - this concerns you and only you. If this means I can't have a "default" swastika on my 109 tail - who the **** cares http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

FPSOLKOR
04-22-2006, 01:09 PM
Originally posted by gravyski:
i have a friend who will be going online in the next few months who is into authenticity. he is wondering why the german aircraft carry no swastikas. would it offend anyone online if he was to include this on the tail of a plane? all feedback on this would be greatly appreciated, as i said, he loves authenticity but does not wish to upset anyone.
Conf ini hackenallowed =1

FPSOLKOR
04-22-2006, 01:26 PM
Originally posted by Interminate:
What kind of pilot strafes horses. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/784.gif
Me. I also like the taste of horse meat!

panther3485
04-22-2006, 10:17 PM
Hi there, FPSOLKOR

Quote:
"Conf ini hackenallowed =1"

This prompted me to have a quick look in my conf.ini but I couldn't find a line hackenallowed =x anywhere.
(Or am I going blind/silly in my old age?)
Do I insert the entire line myself? If so, where in particular should it go?

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif

If there is a simple conf.ini or other such edit I can use, rather than having to run IL-2 Stab, then I would much prefer it.

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif


Best regards,
panther3485

FPSOLKOR
04-23-2006, 01:40 AM
hackenallowed =x [/b] anywhere.
(Or am I going blind/silly in my old age?)
Do I insert the entire line myself? If so, where in particular should it go?

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif

Best regards,
panther3485

HakenAllowed=1
section {game}, 3-d line from above Here is a correct spelling

F19_Orheim
04-23-2006, 03:11 AM
I would think thar FPSOLKOR is Russian and owns the Russian version of the game. It was said to me that the Russian version do include the swastika, where the "western versions" do not. This woud be the reason why panther, you can't see this line in the conf.ini, when he can.

However, maybe you could try to add the line in the ini file. If it does not work, and you feel that this is important for you, I urge you to get IL2 STab

http://www.users.on.net/~mjtm/IL-2/ (http://www.users.on.net/%7Emjtm/IL-2/)

AnaK774
04-23-2006, 03:40 AM
Correct Orheim, works only for russian version via conf.ini

Also there is program called swastika enabler

panther3485
04-23-2006, 04:37 AM
Hi there,
FPSOLKOR, F19_Orheim and AnaK774

Thanks for trying to help, guys. I'm already using IL-2 Stab and while it does the job fine it does use a small amount of resources. A conf.ini edit would therefore be better for me, if one was available to my version, which it appears not to be.

http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

But once again, thanks and it looks as if I'll continue to be using IL-2 Stab!


Best regards,
panther3485

Low_Flyer_MkVb
04-23-2006, 04:57 AM
Hi, Panther -

http://www.airwarfare.com/Sims/FB/fb_essential_files.htm#040

Might help, a 21kb download.

panther3485
04-23-2006, 05:17 AM
Thanks, Low_Flyer

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

Have downloaded this and will try it soon.

How are things on your end on the globe?


Best regards,
panther3485

Low_Flyer_MkVb
04-23-2006, 05:34 AM
Hi Panther,
Not too bad, mate - 'resting between jobs' at the moment as the thespians say, but got a fair bit to come from the old one, so life could be a lot worse...plenty of time to put my new graphics card through it's paces http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

I hope you chappies down under have raised a glass to St. George's day today... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

panther3485
04-23-2006, 06:56 AM
Yeah, Low_Flyer,

I'm just starting two weeks holiday but it's back to the jolly ol' grindstone on May 9th!

Some of us Aussies with English British parentage (such as myself) might give a passing thought to St. George's thingumy but I have to say that downunder, the really big one is St. Patrick's day.

I suspect that a fair proportion of those who celebrate have little or no Irish ancestry (though many white Australians do have some Irish in them and there has been lots of migration from there). But that doesn't seem to matter too much - after all, we are Aussies and it's an excuse for a pi$$-up!

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif


Best regards,
panther3485

tagTaken2
04-23-2006, 08:42 PM
Originally posted by panther3485:
Hi there,
FPSOLKOR, F19_Orheim and AnaK774

Thanks for trying to help, guys. I'm already using IL-2 Stab and while it does the job fine it does use a small amount of resources.

But once again, thanks and it looks as if I'll continue to be using IL-2 Stab!


Best regards,
panther3485

Have you tried Il-2 MAT?

http://www.airwarfare.com/Sims/IL2/il2_essential_files.htm#023

Don't believe it uses any resources. It gives realistically sized and placed markings (not just hakencreuz [sp?], with weathering and is adjustable for theatre and time. Unless you're heavily into skinning, I think it's one of the best and most useful additions.

Minor, at best, irritations:

It takes longer to install than windows... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/compsmash.gif it copies 10's of thousands of (tiny) files to a folder in FB. If you make a copy of the main folder, most of the time taken will be for that &#%$ing CoopRegt to replicate.

The interface makes your head hurt until you get used to it. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif
Having said that, I open it about once a month.

Apart from those, I would recommend it without reservation.

F19_Orheim
04-24-2006, 11:44 AM
Il2_mat is a great utility, as said before, takes forever to install but in my book totally worth it...

Treetop64
04-24-2006, 12:16 PM
Originally posted by Interminate:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by csThor:
Not stupid - not from my POV. I'd bet a month's salary that the very same folks ranting about this "stupid law" would be the first to post riots once the right-wing idiots here in Germany would be allowed to march with their full regalia through our streets.



Yeah and so what if they want to walk around in their full regalia- big deal. What is it your business what they wear and what they think. It really isn't your business. The quicker you learn that, the quicker you'll know what real liberty is. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Dood, that's like saying "so what" if in the United States the Ku Klux Klan wanted to parade around town in their hooded garb, spewing their madness- big deal? I don't think that would go down well, people being mindful of what they represent.

If they want to do that stuff on their own dime and time, and on their own back yard, then fine. Then it is their business. However, they cross the line once they wish to force their ideology upon a public forum in such a fashion.

danjama
04-24-2006, 12:22 PM
Originally posted by Pirschjaeger:
I was at a model boat show last year in Bad Staffelstein. These models were scratch build and simply amazing with one exception, any swastikas were covered with tape.

Can anyone say "ridiculous"? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

Where u at Fritz? Bring yo *** back here....

panther3485
04-24-2006, 12:38 PM
Thanks, tagTaken2 and F19_Orheim

That little prog Low_Flyer showed me seems to work well for the tailfin swastikas.

I may give IL-2 Mat a try later


Best regards,
panther3485