Navy's Swastika
Originally Posted by Stealth
That **** stuff is Historical, but the white supremacists are using Hitler's symbols and they don't even know what they mean. Pretty stupid.
The swastika was used by many cultures throughout the past 3,000 years to represent life, sun, power, strength, and good luck.
And the Schutzstaffel was a large security and paramilitary organization of the National Socialist German Workers Party. What they ended up as, and have been portrayed as is also flawed to a point.
There was three groups within the "SS"
- Leibstandarte, Hitler's bodyguard regiment.
- Totenkopfverbände, that administered the concentration camps.
- Verfügungstruppe, up to 39 divisions in World War II that served as elite combat troops
Knowledge leads to understanding.
Originally Posted by Patman03SprCrw
...--The Navy will spend up to $600,000 changing the walkways, landscaping and solar paneling on and around the barracks. . . so that, when you see them from above, they don't look like a swastika anymore. (Los Angeles Times)...
Originally Posted by Turbo77
And then there's other people who just assume that the so-called "Hitler symbol" was in fact "Hitlers symbol"...
The swastika was used by many cultures throughout the past 3,000 years to represent life, sun, power, strength, and good luck.
And the Schutzstaffel was a large security and paramilitary organization of the National Socialist German Workers Party. What they ended up as, and have been portrayed as is also flawed to a point.
There was three groups within the "SS"
- Leibstandarte, Hitler's bodyguard regiment.
- Totenkopfverbände, that administered the concentration camps.
- Verfügungstruppe, up to 39 divisions in World War II that served as elite combat troops
Knowledge leads to understanding.

The swastika was used by many cultures throughout the past 3,000 years to represent life, sun, power, strength, and good luck.
And the Schutzstaffel was a large security and paramilitary organization of the National Socialist German Workers Party. What they ended up as, and have been portrayed as is also flawed to a point.
There was three groups within the "SS"
- Leibstandarte, Hitler's bodyguard regiment.
- Totenkopfverbände, that administered the concentration camps.
- Verfügungstruppe, up to 39 divisions in World War II that served as elite combat troops
Knowledge leads to understanding.

My dad's collection is in a room in their house, we call it the War Room. There are lots of shadow boxes of the goods. Pretty soon they're going to have to add on.
Last edited by Stealth; Sep 28, 2007 at 02:05 AM.
Originally Posted by Bighersh
While I'm sure the Navy didn't intentionally sign on for this. I'm certain the architect knew WTH he was doing- when he designed that building...
Some things are accidents, other things are people being fooled.
Some things are accidents, other things are people being fooled.
If you did not know what a Swastika was, you would have to admit that's a damn good (and highly efficient) use of the site area available.
It would not surprise me if the architect had previously designed one of the 'L' shaped buildings for a smaller site. This site was perfectly suited to bringing four of the L shapes together. Pretty effective use of his client's (taxpayers) money.
It would not surprise me at all if back in 1967, the architect told the Navy "I've got this great building design that works really well, and cost x,xxx,xxx. Unfortunately, it looks like a Swastika. So I have an alternative plan that is not as nice to live in, houses less families but costs 1.1 times x,xxx,xxx. What do you want?" The client (Navy) chose the design that was cheaper and provided a better quality of life for the residents for the last 40 years. Foolish, I know, but I guess we just have to deal with their decisions.
Last edited by dirt bike dave; Sep 28, 2007 at 09:40 AM.
Originally Posted by dirt bike dave
I'm sure the Navy's architect DID know what he was doing - It is evident because he supplied a building configuration that very efficiently uses the available space. Look at it- this shape provides the residents with plenty of space between the buildings and yet they all have good access to and views of the green space, and they still have convenient access to parking. If you are going to live in an apartment complex on that site, this looks like a very livable solution.
If you did not know what a Swastika was, you would have to admit that's a damn good (and highly efficient) use of the site area available.
It would not surprise me if the architect had previously designed one of the 'L' shaped buildings for a smaller site. This site was perfectly suited to bringing four of the L shapes together. Pretty effective use of his client's (taxpayers) money.
It would not surprise me at all if back in 1967, the architect told the Navy "I've got this great building design that works really well, and cost x,xxx,xxx. Unfortunately, it looks like a Swastika. So I have an alternative plan that is not as nice to live in, houses less families but costs 1.1 times x,xxx,xxx. What do you want?" The client (Navy) chose the design that was cheaper and provided a better quality of life for the residents for the last 40 years. Foolish, I know, but I guess we just have to deal with their decisions.
If you did not know what a Swastika was, you would have to admit that's a damn good (and highly efficient) use of the site area available.
It would not surprise me if the architect had previously designed one of the 'L' shaped buildings for a smaller site. This site was perfectly suited to bringing four of the L shapes together. Pretty effective use of his client's (taxpayers) money.
It would not surprise me at all if back in 1967, the architect told the Navy "I've got this great building design that works really well, and cost x,xxx,xxx. Unfortunately, it looks like a Swastika. So I have an alternative plan that is not as nice to live in, houses less families but costs 1.1 times x,xxx,xxx. What do you want?" The client (Navy) chose the design that was cheaper and provided a better quality of life for the residents for the last 40 years. Foolish, I know, but I guess we just have to deal with their decisions.
it's not uncommon to encounter a client set on 'plopping' a cookie-cutter of an exisiting building on a new site--they sometimes lack the analytical understanding you applied to the problem...and sometimes they are just cheap
Originally Posted by ()smoke()
there's a good probability of plausibilty to your scenario
Originally Posted by Bartak1
If thats all people have to bish about these days...
I know....that's one of the main things that make me sick about society today.
Who gives a rats **** what John Doe is doing. If it "offends" your candyass, ignore it.
$600K for landscaping because people don't like how this looks from thousands of feet above earth. Give me a break.
I just wonder how long it will be before they decide to digitally remove the confederate flag off of the General Lee form all the old Dukes of Hazzard episodes.
I just wonder how long it will be before they decide to digitally remove the confederate flag off of the General Lee form all the old Dukes of Hazzard episodes.
Originally Posted by jk007
I just wonder how long it will be before they decide to digitally remove the confederate flag off of the General Lee form all the old Dukes of Hazzard episodes.
And in 20-30 years, just posessing an image of a confederate flag will make you guilty of a hate crime. Would not surprise me if it is already illegal to display them in some places.
Back to the 'Swastika' buidings - They were built during war time. If the Navy could even buy one extra bomb or shell with the cost savings they acheived by constructing the buildings that way, then that is all the rationalization they need. We are at war now, too, but I guess nowadays not offending people is the highest and best use of Navy's resources.
Originally Posted by Bighersh
While I'm sure the Navy didn't intentionally sign on for this. I'm certain the architect knew WTH he was doing- when he designed that building...
Some things are accidents, other things are people being fooled.
Some folks are ignorant, others are in love with the fascination of Hitler and **** Germany. I saw a young boy (17-19) about 2 years ago, with the "SS" emblem from Hitler's elite soldiers, tattooed on his neck.
He didn't mean, Monte Carlo, Impala, Chevelle, or Camaro "SS" either.
Some things are accidents, other things are people being fooled.
Some folks are ignorant, others are in love with the fascination of Hitler and **** Germany. I saw a young boy (17-19) about 2 years ago, with the "SS" emblem from Hitler's elite soldiers, tattooed on his neck.
He didn't mean, Monte Carlo, Impala, Chevelle, or Camaro "SS" either.
Shocked?
Originally Posted by dirt bike dave
At the rate were are going with this PC BS, I'll guess another 10 years.
And in 20-30 years, just posessing an image of a confederate flag will make you guilty of a hate crime. Would not surprise me if it is already illegal to display them in some places.
Back to the 'Swastika' buidings - They were built during war time. If the Navy could even buy one extra bomb or shell with the cost savings they acheived by constructing the buildings that way, then that is all the rationalization they need. We are at war now, too, but I guess nowadays not offending people is the highest and best use of Navy's resources.
And in 20-30 years, just posessing an image of a confederate flag will make you guilty of a hate crime. Would not surprise me if it is already illegal to display them in some places.
Back to the 'Swastika' buidings - They were built during war time. If the Navy could even buy one extra bomb or shell with the cost savings they acheived by constructing the buildings that way, then that is all the rationalization they need. We are at war now, too, but I guess nowadays not offending people is the highest and best use of Navy's resources.



