Who does land belong to?

[werner_za]

Originally posted by Malayamerican
did I say they should? no. I said they have Asian ancestory. they are mixed. but, by your logic, the French would not be Germanic or Aryan as you say. I have not said the Slavs are asian, but I have said that Hiltler saw them as inferior and impure and nonAryan.the English (who rule Britian) are for the most part Germanic people. the Syrians you are talking about, were far smaller in number than were the numbers of Huns who intermixed withe Europeans to make the Slavs.

The Huns and Mongols never really settled the areas that they subjugated, they were sort of following Iraqi tactics: LOOT& Scoot. The Slavs' Asian ancestry is not even worth considering. I differ on the number of Semites that settled the Roman frontier areas. At any one time the Romans had about 200 000 (excluding their families) troops guarding the German frontier, after Julius Caesar and the Civil War the legions were bled white of Romans, so they came to rely on Spanish,German and Semitic mercenaries. If Semites constituted 5%,say, of the troops that is 10000 men on average over 370 years that would have quite an effect on the present French population.

[Malayamerican]

the Monguls bred with the Europeans and there was more Mongul influcence than there was Semitic.

back to my origanl point: Hitler hated Slavs with a passion, he also, did not see Russians or the French as "Aryan". they would not be in the Nazi party in the mannor you described unless they were trying to "pass" and few of them could.