Nemačka

[Venom]

Gde je 500e po kvadratu nema ni nekog života, ovo na istoku je dovoljan opis. Da nemam klince bila bi možda opcija za mene, jer radim remote, ali svejedno je pitanje kako život tamo izgleda. Kod mene je novogradnja (stanovi) 4-5k, kuće nemam pojma. Oko 3k je neki prosek, tako mi deluje.

[dunja]

Ima li neko iskustva sa montažnim kućama? Mislim na lično iskustvo ili da zna nekoga ko je išao na tu varijantu?

[mackenzie]

Da vidimo malo kako su prošli vinovnici Kragujevačkog masakra i njemačkih odmazdi po Srbiji. Tema koja je malo obrađena, a nedavno sam ostao šokiran kako su svi prošli sa blago rečeno packom. Suđenje se dešavalo između 1947. i 1948. nosi naziv Talačko suđenje oficijelno The United States of America v. Wilhelm List, et al.

 

Wilhelm List - Field Marshal - doživotna, pušten 1952 zbog zdravstvenih razloga umro 20 godina kasnije

Maximilian von Weichs - Field Marshal - uklonjen sa suđenja zbog zdravstvenih razloga, umro 2 godine kasnije

Lothar Rendulić - Generaloberst (general-pukovnik) iz 2. panzer armije - osuđen na 20 godina, smanjeno na 10, pušten 1951.

Walter Kuntze - General der Pioniere (general-lajtnant) - doživotna, pušten 1953 zbog zdravstvenih razloga, umro 1960.

Hermann Foertsch - General-major - oslobođen

Franz Böhme - general 18. korupsa vermahta - izvršio samoubistvo?

Hellmuth Felmy - General der Flieger  (general-lajtnant) - 15 godina, smanjeno na 10, pušten 1951. umro 1965.

Hubert Lanz - general 22. korpusa -  osuđen na 12 godina kao jedini zbog masakra na Kefaloniji u Grčkoj, pušten 1951. umro 30 godina kasnije

Ernst Dehner - generalmajor - 7. godina pušten 1951.

Ernst von Leyser - pješadijski general - 10 godina, pušten 1951.

Wilhelm Speidel - generalmajor u Grčkoj - 20 godina, pušten 1951. 

Kurt Ritter von Geitner - generalmajor, načelnik štaba - oslobođen


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hostages_Trial
 

The tribunal had to deal with two pressing questions:

1. Could partisans be "lawful belligerents" and thus entitled the protected status of prisoners of war; and was that status dependent on whether they fought in uniform or wearing distinctive military insignia?
2. Could taking (and potentially killing) civilian hostages, and retrospective reprisals against civilians, be lawful as a "defense" against guerrilla attacks and partisan warfare?

On the question of partisans, the tribunal concluded that under the current laws of war (the Hague Convention No. IV from 1907), the partisan fighters in southeast Europe could not be considered lawful belligerents under Article 1 of the convention even though most had worn distinctive military insignia in combat (a Red Star sewn onto a uniform cap) and many had fought in military uniform of one form or another, as most fought as guerrillas and as such could not consistently conform to all the conditions of belligerency laid down in the Hague Regulations for regular forces. Irregular forces who engaged in guerrilla warfare - even if they did so in uniform and carried their arms openly in combat - could not be lawful combatants if they subsequently concealed their weapons, resumed everyday clothing, and mingled with non-combatant civilians. For the tribunal, all forms of civilian armed resistance to occupation forces were unlawful, and consequently captured partisans who had hidden within or behind civilian populations could lawfully be executed as war criminals without formal trial.

German soldiers were the victims of surprise attacks by an enemy which they could not engage in open combat. After a surprise attack, the bands would hastily retreat or conceal their arms and mingle with the population with the appearance of being harmless members thereof.

Regarding hostage taking and the retrospective killing of civilians in reprisal for guerrilla actions, the tribunal came to the conclusion that under certain circumstances, hostage taking and even reprisal killings might constitute a lawful course of action as an effective deterrent against guerrilla attacks. In the tribunal's opinion, taking hostages against armed civilian resistance (and killing them should guerrilla attacks continue) could be legitimate, subject to several conditions.

The tribunal observed that both the British Manual of Military Law and the U.S. Basic Field Manual (Rules of Land Warfare) permitted the taking of reprisals to deter a civilian population threatening continued armed resistance. (The British manual did not mention killing, but the US manual included killing as a possible reprisal.

Notably, the tribunal refused to take any regard at all for the Nuremberg principles established previously in the Charter of the International Military Tribunal; where it had been stated at Article 6 that the killing of hostages was itself a war crime. "War crimes: namely, violations of the laws or customs of war. Such violations shall include, but not be limited to, murder, ill-treatment or deportation to slave labour or for any other purpose of civilian population of or in occupied territory, murder or ill-treatment of prisoners of war or persons on the seas, killing of hostages, plunder of public or private property, wanton destruction of cities, towns or villages, or devastation not justified by military necessity.

.. an examination of the judgment shows that the Tribunal’s conclusion that the killing of hostages and reprisal prisoners may in certain circumstances be legal has not been the reason for a finding of not guilty regarding any of the accused in the trial with the possible exception of the defendant von Leyser, of whom the Tribunal said : “ The evidence concerning the killing of hostages and reprisal prisoners within the corps area is so fragmentary that we cannot say that the evidence is sufficient to support a finding that the measures taken were unlawful. The killing of hostages and reprisal prisoners is entirely lawful under certain circumstances. The evidence does not satisfactorily show in what respect, if any, the law was violated. This is a burden cast upon the prosecution which it has failed to sustain.


 

[Desmond Bojčinski]

8 minutes ago, Venom said:

Gde je 500e po kvadratu nema ni nekog života

 

Definiši život i nemanje istog. 

Pričam o mestu ~10k stanovnika, i buraz i snaja rade u njemu, vrtići, škole, gimnazije, sportska udruženja, gradski prevoz, pristojan kulturni život. 

 

Jena, Drezden i Lajpcig na oko sat vožnje. Šlajfaju malo sa krštenim aerodromima, to nema bez 2-3 sata vožnje. 

[Venom]

4 minutes ago, Desmond Bojčinski said:

 

Definiši život i nemanje istog. 

Pričam o mestu ~10k stanovnika, i buraz i snaja rade u njemu, vrtići, škole, gimnazije, sportska udruženja, gradski prevoz, pristojan kulturni život. 

 

Jena, Drezden i Lajpcig na oko sat vožnje. Šlajfaju malo sa krštenim aerodromima, to nema bez 2-3 sata vožnje. 

 

Ako je tako, super, ali sam skeptičan da je onda samo 500e kvadrat. To je uslovno rečeno i moja okolina i po opisu zvuči kao okolina Chemnitza - ostaje pitanje i ekonomske perspektive. Mislim, da me ne razumeš pogrešno, meni lično ni ne treba ništa posebno u životu, napisao sam da bi za mene bilo prihvatljivo da nemam klince. Ali je pitanje šta možeš da radiš i od čega možeš da živiš, a da ne putuješ svaki dan sat vremena, ovo što ja radim nije još uvek toliko često. Prolazili smo kroz neko baš malo mesto oblepljeno AfD plakatima pre par godina, uhvatila nas kiša, pa pitali neku ženu na ulici jel ima neka kafana u blizini, kaže "nema ovde kafane odavno...". Tu možeš da kupiš kuću za 100e kvadrat.

[Venom]

42 minutes ago, dunja said:

Ima li neko iskustva sa montažnim kućama? Mislim na lično iskustvo ili da zna nekoga ko je išao na tu varijantu?

 

Ima moja tazbina oko 25 godina, još stoji. Nisam primetio neke probleme osim loše zvučne izolacije, ali to može biti samo problem njihove kuće konkretno. Koliko se sećam iz priče, oni su sami radili podrum, tako da cena može da varira od toga šta možeš i umeš sam da uradiš. I naravno glavna stvar verovatno zemljište.

 

Video sam i ja skoro ponude za takve kuće gde kao kupiš kuću, ali moraš prvo da nađeš zemljište i ako me nađeš možeš da izađeš iz ugovora. Meni je to malo uvrnuto, doduše hteo sam da pitam drugara arhitektu šta on misli o tome.

[Desmond Bojčinski]

Useljiv stan 58 kvadrata, podrum, tavanac 30ak i dvorišta još 100 kvadrata, u zgradi od 8 stanova sa jednim spratom. Zadnja cena bila 27k. 

 

Još jedan random oglas iz mesta:

 

 

Ako dobro čitam, 155k za celu zgradu sa 5 stanova. U BW za te pare garsonjera možda. 

[Venom]

Ma verujem ti da ima, samo je cena prosto odnos nekakvih objektivnih faktora (ugrubo kvalitet života) i percepcije. Naravno percepcija može da bude iskrivljena, ponekad se isplati imati drugačije mišljenje od većine. Da je cena BW smehotresno naduvana nije sporno. Tvoj brat ako je tamo našao ono što mu treba i ako je to dobio za male pare, onda mu je 100x bolje nego u 50 kvadrata u Beogradu.

[dunja]

27 minutes ago, Venom said:

 

Ima moja tazbina oko 25 godina, još stoji. Nisam primetio neke probleme osim loše zvučne izolacije, ali to može biti samo problem njihove kuće konkretno. Koliko se sećam iz priče, oni su sami radili podrum, tako da cena može da varira od toga šta možeš i umeš sam da uradiš. I naravno glavna stvar verovatno zemljište.

 

Video sam i ja skoro ponude za takve kuće gde kao kupiš kuću, ali moraš prvo da nađeš zemljište i ako me nađeš možeš da izađeš iz ugovora. Meni je to malo uvrnuto, doduše hteo sam da pitam drugara arhitektu šta on misli o tome.

 

Mi smo se dosta bavili tom tematikom, čak smo otišli i da vidimo jednu, tj. sastali smo se sa agenticom jedne od firmi koja to radi. A tih proizvodjača ima ih baš dosta i velika je razlika. Ne toliko u cenama, već više po kom sistemu rade, kako proces teče, koliko se oslanjaju na podizvodjače, i naravno imaju drugačije kataloge, varijante, opcije, i sl.

 

Ali da, najveći problem je naći plac na dobroj lokaciji. Što si bliži urbanoj sredini, posebno ako je blizu železnice, cene skaču dramatično.

 

Edit: jedan naš prijatelj je to radio, ali tokom pandemije, i dosta se namučio jer ta firma koja mu je radila kuću ne radi po sistemu ključ u ruke pa se onda patio sa podizvodjacima i sve je umesto 6 meseci trajalo skoro 2 godine. Delom je to bilo i zbog pandemije. Pa sam zato pitala dal neko ovde ima možda neko drugačije iskustvo.

 

 

 

 

Edited October 27 by dunja

[Shan Jan]

1 hour ago, Desmond Bojčinski said:

Useljiv stan 58 kvadrata, podrum, tavanac 30ak i dvorišta još 100 kvadrata, u zgradi od 8 stanova sa jednim spratom. Zadnja cena bila 27k. 

 

Još jedan random oglas iz mesta:

 

 

Ako dobro čitam, 155k za celu zgradu sa 5 stanova. U BW za te pare garsonjera možda. 

Jebem ti zivot, za te pare tako nesto u Srbiji ne mozes da kupis ni u Siljegovcu.

[Mel]

27 minutes ago, Shan Jan said:

Jebem ti zivot, za te pare tako nesto u Srbiji ne mozes da kupis ni u Siljegovcu.

 

Mozda ima neka caka. Tipa nesto sto kuca zahteva od radova sto puno doda na cenu. Ili neki drugi gvint sa dodatnim troskovima.

[Mel]

2 hours ago, mackenzie said:

Da vidimo malo kako su prošli vinovnici Kragujevačkog masakra i njemačkih odmazdi po Srbiji. Tema koja je malo obrađena, a nedavno sam ostao šokiran kako su svi prošli sa blago rečeno packom. Suđenje se dešavalo između 1947. i 1948. nosi naziv Talačko suđenje oficijelno The United States of America v. Wilhelm List, et al.

 

Wilhelm List - Field Marshal - doživotna, pušten 1952 zbog zdravstvenih razloga umro 20 godina kasnije

Maximilian von Weichs - Field Marshal - uklonjen sa suđenja zbog zdravstvenih razloga, umro 2 godine kasnije

Lothar Rendulić - Generaloberst (general-pukovnik) iz 2. panzer armije - osuđen na 20 godina, smanjeno na 10, pušten 1951.

Walter Kuntze - General der Pioniere (general-lajtnant) - doživotna, pušten 1953 zbog zdravstvenih razloga, umro 1960.

Hermann Foertsch - General-major - oslobođen

Franz Böhme - general 18. korupsa vermahta - izvršio samoubistvo?

Hellmuth Felmy - General der Flieger  (general-lajtnant) - 15 godina, smanjeno na 10, pušten 1951. umro 1965.

Hubert Lanz - general 22. korpusa -  osuđen na 12 godina kao jedini zbog masakra na Kefaloniji u Grčkoj, pušten 1951. umro 30 godina kasnije

Ernst Dehner - generalmajor - 7. godina pušten 1951.

Ernst von Leyser - pješadijski general - 10 godina, pušten 1951.

Wilhelm Speidel - generalmajor u Grčkoj - 20 godina, pušten 1951. 

Kurt Ritter von Geitner - generalmajor, načelnik štaba - oslobođen


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hostages_Trial
 

The tribunal had to deal with two pressing questions:

1. Could partisans be "lawful belligerents" and thus entitled the protected status of prisoners of war; and was that status dependent on whether they fought in uniform or wearing distinctive military insignia?
2. Could taking (and potentially killing) civilian hostages, and retrospective reprisals against civilians, be lawful as a "defense" against guerrilla attacks and partisan warfare?

On the question of partisans, the tribunal concluded that under the current laws of war (the Hague Convention No. IV from 1907), the partisan fighters in southeast Europe could not be considered lawful belligerents under Article 1 of the convention even though most had worn distinctive military insignia in combat (a Red Star sewn onto a uniform cap) and many had fought in military uniform of one form or another, as most fought as guerrillas and as such could not consistently conform to all the conditions of belligerency laid down in the Hague Regulations for regular forces. Irregular forces who engaged in guerrilla warfare - even if they did so in uniform and carried their arms openly in combat - could not be lawful combatants if they subsequently concealed their weapons, resumed everyday clothing, and mingled with non-combatant civilians. For the tribunal, all forms of civilian armed resistance to occupation forces were unlawful, and consequently captured partisans who had hidden within or behind civilian populations could lawfully be executed as war criminals without formal trial.

German soldiers were the victims of surprise attacks by an enemy which they could not engage in open combat. After a surprise attack, the bands would hastily retreat or conceal their arms and mingle with the population with the appearance of being harmless members thereof.

Regarding hostage taking and the retrospective killing of civilians in reprisal for guerrilla actions, the tribunal came to the conclusion that under certain circumstances, hostage taking and even reprisal killings might constitute a lawful course of action as an effective deterrent against guerrilla attacks. In the tribunal's opinion, taking hostages against armed civilian resistance (and killing them should guerrilla attacks continue) could be legitimate, subject to several conditions.

The tribunal observed that both the British Manual of Military Law and the U.S. Basic Field Manual (Rules of Land Warfare) permitted the taking of reprisals to deter a civilian population threatening continued armed resistance. (The British manual did not mention killing, but the US manual included killing as a possible reprisal.

Notably, the tribunal refused to take any regard at all for the Nuremberg principles established previously in the Charter of the International Military Tribunal; where it had been stated at Article 6 that the killing of hostages was itself a war crime. "War crimes: namely, violations of the laws or customs of war. Such violations shall include, but not be limited to, murder, ill-treatment or deportation to slave labour or for any other purpose of civilian population of or in occupied territory, murder or ill-treatment of prisoners of war or persons on the seas, killing of hostages, plunder of public or private property, wanton destruction of cities, towns or villages, or devastation not justified by military necessity.

.. an examination of the judgment shows that the Tribunal’s conclusion that the killing of hostages and reprisal prisoners may in certain circumstances be legal has not been the reason for a finding of not guilty regarding any of the accused in the trial with the possible exception of the defendant von Leyser, of whom the Tribunal said : “ The evidence concerning the killing of hostages and reprisal prisoners within the corps area is so fragmentary that we cannot say that the evidence is sufficient to support a finding that the measures taken were unlawful. The killing of hostages and reprisal prisoners is entirely lawful under certain circumstances. The evidence does not satisfactorily show in what respect, if any, the law was violated. This is a burden cast upon the prosecution which it has failed to sustain.


 

 

Kad sam ja to nesto gledala, nisu vise dobijali ni za zlocine nad regularnom vojskom tipa onih 3 miliona sovjetskih POW.

Skoro svi ti nacisteni koji su se docepali zapada imali su u vrh glave kaznice kao za neku malo ozbiljniju ali ne preozbiljnu kradju. Jedino su partizani imali preki sud (na kojima je zavrsilo pola fasista a pola ostaloga sto je bezalo pred partizanima ukljucujuci i civile), jer su preuzimali vlast/menjali rezim i imali su nultu toleranciju za potencijalne pretnje za uspostavljanje te vlasti, a to bi gotove vojske pa makar u zatvorima bile. Na zapadu nije postojala pretnja da ce nacisti prevratiti rezime, a uklapali su se odmah u novi poredak i bili korisni, tako da tih sudjenja nije bilo brojcano mnogo, posebno ne u zapadnoj Nemackoj, ali su bar kazne bile 99% smesne.

 

Relativno skoro sam citala o tome i ostala u soku. Koliko god da znam da nije bilo previse follow upa za naciste sem za one neke Gebels profila, opet nisam zamisljala ni da je izbliza bilo tako malo sudjenja i jos manjih kazni.

[Venom]

3 hours ago, Mel said:

 

Mozda ima neka caka. Tipa nesto sto kuca zahteva od radova sto puno doda na cenu. Ili neki drugi gvint sa dodatnim troskovima.

 

Caka je u tome što su ovo stanovi koji su izdati, gde ih kupiš i onda uzimaš stanarinu (piše u oglasu 11500 evra godišnje i tako se reklamira). Takvi stanovi često nemaju nikakav kontakt s vlasnikom, ponekad ih vlasnik nikad ni ne poseti. To je čista investicija. Drugi deo cake je što se stanovništvo tamo smanjuje od 90 na ovamo, i što onda tu investiciju ne čini toliko zanimljivom, jer je percepcija da će cena nastaviti da gubi makar u poređenju sa nekim atraktivnijim lokacujama, plus svi uobičajeni rizici kad imaš stan. Recimo u mojoj zgradi je jedna komšinica kupila stan pre 5 godina za 250k, pretprošle je nakon "inflacije" pre toga isti takav prodat za preko 350k. Znači za tri godine 100k više, pa i ako je taj jedan skuplji od ove zgrade, svejedno se više isplatilo kao investicija. Tako ljudi rezonuju.

[Desmond Bojčinski]

5 hours ago, Shan Jan said:

Jebem ti zivot, za te pare tako nesto u Srbiji ne mozes da kupis ni u Siljegovcu.

 

U koji god koordinatni sistem ubacim priču, logika šlajfa. Pričamo o mestu koje je nekoliko redova veličina bolje od svakog drugog na Balkanu i šire, a da su sličnog broja stanovnika i neke mikro lokacije u smislu udaljenosti od većeg grada, univerzitetskog centra, aerodroma, kliničkog centra itd. 10 i kusur hiljada stanovnika gradić sa kompletnom administracijom, čak i svoje tablice štancaju. Gimnazija im je najveća škola istina. 

 

Tldr, sve više ovo deluje kao investicija. Biće na kraju ona:

 

 

[Miki_belavista]

8 hours ago, Shan Jan said:

Jebem ti zivot, za te pare tako nesto u Srbiji ne mozes da kupis ni u Siljegovcu.

cene u bgu su teski apsurd!