World War II

Maybe we should practice "non-intervention" towards those that are defenders of Hitler.

reaching out with reasoned discourse is not exactly akin to military intervention, but some people are impervious to reason, and any such attempt to bridge the divide with them serves only to multiply the disconnect and the vulgarity of the discourse. with such, yes, I believe that silence is the best remedy.
 
Why dismiss the possibility that everything we were taught in school about Hitler is all lies?

Sofia, you do understand that when Nazi soldiers started hearing rumors of some shady stuff going on they kept their mouths shut out of fear that they may find out first hand if they questioned the rumors?

I will say I think Stalin and Soviet Russia was a much bigger stain on humanity, but that being said Hitler was far from a good guy. We all know that history is written by the victors, but to think Nazi Germany and Hitler are complete fabrications is absurd at best. The testimony is too vast amongst far too many different persons, cultures, and countries to be dismissed in the manner you are suggesting.
 
Have you ever studied Hitler's economy? It was not free market....

Your statements lack practically all nuance whatsoever. Make an academic case for your claims, not sheer speculation (which I think an academic case would illustrate that this is the extent such a position can proceed). As it stands, I believe your claims are extremely absurd.

Hitler's economy was the strongest and most dynamic in the world. His policies lifted Germany up from ruins while FDR's America remained mired in Depression.

The economy in Germany was much freer than FDR's. A debt free currency ushered in explosive growth with no inflation. There's your "academic case."

You have been trained to salivate at the mere mention of Hitler's name...ever since you were a child. That's not "academic"...thats Pavlovian conditioning and you dont even realize it.

Question the facts and open your mind. We live in the matrix!
 
Lest not forget that Japan was very tempted to attack china and always was. So with america pushing them or not they would have gone into war methinks. And with no US the UK would have a though job to defend its kolonies in africa against italy and in azia against japan. So they would be tempted to sign an agreement with hitler after hitlers gesture in Dieppe in 41. The european war would then be one front Germany vs Russia with germany ending up victorious. Japan would make greater advancements in azia gaining foothold in China and perhaps UK kolonies and italy would either be defeated by the UK in africa or would get help of germany later on. The world would probably then be left with four superpowers Japan controling south asia, either Italy or UK controlling africa, Germany controlling europe and US in control of america with no bruises of war.

This is my fifty cents. Does it seem better? Not for me it does not, I live in Belgium. Lol
 
Last edited:
Lest not forget that Japan was very tempted to attack china and always was. So with america pushing them or not they would have gone into war methinks. And with no US the UK would have a though job to defend its kolonies in africa against italy and in azia against japan. So they would be tempted to sign an agreement with hitler after hitlers gesture in Dieppe in 41. The european war would then be one front Germany vs Russia with germany ending up victorious. Japan would make greater advancements in azia gaining foothold in China and perhaps UK kolonies and italy would either be defeated by the UK in africa or would get help of germany later on. The world would probably then be left with four superpowers Japan controling south asia, either Italy or UK controlling africa, Germany controlling europe and US in control of america with no bruises of war.

This is my fifty cents. Does it seem better? Not for me it does not, I live in Belgium. Lol

Japan was at war with China. We were also involved there, the Flying Tigers being the most famous. Perhaps another intervention that lead to the rise of more communism.
 
Sofia, you do understand that when Nazi soldiers started hearing rumors of some shady stuff going on they kept their mouths shut out of fear that they may find out first hand if they questioned the rumors?

I will say I think Stalin and Soviet Russia was a much bigger stain on humanity, but that being said Hitler was far from a good guy. We all know that history is written by the victors, but to think Nazi Germany and Hitler are complete fabrications is absurd at best. The testimony is too vast amongst far too many different persons, cultures, and countries to be dismissed in the manner you are suggesting.

Do you realize that the majority of claims against Germany come from the communists? All the camps the Brits and the Americans liberated were proven to be labor internment camps, where some died from disease and starvation, while all the camps the communists liberated were said to be death camps with huge death tolls, which there is no physical evidence to prove. Then entire story falls apart upon actual honest investigation, why do you think they need the rule of thought crime laws to protect it? In a real court of law you have to accept the entire testimony as fact, if you suspect them of lying or embellishing the truth, then the entire testimony must be thrown out, so how much of these confessions do you believe?

child surviving six gassings in a gas chamber that never existed
woman survived three gassings because Nazis kept running out of gas
erupting and exploding mass graves
mass graves expelling geysers of blood
injections into the eyes of inmates to change their eye color
forcing prisoners to lick stairs clean, and collect garbage with their lips
blasting of 20,000 Jews into the twilight zone with atomic bombs
mass murder by tree cutting: forcing people to climb trees, then cutting the trees down
http://www.vho.org/GB/Books/dth/fndvalue.html

Or do you all realize that there were about 5 million German POW's that were forced into slavery after WW2 was over? Or that Eisenhower had his own very efficient death camps in which he put a fence around people and starved them to death? There is a book called Other Losses by James Bacque which tells more of these stories.
t03fr6.jpg
 
The "Allies" weren't nice people either. Though there are a few death camps. I did quick bit of research and was surprised there were only a few elaborate ones. Rest were labor camps. However between Germany and the Soviet Union they basically annihilated the jewish population of Poland. Ironically German jews weren't killed in such a high number. Kinda made me wonder if there was something a bit more ethnic about the holocaust, not religious.
 
without US military aid, the Soviet Union would have been finished after the 1942 thaw.

No way in hell Stalin could have held off Hitler without a second front to divert German troops....and the massive influx of US armored trucks, tanks, and tommy guns.

The war would have ended in 1942.

Your ignorance runs deep, little one.

There was no "second front" opened when the USA entered the war. The "second front" in Europe wasn't opened until the Allies invaded Italy in LATE 1943- more than a year and a half after D-day- and by then the Soviets were rolling the German Army back. If the "second front " you are referring to is North Africa, that front was established in early 1940, long before the USA got into the war.

Regarding equipment- the USSR didn't get American lend- lease equipment in significant amounts until the second half of 1942. The Germans had lost the initiative long before that.

Operation Barbarossa- the German Plan to knock the Soviets out of the war= officially failed on 5 December 1941 (note the date- BEFORE Pearl Harbor) when German forces attempting to take Moscow stalled, then were pushed back. From that point forward, the Germans were never again able to mount a theater wide advance. The Eastern Front became a meat grinder- with both sides sometimes advancing and sometimes retreating. The Germans never again got close to Moscow.

The Soviets eventually did get huge quantities of equipment from the USA, and that equipment helped the Soviets defeat the German Army more quickly, but the Soviets had effectively blunted the German assault before the USA got into the war, and before receiving significant amounts of equipment.

Another thing. My uncle served as a medic with the 42nd "Rainbow" Division (a unit made up largely of National Guardsmen from New York State). The 42nd was one of the Divisions that liberated Dachau. As a medic, he was called upon to try and treat some of the concentration camp prisoners, and he told me the camps were the most gruesome thing he ever saw (and as a medic treating wounded infantrymen, I suspect he saw plenty of gruesome wounds).

I know, I know. You'll claim that all those Jews (and others) were so thin because they were on the Jenny Craig diet (or some similar nonsense) and those giant ovens were just there for baking cookies. I'm just throwing it out there for the rational people on this forum.
 
It was a war zone, the allies were bombing supply lines, and they did also not know about DDT, so typhus was a problem. Why didn't the US share DDT with the world? The official mainline numbers on Dachau is that 25,613 prisoners are believed to have died in the camp. About 30k sickly people dying of disease does not equal millions of people being systematically executed. If you go visit Iraq or Haiti today I am sure you will see sickly people, does that mean there are holocausts happening there? The local morgues have "giant ovens" also, does that mean there are holocausts happening there? If you just buried diseased people in the ground you would pollute your onsite well water supply. BTW Over 60 million people were killed in WW2.
 
without US military aid, the Soviet Union would have been finished after the 1942 thaw.

No way in hell Stalin could have held off Hitler without a second front to divert German troops....and the massive influx of US armored trucks, tanks, and tommy guns.

The war would have ended in 1942. All Germany ever wanted was to reclaim its stolen territory and live in peace with UK




I have no problem with US companies supplying goods on the open market while we remain neutral.

We could have sold them tanks all war long and I would be fine with it.

The Soviet counter offensive was regaining ground from the Nazis by the time DDay began.

DDay would have happened anyway without the Americans, even so, the Mediterranean front, and the mere presence of the UK diverted troops from the eastern front.

Just look at how fast Russia gained ground after the second front was opened.

I would have been content to see the USSR completely exhaust it's economy and it's morale in the process of fighting an even harsher prolonged war on the eastern front.


sofia said:
hmmmmm

How exactly does one "survive" a gas chamber????

How do we account for these millions of "survivors?"...Doent that alone disprove the extirmination theory?......

They survived their stay in an INTERNMENT camp...not an extirmination camp.

My grandfather was there, I've seen the pictures, and he's told me straight up, anyone who denies that this happened doesn't know wtf they are talking about. I believe my grandfather who was there, not some revisionist amateur historian who takes the side of a totalitarian dictator.


PS. Hitler was probably the worst thing to ever happen to the German people.
 
My grandfather was there, I've seen the pictures, and he's told me straight up, anyone who denies that this happened doesn't know wtf they are talking about. I believe my grandfather who was there, not some revisionist amateur historian who takes the side of a totalitarian dictator.


PS. Hitler was probably the worst thing to ever happen to the German people.

Your grandfather was in the Red Army? When did you all immigrate to the states?
 
It wouldn't have been the first or last time we let millions die (Stalin, Mao, etc.), so would you say we should have intervened in those situations as well?
 
TLDR to most of the thread... perhaps I'll go back and look when there's a lot more time.

To address the OP, as I'm sure others have, I would have to point out that WWII was a direct result of how WWI ended. The US had a very big role in how WWI was "settled." This helped set the stage for any charismatic opportunist to advance their agenda in Germany especially.

The US also meddled when they blockaded Japan in the Pacific, which directly led to their reaction via Pearl Harbor.

Finally, the US was already meddling aplenty in WWII.

Things are seldom as simple as "do something or utterly ignore it." This country "did" a lot of things that ultimately led to more problems. I don't like going back and second-guessing the decisions that were made in the past, because they were definitely made in a totally different context. Where we are now, though, and what we do in the future should be based on sound logic and the current context.
 
Your ignorance runs deep, little one.

There was no "second front" opened when the USA entered the war. The "second front" in Europe wasn't opened until the Allies invaded Italy in LATE 1943- more than a year and a half after D-day- and by then the Soviets were rolling the German Army back. If the "second front " you are referring to is North Africa, that front was established in early 1940, long before the USA got into the war.

Regarding equipment- the USSR didn't get American lend- lease equipment in significant amounts until the second half of 1942. The Germans had lost the initiative long before that.

Operation Barbarossa- the German Plan to knock the Soviets out of the war= officially failed on 5 December 1941 (note the date- BEFORE Pearl Harbor) when German forces attempting to take Moscow stalled, then were pushed back. From that point forward, the Germans were never again able to mount a theater wide advance. The Eastern Front became a meat grinder- with both sides sometimes advancing and sometimes retreating. The Germans never again got close to Moscow.

The Soviets eventually did get huge quantities of equipment from the USA, and that equipment helped the Soviets defeat the German Army more quickly, but the Soviets had effectively blunted the German assault before the USA got into the war, and before receiving significant amounts of equipment.

Another thing. My uncle served as a medic with the 42nd "Rainbow" Division (a unit made up largely of National Guardsmen from New York State). The 42nd was one of the Divisions that liberated Dachau. As a medic, he was called upon to try and treat some of the concentration camp prisoners, and he told me the camps were the most gruesome thing he ever saw (and as a medic treating wounded infantrymen, I suspect he saw plenty of gruesome wounds).

I know, I know. You'll claim that all those Jews (and others) were so thin because they were on the Jenny Craig diet (or some similar nonsense) and those giant ovens were just there for baking cookies. I'm just throwing it out there for the rational people on this forum.

All Russia could do was use its vast geography and brutal climate to play defense. Germany had to spread its forces all over Europe and Africa long before D-Day. You're crazy if you think the Soviets could have rolled into Berlin without Patton pounding the Germans from the West.

As to the "gruesomeness of the camps".....they became like that as a result of Allied destruction of German infrastructure. Camps were all equiped with swimming pools and theaters. US soldiers only saw the tail end of the camps when the situation had already detriorated.

There was no esxtirmination...and no gas chambers. Forensic science has even proven that there were no gassings at Auschwitz. It was a Stalinist fairy tale that the Zionists used to gain sympathy for their coming invasion and devastation of the poor Palestinians.
 
Do you realize that the majority of claims against Germany come from the communists?

Yes.

And I have my problems with certain information, other information I do not. Hitler was a bad man. Plain and simple, and regardless of what numbers should be applied to him, they are applied with ease because of a grave he dug himself.
 
All Russia could do was use its vast geography and brutal climate to play defense. Germany had to spread its forces all over Europe and Africa long before D-Day. You're crazy if you think the Soviets could have rolled into Berlin without Patton pounding the Germans from the West.

No, I'm not crazy. I'm a military officer and military history buff.

You seem to be completely clueless of military history in any sense beyond vague generalities.

Patton didn't start "pounding the Germans from the West" until the latter half of 1944. By late 1944, the Russians had been continuously rolling the cream of the German military back for almost 2 years.

About all "Patton" and the other allied troops did was shorten the time it took for the Soviets to reach Berlin by a small amount- but the Russians had been on the offensive long before the Western Front was opened up. By D-Day, the Russians had retaken all of Russia and the Ukraine, most of the Baltic states, and most of Poland- in fact, by D-Day, the Russians were only days away from invading Germany itself.

BTW, the battles on the Western Front (France) were small compared to the battles on the Eastern Front. D-Day and the Normandy operations and "The Battle of the Bulge" were little more than skirmishes compared to the massive battles fought on the Eastern Front- Stalingrad, Kursk, Moscow and many others were simply massive battles.
 
Back
Top