It was clear to Hitler and his Generals in 1943 the war was lost so why fight on? Reason was to buy the SS time to finish there mass murder programme which was ordered by Hitler. And in 1945 Hitler declared Berlin was to be sealed, reason to kill as many civilians as possible in Hitler's eyes the German people failed him. That's the thinking of a evil man.
Originally posted by Bardock42
Then you can go and claim that the Treaty of Versailles is responsible for every death in the second world war. And since the First World War is responsible for the Treaty of Versailles and therefore all the death of The second World War....responsible for the first world war is.....and that can continue forever. You can't just count every death in a war on one person, that would be unjustified and stupid...you can make Hitler responsible for all the ordered killings of Jews, Homosexuals, Communist Gypsies, etc. ... and that's how those numbers should be found (and usually are), to have any accuracy at all.
Then you can go and claim that the Treaty of Versailles is responsible for every death in the second world war.
I do Facts. Fact is, Hitler is responsible for the death of millions people.
Originally posted by who?-kid
That's very very debatable, and is also pure speculation. Maybe, maybe not. Who knows. I don't do "what ifs" however, because it's a pointless and never ending discussion. Amusing at best, but pointless.I do Facts. Fact is, Hitler is responsible for the death of millions people.
no, hitler's ss was responsible. they were ordered by hitler. hitler was elected into power by germans. germans were desperate for direction and leadership as they had all the western world's foot pinned to the back of their necks and their once proud nation was in shambles/impoverished. cause and effect. completely relevant and hardy amusing.
Originally posted by PVS
no, hitler's ss was responsible. they were ordered by hitler. hitler was elected into power by germans. germans were desperate for direction and leadership as they had all the western world's foot pinned to the back of their necks and their once proud nation was in shambles/impoverished. cause and effect. completely relevant and hardy amusing.
We all know the rest.
Originally posted by who?-kid´
It's not that simple. For example, there was already a lot of antisemitism in Germany back then. Hitler used those feelings and threw oil on the fire, for personal (hate) and economic (money) reasons.We all know the rest.
Exactly, it's not that simple...the direct orders of the Holocaust are Hitler's responsibility...fair enough, but all deaths of war...that is stupid.
Originally posted by who?-kid
It's not that simple.
so then we agree
Originally posted by who?-kid
For example, there was already a lot of antisemitism in Germany back then. Hitler used those feelings and threw oil on the fire, for personal (hate) and economic (money) reasons.We all know the rest.
exactly. the potential for evil was there, and hitler exploited it. that doesnt make him the source of evil or the one responsible. it just means he was the one to push everyone's buttons. but what if there was no hitler. do you believe that germans would have never given unconditional support to another tyrant?
That's a pretty good point. His "evil" couldn't have happened if the opprotunity hadn't existed. I also think the full brunt of the evil of the camps can't be placed solely on Adolfs considerable shoulders. The citizens of Germany knew those camps were operating, and what was going on inside them. I've always assumed that was why older Germans were so reluctant to talk about it in interviews.
Originally posted by PVS
but what if there was no hitler. do you believe that germans would have never given unconditional support to another tyrant?
The Germans were humiliated and broke after WWI (their own fault, make no mistake). So I guess if another strong man with the charisma and confidence of Hitler would have stood up, there's a fair chance people would have elected him.
Or maybe not. History is not made by a few important moments (Treaty of Versailles => Hitler hating Jews => Hitlers election => Hitler invading Poland => Hitler backstabbing Russia and so on).
No, history is made of thousands and thousands little pieces who all play their tiny role. If a few pieces are missing, there's a big chance you get a completely new scenario.
Originally posted by who?-kid
That's impossible to say but for once, I'll give it a try.The Germans were humiliated and broke after WWI (their own fault, make no mistake). So I guess if another strong man with the charisma and confidence of Hitler would have stood up, there's a fair chance people would have elected him.
Or maybe not. History is not made by a few important moments (Treaty of Versailles => Hitler hating Jews => Hitlers election => Hitler invading Poland => Hitler backstabbing Russia and so on).
No, history is made of thousands and thousands little pieces who all play their tiny role. If a few pieces are missing, there's a big chance you get a completely new scenario.
WOAH, woah, woah.....not so fast there buddy, its certainly not the mistake of the Germans that they were broke and humilated...
Originally posted by Quiero Mota
I don't agree. The Treaty of Versailles was just designed to keep them in check.
Check, right? Blame the whole war on Germany alone and take enormous amounts of reparations to keep them in check. Worked out fine as well, twenty years later they were up kicking ass again.