Originally posted by leonheartmm
dude, i have NO idea, how you can even make that ridiculous claim. england didnt enter that war due to altruistic reasons to free the germans. it entered because hitler was agressive against it and it had to defend itself. same with america, america entered near the very end when the fighting was apparently reaching its shores{and it did in pearl harbour}. the allied troops too commited many atrocities{most are not there in american history books, but for gods sake, open a german/russian one} and didnt give a second thought to the people who were actually suffering due to hitler under him. in an effort to disable the enemy, the allied forces indiscriminately carpet bombed factories/power stations etc, without thinking twice about the majority of innocent workers/slave workers employed there. entire dams were destroyed and the predicted ensuing water destroyed THOUSANDS of homes downstream and killed thousands of people, not to mention destroyed thousands if not millions of acres of farm land used to fead the poor. americans also EXECUTED an insanely large percentage of prisoners of war, all this goes for the british too. they allies were openly cruel to even civilians who supported the third reich. in america itself japanese were rounded up and kept in condentration camps for a significant part of the war. furthermore the alies practically BROKE UP whatever was of the german empire and redistributed its stolen resources/leading scientists/intellectuals/gold/raw materials/reaearch hungrily amon each other and made different countries which each suited one of the allies purposes in the way they were laid out. also the main reason for the war, was the treaty of versailes, which was made BY the selfish allies to disadvantage geramany extremely unfairly and was the REASON why extremely frustrated and hence extremely ambitious psycho nationalistic leaders like hitler were given birth to in the repressive atmosphere. really u think the entire nation was mad to follow a man who shunned and wowed revenge on the wrest of the world like a lunatic????? no they were ANGRY.and lets NOT forget what america did to the japanese empire, continuously carpet bombing its CIVILIAN areas which killed hundreds of thousands. in the napalm raid, nearly half a million people REPORTEDLY died, all civilians, all purposely targetted. and oh my what happened next, america invaded the nearer islands, and committed as much atrocities on foreign ground as hitler did on his own. civilians and militants included, indiscriminately. and really, just because japan REFUSED TO SURRENDER{which was too much for the american ego to take}, americans NUKED THEM, "TWICE" and cause the single greatest loss of life{actually sumwhat less then the earlier napalm bombings} in history, not to mention suffering on the civilians. the abonimable weapons were used to TEACH JAPANESE A LESSON, and to break morale, NOT to try n put down the "evil people". and what were the targets?????????? hiroshima and nagasaki, two of the greatest CITIES in japan, FILLED with innocents. any idea how many CIVILIANS that killed????????????????????? and has killed even now to due radiation posinong, on top of mutated births etc. oh hey, did they actually try to SUPPORT the people who had suffered during the war after the war ended???????????/ NO, they just left em there, their own interest met, they cudnt give more of a damn about the victim.
and before i forget, in the period leading upto the occupancy, due to psuedo IQ TESTING by a known eugenics supported{forgot his name}, he was, falsely, able to show to the government how the nordic people were the most superior in intelligence and how the slavs,gypsies were exceedingly dummer. this lead to immigration QUOATAS being formed which barred{guess how many................} a little over 6 MILLIION immigrants from entering the country due to the passed immigration act. a number of some significance in the history of europe. just goes to show how NON ALTRUISTIC america and its ally's purpose for entering the war were.any1 who calls the second world war as justified or humane in the long run needs to have his head examined by a neurologist. ignorance has its limits.
You are absolutely wrong. There was no aggression toward England. England and France Declared War on Germany when they Took back The port city of Danzig from Poland (Which they lost in WW1). Hitler made exhaustive diplomatic efforts to keep peace between England and Germany. When England and France declared War , they were not ready for it. Germany was not going to wait for them mass and equip an Army , so they Attacked . And i think its funny how our Pres. uses terms like Preemptive strike....Isn't that another term for Blitz Krieg?
Originally posted by Versyn Gaul
You are absolutely wrong. There was no aggression toward England. England and France Declared War on Germany when they Took back The port city of Danzig from Poland (Which they lost in WW1). Hitler made exhaustive diplomatic efforts to keep peace between England and Germany. When England and France declared War , they were not ready for it. Germany was not going to wait for them mass and equip an Army , so they Attacked . And i think its funny how our Pres. uses terms like Preemptive strike....Isn't that another term for Blitz Krieg?
England and France both declared that they would protect Poland even at the cost of war. Hitler decided to attack anyway, they were just protecting their ally.
Not to mention that Hitler blatantly ignored the limits given to Germany by the treaty of Versailles and far more important he ignored the Munich Agreement by attacking Poland, you can not blame the French and English for starting the war.
They don't want Democracy , they want Tribal rule , and they want their boundaries back that were segmented by England in WWI. We can not win over there. We let Israel get away with exactly what we smack them around for. Iraq had weapons of mass destruction? Yes because we gave them to Iraq during the Iraq/Iran war. Iraq had missiles that would reach over 300n.m. Israel has missiles that will reach Iran. Iraq Tries to take back Kuwait(which was Iraq territory until the British segmented it for the oil after WWi) But Israel is building walled Cities in Palestine and putting up road blocks on Palestinian roads. Palestine fight back with what they can (Suicide bombers) and they kill a handful of people. In retaliation Israel attacks Cities and kill 3,000 people and confiscate all currency in their banks. We will never win.
Originally posted by Fishy
England and France both declared that they would protect Poland even at the cost of war. Hitler decided to attack anyway, they were just protecting their ally.Not to mention that Hitler blatantly ignored the limits given to Germany by the treaty of Versailles and far more important he ignored the Munich Agreement by attacking Poland, you can not blame the French and English for starting the war.
Danzig was the only Port City Germany had. The people had no Import/Export trade which is vital for any country to survive. Even before Hitler ,The German Govt. begged for this City back and to allow them in to the world trade market . The League of nations would not. If you remember Germany took back what was German before the treaty of Versailles and the RUSSIANS took the rest. It was a matter of survival. Hitler had no interest in France or England. What was threatening Germany were the Communist Bolshevik Unions that were taking over. This is why the(National Deutches Arbeita Parti) German workers party ,was formed. Because Communism was taking over. Hitler had his eye on Russia. And if you remember Russia and communism was a thorn in the U..S.' side for 50 years.
Originally posted by Devil King
YouTube video
LMAO!!!!!
Originally posted by Versyn Gaul
Danzig was the only Port City Germany had. The people had no Import/Export trade which is vital for any country to survive. Even before Hitler ,The German Govt. begged for this City back and to allow them in to the world trade market . The League of nations would not. If you remember Germany took back what was German before the treaty of Versailles and the RUSSIANS took the rest. It was a matter of survival. Hitler had no interest in France or England. What was threatening Germany were the Communist Bolshevik Unions that were taking over. This is why the(National Deutches Arbeita Parti) German workers party ,was formed. Because Communism was taking over. Hitler had his eye on Russia. And if you remember Russia and communism was a thorn in the U..S.' side for 50 years.
If that's the case then why would they give the half of Poland to Russia if they feared Communism above all else? Why would they invade in three places at once if they just wanted one port city? Hitler wanted war, he had building an army for war he had constantly pushed the League of nations as far as possible. Of course there would be a limit. He just pushed to far.
And if Hitler wanted peace he wouldn't have signed the Munich agreement he knew damn well what the result of this war would be.
Originally posted by Fishy
If that's the case then why would they give the half of Poland to Russia if they feared Communism above all else? Why would they invade in three places at once if they just wanted one port city? Hitler wanted war, he had building an army for war he had constantly pushed the League of nations as far as possible. Of course there would be a limit. He just pushed to far.And if Hitler wanted peace he wouldn't have signed the Munich agreement he knew damn well what the result of this war would be.
I don't mean to be rude to a brother "Empire" fan , but you are very much in the Dark when it comes to early 20th Cen. History(which is understandable history is written by the victors) and i don't want to take up any more time on this thread. If you would like to discuss this in depth, i would be glad to PM and i could give you recourses to research and you will understand 🙂
Originally posted by Versyn Gaul
I don't mean to be rude to a brother "Empire" fan , but you are very much in the Dark when it comes to early 20th Cen. History(which is understandable history is written by the victors) and i don't want to take up any more time on this thread. If you would like to discuss this in depth, i would be glad to PM and i could give you recourses to research and you will understand 🙂
Just because the winners write history doesn't mean it's incorrect. Hitler started the war no matter how you twist or turn it. He attacked Poland knowing it would start a war with France and England.
The treaty of Versailles may not have been a nice treaty and definitely a cause for war and a good reason why the German people liked it, but that doesn't all of a sudden mean that Hitler had no alternative.
Originally posted by Fishy
Just because the winners write history doesn't mean it's incorrect. Hitler started the war no matter how you twist or turn it. He attacked Poland knowing it would start a war with France and England.The treaty of Versailles may not have been a nice treaty and definitely a cause for war and a good reason why the German people liked it, but that doesn't all of a sudden mean that Hitler had no alternative.
There was no alternative. Furthering my point of your lack of understanding of the History.
Originally posted by Versyn Gaul
There was no alternative. Furthering my point of your lack of understanding of the History.
Just because I don't agree with you doesn't mean I don't understand history. And there were plenty of alternatives. Like not attacking Poland for one.
Hitler wanted a war he created an army for a war, if he just wanted to get one more port why did he attack the Netherlands for instance? A country that wanted to be neutral in the war and didn't choose any side in the conflict?
But hey why don't you just post the links and so called sources you have that make Hitler look like nothing more then an innocent bystander without a choice in the matter.
Originally posted by Fishy
Just because I don't agree with you doesn't mean I don't understand history. And there were plenty of alternatives. Like not attacking Poland for one.Hitler wanted a war he created an army for a war, if he just wanted to get one more port why did he attack the Netherlands for instance? A country that wanted to be neutral in the war and didn't choose any side in the conflict?
But hey why don't you just post the links and so called sources you have that make Hitler look like nothing more then an innocent bystander without a choice in the matter.
No I make him a Leader of a country Like Washington ordering the Small Pox infested blankets to the Seneca Indians in order to wipe them out or The British Empire Conquering India for the trade(East India Company) or Us Invading Mexico in 1840s to acquire the Mexican held territory in North America. Or America forcing Trade upon the Japanese with the use of War ships. Or like The U.S. invading Cuba and Philippines to take it from Spain. I could go on.
Originally posted by Versyn Gaul
No I make him a Leader of a country Like Washington ordering the Small Pox infested blankets to the Seneca Indians in order to wipe them out or The British Empire Conquering India for the trade(East India Company) or Us Invading Mexico in 1840s to acquire the Mexican held territory in North America. Or America forcing Trade upon the Japanese with the use of War ships. Or like The U.S. invading Cuba and Philippines to take it from Spain. I could go on.
I completely fail to see your point here, you said Hitler didn't have a choice. He had plenty of choices. You said he didn't want a war, when he did everything he could to prepare and create it including invading neutral country's, and signing treaty's knowing full well he would brake them not much later.
Originally posted by Fishy
I completely fail to see your point here, you said Hitler didn't have a choice. He had plenty of choices. You said he didn't want a war, when he did everything he could to prepare and create it including invading neutral country's, and signing treaty's knowing full well he would brake them not much later.
The point is He had no choice to preserve Germany. The League of Nations wanted them to all die and He could not let that happen. The Germans were starving to death man THE PEOPLE OF GERMANY were starving to death. There was no choice. The point was any Nation will do ANYTHING to perpetuate their existence. Just like th U.S. , Hence my examples. You don't know what you are talking about. Your spewing the same tiered Rhetoric that Western High schools teach.
Originally posted by Devil King
I've gone ahead and put a couple of key points in your post in bold print. SADDAM WAS NOT HITLER.
Well not numerically in his killings, but he was up there for his attacks on the Kurdish civilian population, and his use of gas to massacre civiilains. He hated them many others, he solidified a strong authoritarian power, and he started an invasion to capture kuwait (which was all they could hope to accomplish).
He was a little hitler.