Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: Irongrip400 on May 06, 2012, 05:54:05 PM
-
Now that we are 70 or so years after his reign, and most who had to deal with him are dead, how will he be remembered? What I wonder, is that will he eventually just be remembered as a conqueror, or will the atrocities he committed keep with his legacy? Will he be remembered with the likes of Napoleon and Julius Caesar , or something all on his own?
-
Now that we are 70 or so years after his reign, and most who had to deal with him are dead, how will he be remembered? What I wonder, is that will he eventually just be remembered as a conqueror, or will the atrocities he committed keep with his legacy? Will he be remembered with the likes of Napoleon and Julius Caesar , or something all on his own?
He's still pretty much remembered as Satan.
His legacy will probably dull with time, especially when the next genocidal madman gains control of some powerful country. History ebbs and flows, and history repeats.
The next Hitler will be the new "Satan", and he'll just be another genocidal douche in the anals of history.
-
Now that we are 70 or so years after his reign, and most who had to deal with him are dead, how will he be remembered? What I wonder, is that will he eventually just be remembered as a conqueror, or will the atrocities he committed keep with his legacy? Will he be remembered with the likes of Napoleon and Julius Caesar , or something all on his own?
He'll be remembered as a fucking idiot.
- Started a 2 front war
- Couldn't make up his mind between Stalingrad and Moscow
- Ignored the Russian winter
- Listened to Goring regarding Dunkirk
- Lacked the will to continue in the battle of Brittan
- Insisted the Me-262 be a bomber
- Opted to make too expensive impractical tanks for his situation
- Didn't give his generals the power to move certain divisions where in one such incident could have turned the tide on D-day
the list goes on and on.
-
Now that we are 70 or so years after his reign, and most who had to deal with him are dead, how will he be remembered? What I wonder, is that will he eventually just be remembered as a conqueror, or will the atrocities he committed keep with his legacy? Will he be remembered with the likes of Napoleon and Julius Caesar , or something all on his own?
It depends solely on shit that is very politically incorrect to talk about.
-
It depends solely on shit that is very politically incorrect to talk about.
(http://www.jaguarenterprises.net/images/rotflmao.gif)
Was that a grammatical error?
Did you really mean to say "that is" ?
Are you sure you didn't instead mean "who are" ? :D
-
He'll be remembered as a fucking idiot.
- Started a 2 front war
- Couldn't make up his mind between Stalingrad and Moscow
- Ignored the Russian winter
- Listened to Goring regarding Dunkirk
- Lacked the will to continue in the battle of Brittan
- Insisted the Me-262 be a bomber
- Opted to make too expensive impractical tanks for his situation
- Didn't give his generals the power to move certain divisions where in one such incident could have turned the tide on D-day
the list goes on and on.
This pretty much goes without saying.
Nice drop on the Me-262 info. Not well known fact.
Fucking idiot wouldnt listen to any of his military advisors, ever. Personally decided, against advisement, that the ME-262, a fighter that could fly right by our fighter escorts and knock our bombers out of the sky, no, he decided it was more important to strike back at the Allies with high speed bombers rather than defend his own soil.
I think idiocy goes without saying.
-
This pretty much goes without saying.
Nice drop on the Me-262 info. Not well known fact.
Fucking idiot wouldnt listen to any of his military advisors, ever. Personally decided, against advisement, that the ME-262, a fighter that could fly right by our fighter escorts and knock our bombers out of the sky, no, he decided it was more important to strike back at the Allies with high speed bombers rather than defend his own soil.
I think idiocy goes without saying.
You could also throw the Ardennes Offensive on there as well. He threw pretty much his last haymaker at the West in a futile assault that wasted whatever fighting strength Germany had left. He should have thrown that against the Soviets to let the West have time to take Berlin. Or at best stopped the Russians as their supply lines were stretched to the breaking point and even they were going to be having manpower problems soon.
You could also say he started a 3 front war. East-West-Africa/Italy.
-
You could also throw the Ardennes Offensive on there as well. He threw pretty much his last haymaker at the West in a futile assault that wasted whatever fighting strength Germany had left. He should have thrown that against the Soviets to let the West have time to take Berlin. Or at best stopped the Russians as their supply lines were stretched to the breaking point and even they were going to be having manpower problems soon.
You could also say he started a 3 front war. East-West-Africa/Italy.
Yeah, Hitler pretty much rates number one on the recent history list of incompetent Commander's in Chief.
-
He'll be remembered as a fucking idiot.
- Started a 2 front war
- Couldn't make up his mind between Stalingrad and Moscow
- Ignored the Russian winter
- Listened to Goring regarding Dunkirk
- Lacked the will to continue in the battle of Brittan
- Insisted the Me-262 be a bomber
- Opted to make too expensive impractical tanks for his situation
- Didn't give his generals the power to move certain divisions where in one such incident could have turned the tide on D-day
the list goes on and on.
I see you e done your homework. Are you military by chance? Yes, he should've smashed the allies at Dunkirk, but hesitated because he thought Goering could bring them down with his Luftwaffe. Attacking the soviets was a huge problem, but he could've won it had he not gone to yugoslavia first. And declaring war on the US when Japan wouldn't declare war on the Russians was a mistake too.
-
I see you e done your homework. Are you military by chance? Yes, he should've smashed the allies at Dunkirk, but hesitated because he thought Goering could bring them down with his Luftwaffe. Attacking the soviets was a huge problem, but he could've won it had he not gone to yugoslavia first. And declaring war on the US when Japan wouldn't declare war on the Russians was a mistake too.
It was, sure, the Eastern borders were secure but he did anyways and had chances to finish the Soviets off but failed to make the correct strategic and tactical decisions.
In that regard:
- His orders to fight to the death in Stalingrad and losing Paulus and the 6th army was a huge mistake.
-Listening to Goering (About anything) and agreeing to do the disastrous airlift to an encircled 6th army instead of sending an actual relief column was a big mistake.
-Operation Citadel/Zitadel was in-reality a draw but he wasted more men, material, fuel and those shiny new Panthers and Tigers on it for no gain.
-Having Italians and Romanians guard the flank for the 6th Army during Stalingrad was a really bad move, no armor, poor training and they were smashed by the Soviets which doomed Gen/Field Marshall Paulus.
-Choosing Operation Barbarossa to begin before securing the Suez and the M.E. oil fields was, again, the wrong move.
-Choosing to begin the bombings of cities as terror attacks during the air war over Britain instead of continuing to pound the RAF airfields, factories and radar stations. Hitler had the RAF on the ropes during this time and ready to break. The British bomb Berlin, Hitler gets emotional and the rest is history. This was a bad decision in a long line of bad decisions fueled by his mental weakness and emotions.
-
I see you e done your homework. Are you military by chance? Yes, he should've smashed the allies at Dunkirk, but hesitated because he thought Goering could bring them down with his Luftwaffe. Attacking the soviets was a huge problem, but he could've won it had he not gone to yugoslavia first. And declaring war on the US when Japan wouldn't declare war on the Russians was a mistake too.
No, WW2 has always been an interest of mine. I prolly have 50+ books on it. Hitler had the best trained and most powerful army on earth and wouldn't listen to his generals. If he would have prepped for the Russian winter and made a b-line to Moscow, taking it would have led to the collapse of Russia.
I think, Credit Richard Sorge for being the spy who informed the Russians that Japan had no interest in attacking Russia and the fact that Russia beat the crap out of them in a earlier battle.
But I credit Hitler for the brilliance and brutalilty of taking power and manipulating an entire nation into what was thought of as a righteous war
-
It was, sure, the Eastern borders were secure but he did anyways and had chances to finish the Soviets off but failed to make the correct strategic and tactical decisions.
In that regard:
- His orders to fight to the death in Stalingrad and losing Paulus and the 6th army was a huge mistake.
-Listening to Goering (About anything) and agreeing to do the disastrous airlift to an encircled 6th army instead of sending an actual relief column was a big mistake.
-Operation Citadel/Zitadel was in-reality a draw but he wasted more men, material, fuel and those shiny new Panthers and Tigers on it for no gain.
-Having Italians and Romanians guard the flank for the 6th Army during Stalingrad was a really bad move, no armor, poor training and they were smashed by the Soviets which doomed Gen/Field Marshall Paulus.
-Choosing Operation Barbarossa to begin before securing the Suez and the M.E. oil fields was, again, the wrong move.
-Choosing to begin the bombings of cities as terror attacks during the air war over Britain instead of continuing to pound the RAF airfields, factories and radar stations. Hitler had the RAF on the ropes during this time and ready to break. The British bomb Berlin, Hitler gets emotional and the rest is history. This was a bad decision in a long line of bad decisions fueled by his mental weakness and emotions.
Agree.
He was a politican, not a military commander, and he paid the price for his arrogance by not listening to those that knew what they were talking about.
His arrogance and lack of ability to control his emotions was his downfall.
-
No, WW2 has always been an interest of mine. I prolly have 50+ books on it. Hitler had the best trained and most powerful army on earth and wouldn't listen to his generals. If he would have prepped for the Russian winter and made a b-line to Moscow, taking it would have led to the collapse of Russia.
I think, Credit Richard Sorge for being the spy who informed the Russians that Japan had no interest in attacking Russia and the fact that Russia beat the crap out of them in a earlier battle.
But I credit Hitler for the brilliance and brutalilty of taking power and manipulating an entire nation into what was thought of as a righteous war
Which books? I have rise and fall of the third reich, Patton and Rommel , knights cross and a book called world war two by Keegan. Let me know what else I need to read, as well as any world war 1 books.
-
His legacy is and always should be: an evil mass-murderer.
-
Which books? I have rise and fall of the third reich, Patton and Rommel , knights cross and a book called world war two by Keegan. Let me know what else I need to read, as well as any world war 1 books.
Here's some of them, (I didn't put the authors but you should be able to get them all on Amazon, except Hitler Moves East cuase its pretty old)
**A Time of Trumpets
**The battle of Kurst
Citizen soldier
**D-Day (Ambrose)
D-Day (Beevor) just bought it this weekend
**Fall of Berlin
**Hitler Moves East 1941-1943 (Paul Carrell)
Armageddon in Stalingrad Vo. 2
Dirty little secrets of WW2
Tigers in the mud
War as we knew it
Hitler's Panzers
tigers in Action
Panzer Tactics
Tank rider
**the Battle of the Bulge (Hugh Cole)
The with ** i strongly recommend. the book "dirty little secrets of WW2" is a great bathroom reader.
-
Here's some of them, (I didn't put the authors but you should be able to get them all on Amazon, except Hitler Moves East cuase its pretty old)
**A Time of Trumpets
**The battle of Kurst
Citizen soldier
**D-Day (Ambrose)
D-Day (Beevor) just bought it this weekend
**Fall of Berlin
**Hitler Moves East 1941-1943 (Paul Carrell)
Armageddon in Stalingrad Vo. 2
Dirty little secrets of WW2
Tigers in the mud
War as we knew it
Hitler's Panzers
tigers in Action
Panzer Tactics
Tank rider
**the Battle of the Bulge (Hugh Cole)
The with ** i strongly recommend. the book "dirty little secrets of WW2" is a great bathroom reader.
Add in:
-Ardennes '44
-With the Old Breed
-
Add in:
-Ardennes '44
-With the Old Breed
"The Pacific" on HBO got me to buy that one.
I'll check out Ardennes 44
-
He's still pretty much remembered as Satan.
His legacy will probably dull with time, especially when the next genocidal madman gains control of some powerful country. History ebbs and flows, and history repeats.
The next Hitler will be the new "Satan", and he'll just be another genocidal douche in the anals of history.
I actually think Hitler will stand the test of time as the ultimate badguy......his mystique and his hypnotic personality are what separate him from the other conquerors...he had a whole philosophy behind what he was doing ....it wasn't just destroy, maim, and conquer
-
I actually think Hitler will stand the test of time as the ultimate badguy......his mystique and his hypnotic personality are what separate him from the other conquerors...he had a whole philosophy behind what he was doing ....it wasn't just destroy, maim, and conquer
Not to start an argument, but I believe he was as bad as the others, we just have what he did on film. I think the age of seeing battle and war on the tv or big screen really makes things worse, because you see it first hand. But yeah, I do see what you're saying about him as the person, that he was a great orator.
-
Not to start an argument, but I believe he was as bad as the others, we just have what he did on film. I think the age of seeing battle and war on the tv or big screen really makes things worse, because you see it first hand. But yeah, I do see what you're saying about him as the person, that he was a great orator.
point taken.....agreed....
-
Stalin, Pol Pot, both pretty dam evil too.
-
I actually think Hitler will stand the test of time as the ultimate badguy......his mystique and his hypnotic personality are what separate him from the other conquerors...he had a whole philosophy behind what he was doing ....it wasn't just destroy, maim, and conquer
You could say the same of Stalin, Mao, and other communist dictators. Marxism is more than just an ideology; it is a philosophy. In fact, Marxism is a far more developed philosophy than whatever Hitler practiced. Hitler really was just a power-hungry fool who pimped the parts of Nietzsche that suited him. Hardly a "whole philosophy."
Note: The very foundation of fascism is a rejection of intellectualism and objective reality. So the likes of Hitler and Mussolini were closer to irrationalist mystics than philosophers.
-
You could say the same of Stalin, Mao, and other communist dictators. Marxism is more than just an ideology; it is a philosophy. In fact, Marxism is a far more developed philosophy than whatever Hitler practiced. Hitler really was just a power-hungry fool who pimped the parts of Nietzsche that suited him. Hardly a "whole philosophy."
Note: The very foundation of fascism is a rejection of intellectualism and objective reality. So the likes of Hitler and Mussolini were closer to irrationalist mystics than philosophers.
good post...point taken
-
He'll be remembered as a fucking idiot.
- Started a 2 front war
[...]the list goes on and on.
(http://www.jaguarenterprises.net/images/em/angel2.gif)
{blink}{blink} You mean the way Bush and his neo-con buddies did in Iraq & Afghanistan? ...cheered on by the American people?
Is that what you mean by a 2 front war?
-
(http://www.jaguarenterprises.net/images/em/angel2.gif)
{blink}{blink} You mean the way Bush and his neo-con buddies did in Iraq & Afghanistan? ...cheered on by the American people?
Is that what you mean by a 2 front war?
Bush and his neo-con buddies?
So it was just Bush and his Neo-Con buddies voting in Congress to authorize war powers?
Hmmmm, interesting, I didn't know our government worked that way.
-
Bush and his neo-con buddies?
So it was just Bush and his Neo-Con buddies voting in Congress to authorize war powers?
Hmmmm, interesting, I didn't know our government worked that way.
I don't recall there having been a Declaration of War made by Congress.
If i recall accurately what went down, Congress instead voted to let the President decide whether to launch a war.
They shrank from their duty, and passed the buck to Bush, when it should have stayed with them.
If I'm incorrect, feel free to point it out, and I will humbly stand corrected.
-
(http://www.jaguarenterprises.net/images/em/angel2.gif)
{blink}{blink} You mean the way Bush and his neo-con buddies did in Iraq & Afghanistan? ...cheered on by the American people?
Is that what you mean by a 2 front war?
That's not even close to the same thing. Hitler invaded both sides of his country, to compare that to the US we would have to invade Canada and Mexico (which we would make short work of). Iraq and afganastan are two rathole countries that I could give a fuck less about. Let's stay on topic and keep your 21st century wars to yourself.
-
That's not even close to the same thing. Hitler invaded both sides of his country, to compare that to the US we would have to invade Canada and Mexico (which we would make short work of). Iraq and afganastan are two rathole countries that I could give a fuck less about. Let's stay on topic and keep your 21st century wars to yourself.
America is Satan, Buy gas pills
-
(http://www.jaguarenterprises.net/images/em/angel2.gif)
{blink}{blink} You mean the way Bush and his neo-con buddies did in Iraq & Afghanistan? ...cheered on by the American people?
Is that what you mean by a 2 front war?
No, go study history. Also I am still waiting for your expert argument about we are already in WW3.
By your logic, then during WW2 while we were island hoping, in Italy, in France, in the Phillipines etc you could say we were in a 5+ front war. See how dumb the comparison is?
Meanwhile, you know my stance on Iraq as it was a useless waste of life, however, Afghanistan was appropriate. Any chance we get to bomb, kill or desrtroy Taliban or AQ is a very good.
Satan Approves. ;)
I personally approve pissing on their dead bodies.
-
No, go study history. Also I am still waiting for your expert argument about we are already in WW3.
By your logic, then during WW2 while we were island hoping, in Italy, in France, in the Phillipines etc you could say we were in a 5+ front war. See how dumb the comparison is?
Meanwhile, you know my stance on Iraq as it was a useless waste of life, however, Afghanistan was appropriate. Any chance we get to bomb, kill or desrtroy Taliban or AQ is a very good.
Satan Approves. ;)
I personally approve pissing on their dead bodies.
Lol.
The US rose hugely to the challenge in WWII and mobilized across half the world and fought through some of the most horrible jungle terrain in the world while simultaneously fighting across Europe.
Japan really screwed the pooch hitting Pearl Harbor IMHO.
Yamamoto knew what was up. Lol.
Good luck getting the entire US to truely believe in something like that again.
-
Lol.
The US rose hugely to the challenge in WWII and mobilized across half the world and fought through some of the most horrible jungle terrain in the world while simultaneously fighting across Europe.
Japan really screwed the pooch hitting Pearl Harbor IMHO.
Yamamoto knew what was up. Lol.
Good luck getting the entire US to truely believe in something like that again.
Well, if those 2 carriers were at Pearl Harbor during the attack we would be talking about a much different outcome. But I do agree, I don't think the Japanese thought the U.S. at the time could mobilize like it did.
They def. screwed up on that account, but with the scrap iron/fuel embargo we (U.S.) didn't give them much of a choice at the time.
-
Well, if those 2 carriers were at Pearl Harbor during the attack we would be talking about a much different outcome. But I do agree, I don't think the Japanese thought the U.S. at the time could mobilize like it did.
They def. screwed up on that account, but with the scrap iron/fuel embargo we (U.S.) didn't give them much of a choice at the time.
Not to mention if the Japs had launched a third wave and hit the fuel storage tanks.
-
Not to mention if the Japs had launched a third wave and hit the fuel storage tanks.
Good point. Their war plan failed. If they were unable to score a true knockout blow then chances for victory diminished greatly.
-
Well, if those 2 carriers were at Pearl Harbor during the attack we would be talking about a much different outcome. But I do agree, I don't think the Japanese thought the U.S. at the time could mobilize like it did.
They def. screwed up on that account, but with the scrap iron/fuel embargo we (U.S.) didn't give them much of a choice at the time.
Agreed on that. Little bit overconfidence on their part.
Wasnt that whole plan something we basically gave them an idea for? I thought it was a possible outcome the US was worried about and we shared it with them for some godforsaken reason?
I cant remember exactly. Been a long time since I studied the subject.
-
Well, if those 2 carriers were at Pearl Harbor during the attack we would be talking about a much different outcome. But I do agree, I don't think the Japanese thought the U.S. at the time could mobilize like it did.
They def. screwed up on that account, but with the scrap iron/fuel embargo we (U.S.) didn't give them much of a choice at the time.
Good point but it should never have gotten that far...the U.S. was crazy to think that being isolationist would have spared them from war..it just made it more inevitable...we should have come in earlier
-
That's not even close to the same thing. Hitler invaded both sides of his country, to compare that to the US we would have to invade Canada and Mexico (which we would make short work of).
Oh no you wouldn't. Between Moctezuma's revenge, and the Saskatchewan Army, your guys would scream like little girls and run away.
You seem to be forgetting what happened 200 yrs ago, the last time you tried to invade Canada.
Iraq and afganastan are two rathole countries that I could give a fuck less about.
OK, all kidding aside.
Do you not see the similarities? I realize it's not the same as the US invading Canada & Mexico because Iraq & Aghanistan are halfway around the world, however, these are two front wars on either side of Iran... a country they have for all intents & purposes been losing a war with since the days of Mossadegh. I think mossadegh was the last victory they had there, ...and they want "their country" back.
And now after needlessly sacrificing sooo many American lives, their further attempt to cripple not only it's biggest potential rivals India & China, but also Iran by sanctions, employing the Belgian based SWIFT as a weapon, has only backfired on them.
India is buying a million barrels a day using gold, and china is purchasing using Renminbi, accelerating the strengthening of both of these currencies. (yesterday's Au performance notwithstanding)
Let's stay on topic and keep your 21st century wars to yourself.
ok fine. no need to mention Congress' dereliction of duty, that launched a massive war that has lasted longer than WWII and could result in the destruction of America. {sigh}
-
The US knew, or was at least warned about the impending attack on Pearl Harbor days prior. After that happened, my 17 year old grandfather enlisted in the navy and fought in the south pacific. Americans were fucking animals back then. And I mean that in a good way.
-
The US knew, or was at least warned about the impending attack on Pearl Harbor days prior. After that happened, my 17 year old grandfather enlisted in the navy and fought in the south pacific. Americans were fucking animals back then. And I mean that in a good way.
When I said on here 6 years ago that Roosevelt knew about the impending attack in advance, bmacsys had an absolute hissy fit. My how times have changed. :-\
-
The US knew, or was at least warned about the impending attack on Pearl Harbor days prior. After that happened, my 17 year old grandfather enlisted in the navy and fought in the south pacific. Americans were fucking animals back then. And I mean that in a good way.
I thought it was a possible contingency that we were worried about happening anyway? And for some reason in the 30's we let the japs know that?
-
I thought it was a possible contingency that we were worried about happening anyway? And for some reason in the 30's we let the japs know that?
A few years ago 240 shared an interesting perspective on this... y'all might want to drag him into this discussion.
-
I just watched something on the military channel, and they said that there was a code word on the Japanese radio that was for N attack(can't remember what it was) and it was heard a few days prior. Also, the British spotted their fleet a few days earlier in in the pacific and warned. And, I believe in Rise and Fall of the Third Reich, they reference it. I don't think it was a huge conspiracy, just something our people dusted off as a low level threat. With the embargo we put on them, I don't know how we thought that though.
-
I just watched something on the military channel, and they said that there was a code word on the Japanese radio that was for N attack(can't remember what it was) and it was heard a few days prior. Also, the British spotted their fleet a few days earlier in in the pacific and warned. And, I believe in Rise and Fall of the Third Reich, they reference it. I don't think it was a huge conspiracy, just something our people dusted off as a low level threat. With the embargo we put on them, I don't know how we thought that though.
LOL, You didn't. The embargo you put on them was designed to bring about the very attack in the first place.
That was what Roosevelt wanted... something to enrage Americans and manipulate their support for war.
While everyone else was fighting, America was on the sidelines, and Prescott Bush was financing hitler every step of the way.
-
The US knew, or was at least warned about the impending attack on Pearl Harbor days prior. After that happened, my 17 year old grandfather enlisted in the navy and fought in the south pacific. Americans were fucking animals back then. And I mean that in a good way.
gotta disagree on this one...if ANY U.S. president knew of something like that and did nothing that would be high treason
-
I just watched something on the military channel, and they said that there was a code word on the Japanese radio that was for N attack(can't remember what it was) and it was heard a few days prior. Also, the British spotted their fleet a few days earlier in in the pacific and warned. And, I believe in Rise and Fall of the Third Reich, they reference it. I don't think it was a huge conspiracy, just something our people dusted off as a low level threat. With the embargo we put on them, I don't know how we thought that though.
I agree with you on this one...it was sort of a major fuck-up...just like 9/11...had a feeling about something going to happen but didn't put together all the clues in time
-
I agree with you on this one...it was sort of a major fuck-up...just like 9/11...had a feeling about something going to happen but didn't put together all the clues in time
Oh, no doubt. I don't think the government knew, and hoped for it to happen so that they could enter the war. Hindsight is always 20/20, I'm sure there are threats that get the dust off on a daily basis. But I do think that some of these high officials believed it was coming in the few days before, but you can't convince everybody of your own beliefs. It's just a good thing that things shook out the way they did, and our fleet wasn't totally crippled, and we blasted those fools to the stone age, and gave em some democracy.
-
Oh, no doubt. I don't think the government knew, and hoped for it to happen so that they could enter the war. Hindsight is always 20/20, I'm sure there are threats that get the dust off on a daily basis. But I do think that some of these high officials believed it was coming in the few days before, but you can't convince everybody of your own beliefs. It's just a good thing that things shook out the way they did, and our fleet wasn't totally crippled, and we blasted those fools to the stone age, and gave em some democracy.
And let us remember that this was back in the 40's so take into account the communication/surveillance technology at the time.
From spotting a warship or 2, to possibly seeing a submarine, intermittent radio traffic... this was all handled by technology that is in the stone age compared to what we have now.
-
watching a show on hitler/himler on military channel...
fascinating... they were able to assassinate him in his vacation home with sniper/explosive rounds, but decided against it.
The Allies were scared Hitler would be replaced with a leader that was actually competent in the military sense. He was doing a fine job losing the war on his own.
-
Now that we are 70 or so years after his reign, and most who had to deal with him are dead, how will he be remembered? What I wonder, is that will he eventually just be remembered as a conqueror, or will the atrocities he committed keep with his legacy? Will he be remembered with the likes of Napoleon and Julius Caesar , or something all on his own?
USA woulda helped europe ahead 70 years, by siding the adolf.
Maybe rest of world too.
-
gotta disagree on this one...if ANY U.S. president knew of something like that and did nothing that would be high treason
HUH?! ???
Uh... I hate to break it to you André, but high treason was committed, ...by a whole lotta people including the POTUS
-
LOL, You didn't. The embargo you put on them was designed to bring about the very attack in the first place.
That was what Roosevelt wanted... something to enrage Americans and manipulate their support for war.
While everyone else was fighting, America was on the sidelines, and Prescott Bush was financing hitler every step of the way.
This.
-
Now that we are 70 or so years after his reign, and most who had to deal with him are dead, how will he be remembered? What I wonder, is that will he eventually just be remembered as a conqueror, or will the atrocities he committed keep with his legacy? Will he be remembered with the likes of Napoleon and Julius Caesar , or something all on his own?
He is remembered as the An Evil Demigod......, who took an impoverished country...........built it up, and destroyed it in a period of twelve years.....!!!....With much death, destruction left in his wake. A self absorbed, egocentric nightmare, who should have been aborted....."Not that I am bitter"!!!!
-
It's easy to second guess Hitler's political and military decisions today in retrospect and viewed through the prism of over 60 years of history written by the so-called "victors," who all have the same politically correct agenda. It's all revisionist history though.
The world went through a lot of suffering so a small country could be created in the middle east, out of the ashes of WWII, in 1948.
you think wwII happpened so they could create Israel... not that Israel hapoened BECAUSE of WWII?
that seems revisionist to me.
-
Don't forget that we have more footage of Hitler and his speeches than any of those other "bad guys" in history.
He recorded himself for posterity and that has left us with full visuals of his rantings.
The fact we can view him full on is part of what gives us such disdain for him.
-
It's sometimes hard to conclude that Hitler was any worse than many of the World's other leaders, who've left millions of casualties in their wakes as well. It tends to depend from whose perspective the story is told.
-
Until the lion has his own historian, tales of the hunt will always glorify the hunter
~ Ancient African Proverb
-
Dang, that was fast. LOL! Thanks OzmO. :)
-
Of course it does. The victors write the history.
This is not something that happened 500 years ago or so. We have relatives that were there. They aren't rewriting history.
Look. Israel was a by product of something that was started by a crazy group of people.
That's all there is to it.
-
It's easy to second guess Hitler's political and military decisions today in retrospect and viewed through the prism of over 60 years of history written by the so-called "victors," who all have the same politically correct agenda. It's all revisionist history though.
The world went through a lot of suffering so a small country could be created in the middle east, out of the ashes of WWII, in 1948.
So you are saying the whole WW2 was for the sole purpose of creating Israel?
-
The US knew, or was at least warned about the impending attack on Pearl Harbor days prior. After that happened, my 17 year old grandfather enlisted in the navy and fought in the south pacific. Americans were fucking animals back then. And I mean that in a good way.
How so?
We get warnings of many things all the time. How did we know the exact time and place the Japs were going to attack?
BTW it was common place thought in 1941 that the Japs were going to attack us.
-
It's easy to second guess Hitler's political and military decisions today in retrospect and viewed through the prism of over 60 years of history written by the so-called "victors," who all have the same politically correct agenda. It's all revisionist history though.
The world went through a lot of suffering so a small country could be created in the middle east, out of the ashes of WWII, in 1948.
Yeah anybody would have gassed those jews ::)
-
Yeah anybody would have gassed those jews ::)
So many people hate the Jews, so much so that only CT's can explain them.
-
Don't forget that we have more footage of Hitler and his speeches than any of those other "bad guys" in history.
He recorded himself for posterity and that has left us with full visuals of his rantings.
The fact we can view him full on is part of what gives us such disdain for him.
This is true but we really don't have any footage or sound from personal meetings he had with his inner circle or with world leaders or his military. No one today knows exactly what Hitler sounded like when speaking normally in everyday language...his speeches were depicting him speaking loudly and forcefully...