• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Did We Misunderstand Hitler?

Jack Hays said:
Yes. And it had nothing to do with WW2.........................
Click to expand...
In the combobulated logic of many Germans the loss of territory that was "ceded" to the new republic (Poland) as a result of the 1918 defeat, was a package in the overall parcel of reasons for WW2.

Most had long since forgotten the despicable partitions of over a century earlier or, if they remembered their history, were convinced that the partitions had been justified anyway. On account of deeming the lands to always having been German.

Anything that happened before the order of the Teutonic Knights conveniently left to the mists of history.
 
Abbazorkzog said:
They were essentially the modern day Spartans - the Nazis. The Spartans would determine whether or not a newborn infant was racially pure or not, and if it was not - for example, if it had any form of abnormalities (underweight, deformities, sickly, etc) it would be cast off a mountain to die.
I have a twisted, self-loathing sort-of respect for the Nazis and Hitler. He was unequivocally a strong leader and a good head-of-state, and the Nazis were systematic and damn-near mathematically-methodical in their controlled, directed man-made attempt at rendering entire demographics, cultures and gene-pools of people extinct.
Click to expand...

They were something alright. The world would be a much uglier place though if they had won. Ironic to me is that Hitler himself was no Aryan, and quite possibly a fraction Jewish.
 
Jack Hays said:
There was going to be a second war no matter what. And yes, the Germans started WW1.
Click to expand...
Well, by now historians have come to address the greater complexities of everything that led to WW1.

No doubt Germany's role was critical to the beginning of that war but putting the whole responsibility at the Kaiser's doorstep would be an oversimplification.
 
Chagos said:
Well, by now historians have come to address the greater complexities of everything that led to WW1.

No doubt Germany's role was critical to the beginning of that war but putting the whole responsibility at the Kaiser's doorstep would be an oversimplification.
Click to expand...

Nah. It was the Germans.

[h=3]Germany's Aims in the First World War: Fritz Fischer, Hajo ...[/h]www.amazon.com › ... › Politics & Government


Amazon.com, Inc.


Fritz Fisher "Germany's War Aims in the First World War" dwells on the tremendous amount of material collected primarily from the archives of the Central powers ...
 
calamity said:
They were something alright. The world would be a much uglier place though if they had won. Ironic to me is that Hitler himself was no Aryan, and quite possibly a fraction Jewish.
Click to expand...
That's long since been cleared up, Hitler was not Jewish in the sense of any bloodline.
 
Jack Hays said:
Germany got what they deserved at Versailles. They started WW1, they paid the price.
Click to expand...

Actually, they got far worse than what the deserved. It'd be like if you totaled your Prius, and the insurance company decided to up your premium to $5,000 a month. The forced "deal" they gave Germany caused widespread poverty and hyper-inflation in Germany.
 
Velvet Elvis said:
Actually, they got far worse than what the deserved. It'd be like if you totaled your Prius, and the insurance company decided to up your premium to $5,000 a month. The forced "deal" they gave Germany caused widespread poverty and hyper-inflation in Germany.
Click to expand...

Having brought mass death and destruction on Europe, the Germans deserved every bit of that.
 
Jack Hays said:
Nah. It was the Germans.

[h=3]Germany's Aims in the First World War: Fritz Fischer, Hajo ...[/h]www.amazon.com › ... › Politics & Government


Amazon.com, Inc.


Fritz Fisher "Germany's War Aims in the First World War" dwells on the tremendous amount of material collected primarily from the archives of the Central powers ...
Click to expand...
That deals with ambitions and one can speculate that had a war not started in 1914, it might well have happened later.

My point is that everybody involved was incapable of foreseeing the consequences and thus stumbled from rampant bravado into the subsequent catastrophe. There are plenty of accounts of especially the Kaiser and the Czar, seeing where the general bluffing was leading, having tried to stop at the last moment but the politicos edging them on.

France's Poincaré was a big pusher for war.
 
Chagos said:
That deals with ambitions and one can speculate that had a war not started in 1914, it might well have happened later.

My point is that everybody involved was incapable of foreseeing the consequences and thus stumbled from rampant bravado into the subsequent catastrophe. There are plenty of accounts of especially the Kaiser and the Czar, seeing where the general bluffing was leading, having tried to stop at the last moment but the politicos edging them on.

France's Poincaré was a big pusher for war.
Click to expand...

The Germans wanted the war, and saw the assassination as an opportunity.
 
Jack Hays said:
The Germans wanted the war, and saw the assassination as an opportunity.
Click to expand...

That is not the same as actually starting it.
There would be no war if the Serbians had not assassinated Franz Ferdinand, that is simply a fact, one you cannot challenge.
 
Abbazorkzog said:
That is not the same as actually starting it.
There would be no war if the Serbians had not assassinated Franz Ferdinand, that is simply a fact, one you cannot challenge.
Click to expand...

The Serbian assassination would not have led to war had the Germans not seized the opportunity.
 
Jack Hays said:
Yes. An attempt to revise Fischer. I'm not persuaded.
Click to expand...
I'm not persuaded either way.

What also never persuades me completely is the history of victors. The truth, as so often, is something from everything.

What I'm pretty certain of is that if WW2 had not happened in all its foulness from the German side, a less frenzied look at the roles that all participants played in not preventing WW1 would long since have been easier.

And less frenzied in wishing to apply simplification on to complexites.
 
Chagos said:
I'm not persuaded either way.

What also never persuades me completely is the history of victors. The truth, as so often, is something from everything.

What I'm pretty certain of is that if WW2 had not happened in all its foulness from the German side, a less frenzied look at the roles that all participants played in not preventing WW1 would long since have been easier.

And less frenzied in wishing to apply simplification on to complexites.
Click to expand...

Fischer does not write as a victor. He is a German writing about Germany.
 
Jack Hays said:
Having brought mass death and destruction on Europe, the Germans deserved every bit of that.
Click to expand...

Because England, France and Russia didn't do any fighting. It was all Germany's fault.

:roll:
 
Tigerace117 said:
Because England, France and Russia didn't do any fighting. It was all Germany's fault.

:roll:
Click to expand...

Great Britain, France and Russia defended themselves against Germany and Austria-Hungary. Had the Germans not wanted war there would have been no war.
 
I don't think we misunderstood him, military conquest and genocide being hardly ambiguous. His intentions, if not quite his motives, were self-evident. He committed his objectives to print, for all to see.

A brilliant, gifted man who employed his facilities to nefarious ends. He did what he did because he could and because the times were opportune. There were likely millions across Europe, afflicted with a similar pathology, if lacking his ability.
 
Jack Hays said:
Great Britain, France and Russia defended themselves against Germany and Austria-Hungary. Had the Germans not wanted war there would have been no war.
Click to expand...

Frankly, that's not true. England only joined the war after the Germans pushed through Belgium. Russia and France had been trying to keep the Germans from unifying for years.
 
Tigerace117 said:
Frankly, that's not true. England only joined the war after the Germans pushed through Belgium. Russia and France had been trying to keep the Germans from unifying for years.
Click to expand...

Ahem. Germany had been unified since 1871. Great Britain joined because of alliance obligation in the face of German aggression.
 
Jack Hays said:
Great Britain, France and Russia defended themselves against Germany and Austria-Hungary. Had the Germans not wanted war there would have been no war.
Click to expand...

Russia was the instigator, diving into Serbia when the Austria-Hungarians retaliated there after the assassination of the Archduke. The Germans were allied with them, and decided to invade Louxemburg and Belgium, which resulted in war with France. The Brits, an Empire in their own right at the time, decided to declare war on Germany.

Once Germany looked East, the Russians ended up getting their asses beat, and then had a revolution. The Germans had the upper hand in the West after that, at least until the US got involved. By then, however, they had revolution problems of their own, which is why they retreated and sued for peace.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom