|
Real0ne -> RE: Pearl Harbor Day (12/25/2015 10:22:34 AM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: NorthernGent
quote:
ORIGINAL: Real0ne
quote:
ORIGINAL: NorthernGent
I didn't make a claim. You did. Your claim was/is that 'Hitler' was set up.
Whaddya mean? Someone smuggled a huge arsenal into Germany without their knowledge and forced them to use them?
At this juncture I have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.
Do you realise that the Germans had invested an inordinate amount of money in armaments and needed a return to prevent it being a complete waste of a huge amount of money and destabilising the whole economy?
but Gent, this:
quote:
ORIGINAL: NorthernGent
No one set Hitler up, he was an idiot fantasist who did that off his own back.
is a claim.
a claim you left entirely unsupported.
No, it was your claim and a rebuttal on my part.
Part of the rationale for your claim was that Hitler made peace feelers towards Britain.
I have already told you that there were a couple of reasons for this:
Firstly, his designs were not really towards Britain or France. He was looking East. But, if he needed to take out Britain and France to do what he felt he had to do in the East then he was more than prepared to do so. He fought during WW1 so was well aware of the difficulties presented by fighting a war on two fronts. But, something had to give: either Britain and France accepted Germany's 'right' to subjugate Central and Eastern Europe, which was never going to happen, or Germany took out both France and Germany. Whichever Hitler and associates felt they had to do.
Secondly, he held huge admiration for the English for various reasons and imagined a world where Britain and Germany were allies and the two strongest powers in the world. But, this involved Britain ignoring Germany's right to control of the continent, which was never going to happen - only in Hitler's fantasies.
I have also told you that Germany needed a war in 1939. All of that money they had spent on armaments was generating no return. The economy was about to suffer as a result.
And, I've mentioned that it was a constant within the Nazi Party philosophy, from their inception, that Slavs were inferior to them and Germany's rightful destiny was to be their masters. Conquest in the East was at the heart of both their domestic and foreign policy - and once they got into power it was only a matter of time before they invaded countries to meet this goal. Which they did.
Whaddya want? An essay?
In terms of Britain's role and meddling. Britain's foreign policy towards continental Europe was to keep out of their wars but ensure a balance of power in the region. That had always been the case. The only time we ever got involved was when one power threatened to dominate the continent, e.g. Napoleon and the Nazis and the Kaiser; and I think there is only one time we have sent an army to Europe at the outset of war and that was WW1 - which tells you that war in continental Europe was not for us. Why would it be? There was nothing for us in continental Europe - we were a commercial nation who looked for places around the world to trade. There were countless wars in Europe that Britain did not get involved in - hundreds.
In terms of Britain's dealings with Hitler. Britain negotiated with the Nazis when many other nations were calling for Britain to declare war on them. We accepted his position that Germany should have former German lands back, those populated with Germans, when many other nations didn't. It was a popular feeling here among the people and the Government that Germans wanting to be part of Germany is fair enough and so what? Who cares?
So, in this instance, far from meddling, Britain stood pretty much alone in agreement with Germany that Germans within Germany wasn't a problem when other nations were calling for us to clamp down on them.
It only became a problem for us when they moved away from the 'Germans in Germany' position. This happened when they annexed the remainder of Czechoslovakia in 1938, which was made up of non-Germans. It was at this point that we reasoned that the Nazi Party were being less than honest with the 'Germans in Germany' position and that is when we began to prepare for war. The invasion of Poland was merely the tip of the iceberg.
What you fail to grasp is that when you state the contrary you enter a counter claim. sheez
Hitlers reason for making peace is irellevant, the point is that HE DID and continued to plead for peace and BRITIAN not only REFUSED to come to the table but it UNDERMINED the peace process. Your attorney general hartwig even recogised it, as well as that hilter who you want to label a lunatic fanatic WAS RIGHT.
Then you go on to throw the results over the course of 4 years into single event in pretense dominating the all of eurpoe and russia was the hitlers stategy from the very beginning when the evidence shows it was CLEARLY NOT.
While you can say that about the US as our military equipment becomes outdated every 20 years, yes we need a war to get rid of it so we can build new and better ways to kill and subjegate the world, however this is not the case with hitler, he was under threat from other nations and under pressure from his own people to gain back the colonies they lost through the bullshit versailles treaty orchestrated BY THE MEDDLING BRITISH, dulles and davis (a pure and obvious conflict in interests) and to top it off germany was NOT even allowed to have any of their representatives present, but you seem to sweep that aside to change the context in favor of the meddling perps whos goal was to break germanys back economically.
The fanatics as always are the BRITS with their arrogant approach and desire to govern the world on behalf of the old world aristocracies and the banks without the consent of the governed but insterad at gun point until every single peson capitulates. Just like america.
Its easy to come to your conclusion if you cherry pick through the facts to make your case rather than the mitigating circumstances on hitlers and germanys side of the argument. When you take everything into consideration your claim falls apart. This is all about oppression and money and I already posted the evidence proving such that you have neither denied nor attempted to refute.
|
|
|
|
