Who Started World War II?

[August]

Originally Posted by Captain Jeff

So what did we learn from World War 2?

How to mass produce penicillin.

[u crank]

Originally Posted by August

How to mass produce penicillin.

Now that's progress.

[Fahnenbohn]

Originally Posted by Captain Jeff

Of course nobody wants to admit that their country started World War 2. Why would anyone want to think their parents/grandparents had a hand in starting the bloodiest event in human history?

Errr. I'm from France ... But yes, many guys here are from Britain or USA ...

Originally Posted by Captain Jeff

The real question is what did we learn from it. Look at the world today. There's always a war somewhere. We have multiple nations worried about migrants because their people don't want to live with those "other" people. We have financial crisis' that can't seem to be solved and money problems can lead to anger and hate.

Yes, this is a very interesting question ! Our world is ruled by those who won against the Third Reich. And here is the result. The international finance and war of democracies are spreading chaos and misery everywhere.

Also, read my conclusion at the end of my second document.

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/show...&postcount=641

Originally Posted by Fahnenbohn

If you are thinking about National-Socialism, this is not an ideology.

I'm not sure if I should or .
I know one thing, F.'s fantasies are entertaining.
I'd love to hear your point of view about, for example, Treblinka, but I guess that would fall under "discussing the holocaust", and in your case, denying it, which is unfortunately a red flag even on Subsim.

[Fahnenbohn]

Originally Posted by u crank

What is it then?

That : http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/show...&postcount=204

Oh, I guess you never wondered about your own political system ...

[u crank]

Originally Posted by Fahnenbohn

Our world is ruled by those who won against the Third Reich.

You say that as if Nazism is some kind of force for the good of mankind. There is not one shred of evidence for this. There is a mountain of evidence to the contrary. Time to lay it all on the table. Enlighten us Herr Fahnenbohn.

[Fahnenbohn]

Originally Posted by u crank

There is a mountain of evidence to the contrary.

You wanted to say : a mountain of propaganda ? Yes, sure.

We could for example make a comparison on how black people was treated in USA and in Germany ...

From the Official German Book published after the Olympic games (1936) :





Germans were really some horrible hateful racists ! ...

[u crank]

Originally Posted by Fahnenbohn

Yes, sure. One thing : Nazism was NOT an ideology, but a pragmatic policy .....

I call it rule by gangsters plain and simple. If your opponent disagrees with you kill him or put him in prison. Totalitarianism. Nothing less. And you like this?

[Rockin Robbins]

Duplicate

[Fahnenbohn]

Originally Posted by u crank

If your opponent disagrees with you kill him or put him in prison.

You're talking about the communists ? They were preparing a violent revolution. So, they had to be locked up in the interests of public safety. Most of the German communists became nazis when they saw how great was the change in Germany.

[Rockin Robbins]

Careful what you say to trap yourself there Fahrendude.

[Oberon]

Originally Posted by Fahnenbohn

You're talking about the communists ? They were preparing a violent revolution. So, they had to be locked up in the interests of public safety. Most of the German communists became nazis when they saw how great was the change in Germany.

As opposed to the completely bloodless way that the National Socialist party came to power....

[Cybermat47]

Originally Posted by Fahnenbohn

Germans were really some horrible hateful racists ! ...

Those are pictures of ordinary Germans, not Nazis.

Find some proof that Hitler tolerated all ethncities, and you might make a point.

[Sailor Steve]

Near the beginning of all this, you said:

Originally Posted by Fahnenbohn

OK, no problem ! As I told you in PM, I'm honestly searching the truth, and I'm open to the debate.

Everything you've said since then has been the opposite. You have the truth, and every other source is lying. To me this is sounding more and more like every other conspiracy theory I've seen, from governments hiding UFOs to the Kennedy assassination to 9/11. Everything that disagrees with you is propaganda. Only your sources are honest.

If England and France had not declared war, do you really think Hitler would have set Poland free? Things he himself said indicate the opposite. They've been quoted, and you dismissed them.

I also notice you tend to not answer others except to criticize their sources. I pointed out that the Mussolini peace plan was presented after Germany invaded Poland. This makes the claim that Britain and France ignored the offer to be dishonest at best. They had a treaty with Poland, and they honored it. Invading another country and then offering peace is backwards.

All your sources try to hide the bottom line I pointed out long ago. Nobody twisted Hitler's arm and forced him to invade Poland. Documented talks between him and his generals has shown that the invasion was planned weeks before the actual event. It's probable that he expected no resistance from the Allies, just as he got none when he forced Czechoslovakia into submission. Trying to make it look like the other side's fault is diverting attention from the truth. Hitler invaded Poland. That's the long and the short of it.

[Catfish]

For what it's worth, if he wants to present evidence or unpublished material, why not, go on. Why a time limit? Translating those texts sure takes time. And, does anyone have to be afraid of its contents?

The documents are interesting enough, however all boils down to when those "offers of peace" from Italy or whoever came, and it was pretty useless to propose that after there were troops already in Poland.
And, like the reeducation, you also should not believe all what Hitler said, to make the german people believe in his righteousness to attack Poland, errm defend Germany i meant
"Seit 5:45 wird jetzt zurueck [sic!] geschossen"

Hitler wanted to go for Russia right from the beginning, and just because of that he wanted no peace with Russia. Unless Stalin would have given him some big chunks of land voluntarily, which i somehow .. doubt.

A peacefully united Europe? I assume Hitler did not really want to go to war in the west, but he had strategically only one chance to prevent a two-front war like in WW1, after England declaring war. And there were of course already plans for that, just in case. Like the US having plans for Canada, as we now know.
So it may have been England that made it a worldwide war, out of a locally restricted one like Hitler had tried, alright.

But assuming Hitler wanted peace with Russia, Poland or the jews is "a bit" ridiculous though.