Dresden marks anniversary of WWII bombings

[Catfish]

Originally Posted by tater

The total number of civilians killed by allied bombing adds up to noise just compared to the axis murder of civilians under their direct control.

Up to 5 million civilians killed by german troops in WW2, right. Only a tenth (about 500,000+ civilians) in Iraq, up to now. But then US soldiers call them "sand ******s" - somehow reminds me of people defined as "inferior", by a "superior" ... race ? Nation ?
I really doubt anyone has learned anything from history, other than being self-righteous and hypocritic while only seeing others committing war crimes, or crimes against humanity. What the US did to its own US people of japanese origin in WW2, deserves an own monument of shame.

The axis was in complete control. THEY started the war, it was their choice to wait to surrender as long as they did. Their surrender was long since a foregone conclusion, and they in fact did so, so the poor timing (not quitting before they were bombed into the stone age) is their own fault.

It was without doubt good, that Hitler and this arrogant policy against the "Untermenschen" was stopped. However to say that Hitler started the world war ? He surely did not want it, he had indeed believed England would not join the war after the invasion of Poland, however it did declare war - "Total Germany" - like England had done in 1914 initiating the first world war, after the german invasion of Belgium.

Greetings,
Catfish

[Raptor1]

Originally Posted by Catfish

It was without doubt good, that Hitler and this arrogant policy against the "Untermenschen" was stopped. However to say that Hitler started the world war ? He surely did not want it, he had indeed believed England would not join the war after the invasion of Poland, however it did declare war - "Total Germany" - like England had done in 1914, after the german invasion of Belgium.

Greetings,
Catfish

Because obviously if he was so opposed to a world war the most sensible thing to do was to invade neutral countries like Norway, Belgium, the Netherlands, Yugoslavia, the Soviet Union...

[Catfish]

Originally Posted by Raptor1

Because obviously if he was so opposed to a world war the most sensible thing to do was to invade neutral countries like Norway, Belgium, the Netherlands, Yugoslavia, the Soviet Union...

You are kidding, right ?
Hitler wanted to go for Russia all the time, this is why Poland had to be overrun - b.t.w. with the help of England's later ally, Mr. Stalin (who was not so shy in killing millions of civilians and jews himself). Since Poland was divided, between Hitler and Stalin, England (and France) declared war to Germany because of this, but not to Russia. Astonishing, isn't it.

So England had declared war to Germany along with France, after the invasion of Poland, because of the treaties undersigned. But France and England did not do anything to help Poland, they were not able to, in this so-called phony war.
FInally, to evade a trench situation like in WW1 Hitler then used the Blitzkrieg tactics to go for France right away - while overrunning Belgium and the Netherlands - strategically right but tactically impossible as his own generals said - but he succeeded. And his own generals were just muzzled, by their Fuehrer's victories.

Norway was invaded because England had exactly this in mind, to get the iron mines and steel factories, only Germany was a tad faster.
England AND Germany had been good trade partners to Norway, but it would not have liked either invasion for sure.

Hitler sure was an unsympathetic lunatic, but i would place Stalin not very far from him.

Greetings,
Catfish

[Raptor1]

Originally Posted by Catfish

You are kidding, right ?
Hitler wanted to go for Russia all the time, this is why Poland had to be overrun - b.t.w. with the help of England's later ally, Mr. Stalin (who was not so shy in killing millions of civilians and jews himself). Since Poland was divided, between Hitler and Stalin, England (and France) declared war to Germany because of this, but not to Russia. Astonishing, isn't it.

That may be so, but if Hitler had wanted to invade the Soviet Union from the start, he must've been willing to start a world war, which he did. Britain's declaration of war has little to do with the global nature of the war.

Originally Posted by Catfish

So England had declared war to Germany along with France, after the invasion of Poland, because of the treaties undersigned. But France and England did not do anything to help Poland, they were not able to, in this so-called phony war.
FInally, to evade a trench situation like in WW1 Hitler then used the Blitzkrieg tactics to go for France right away - while overrunning Belgium and the Netherlands - strategically right but tactically impossible as his own generals said - but he succeeded. And his own generals were just muzzled, by their Fuehrer's victories.

I'm aware of the history of the start of the war. You are both grossly overestimating the effect of the Blitzkrieg itself and Hitler's involvement in it. While the Blitzkrieg was very important to the outcome of the campaign, it was France's highly dubious operational decisions that left them completely exposed that were the most decisive factor in the success of the German invasion. As for Hitler, he had very little to do with the development of the doctrine associated with Blitzkrieg or with the success of the invasion. Hell, there were times when the German field commanders had to deviate from the plan and circumvent or even disobey orders because they had been told to halt, largely because of Hitler's meddling, when the French lines were collapsing.

Now, when Hitler did take direct command of the German army's operational planning, then you get disasters such as Fall Blau, Operation Citadel, Normandy and Operation Bagration.

Originally Posted by Catfish

Norway was invaded because England had exactly this in mind, to get the iron mines and steel factories, only Germany was a tad faster.
England AND Germany had been good trade partners to Norway, but it would not have liked either invasion for sure.

That's a really long debate which I will not get into at the moment. Regardless of Norway, Hitler did a very poor job at preventing the European war from expanding massively.

[Takeda Shingen]

I'm never quite sure how to reply to a thread like this. The Second World War was a watershed moment for the world, and changed our collective perception of right and wrong, good and bad, forever. That being said, I think that the best way to address an anniversary such as this is with regret. I regret that, in the past days before most of our births, your government and our's decided to make themselves into enemies. I have met a countless number of Germans on this forum whom I respect deeply and condsider to be my friends. I have learned much from you, and mourn the loss of life that is shared in our common past.

[Oberon]

Originally Posted by Takeda Shingen

I'm never quite sure how to reply to a thread like this. The Second World War was a watershed moment for the world, and changed our collective perception of right and wrong, good and bad, forever. That being said, I think that the best way to address an anniversary such as this is with regret. I regret that, in the past days before most of our births, your government and our's decided to make themselves into enemies. I have met a countless number of Germans on this forum whom I respect deeply and condsider to be my friends. I have learned much from you, and mourn the loss of life that is shared in our common past.

This...so very much this. To be honest to go into discussions of what when why and who, whilst entertaining, does deviate from the point of this topic which is to regret what happened...and one would hope learn from it...

[Catfish]

Originally Posted by Takeda Shingen

... The Second World War was a watershed moment for the world, and changed our collective perception of right and wrong, good and bad, forever. That being said, I think that the best way to address an anniversary such as this is with regret. I regret that, in the past days before most of our births, your government and our's decided to make themselves into enemies. I have met a countless number of Germans on this forum whom I respect deeply and condsider to be my friends. I have learned much from you, and mourn the loss of life that is shared in our common past.

Wow this was ... touching
Great post, thanks.

[tater]

Every excess death in Europe (and North Africa) during WW2 was Germany's fault. On all sides. There were 6 million killed in the camps alone. More civilians elsewhere. Plus all troops killed on all sides. 25 million is closer to the mark, not 5 million. The total deaths to allied bombing (all theaters) were ~600,000.

The country that starts the war gets credit for all deaths. It's like a robbery. A guy robs a store, and someone in the back room has a heart attack and dies (completely unaware the robbery is going on). The robber is now charged with murder since a death occurred during the commission of a crime.

Japan killed maybe 10 million total.

Regarding Iraq, the war started when Iraq invaded Kuwait (the intervening years were a cease-fire that could have legitimately gone hot the very first time they so much as turned on a radar). Iraq is responsible for the outcome.

Regarding Iraq, the war started when Iraq invaded Kuwait (the intervening years were a cease-fire that could have legitimately gone hot the very first time they so much as turned on a radar).

Wow

[tater]

Originally Posted by Catfish

It was without doubt good, that Hitler and this arrogant policy against the "Untermenschen" was stopped. However to say that Hitler started the world war ? He surely did not want it, he had indeed believed England would not join the war after the invasion of Poland, however it did declare war - "Total Germany" - like England had done in 1914 initiating the first world war, after the german invasion of Belgium.

Wow.

[MH]

This :

Originally Posted by Catfish

Up to 5 million civilians killed by german troops in WW2, right. Only a tenth (about 500,000+ civilians) in Iraq, up to now. But then US soldiers call them "sand ******s" - somehow reminds me of people defined as "inferior", by a "superior" ... race ? Nation ?
I really doubt anyone has learned anything from history, other than being self-righteous and hypocritic while only seeing others committing war crimes, or crimes against humanity. What the US did to its own US people of japanese origin in WW2, deserves an own monument of shame.

vs that:

Originally Posted by Catfish

It was without doubt good, that Hitler and this arrogant policy against the "Untermenschen" was stopped. However to say that Hitler started the world war ? He surely did not want it, he had indeed believed England would not join the war after the invasion of Poland, however it did declare war - "Total Germany" - like England had done in 1914 initiating the first world war, after the german invasion of Belgium.

Greetings,
Catfish

Hitler wasnt so bad.
World domination of master race slavery concentration camps mass murder on industrial scale-yes Hitler was just another guy that did not win.
Damn the English who started ww2.

[Catfish]

Originally Posted by MH

Hitler wasnt so bad.
World domination of master race slavery concentration camps mass murder on industrial scale-yes Hitler was just another guy that did not win.
Damn the English who started ww2.

Certainly Hitler was a mass murderer in an industrial scale, having queer dreams about a master race etc. etc. we know all that.

But he did not want world domination, he wanted Russia. It was good that England declared war, and France - so why damn them ? - but they did, not Hitler. Just a correction. It was necessary, no doubt.

Greetings,
Catfish