Adolf Hitler and the side of History never before seen.

Discussion in 'General Photos & Multimedia' started by Desert Fox, Feb 18, 2013.

  1. Hu Songshan

    Hu Songshan INT'L MOD

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2011
    Messages:
    3,700
    Ratings:
    +3 / 3,673 / -0
    Country:
    China
    Location:
    China
    Doubtful on that, Japan was beaten by the Soviet Union at Khalkhin Gol and Lake Khasan, in the far east Stalin kept at 70-75 divisions much more then Japan had in their entire army.
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 4
  2. lemurian

    lemurian FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2010
    Messages:
    228
    Ratings:
    +0 / 102 / -0
    That would have been a war on two fronts-a cardinal mistake. And no, the Wehrmacht would simply have collapsed in that case. You have to remember that German Military thinking was still shaped by the memories of WWI, where they did fight a two front war. The Molotov-Ribbentrop pact allowed Hitler the strategic freedom to concentrate on a single front.

    Hitler had a great deal of respect for the British and what they had done in India. He wanted the German Lebensraum in the East to be based on the British Empire. As for the French, Hitler simply wanted to crush them.

    In 1941, Hitler could argue that the Western front was dead. France was defeated, Britain was cowed down. The victory over France had given Hitler new respect among his generals. Was the invasion of SU a mistake? A lot of Hitler's Generals thought so too. Hitler then just rattled off economic figures and stated that my generals knew nothing of the economic aspects of war.
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 3
  3. Chinese-Dragon

    Chinese-Dragon PDF THINK TANK: ANALYST

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2010
    Messages:
    26,443
    Ratings:
    +32 / 42,305 / -0
    Country:
    China
    Location:
    China
    By attacking the Soviet Union, Hitler MADE it a war on two fronts.

    The war on the Western front was obviously not "won" at that time. Sure he had taken a lot of territory and forced his opponents down, but the war on the Western front certainly wasn't over, as the following years proved.
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 1
  4. Desert Fox

    Desert Fox SENIOR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2010
    Messages:
    6,729
    Ratings:
    +3 / 8,490 / -7
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    Pakistan
    But there's a difference, a very big difference. All of the allied violations of sovereignty of neutral nations during the war are either justified or shoved under the rugs.

    Hitler invaded Belgium, Norway, Denmark, Netherlands because he was a evil genius who wanted to take over the world.

    While everything the Allies and Soviet union did was completely justified.

    Oh, Stalin invaded Finland, Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, and Moldova to spread Marx's and Lenin's dream of equality and egalitarianism, which is why when the German armies steam rolled through these countries on their way to moscow the populace welcomed them as liberators and the local NKVD bosses were hanging from trees.


    Hitler didn't create a "superpower", Soviet Union suffered immeasurable losses during the war, as Stalin Himself put it; "Equal to 4 Hiroshima's and Nagasaki's", i though personally believe it was more than that.

    General Patton, staunch anti-communist, when encountering the Soviet armies immediately saw their weaknesses and knew the Western allies could beat them back to the original Russian boundaries within a year or two, the red army was living off of food that it captured since Ukraine, the breadbasket, had been ravaged by war. But if given time the red army was more than capable of taking on the Western allies if given the chance. In other words the Soviet were given the space to breath in order to reequip and build up their strength.

    He was smart, which is why his Western flank in mainland Europe was secure for 4 years.
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 3
  5. lemurian

    lemurian FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2010
    Messages:
    228
    Ratings:
    +0 / 102 / -0
    Quite so.. Britain was a true sea power, and the only scenario in which Battle of Britain might have been won was by the utter domination of the Luftwaffe over the British isles. Here, the Luftwaffe disappointed Hitler. Like Napoleon before him, unable to finish off the British, Hitler's eyes turned east.
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 2
  6. MastanKhan

    MastanKhan PDF VETERAN

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2005
    Messages:
    6,620
    Ratings:
    +18 / 10,579 / -1
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    United States
    Hi,

    So what was wrong with Ghengis Khan!!!!!!!!
     
  7. Chinese-Dragon

    Chinese-Dragon PDF THINK TANK: ANALYST

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2010
    Messages:
    26,443
    Ratings:
    +32 / 42,305 / -0
    Country:
    China
    Location:
    China
    Here is an interesting interactive map of Europe during WW2:

    World War II Interactive Map

    (Click on the dates to see the map of Europe at various points, which I'm looking at as I'm typing this below).

    In 1942, Nazi Germany was sitting comfortably, having taken much of the landmass of Europe and even a significant chunk of the Soviet Union.

    In 1943, Nazi Germany was suffering catastrophic losses on the Eastern Front and were being forced back by the Soviet Union. Simultaneously, the allies were also pushing up through the Southern Front into Italy.

    In 1944, The Soviet Union had forced Nazi Germany into a full retreat on the Eastern front. To the South, Italy and Greece were taken by the allies. And in the West the allies had taken back France, Belgium, the Nethlands, Luxemborg, etc.

    So yeah, they were being hammered from all directions. I still think if they had focused in one direction only they wouldn't have lost so badly. They ended up stretching themselves out too thin.
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 2
  8. Desert Fox

    Desert Fox SENIOR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2010
    Messages:
    6,729
    Ratings:
    +3 / 8,490 / -7
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    Pakistan
    Its not like he had a choice. More than 3 million red army troops on his border and 20,000+ Tanks, Hitler had to make the move. Three weeks into Op. Barbarossa, thousands of Red aircraft destroyed and captured, thousands of red tanks destroyed and captured, and more than 3 million red army POW's. If not for offensive purpose then why where this many soldiers stationed there?

    Now imagine Hitler didn't make his move, today he would have been cursed by the very same mainstream conformist "historians" for having been negligent and not taken any preemptive actions against the Soviets and thus letting Europe fall to Communism.
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 3
  9. Chinese-Dragon

    Chinese-Dragon PDF THINK TANK: ANALYST

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2010
    Messages:
    26,443
    Ratings:
    +32 / 42,305 / -0
    Country:
    China
    Location:
    China
    Hitler blunted the ambitions of the Soviet Union in Europe, fair enough.

    But in fact the Soviet Union emerged from WW2 stronger than before, even becoming a fully-fledged superpower in the post-war period. Which might not have happened if not for WW2.

    If the Soviet Union was such a threat, why didn't Germany ally with the rest of Europe in order to present a united front against the Soviet Union? Instead Germany expanded in all directions (opening wars on all fronts) before they took on the USSR.

    Germany + Europe would have stood a much better chance against the USSR, compared to Germany fighting against both Europe and the USSR at the same time.
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 1
  10. Desert Fox

    Desert Fox SENIOR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2010
    Messages:
    6,729
    Ratings:
    +3 / 8,490 / -7
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    Pakistan
    Interesting map.




    When you have 4 World powers and 77+ other nations conspiring against you, you either surrender or you defend your right to existence.

    Keep in mind, before Hitler declared war on USA, American anti-sub Aircraft were engaging German ships, and despite that Hitler ordered U-Boat captain to avoid engaging American ships at all costs.
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 3
  11. Echo_419

    Echo_419 SENIOR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2012
    Messages:
    4,695
    Ratings:
    +0 / 3,079 / -0
    Country:
    India
    Location:
    India
    The plan blitzkrieg was best against medium & small size country's even a little bigger than medium countries like France
    Invading the biggest nation on the earth logistical nightmare for nazis & Soviet Union was also very large occupying the whole dam thing would have been a liability than a asset
    Hitlers generals warned him but he was a Dumb ****
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 1
  12. Echo_419

    Echo_419 SENIOR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2012
    Messages:
    4,695
    Ratings:
    +0 / 3,079 / -0
    Country:
    India
    Location:
    India
    If I was more handsome,charming & a good in acting i might would have won some oscars

    If is a very big word
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 2
  13. Desert Fox

    Desert Fox SENIOR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2010
    Messages:
    6,729
    Ratings:
    +3 / 8,490 / -7
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    Pakistan
    The Soviet Union was given the time and space to rest, rearm, and rebuild, by the allies. Read up on the "Patton Papers" to see what i'm talking about.

    After WW2, a massive power void was created all over the world. A void that Stalin had predicted well before and during the war. You had new nations forming out of former colonies of Axis and Allied nations. Two major powers of the World, USA and USSR were now filling in the void by spreading their ideologies competing against each other. From Koreas to East Germany, from China to Vietnam, Communism was spreading like wildfire, the West did lose a lot by helping to defeat Germany when they could have accepted Hitler's peace offers and assisted him in defeating the Soviet Union.

    BTW, the same powers accuse Hitler of wanting to take over the world actually ended up taking over the world (USA, USSR).

    Do you know how many times Hitler proposed to Britain peace offers and offers of alliance?

    When Churchill was leaving London to meet Roosevelt for a conference in Quebec late in the summer of 1943, a reporter asked if they were planning to offer peace terms to Germany. Churchill replied: “Heavens, no. They would accept immediately.”


    Roosevelt had giving order to his navy to pursue and fire on German ships months before Germany declared war on the US.
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 4
  14. Chinese-Dragon

    Chinese-Dragon PDF THINK TANK: ANALYST

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2010
    Messages:
    26,443
    Ratings:
    +32 / 42,305 / -0
    Country:
    China
    Location:
    China
    Of course. :tup:

    But in the end the Nazis lost badly, we know that.

    Post-WW2 it became a game of superpowers, between the USA and the Soviet Union.

    If Germany had won the war, then it would have turned out entirely different. What I'm saying is that Germany could have won, their Army was just as formidable as the Soviet Red Army, the problem is they were stretched out too much and fighting in too many directions.
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 1
  15. Ayush

    Ayush SENIOR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2012
    Messages:
    7,832
    Ratings:
    +3 / 11,357 / -7
    Country:
    India
    Location:
    India
    cant say much on this topic,but personally i hate hitler.

    (though i believe that germany did play a role in indian troops,by deviating british troops).
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 1