It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Historian's Claim:Hitler Had the A-Bomb!

page: 2
0
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 7 2005 @ 10:01 AM
link   
"In November the plant was attacked by a massed daylight bombing raid of 143 B-17 bombers dropping 711 bombs"

en.wikipedia.org...

they probably were working on a Nuclear Weapon, but after 711bombs were dropped on "ONE" factory, any traces of it were gone. They levelled the building and the area around it. destroying any chance of really knowing how much the Nazi's knew.




posted on Mar, 7 2005 @ 10:16 AM
link   
I'd like to see the soil sample data before jumpting to conclusions.



posted on Mar, 7 2005 @ 10:34 AM
link   
What can the soil sample be reasonably expected to show anyway? Radioactivity? There's lots of radioactivity and radionuclides out there, especially from all the actual nuke tests.

I fail to see why the nazis would have a nuke and not use it, if not in america or russia then london, and if not in london then in paris, or even inside germany during the last phases of the war.



posted on Mar, 7 2005 @ 10:56 AM
link   
Rügen (Polish Rugia) is the largest German island. It is situated off the coast of Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania in the Baltic Sea. Its area is 935 km² and its population was 73,000 in 2001. Together with the neighboring smaller islands Rügen Hiddensee and Ummanz it is administrated as the district Rügen.

That's a lot of Island to test on. It also would be in the way of the fallout after Chernobyl - so a lot of the soil would have 'small' traces of radioactice fallout. So, that can't be used as hard evidence.

I don't doun the German Army trying to get Nuclear Weapons, I also think they could of got one - although, it would of been 'very' low yield and this might of stopped them funding or caring for it after it did little damage?

Just a thought.



posted on Mar, 7 2005 @ 11:25 AM
link   
hitler also never used bio-chemical used against allied force
hitler also has some biological-chemical weapon but he never used despite of defeated in all front. same is here in case of nuclear bomb he did not used because he felt it could get similare reponse


[edit on 7-3-2005 by mirza2003]



posted on Mar, 7 2005 @ 11:31 AM
link   
You'd be right there. Although the Japs used chem and bio weapons in China.

But Hitler knew that every British citizan has been given gas masks, so it wasn't worth the waste of a missile.



posted on Mar, 7 2005 @ 12:57 PM
link   
I think you underestimate the germans, I think they had the A-Bomb alright, just no way to deliver it...



The V-2's and the V-3 did not have the payload required for a WWII era device. The American bombs took up most of the bombload of a B-29 Super fort.


WTF is the V-3? that thing from Red Alert?
(just messing with ya)

Well, we will all know soon enough, but I think Germany were the first to have detonated a nuke...in know history anyway. (even if it's still fringe right now)

But we had nukes millenia ago, just look at india :|



posted on Mar, 7 2005 @ 01:08 PM
link   
No no no, Hitler had a bomb, not an A-bomb



Hitler would have used an atomic bomb if he had it, he would not have hesitated one bit.



posted on Mar, 7 2005 @ 01:19 PM
link   
Do you really believe hitler was psychotic? what would he have used it on?

Hitler didn't didn't FIRE BOMB civilian cities, Hitler didn't drop the nuke on Hiroshima, A CITY FOR CRYING OUT LOUD! even him killing the jews is speculative at best, a million at MOST died in concentration camps, most of them by Typhus, the disease Anne Frank died of, not of Zyklon-B gas that was actually Insecticide...

Hitler was not a good strategist, he invaded neutral countries, etc, etc, which is all wrong, but he is often made out to be much worse than he actually is...the bodies in Auswitch were actually burned since they died of a disease and they wanted to make sure the corpses wouldn't spread it any further...

I dunno, but hte world might actually have been beter if Hitler won, it's a chaotic mess right now...it might still have been a mess, I know, but who knows...

Ugh i'm confusing my self now...don't think i'm some Nazi, I don't condone Hitler's actions since he cowardly invaded my home country without declaring war...



posted on Mar, 7 2005 @ 06:16 PM
link   
lol, hitler had a bomb, and here i was going on earlier about the a-bomb, lol.



posted on Mar, 7 2005 @ 06:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by GrOuNd_ZeRo
Do you really believe hitler was psychotic? what would he have used it on?

Hitler didn't didn't FIRE BOMB civilian cities, Hitler didn't drop the nuke on Hiroshima, A CITY FOR CRYING OUT LOUD! even him killing the jews is speculative at best, a million at MOST died in concentration camps, most of them by Typhus, the disease Anne Frank died of, not of Zyklon-B gas that was actually Insecticide...

Hitler was not a good strategist, he invaded neutral countries, etc, etc, which is all wrong, but he is often made out to be much worse than he actually is...the bodies in Auswitch were actually burned since they died of a disease and they wanted to make sure the corpses wouldn't spread it any further...

I dunno, but hte world might actually have been beter if Hitler won, it's a chaotic mess right now...it might still have been a mess, I know, but who knows...

Ugh i'm confusing my self now...don't think i'm some Nazi, I don't condone Hitler's actions since he cowardly invaded my home country without declaring war...


Well said. Hitler, although a good politician was not a military man. He should of listened to his generals more often - but didn't. Luckily for me. (Part Russian, so I'm scum as far as he would care.)

On the concentration camp note, I actually remember reading something saying half the rooms they said were used for gassing people were not air tight. LOL



posted on Mar, 7 2005 @ 07:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by GrOuNd_ZeRo
Hitler didn't didn't FIRE BOMB civilian cities, Hitler didn't drop the nuke on Hiroshima, A CITY FOR CRYING OUT LOUD! even him killing the jews is speculative at best,


Dude are you off your rocker? Are you denying that Hitler is not responsible for the systematic murders of million of Jews and other "undesirables"???

Also, Hitler did not Fire Bomb or nuke London because A) He did not have a long range bomber fleet, and B) he had no nuclear weapon to use.



posted on Mar, 7 2005 @ 07:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by GrOuNd_ZeRo
IWTF is the V-3? that thing from Red Alert?
(just messing with ya


The V-3 was sort of a super gun that reached the build stage before British Bombers destroyed it.

en.wikipedia.org...


Germany had no bomb. Period. The historical evidence is there:

1) No reactor by the end of the war and no real evidence
2) Shortage of heavy water
3) Lack of resources to develop a project similar to the Manhattan Project
4) Too many scientists escaped the Nazi's in the 30's Fermi, Bethe (RIP) etc etc etc
5) Werner Heisenberg: ample evidence shows he may have stalled the project or at least slowed it down.
6) British Intelligence recorded post war meeting between captured German scientist and the evidence shows they were shocked by the developments in the US



posted on Mar, 7 2005 @ 08:06 PM
link   
Odium: (And everyone else who believes the Germans had an A-Bomb)
BTW, yes, I am aware of the length of my post but please read as I took the time to compile this information and it PROVES that Germany could not have constructed an Atomic Bomb:


I respect all of your opinions, but you are jumping way too far ahead without any REAL proof. OK, I agree with some statements, Yes, the Telemark Research Base (widely known since Allied Operations decimated the place) did exist, Yes, they did have Heavy Water and Atomic Piles and yes they did have the knowledge to build such a weapon, but it was of course another problem of too little, too late, for the Germans yet again. By the time all the materials could have even been READY for production of an Atomic Bomb, which I seriously doubt as there is overwhelming evidence that alot of it was destroyed or stalled or not well funded or even considered, it would have been far too late to start building an Atomic Bomb, and even if they DID have anything close to an Atomic Bomb, it probably would have been in its very early stages and a very low-yield device and was most likey DESTROYED.

Also, the fact that Karlsch claims they tested a Nuclear Device on Ruegen in 1944/45 is load of crap too. By then the Allies had liberated Norway well and truely from Nazi control and Poland was already liberated by the Russians, plus at this stage of the war, the Allies were pretty much counting the days 'till the war was over and the Third Reich's collapse was inevitable (this was evident even as far back as 1943, when Hitler and Goebbels introduced their "Total War" plan). Almost all of Germany's workforce and resources would have been concentrated on helping the war effort, and in fact, many operations despite being military, were simply cancelled around 1943/44 when the "Total War" plan was declared, because (to the best of my memory) Hitler ordered MOST military projects that could not show significant results to help the war effort in least 6 months from mid-1943 to be stopped. Also, all German infrastructure was literally crumbling, the lack of resources, lack of scientists/physicists, and lack of secure locations to carry out Nuclear Weapons research meant the Germans made very little progress in this field.

I agree that the Germans did know about the idea of the Atomic Bomb, (of course they had to since Otto Hahn and Fritz Strassman demonstrated fission in December 1938 and proposed this could be used for a bomb), but the fact is that the High-Ranking Military Officials especially Hitler himself, wouldn't advocate such a program because firstly, it would take long to develop, it would be very costly, and it couldn't show results very quickly, besides most of the Secret Weapons funding went to the Luftwaffe, because Hermann Goering (Head of Luftwaffe) was on good terms with Hitler, and Hitler had a personal love for aircraft and their potential as weapons. Also, there is alot of evidence to suggest that Werner Heisenberg intentionally slowed down progress in making Atomic weapons because he understood the capabilities of such a weapon and didn't particularly like the Nazi Regime. The Germans focused more on producing energy by using fission and tried many experiments to see how viable this would, and also thought of using fission in medical sciences and such.

Finally, yes they did have an OFFICIAL nuclear research program around 1942 and onwards, which was started by Albert Speer (Nazi Munitions Minister) and had the approval of Hitler to go ahead. However it made jack-all progress and faced several delays and strokes of bad luck. As I mentioned before Werner Heisenburg (leading German physicist) did believe that an Atomic Bomb could be produced but deliberately slowed an research down as he did not want the Nazi's to possess such a weapon, and when he was asked by Speer how long it would take to produce a weapon, Hesienburg told him that a bomb could be produced by 1945, and although he didn't advocate it, around 1942 it was seen as feasible, and it was given the go ahead.

Around late 1942 (even by this time Germany was in no state to produce Atomic Bombs, America entered the war, there-by sealing Germany's fate, war is tough on any country), Speer set up a single research team with the task of creating a Nuclear Reactor. He assembled a team of scientists and physicists who requested a budget of 40,000 Reichmarks (less than the cost of one Panzer IV tank, 1/5 of the cost of the Manhattan Project, no where NEAR enough to produce an A-Bomb) and this more than anything guaranteed the project would fail. From then on the program focused mainly on producing a reactor suitable for power-production rather than for weapons production. Two Atomic Piles were eventually built, one near Hechingen and the other near Erfurt both using deutrium as the moderator (heavy water). No working reactor was ever built, and neither Atomic Pile built enough fissionable material as a by-product to even consider using it in an Atomic Bomb. By the time the potential and all the neccessary scientific work about the A-Bomb realised, it was FAR TOO LATE. By 1944, the German industry was in chaos, the project recieved no more funding, and barely any uranium supplies were viable, the Germans only had two small areas to mine uranium ore from, in the North of Belgium and another area in Bohemia (by 1944 Germany could no longer support any mining operations) and thanks to successful RAF and USAAF raids on the Telemark Research Base, NOTHING TO DO WITH ATOMIC BOMBS OR NUCLEAR RESEARCH COULD CONTINUE, Germany simply lacked the MEANS, the RESOURCES, the MANPOWER and the SECURITY AND INFRASTRUCTURE. The only other project that was related to Atomic Weapons research was a 1943 study by the Scientific Institute of Dahlem in Germany about the effects of radiation on humans and how radioactive material could be used in war (equivalant of modern dirty bombs basically), however the project was cancelled on Hitler's direct orders in 1944. Also to add the sheer failure of the German Atomic Research program, the two Atomic Piles were both researching of different methods of how a reactor should work and the whole project was delayed by Heisenburg himself, as he did not want an Atomic Bomb to be built.

So there! There is no way in hell Germany could have built anything close to an Atomic Bomb, let alone enough fissionable material or even a FREAKIN' REACTOR! Personally, the theory that Germany tested a bomb on Ruegen too is complete and utter s***, as I seriously doubt they could have devoted so much time and effort into producing a bomb so quickly after it was realised that fission could be used to make an Atomic Bomb in 1939! BTW, where does this great historian Karlsch get the knowledge or information about a Nazi Atomic Bomb test in WW2, even if it did happen, it would have had to have been ONE OF THE MOST secret operations of the war, and by 1944/45 the Allies would have surely found out, and I'm sure there had to have been some sort of records or evidence of the bomb elsewhere before it was tested on Ruegen. Besides, Hitler and the Nazi's weren't in any state to be conducting Atomic R&D and testing in 1944, if he had the bomb, he would have used it, no matter on who or what an impact it would make, he WOULD HAVE USED IT, no questions. Hell, many secrect weapons programs were sped up just to please Hitler's 1943 "Total War" plan, the King Tiger Tank (Tiger II) and the V1 rocket are examples. The Nazi's wouldn't have had the time or resources to gamble on such a project like the Atomic Bomb without even understanding how such a thing would work, if they had anything that made an impact to the war in any way they used it, if any secret weapons program was near completetion they used it, it was just a matter of TOO LITTLE, TOO LATE! By the time Germany had all these terrific weapons and had the means the employ them (alot were without any success), it was already too late, by that time some Russia Partisian was already hoisting a Soviet flag on the Reichstag and Hitler already had the gun to his head. Even if they had Atomic bomb ready by 1945, they had no real chance to use it by air or sea, they could have only detonated it on land somewhere in Germany, which would have done more harm than good for them.

Hopefully now you all understand how Germany couldn't have had an Atomic Bomb!


P.S. Chemical and Biological weapons are a different story, to Germany it was case of been there, done that, however stick to the topic!



posted on Mar, 7 2005 @ 09:16 PM
link   
On another note don't confuse the Vengance Weapons (V-1 Rocket, V-2 Rocket, V-3 "Super Cannon") with other German plans to build more ballistic missiles after the V-2. The V-2's proper name is the A4 "Aggregrat" Missile or the Fi 203. Later attempts were made to build A5, (most of you are thinking of the V3 Rocket as the successor to the V2, but its actually the A5) A6, A7 and such rockets. There was even a plan to build the worlds first ICBM the A10 Missile, it was supposed to be a two-stage, radio-guided ballistic missile but never got past the drawing board and was scrapped in Febuary 1945. Anyway here are some pictures of the missiles I am talking about, just to confuse you even further:
(Pictures are good quality now! Yay!)

This is the original V1 Missile:

photobucket.com...

This is the original V2 Missile (A4) being launched in Peenemunde (Secret German Weapons Base on Baltic Island of Peenemunde)::

photobucket.com...

This is the V1 in Action:

photobucket.com...

This is the manned V1 or the Reichenberg IV (fortunately never used):

photobucket.com...

Here is the V2 being readied for launch in the White Sands Proving Ground (as most of you know, many V2's along with the production teams
were shipped to the US after WW2):

photobucket.com...

Here is the V2 Mobile Launching Platform, called the "Meillerwagen":

photobucket.com...

Original A5 Missile (many of you call it the "V3", however that was completely different weapon):

photobucket.com...

V2 Missile Impact Crater (this was without the 900kg Amatol Warhead
):

photobucket.com...

P.S. As for the V3 "Super Cannon", can anyone give me some pictures or more information about it, I haven't really heard of bigger cannon than the Schwere "Gustav" and "Dora" Kanones, and besides I don't see the point the Nazi's would make one at later stages of the war, they'd be practically immobile and would require one hell of a crew and alot of money. Just like the "Gustav" and "Dora" Cannons were, they cost altogether about 7 million Reichmarks, required a crew of 2000 to operate (each) and took 2 weeks to be packed and un-packed and plus you need railway tracks all over the place to move them and they were very vunerable to attack. I think they were each only used twice, so there you go.

Here's the "Gustav" cannon:

photobucket.com...

Anyways.... back to the topic at hand


[edit on 7/3/05 by The Godfather of Conspira]



posted on Mar, 7 2005 @ 09:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by The Godfather of Conspira
[BTW, yes, I am aware of the length of my post but please read as I took the time to compile this information and it PROVES that Germany could not have constructed an Atomic Bomb:


It is a bit long but basically amplifies alot of the point I have been trying to make in this thread



posted on Mar, 8 2005 @ 12:23 AM
link   
The study of history is the study of choices made by people and the consequences of those choices. Make a different set of choices and you will end up with a different out come. If you remove Hitler and the racist Nazie part from history, you'd still have a war against France and a war against Soviet Russia. A war with France would imply a war with the UK and ultimately the USA [AKA WW-I]. So in short you still have WW-II. In such a history Germany would not suffer the brain drain it did and the USA would not benifit from such a brain drain....so does the ABomb then happen in Germany instead?

Such a Germany would not have waited until 1943 to invoke total war economy , it would have done it in 1939/1940. Such a Germany would not have passed over the potential of such technologies as rockets ; jets ; guided missiles & synthetic fuels etc etc.The mere fact Germany was outnumbered so much in Europe of the 1930s would demand the development of such technologies when they emerge....nor would they have ignored the power of the atom,especially if faced with an emerging threat from a collosal Soviet Union.

In the study of the history of technologies, it seems that the preconditions for technologies to emerge must be inplace, but it takes a 'great person' to make such technologies work, especially in the form of a weapon. But even with out that combination , you can still have the technology developing , its just not as efficent as the apriora idealised system, or its a generation behind the competion. If thats the case, then the issue evolves around who best exploites the technology thats at their disposal in the war in question.

Like wise , while the industrial potential of the USSR/USA/allies was hugh, its of little merrit if its not applied as throughly as it was.Those were choices that were made...by comparison the industrial capacity of germany never reached its peak. Look at soviet union Vs Germany. By the paper comparison of industrial strengths, Germany should never had a chance, and yet it was a very near run thing! Mistakes were made on both sides but the consquences seemed to have hammered the germans more that the USSR. Its all a question of choices.

It amazes me how many people desperately cling to the belief that very existance of the technology will save them just because its their. No matter what calculus you invoke, the USA /allies could never face losing WW-II or else their entire house of cards falls apart. But its all just a set of choices with consequences. Even today that country desperataly clings to the belief that these technologies will save it from its ultimate demise....it won't.

BTW it doesn't do any one any good to deny the scale of the slaughter of the jews/poles/slavs in WW-II. Those people made choices and we all have suffered the consquence of those choices. That same calculus could happen today and its stupid to think that what happened in Nazie Germany could only happen in the Nazie Germany of the past. It could very well be shaping up right now under our noses as we speak just in a different form.



posted on Mar, 8 2005 @ 04:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by GrOuNd_ZeRo
Do you really believe hitler was psychotic? what would he have used it on?

Hitler didn't didn't FIRE BOMB civilian cities, Hitler didn't drop the nuke on Hiroshima, A CITY FOR CRYING OUT LOUD! even him killing the jews is speculative at best, a million at MOST died in concentration camps, most of them by Typhus, the disease Anne Frank died of, not of Zyklon-B gas that was actually Insecticide...

Hitler was not a good strategist, he invaded neutral countries, etc, etc, which is all wrong, but he is often made out to be much worse than he actually is...the bodies in Auswitch were actually burned since they died of a disease and they wanted to make sure the corpses wouldn't spread it any further...

I dunno, but hte world might actually have been beter if Hitler won, it's a chaotic mess right now...it might still have been a mess, I know, but who knows...

Ugh i'm confusing my self now...don't think i'm some Nazi, I don't condone Hitler's actions since he cowardly invaded my home country without declaring war...


Let me just make sure I understand what you are saying...

So your saying that Hitler was completely innocent in WW2, didn't exterminate 6 million Jews in Nazi Death Camps and altogether 11 million Jews, Gypsies, Slavs, Mental Handicapped and other "non-Aryan" people and that the actual amount of people that died during the "Holocaust" are 1 million from Typhus , and that he invaded neutral nations, he was made out much worse that he really was, and that the world would have been a much better place if the Nazi's were still around and you DON'T condone his actions WW2.

I think you must have been living in some alternate reality or somethhing...

Right. OK. You need some help with history then, and possibly your mentality. There is overwhelming evidence that Hitler and the Nazi's systematically exterminated 11 million people who they saw as being "non-Aryan" and "undesirable" and that 6 million of those people were Jewish. There's book after book, video after video, testimony after testimony of SS Officer's, Allied and Russian soldiers, survivors, hell, MOVIES have been made about the "Holocaust"! So all this overwhelming evidence is a bunch of lies and is made up? Google Holocaust, Jews, WW2, something along those lines and you will get proof coming down on top of you like a ton of bricks, it's an undeniable and globally-accepted fact of history, I seriously wonder about someone's mental health when they things like this, if you could see the horrors of such a thing you would understand me.

Hitler invaded neutral nations? Right, I'm sure, was France neutral? Or Russia? Or how about the nations of North Africa and so on. Where are you coming up with these random stupid facts? And why would invading neutral nations be good anyway in times of war? You've completely lost the plot here, and the fact you say that he was made out to be much worse than he really is, is the biggest load of s***! It's completely the opposite, Hitler's effective propaganda and tough control over his citizens through the Gestapo and the SS made sure everyone saw Hitler as brilliant, glorious leader. Personally, the Allies were correct in all of their assumptions of this madman, as only some as sick as him could think of something like the "Final Solution", if you have no idea of what I am talking about please learn something about history before blabbing s***!

Finally, you say the world would have been better place with him and that you don't condone his actions! Are you sure your not a Neo-Nazi or something? Only someone who hasn't been to school, and has been living in Antarctica for the past 70 years could be forgiven for saying something like that!!! If Hitler and the Nazi's had somehow won WW2 (:lol
, the world would be a very different place! He would have surely systematically wiped out every single ethnic minority around the world, he world have formed a single-world government, he would have used his propaganda and secret services to effectively rule the world, it would have been an unimaginable, and terrible scence, wars would be rampant, fighting constant, poor living conditions, you couldn't even imagine what would happen if Hitler had won WW2, and by not condoning his actions in WW2 you are either supporting him or undecided on the topic, but seriously, you need to question what you have said, think about it carefully, AND PICK UP A F***ING HISTORY BOOK!


Please understand what you have said is wrong, and I don't think you are even close to being fully aware of what Hitler and the Nazi's did during their evil reign. And by the way, if Hitler could have he would have, so going on about Allied tragedies of WW2 like Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and fire-bombing raids, (I say this with complete and utter respect), are pale in comparison to the "Holocaust" and other attrocities committed during WW2 by the Nazi's. If Hitler had the chance to drop an Atomic Bomb on the world he would have used this as a tool of fear and he probably would have done it.



posted on Mar, 8 2005 @ 05:05 AM
link   
there was a silly amount of jews going through gas chambers in auchwitz every day, sick horrible experiments were also performed on children , By Dr Josef Mengele, It was turned into a processing plant for execution, I dont recall the exact number, But towards the end of the war Auchwitz was able too execute 10s of thousands of jews a day



posted on Mar, 8 2005 @ 07:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by GrOuNd_ZeRo
Do you really believe hitler was psychotic?


- Yes, it's a view held by many of his own contempories and most people, period.


Hitler didn't didn't FIRE BOMB civilian cities,


- So the massed dropping of incendiary bombs by the Luftwaffe in WW2 is a figment of people's imagination is it?

What you mean is that they had neither the means nor the understanding to deliberately create the 'fire-storm'. This is true and it was indeed a terrible 'weapon' used against mostly civillian targets.

.....and frankly if you really think - given what we know they did actually do - that Hitlers gang would have refrained from using this 'weapon' on civillians had they been able I suggest you are as wrong as you are daft.


even him killing the jews is speculative at best


- No it isn't.

It is a fact that they specifically murdered countless numbers of defenceless Jewish people (of all ages, men, women and children) as a matter of their perverted criminal disgusting 'philosophy'.


a million at MOST died in concentration camps, most of them by Typhus, the disease Anne Frank died of


- Jayzuss wept.
Do you really think the point is anything about quibbling over how many millions or the means used?



not of Zyklon-B gas that was actually Insecticide...


- So?
Are you denying it's toxicity in concentration?

What is it with Holocaust questioners/deniers?

We have the plans, we have the (sometimes proud and utterly unrepentant) personal admissions of some of the Germans involved, we found the Wanasse documents where Heydrich & Co. set it all off.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join