Would you have voted for Hitler?

Originally posted by whatukno
reply to post by thedarktower

 

Right wingers would have voted for Hitler in a heartbeat!

Hell, the stage is set for some right winger to repeat history today, all the TPM idiots would love to put some Hitler clone in charge. They would beg for it.

"Oh he wants to get rid of the illegals! and he says he will get us jobs! I'll vote for him!"

You beat me to the connection friend.

When the economy goes sour (and it always does) we can find solutions or point fingers.

Who do we point fingers at? The vulnerable groups.

Mexicans, I'm sorry to say that this is probably only the beginning of this scape goat campaign...

reply to post by thedarktower


I am not of pure Arian Descent and therefore would undoubtedly not be allowed to vote.

Knowing what I know now....hell no! If I was an unemployed German during the early 30s and I figured voting for him would give back some worth and national prestige(and jobs) to the country...yes.

reply to post by Pockets


no, you voted for american imperialism. which sends in mcdonalds and walmart before it sends in the tanks. in iraq they love the freedom and democracy bush sent them. when saddam ran iraq it was said that you can leave a pile of gold on a table come back at night and it would still be there.

reply to post by randomname

no, you voted for american imperialism.

Where is your proof of this?

you can't make a claim against me without some facts

I never voted for anything American....for the record

hello, from the history I have read, Hitler was not voted into power by a 'popular' vote, as he had about 30% of that, the Riechsstag members not in league with him were locked out one day, and the rest inside the chamber voted the 'enabling act' in, so that Hitler came to power illegally.

Considering the fact that I fell for Obama's BS, yes, yes I would have.

Originally posted by Sinter Klaas

Sorry, but the documentary evidence is quite clear that Hitler (and many others) had their mind set on a war with France, Britain, Poland, Chechoslovakia and the Soviet Union (and perhaps the US) long before they even took power.

France was because of previous conflict, Britain would rather be at war with, The Soviet Union because of hate or fear of communism, and the others were because of their plans to create lebensraum and they were home to a population of Germans.

I'm interested in your sources. Mind giving a link ?

No, not at all. But considering this topic I'd have to name books as I know of almost no good sources about the Nazis on the net.

reply to post by NichirasuKenshin


just a quick thing, you mentioned Hitler wanted to go to war with Russia and Britain. At first, Germany and Russia were allied, Stalin and Hitler were on good terms, until they grew suspicious of one another. Germany had a naval base in Russia for a while and i seen an interview on the histroy channel with an ex Russian soldier during WW2 who said they all got on rather well at the docks.

Also, Hitler expected Britain to side with him at the start, Neville Chamberlain didnt want to go to war with him. When there was trouble between Germany and Czechoslovakia, he was quoted as saying: "why bother about a country so far away and that we know little about". When Hitler invaded Poland after Churchill said he would consider it an act of war, thats when things went ahead.

Also, an interesting fact i heard from my histroy teacher in college. The first civilian bombing of the war by air was German on London, though it was a mistake. The Luftwaffe were going for military targets and were blowing of course, the weather was very bad and they had to drop their payload to get home. They thought they were over the sea when they dropped the first bombs, but were over London. Apparently some of the pilots were executed as a result. Then Britain retailaited by bombing German towns, and so it went back and forth from there.

[edit on 12-8-2010 by thedarktower]

Originally posted by thedarktower
reply to post by NichirasuKenshin

 

just a quick thing, you mentioned Hitler wanted to go to war with Russia and Britain. At first, Germany and Russia were allied, Stalin and Hitler were on good terms, until they grew suspicious of one another. Germany had a naval base in Russia for a while and i seen an interview on the histroy channel with an ex Russian soldier during WW2 who said they all got on rather well at the docks.

Of course they got along well. What reason would there be for dock-workers to hate each other?
These were the "people", not the leaders. "People" never want war, and "people" only seldomly hate other people categorally.

Nevertheless the Hitler-Stalin pact was a great surprise for many Germans. They had been trained that the "Communists" were nothing more than stooges of the "international jew".. So there was some consternation. But all in all the foot-soldiers got along well.

The dock's were not the only place that they met. Long before the pact, going back to the Weimar days, the Soviets and Germans would be working jointly on building tanks, and writing doctrine for tank-warfare. It's really not a black and white picture.

But, in Hitler's mind and the minds of the Nazis elite, there was no question: The pact with Stalin was made out of necessity and was to go on only as long as the free hand in the west was needed. Then it was the Soviets turn to be attacked.
It was one of the truly gigantic miscalculations of the Nazis.

My point is not that the Germans hated the Soviets or vice versa and that that led to the war.
The Hitler-Stalin pact was firstly and foremost a pact of economic assistance. The Germans needed the peace with Russia to have a free hand in the West. And they needed the Soviet commodities to wage the offensive in the West. These were the primary reasons for the 1-year "friendship" between the Nazis and the Soviets. From Hitlers writings, his talks and his planning it is absolutely irrefutable that this was a short term solution; that the Soviets would be attacked was clear long before that deal was made. I would refer you to Hitlers Table talks, his own writings, his delibarations with the Werhmacht.

If you consider the different elements of the coalition under Hitler - the old elites, the Nazis, and the nationalistic-völkisch groups then it is quite clear that war in the east was the primary goal of the campaign. Conquering "Lebensraum" in the east was an agreed part of Nazi ideology. You can check that claim by reading any and all early writings of Nazis such as Himmler, Goebbels, Darré, Rosenberg, Backe, Sebottendorff. You will also find this view prevalent among the top German Generals, Brauchitsch, Jodel and Halder. They all knew - at least from 33/34/35 on, that the ultimate fight would be on the eastern front.

Look at the RUSHA files. Look at Generalplan Ost. These thing didn't just pop up in 1941 - these were basic tenets of Nazi ideology that can be traced back to the very beginnings of the NSDAP. Basically, the NSDAP secured widespread cooperation among the Nationalist/Völkisch circles by promising to fullfil their dream of eastern expansion ( a goal that is part of German expansionism ever since the days of Luther and the German Order in medieval times, and remains so today)

Also, Hitler expected Britain to side with him at the start, Neville Chamberlain didnt want to go to war with him. When there was trouble between Germany and Czechoslovakia, he was quoted as saying: "why bother about a country so far away and that we know little about". When Hitler invaded Poland after Churchill said he would consider it an act of war, thats when things went ahead.

I can't disagree with that analysis. This is why I said GB could have, just like the US, stayed out of the war. This doesn't change the fact that Hitler was the aggressor. Germany had no legal claim on all of Chechoslovakia and certainly not on any part of Poland except for the corridor.

It's true that Hitler was naive enough to believe that Britain would eventually be ok with the Nazis expansion.
This was the same basic mistake that the German elites made in the first world war.

I do not find any of this to be a reason to expulcate anything Hitler did.

Also, an interesting fact i heard from my histroy teacher in college. The first civilian bombing of the war by air was German on London, though it was a mistake. The Luftwaffe were going for military targets and were blowing of course, the weather was very bad and they had to drop their payload to get home. They thought they were over the sea when they dropped the first bombs, but were over London. Apparently some of the pilots were executed as a result. Then Britain retailaited by bombing German towns, and so it went back and forth from there.

This has some truth to it, but it is not entirely true. I'll provide you with a basic narrative.

In the battle for Britain, it quickly became evident that the Germans had neither the bombing capacity nor the fighter-escort capacity to destroy the RAF or to significantly hurt GB's armaments production.

So very early in the campaign Goering re-directed the effort of the bombing campaign on civilian targets - especially London, Liverpool, the big cities. Goering's reasoning behind this was that if they could not strike the british were it really hurt militarily, they could demoralize the populace of GB by intense civilian bombing. The reasoning was false; the "Blitz" proved the one thing that really welded GB together and made them determined to fight or go down dying.

It was not exactly the result of a mistake that London was repeatedly bombed. Goering's orders survived the war and they are quite clear.

But it is true that the Germans never once had the capability (or maybe even the intent) to bomb Britain the way that Britain and the USA bombed Germany from 1943 on. I'm pretty sure the British would have done so regardless of German actions. But luckily for them, the British can today take the high ground and simply assert that the "Germans started doing that, therefore it was ok".
This is in accordance with historical fact, even though it may be a lie (they may have dones so anyway). That's one of the pleasures of being the attacked in a war; you can always claim that your violence is reactive while your opponents violence can be portrayed as active.

[edit on 12-8-2010 by NichirasuKenshin]

[edit on 12-8-2010 by NichirasuKenshin]

reply to post by thedarktower


I say down with all is'ims' lets find a new way that doesn't end with is'im.

reply to post by thedarktower


Most humans that I have encountered are service to self. They look after their own self-interest and will not stand up for anyone other themselves or their family.

We as a species, are doomed to keep repeating historical mistakes until we all wake up and realize we either hang together or die alone.

I've heard many people state, "how could the germans have been so dumb".

Then watched Nixon, Reagan and Bush get elected.

The repercussions of a predominantly Republican White House, Senate and Congress for the last several decades is evident.

People are short sighted.

They think the mess we Americans are in is due to Obama.

No, it's the effects of thirty years of mismanagement by both parties, but predominantly Republican (Corporate) rule.

All in the name of profit for the almighty dollar vs human interests.

The trillions of dollars America has poured into "the war machine" would have been better put to use in educating our youth and feeding and housing our homeless.

Instead we make war.


[edit on 12-8-2010 by ofhumandescent]

holland is on course by voting for wilders....extreem rightwing politican
wildy sponsort by the USA to bring hate about the moslims...

[edit on 12-8-2010 by ressiv]

I'd vote for him with no doubt.
It is unfair to consider National Socialism just a form of racism, as it is not. A moderated National Socialism could be the answer of all our problems today.
Let's be clear, i love jews, so me being pro Nazi has nothing to do with racism in no way.
Asside from the antisemitism and the white aryan race supremacy,
what was wrong about nazi politics? They demanded discipline for the good of all not just the individuals. Isn't that what keeps people together?

Sorry but i don't believe in the Holocaust, as much as i support jews and israel, but even if it happened, let's remember that in the WWII there died millions from other nations too, million have died from the comunism in russia, millions have died from genocide in other countries around the world. How am i to interpret this, that the life of a jew is more valuable than that of others?
No offence intended, but as much as Hitler is portrayed as a monster, he did no more than other leaders of other nations in the WWII and other wars.


I see many on ATS that speak about "illegal war",
come on, has there been any "legal war", can such thing as "legal war" exist at all?

[edit on 12-8-2010 by ProdigalSon]

reply to post by NichirasuKenshin


when i said that the Russian and Germans got on with each other at the docks, what i meant was as opposed to later in the war when the Germans regarded the Russians as sub human and treated them as such. Like no bothering to feed the Russian prisoners of war. They thought American and British were at least on the same level of human standard, just fighting for the wrong side.

Can you imagine though, if the nazi's had won the war, what would we be told in school about this mythical Ayran race? it would be indoctrined into all of us from an early age. Crazy idea

Originally posted by On the level
Say what you like about Hitler but he was a great public speaker

Realy..? Thats funny,
I couldnt understand a word he said!

This is hard to say as there is the historical view in consideration. We had people comparing both Bushes to Hitler, and the same is being said about Obama.

As an interesting historical footnote; if Hitler and Churchill both died in 1938, Hitler would had been Germany's greatest leader taking the country out of the great depression. Churchill would have been remembered as an alcoholic First Lord of Admiralty who led a disastrous military campaign in WW1. Then 1939 happened and the rest is history.

Obama was elected by many people wanting "hope and change", not unlike the Germans voting for National Socialism during their great depression. Time will tell.

reply to post by thedarktower


Truth is before WWII almost 90% of people would have voted for Hitler even the ones who are saying no in this thread. At that time he was guiding light to million of people. Though opinions and things changed after WW2.

(Taking in context if I was a German)
Prior to WW2 would I have voted for Hitler: Most probably yes
Would I have voted for Hitler today: Depends on his current policies.

[edit on 12-8-2010 by name pending]

Originally posted by ofhumandescent
reply to post by thedarktower

I've heard many people state, "how could the germans have been so dumb".

Then watched Nixon, Reagan and Bush get elected.

The repercussions of a predominantly Republican White House, Senate and Congress for the last several decades is evident.

People are short sighted.

They think the mess we Americans are in is due to Obama.

No, it's the effects of thirty years of mismanagement by both parties, but predominantly Republican (Corporate) rule.

My dearest Friend...

I felt the intention of posting a reply here too but... yours is enough !!!
This thread could end after your post.

Most people here haven't really ever voted.
They only think they did.

I've dropped a star at your Comment (an amazing one) and if I could I would have dropped a million stars on it.
I've logged just due to this thread; if I could know about your Post I wouldn't have even logged but, also, I wouldn't have known your thoughts.

STILL THERE ARE THINKING MINDS.
STILL THERE ARE EYES THAT SEE.

Accept a "tight hug", straight from Rio de Janeiro.
By the way... my Grandparents came from Germany to Brazil a long, long time ago.


Doc

reply to post by Sinter Klaas


I feel where you are comming from friend.. I just cannot stand the thought of him especially when the picture comes to mind of him standing in front of many ranting his lame ways. Thats all I wasnt trying to be rude..

[edit on 8/12/10 by Ophiuchus 13]