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.

 

The Priest who changed the history

page: 6
12
<< 3  4  5   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 9 2012 @ 03:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by Gorman91
reply to post by Omphale
 


The statement was in context to nuclear technology.

German military technology was, in general, half a century ahead of everyone else.

After the war, having nazi designs was like having all the gold in the world.




In nuclear technology, however, the Germans lagged.


Mine was equally in context...all the expertise that allowed for that technological advancement came from the United States of America...including the financial resources to develop the manufacturing side of it...

Therefore...after the war, and in the build up to the end of the war, the US and UK, and to a lesser extent Russia, sent into to Germany crack units to retrieve the evidence of said complicity and so they could continue to manufacture those products back home.




posted on Jan, 9 2012 @ 04:09 AM
link   
reply to post by Omphale
 


Perhaps. But I don't really recall the Americans nor the Russians having the same weapons quality as Germany by the end of the war. Everything from the ak47 to the Apollo rockets was based off German designs that Germany created.

I have no doubt they probably stole manufacturing ideas from other places. But the designs themselves for the product? I doubt it.



posted on Jan, 9 2012 @ 04:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by Gorman91
reply to post by Omphale
 


Perhaps. But I don't really recall the Americans nor the Russians having the same weapons quality as Germany by the end of the war. Everything from the ak47 to the Apollo rockets was based off German designs that Germany created.


Well the Russians no, that is a seperate matter entirely, which isn't relevent at all...the US did not have the manufacturing capability for one, nor did they have to in order to engage, they were offering man power and resources, not finished goods to the British...same with the Germans, except the relations were direct with the supplier...be it steel, oil, rubber or weapons grade minerals...often in return, or as payment, since the Germans were often cash poor, the US supplier would receive freight ships.

In terms of weapons technology, most of that supplied by the US was aeronautical, bomb sights the such-like. It was the Nazi's attitude that such engineering expertise was rightfully German, and since many engineers did in fact migrate to the US after the first war, it was a natural presumption, and up until 1941, there was very little resistence or prevention of this practice and in fact much support. Had anyone other than FDR been President, it is highly unlikely that the US would have joined the war. But since many of the US investors were able to claim reparations for the damage to their factories in Germany, and the occupied territories, it would appear that they made recompense...that companies such as Lockheed had that technology returned to them, or retreived for them, would stand to reason, but they also required the manufacturing expertise that was the German half of the deal, hence Operation Paperclip.


edit on 9-1-2012 by Omphale because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 9 2012 @ 04:46 AM
link   
reply to post by Omphale
 


And, another important aspect of Paperclip...the doctors. The Nazis did what nobody else, could, would or should...they were able to advance technologically because they had an almost infinite supply of disposable human subjects to experiment on...



posted on Jan, 9 2012 @ 04:49 AM
link   
reply to post by Omphale
 


Sigh, how true you are.


Always an interesting thought, and a bit of a sad reminder that most of our modern world still comes from what Nazis did half a century ago.



posted on Jan, 9 2012 @ 05:21 AM
link   
Ah the old would you kill Hitler if you had the chance Question.

I always say no because of the implications of messing with time. Who wouldn't be born, and would the future really be better off? Now even though Hitler is the poster child of WW2, if he wasn't around someone else would have taken his place. The 30-50 were a racially charged time, and Imperialism(I mean old school Imperialism) was still possible. It could have easily been Russia, Japan, Italy, and I think the Ottomans(Can't remember if thats 1 or 2). And while the things the Nazis did were horrible we got a lot of our modern knowledge of rockets and medicine from them.

en.wikipedia.org...

And Dr. Mengele well basically the embodiment of evil, did give us key insights of the human body from his research. Not that I'm saying the end justifies the means or that those lives lost were worth it, but given the opportunity mess with history and the past like that it is something to consider.

As it stands right now I don't think myself so arrogant enough to think I would be able to make the future better through intervention of the past.
edit on 1/9/2012 by Mcupobob because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 05:47 AM
link   
reply to post by diamondsmith
 


Here, I'll help you out a bit.


Consequentialism is the class of normative ethical theories holding that the consequences of one's conduct are the ultimate basis for any judgment about the rightness of that conduct. Thus, from a consequentialist standpoint, a morally right act (or omission) is one that will produce a good outcome, or consequence

en.wikipedia.org...

edit on 11-1-2012 by Turq1 because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
12
<< 3  4  5   >>

log in

join