-Whiteroom-
Pineapplewhat
+572|6912|BC, Canada

-Sh1fty- wrote:

I never said it was more probable that somebody worse would rise to power.
You seem to think its likely enough, that you wouldn't try to prevent the worst war that ever happened, just in case. Shifty WWII is the worst case scenario that humans have actually been through. Aside from nuclear holocaust, it really doesn't get much worse. I was gonna say more, but either you are beyond hope or trolling...
eleven bravo
Member
+1,399|5512|foggy bottom
switzerland horded nazi gold
Tu Stultus Es
Spearhead
Gulf coast redneck hippy
+731|6943|Tampa Bay Florida

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

We don't know if somebody better than Hitler would've risen to power, either.

But I'd bet on it.
The simple fact of the matter is that the Nazis were fucked since BEFORE they even invaded Poland.  There is simply no way they could have imposed their insane and fanatically racist social policies in every single country they conquered, and not expect to piss off quite a few people.  Hitler was not a politician or statesman, he was a charismatic, pseudo-intellectual, lowlife manchild who happened to be at the right place at the right time.

Not to mention, they conquered France, bombed Britain, and reduced Russia to rubble all in a period of two years.  That's 3 out of the five major superpowers during that time period.  The idea of permanent world domination or even regional hegemony by the Nazis was logistically impossible, from the get-go.
unnamednewbie13
Moderator
+2,053|7025|PNW

What Hitler was was a good speaker and rabble-rouser. A superweapon may have allowed the Nazis to consolidate a hold on a good portion of Europe over the course of an alternative cold war, meanwhile exercising buttheadedness in a big way like Stalin did.
Trotskygrad
бля
+354|6252|Vortex Ring State
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5611|London, England
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,815|6359|eXtreme to the maX

Spearhead wrote:

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

We don't know if somebody better than Hitler would've risen to power, either.

But I'd bet on it.
The simple fact of the matter is that the Nazis were fucked since BEFORE they even invaded Poland.  There is simply no way they could have imposed their insane and fanatically racist social policies in every single country they conquered, and not expect to piss off quite a few people.  Hitler was not a politician or statesman, he was a charismatic, pseudo-intellectual, lowlife manchild who happened to be at the right place at the right time.

Not to mention, they conquered France, bombed Britain, and reduced Russia to rubble all in a period of two years.  That's 3 out of the five major superpowers during that time period.  The idea of permanent world domination or even regional hegemony by the Nazis was logistically impossible, from the get-go.
Of course they could, they did it for ~5 years and were brought down from the outside, not within.
North Korea is still going, the Israelis managed to invade a wholly hostile region and impose their totalitarian theocratic nutballery on the locals, why were the Nazis doomed before they started?
Fuck Israel
-Sh1fty-
plundering yee booty
+510|5727|Ventura, California
Yeah what would Russia have been without the Lend-Lease Act? Britain without the constant flow of American supplies? etc. Without that Hitler had a very good chance. I'd say he was a little greedy going after Russia though.
And above your tomb, the stars will belong to us.
War Man
Australians are hermaphrodites.
+564|6967|Purplicious Wisconsin

-Sh1fty- wrote:

Yeah what would Russia have been without the Lend-Lease Act? Britain without the constant flow of American supplies? etc. Without that Hitler had a very good chance. I'd say he was a little greedy going after Russia though.
It isn't greed if you are fucked anyway without fuel and other resources for your vehicles, Russia had to be invaded for its resources.
The irony of guns, is that they can save lives.
jord
Member
+2,382|6931|The North, beyond the wall.
thanks for the lesson there general
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6658|North Carolina

War Man wrote:

-Sh1fty- wrote:

Yeah what would Russia have been without the Lend-Lease Act? Britain without the constant flow of American supplies? etc. Without that Hitler had a very good chance. I'd say he was a little greedy going after Russia though.
It isn't greed if you are fucked anyway without fuel and other resources for your vehicles, Russia had to be invaded for its resources.
He sealed his fate by attacking Russia.

They lost a two front war the first time around, so they should have known better at that point.
Spearhead
Gulf coast redneck hippy
+731|6943|Tampa Bay Florida

Dilbert_X wrote:

Of course they could, they did it for ~5 years and were brought down from the outside, not within.
North Korea is still going, the Israelis managed to invade a wholly hostile region and impose their totalitarian theocratic nutballery on the locals, why were the Nazis doomed before they started?
The North Koreans and Israeli's are both being kept alive by much larger and much more powerful interests.  United States and China.

France was the first superpower to fall because it was an easy target.  It bore the brunt of World War One, I think they front was something like only 30 miles away from Paris at one point. 

The Nazi's never had as much power as people like to think.  Every conquered nation except Germany had a fully formed government-in-exile, complete with tens of thousands of men trained and equipped by Britain/USA/Canada.  Ever wonder how we captured the enigma?  It was a massive raid on a Germany convoy by the Polish underground.  They could not even control Warsaw, on Germany's own doorstep.  The Italian fascists were incompetent and weak (the reason Germany had to invade them after Mussolini was overthrown). 

As War Man said, the Nazi's needed many more natural resources than their war machine was provided -- It was the oil fields in the Middle East and in Russia which would have been necessary, at the bare minimum, to even hope of "winning" the war, not even considering the manpower which would have been needed to defeat an insurgency in Russia and to invade and conquer what is probably the most geographically protected country in Europe, Britain (and their Navy).  It's not a coincidence that El Alamein and Stalingrad are considered the two major turning points of the war in the West.  When you factor in the United States, isolated in the Western hemisphere, World War Two does not look nearly as "desperate" as people make it out to be.

Hitler also had no family and the German high command absolutely hated each other at every level.  There were no institutions to unify they country if something happened -- the German government was at that point a bureaucracy made up of dozens of powerful little dictators who turned on each other left and right when they perceived a threat from the inside (Night of long knives)  When they were winning they had a decent working relationship, but when there were setbacks they were a pathetic excuse for any nations leadership.  It was only a matter of time before they pissed off too many people or the system they had built crumbled.

Last edited by Spearhead (2012-01-20 11:19:59)

RAIMIUS
You with the face!
+244|6968|US
Well, the enigma was broken several ways.  Some Polish mathematicians figured out a half-way fast way to break it.  The U-505 capture provided a working one.  There are several other examples of ways to break the codes or where the allies obtained an enigma machine.
FatherTed
xD
+3,936|6753|so randum
(bletchley park)
Small hourglass island
Always raining and foggy
Use an umbrella
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5611|London, England

FatherTed wrote:

(bletchley park)
gesundheit!
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
eleven bravo
Member
+1,399|5512|foggy bottom

jord wrote:

thanks for the lesson there general
im taking notes
Tu Stultus Es
unnamednewbie13
Moderator
+2,053|7025|PNW

Turquoise wrote:

They lost a two front war the first time around, so they should have known better at that point.
The first time around was a different matter. The second time around was mostly brought on by the punitive treaties the first time around, and nearly won by Germany. They had the advanced equipment and veteran troops/officers, but were hobbled by blundering micromanagement from the top and the misappropriation of resources in the war against Jews.
Fallschirmjager10
Member
+36|6713

eleven bravo wrote:

jord wrote:

thanks for the lesson there general
im taking notes
eleven bravo
Member
+1,399|5512|foggy bottom

War Man wrote:

-Sh1fty- wrote:

Yeah what would Russia have been without the Lend-Lease Act? Britain without the constant flow of American supplies? etc. Without that Hitler had a very good chance. I'd say he was a little greedy going after Russia though.
It isn't greed if you are fucked anyway without fuel and other resources for your vehicles, Russia had to be invaded for its resources.
i never would have thought you believed pearl harbor was justified
Tu Stultus Es
BVC
Member
+325|6948

jord wrote:

but would 100 000 war of independence era british soldiers beat 100 modern us marines?
Put the 100 marines in tanks/bradleys & they could almost do it without firing a shot, just drive right through them.
-Sh1fty-
plundering yee booty
+510|5727|Ventura, California
They could do it in HMMWVs.
And above your tomb, the stars will belong to us.
Fallschirmjager10
Member
+36|6713

Fallschirmjager10 wrote:

eleven bravo wrote:

jord wrote:

thanks for the lesson there general
im taking notes
eleven bravo
Member
+1,399|5512|foggy bottom

Fallschirmjager10 wrote:

Fallschirmjager10 wrote:

eleven bravo wrote:


im taking notes
Tu Stultus Es
Jaekus
I'm the matchstick that you'll never lose
+957|5431|Sydney

-Sh1fty- wrote:

They could do it in HMMWVs.
lol
eleven bravo
Member
+1,399|5512|foggy bottom

Pubic wrote:

jord wrote:

but would 100 000 war of independence era british soldiers beat 100 modern us marines?
Put the 100 marines in tanks/bradleys & they could almost do it without firing a shot, just drive right through them.
i doubt it.  100000 is a lot of people.  minie balls werent spitballs and cannons were pretty powerful.  i bet a cannon ball could damge a tank pretty well and probably disable a bradley
Tu Stultus Es

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2025 Jeff Minard