You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

0
0

[–] 17599566? ago 

… okay

That does not address anything that I wrote.

I'll restate my core point; Going to war with Poland was a mistake. Hitler did lose the war, after all.

0
0

[–] 17599571? ago 

If one naive reader were to read your input, he'd be convinced that Germany is the originator of about every single aggressive behavior and was first in showing signs of willing conflict. When all lights were green showing that neighboring countries operating as proxies for the Jews were preparing for war. About every single provocation and aggression by the future Allies wouldn't count, some of them literally involving economical aggression or physical damage. These don't count. Only the "warmongering" of Germany is to be noted. Despite the very fact that Hitler, contrary to the Jews' puppets, did not want that war.

Let's just ignore that the League of Nations did everything possible to stop Poland from mistreating Germans. It was perfectly clear, they all knew what was going on.

Czechoslovakia was an obvious spearhead that would be used against Germany. The Sudetenland was a logical piece of land to grab, mostly populated by Germans, and necessary for the military assets that fell into German hands as a consequence. It was a smart move. It was legitimate considering the population living there. What would the Poles say? They too with Ukraine seized some land from the corpse of that artificial "Czechoslovakia". In no way they could hold an annexation against Germany on moral grounds. If we go back to Poland, we see that absolutely nothing was done to save the Germans from atrocities. The Allies foiled all attempts to solve this problem peacefully. They were the biggest hypocrites of the lot.

>>13010431

I'll restate my core point; Going to war with Poland was a mistake. Hitler did lose the war, after all.

So if he had won it would have not been a mistake? Well, that's one of the flimsiest criteria one could retain against the legitimacy if not necessity of a conflict, especially when said conflict's outcome was not a foregone conclusion.

Besides, you go from "starting the war" to "going to war with Poland", which conveniently removes the US very real moves against Germany.

I'm not sure where we're going with this. You may be bitter that Germany lost, I don't know, I could understand that.

0
0

[–] 17599578? ago 

if he had won it would have not been a mistake?

If Hitler had made different decisions, I believe that he could have won, yes. Diplomatically or militarily. I don't believe that that is a controversial statement.

The USA behaved aggressively towards Germany

Yes but that does not have much to do with the invasion of Poland. I will say that declaring war on America was also a mistake.

And before you respond with "Oh but America blew up German ships so Hitler HAS to react to that and do what the jews wanted him to do!"

Contemplate the following;

Which is preferable?

  1. Having America blow up a few ships every now and again

or

  1. Having America blow up many more hundreds of your ships, flatten your cities, land 200,000 soldiers in Sicily and knock out our only major ally and then land another 200,000 in France?

Which harmed Germany less?

I'm not sure where we're going with this

Yes I am sad that Germany lost because while some things Hitler did were unjust and wrong, a lot more was necessary and good. Such as eliminating jewish power in the nations he conquered. My point is that invading Poland was a mistake because it set into motion a series of events that not only destroyed Germany, but led to the near total domination of our civilization by jews.

I am not accusing Hitler of being a jewish agent, I am pointing out the fact that the brother-war between Germans and Poles led to our current state. Brother-wars ALWAYS lead to suffering and oppression for Whites and power and domination for kikes.

Hitler needed to strike first to save Germany

I am paraphrasing what you said to make it more concise. But I believe this is what you're saying.

Okay, if war in 1939 was the only way to preserve Germany, why'd he lose?

Again, anything is possible including an alliance with Poland. But you know what will guarentee that you will not get an alliance with Poland? Demanding their land and threatening war if you don't get your way. Then breaking your own agreements with them and acting like you want to conquer Europe.

No one likes aggressors. If you behave like one, you will be treated like one. Hitler was a fan of Otto Von Bismark, so he would know that you can gain a lot by appearing like the victim of someone else's aggression. He allowed France to not only attack Germany, but to invade before crushing them. Poland was no threat to Germany. Frankly, neither was France. It would have been better if he played the long game and won rather than invading everyone and losing.

Czechoslovakia was an obvious spearhead that would be used against Germany

It would have been wonderful if the allies were so stupid as to build up forcess in a tiny, indefensible nation surrounded by Axis sympathizers. Then, unlike at Dunkirk, Hitler could have captured the entire British army.

The Sudetenland was a logical piece of land to grab

Yes, obviously. They were German then thus they should have belonged to Germany. And Britain and France allowed it without declaring war. As I pointed out, there were many sane British elites who didn't want another war over nothing. But Poland was too far.

It was a smart move

In the short term. In the long term, it demonstrated to the world that Hitler was not being honest and could not be trusted.

You know that.

They too with Ukraine seized some land from the corpse of that artificial "Czechoslovakia". In no way they could hold an annexation against Germany on moral grounds.

This is true and I often use this argument against people ranting about Hitler being evil for demanding Danzig. But teh problem with this argument is that it reduces Hitler from a righteous man seeking only to restore Germans to Germany to just another imperialistic dictator.

I mean, sure, it's not like the Poles were righteous defenders of national autonomy. You mentioned Ukraine. You could also mention that much of eastern Poland was Belarusian and they even stole some (admitedly majority Polish) land from Lithuania trhough brute force no different than Hitler's strong arm tactics against them. So you could say "Hah! WHat goes around, comes around Poland! You deserved it."

But I'm not interested in humiliating Europeans and stealing their land just because they did evil in the past. I'm interested in liberating ALL of us from the jew. And going to war to steal other people's land is not the way to do it.

Yes the allies were hypocrites. But saying "WELL TEHY WERE HYPOCRITES TOO!" is not the best argument when defending Hitler as it just reduces him to their level.

0
0

[–] 17599575? ago 

Let's just ignore that the League of Nations did nothing to stop Poland from mistreating Germans.

Correction.