Could the Nazi Germans have "Won" the war?

[Adler17]

The discussion about Churchill being a war criminal we already had. However, DAv2003, Churchill also went on destroying cities when it became obvious that Germany was not surrendering. Also these British bombings were only meant to terrorize the German civil population, so they were a war crime. However since we had this kind of discussion before I suggest to come back to the topic.
Oh yes, there were Norwegian partisans which sunk a ferry with the heavy water. However the barrels with the best heavy water were not lost but swam on the surface as heavy water is only heavy by the name. It was found in Germany after the end of the war at a site which is believed to have the first German nuclear reactor, which wasn´t finished yet totally finished.

Adler

 

[Ancient Grudge]

Churchill and Hitler are pretty much the same in that regard.

Where do you pull this load of crap from? I mean seriously what is your problem?

Hitler went for terror bombing, atleast the British AND American Bomber Squadrons went for infastructure/industrial targets.

Comparing the two men is just sick.

 

[Adler17]

Ancient Grudge, the US went on industrial targets (until late in the war). The British, except Essen of course, only to terrorize the population. Churchill has done many good things. But that was in no way such a thing.

Adler

 

[Ancient Grudge]

So you're telling me the purpose of every British raid during WW2 over Europe was Terror bombing?
Even Dresden was an attack on what was thought to be a military target....

 

[Elysdeon]

One thing that I don't get is saying that the decision to invade Russia in 1941 was a mistake. There's simply no way that the USSR and Germany wouldn't have gone to war eventually. They were simply too different and too belligerent. Waiting longer would have simply made the USSR even stronger, given it's massive industrial base(which was still growing enourmously until Barbarossa), and it's far bigger population. Plus, the army would have recovered more from the purges of 1938 if given more time. No, attacking the USSR in 41' was actually a good call, given the other options.

Some things should have been done differently, i.e, making the Ukrainians, White Russians, etc., allies instead of terrorizing their populace. They hated Stalin and the Communist regime and welcomed the Germans as liberators. Also, declaring war on the US wasn't the brightest idea. Sure, the USA wasn't exactly a neutral power, given the "undeclared war" in the Atlantic, and the Lend-Lease Acts to the UK and the USSR, but without being at war, they couldn't have much more then that, such as Operation Torch, and all the strategic bombings.

 

[Adler17]

AG, I don´t want to have another Dresden thread here and so I only say I simply disagree with you and say Dresden was a war crime.

Adler

 

[fing0lfin]

Both Churchil and Hitler was war criminals, but no one judges the winers.Churchil's war crimes was forgotten.

And about the Ukrainians in the war, i think there were 1 milions of them fighthing against the red army, and most of them were SS members.

 

[Nyvin]

So you're telling me the purpose of every British raid during WW2 over Europe was Terror bombing?
Even Dresden was an attack on what was thought to be a military target....

That's more then Obvious. Not only dresden, but all of the british bombing raids were aimed at lowering moral to fight and scare. The british relied a lot on the fear of the enemy to survive, so using terror against them and killing civilians worked out to their favor.

One of the main points that Churchill made in his speech about Dresden was "lowering moral"

Churchill might have been even worse then hitler since he got off scott free for everything and Hitler nobely killed himself in the end.

 

[FredLC]

One thing that I don't get is saying that the decision to invade Russia in 1941 was a mistake. There's simply no way that the USSR and Germany wouldn't have gone to war eventually. They were simply too different and too belligerent. Waiting longer would have simply made the USSR even stronger, given it's massive industrial base(which was still growing enourmously until Barbarossa), and it's far bigger population. Plus, the army would have recovered more from the purges of 1938 if given more time. No, attacking the USSR in 41' was actually a good call, given the other options.

In the Main Kampf, when Hitler (extensively) speaks of his theory of the vital space, which he beileved should be in european soil (as he thought that colonies were a bad idea, germany was too late to start an oversea empire) he argued that Russian soil was ideal to the attack, not only because of it's lengthy, but also because he didn't feel for the russions the same admiration he had for the British.

(Amazingly enough, if Hitler had it his way, both the UK and the US would have been his allies. He was found of Great Britain, and admired many of US behaviors in the past, particlarly regarding it's expansion, which was coincident with his "vital space" theories. Though I don't remember it specifically in the book, I'm sure the US eugenics school was also something that boosted Hitler's admiration).

So, while I believe that there could have been military concerns involved, much regarding the attack on the USSR was more political than strategic.

Churchill might have been even worse then hitler since he got off scott free for everything and Hitler nobely killed himself in the end.

Well, I am not aware enough of Churchill's alleged war crimes to judge him a criminal or not, but I certainly doubt one thing: that Hitler had an epiphany and ended his life in shame of his actions, nobely seeking redemption. Way I see things, he was bitter with the destruction of his plans and afraid to face the judgement of the world, which would, predictably, turn him into teh monster of the century (what happened anyway, he just got away without seeing it).

Regards .

 

[ComradeDavo]

One thing that I don't get is saying that the decision to invade Russia in 1941 was a mistake. There's simply no way that the USSR and Germany wouldn't have gone to war eventually. They were simply too different and too belligerent. Waiting longer would have simply made the USSR even stronger, given it's massive industrial base(which was still growing enourmously until Barbarossa), and it's far bigger population. Plus, the army would have recovered more from the purges of 1938 if given more time. No, attacking the USSR in 41' was actually a good call, given the other options.

Some things should have been done differently, i.e, making the Ukrainians, White Russians, etc., allies instead of terrorizing their populace. They hated Stalin and the Communist regime and welcomed the Germans as liberators. Also, declaring war on the US wasn't the brightest idea. Sure, the USA wasn't exactly a neutral power, given the "undeclared war" in the Atlantic, and the Lend-Lease Acts to the UK and the USSR, but without being at war, they couldn't have much more then that, such as Operation Torch, and all the strategic bombings.

Good post! I agree!

 

[privatehudson]

That's more then Obvious. Not only dresden, but all of the british bombing raids were aimed at lowering moral to fight and scare

Frankly it's not. The RAF was not used for the sole purpose of terror bombing, nor was Bomber Command. It's roles were many and varied (though Dresden etc did take up the bulk of it's role) and to lump them all under such an innacurate title is just plain ignorance.

Churchill might have been even worse then hitler since he got off scott free for everything and Hitler nobely killed himself in the end.

I don't see anything noble in the end of Hitler's life. The guy wanted to destroy Germany at the end out of the arrogant presumption that she didn't deserve to survive if she wasn't strong enough to win. The fact that he blew his own brains out, thus leaving everyone else to mop us his mess he himself made doesn't strike me as noble at all but cowardly.

 

[AdrianE]

If the Nazis had been civilised enough to turn the Ukraine into an ally, they wouldn't be invading in the first place! There would be no war.

 

[Nyvin]

Frankly it's not. The RAF was not used for the sole purpose of terror bombing, nor was Bomber Command. It's roles were many and varied (though Dresden etc did take up the bulk of it's role) and to lump them all under such an innacurate title is just plain ignorance.

Okay, maybe not the 'sole role of the RAF' but it certainly was for all of the actual 'bombing raids' like I was saying. A lot of the times it's popular to say that 'our side was more noble' but most of the time that ends up being not true at all, sometimes even the opposite is true.

 

[privatehudson]

Okay, maybe not the 'sole role of the RAF' but it certainly was for all of the actual 'bombing raids' like I was saying

Sure but so was virtually ever other major airforce at the time to varying degrees, there's no need to single out bomber command especially I think.

 

[EmperorGandalf]

One thing about the war is in addition to killing or making many Jews flee, the Jews who escaped the Nazis were able to help the other side. Also, the germans did not let woman do "man" work, while the allies (at least some of them) had women working in the factories while the men were away.
also, if the germans had a less crazy and more practical ruler than hitler, they would have done better.
Attacking russia and the US was a mistake i agree, but the US and Russia would probably join the war at some point
Also, as a possible consequence of undoing these mistakes, the Nazis could have developed the atomic bomb, and i am quite certain they would not hesitate to use it (The US was regretful that they had to use the bomb, yet they dropped TWO of them! Also, that was just against one nation! imagine the devastation the Nazis would have created!)

 

[EmperorGandalf]

Also, i think they should be called nazis, because many of the people in power were, and calling all of them "Germans" might insult some german people, while (I hope) there are no Nazis anymore

 

[Elysdeon]

Also, i think they should be called nazis, because many of the people in power were, and calling all of them "Germans" might insult some german people, while (I hope) there are no Nazis anymore

Yes, because everyone that fought in WW2 on the German side was a nazi.

It's not factual, and way overly PC.

 

[Nyvin]

Yes, because everyone that fought in WW2 on the German side was a nazi.

It's not factual, and way overly PC.

the nazi's were the foundation to the German war drive though.

 

[Nobody]

Churchill might have been even worse then hitler since he got off scott free for everything and Hitler nobely killed himself in the end.

You are crazy. Hitler wasnt nobel sucide is noble its cowardly. He didnt die fighting to protect germany he killed himself in a bunker like a coward. Winston Churchill stood down as soon as he was asked to. The british Parliament declared war not churchill. Hitler sent his armys in and killed millions. The allies feed europe as soon as the war was over. American and Britian Faced Nuclear to feed the people of berlin. Hitler killed 6000000 jews. And the most redeming feature... Hitler started the war, hitler invaded France, Hitler bombed britain first (while the brits were droping pamphlets) Britan saved the world. Germany murded 6000000 jews. If the German people didnt want hitler they could of removed him but instead they stood around charnting his name and elected him based on his racist policys. Its no conincidence tyrants came to power in germany. I am willing to beat that if the germans were taking London chruchill wouldnt have shot himself. Thats the reason skinheads all around the world love him. He is evil and so was nazi germany.

I continutely see americans on here saying how bad the japense prison camps were but the germans never say how bad hitler was they just argue they the allies were also bad. (this might be because everybody already knows how terrible he was)

 

[ComradeDavo]

If the Nazis had been civilised enough to turn the Ukraine into an ally, they wouldn't be invading in the first place! There would be no war.

I must point out that it would have been rather difficult to convert Ukraine into an ally with the amount of Soviet troops in the country.