The AH Debate

[rabidveggie]

Check your history Kadasbrass Hitler did use the Jews for force labor. While in concentration camps he sent alot of them out to go work in different locations, he also used Jews and prisoners of war to build his rocket research facilities underground after the Allies bombed his surface one. His decision making abilities were definitely compromised during the end of the war as he hit a delusional state plotting mass counter attacks with his amazing invisible legions, but that just sped up his defeat. Stalin would have been just as willing to sacrifice his troops in Stalingrad, just had more troops and home field advantage. Hitler also never moved his troops during D-Day because he, and around half his generals believed the attack would come else where and that the initial landings were only a smaller portion of his troops. Even Rommel was caught by surprise by the landings and was currently on vacation. Had the war gone a little differently all of Europe could very well be speaking German right now. I say put him in the game over some ancient Celtic Queen that I doubt half the people in the forums have heard of.

 

[Virulent]

I usually avoid these debates like the plague but there is one thing I want to say. In the Chinese version of Civ IV they apparently replaced/renamed several of the leaders such as Qin, Mao and Genghis with fictional ones. Couldn't Firaxis do the same thing and replace Hitler with a made up leader in the German version?

 

[Ceritoglu]

Is the inclusion of AH more likely to gain sales or lose sales?

That's the fundamental question Firaxis will be asking.

 

[flyingchicken]

Is the inclusion of AH more likely to gain sales or lose sales?

That's the fundamental question Firaxis will be asking.

I don't think it would boost nor lose sales to any significant degree. However, I'm pretty sure it will cause some controversy; I believe if even a few people are greatly affected by controversy (GTA, Jack Thompson, those things), it will cause an unwanted stir (positive or negative, still a hassle).

 

[Julian Delphiki]

Check your history Kadasbrass Hitler did use the Jews for force labor. While in concentration camps he sent alot of them out to go work in different locations, he also used Jews and prisoners of war to build his rocket research facilities underground after the Allies bombed his surface one.

The problem was that prisoners were treated so badly that they were very inefficient workers. Kadasbrass's summary of A.H's actions was very good, i recommend for you to do some research.

 

[50_dollar_bag]

I don't want Hitler in the game simply because I don't want to look at his face during trade negotiations, nasty little man. It'd would be worse than Louis the XIV.

 

[Julian Delphiki]

What, Louis XIV has some very eager fans on this board ?

 

[mrt144]

what is the greatest good that can come from having hitler in the game?

 

[cuchulain]

Hehe, the Mongol empire actually expanded faster after his death. And considering he conquered more territory than any other person in one lifetime, that says something

Buutt anyway... (hoping not to be responsible for starting yet-another-off-topic G.K debate )

edit: @cuchulain: I don't think Shaka was defeated either. The Zulu were when attacked by the British, but that was after Shaka.

Fine; I think you guys get my point though.

 

[Julian Delphiki]

what is the greatest good that can come from having hitler in the game?

End of "why A.H is not in the game)/A.H should be in the game threads". Instead, it would be "why did they include A.H in the game?/A.H should not be in the game".

 

[Kadasbrass]

Check your history Kadasbrass Hitler did use the Jews for force labor.

Didn't say he didn't use them for forced labor, I said the resources he used for the holocost exceeded the resources he got from it (labor camps included). Wasting valuable war resources, troops and equipment, to huntdown and keep them under wraps. Where there were work camps, they were very minor set up. An intelligent leader wouldn't need to use an army to keep a boot production line running (the camps set up before the war did produce some clothing articles for the troops, the camps after the war didn't even bother to waste time with labor camps).

 

[Danielos]

Didn't say he didn't use them for forced labor, I said the resources he used for the holocost exceeded the resources he got from it (labor camps included). Wasting valuable war resources, troops and equipment, to huntdown and keep them under wraps. Where there were work camps, they were very minor set up. An intelligent leader wouldn't need to use an army to keep a boot production line running (the camps set up before the war did produce some clothing articles for the troops, the camps after the war didn't even bother to waste time with labor camps).

But didn´t the loot stolen from all the murdered jews help to finance the German war machine?

 

[Kadasbrass]

But didn´t the loot stolen from all the murdered jews help to finance the German war machine?

The holocaust occured in different stages, during the early and mid stages a number of jews would have had to sold/trade their stuff slowly in order to get food for their family. Germany may of god valuables in the later processes but Germans citizens and German troops also did their own fair share of looting. When factoring the reduced tax base, work force, labor hours, and potential soldiers they could of gotten, compared to the resources devoted to the whole thing, the whole thing was a general waste of resources.

The holocaust had no NET wartime benefit for Germany. Merely the deranged goals of a madman using a scapegoat for his own politcal ends.

 

[Julian Delphiki]

Of course it did help funding the war and it also helped to make high rating nazi officials very, very rich (Göring being a prime example).

Nazis stole incredible amount of wealth, not only from jews and other murdered people but from occupied countries as well. They always emptied the state banks gold reserves and those countries had to pay "occupation costs". French paid most, about half of the 104 billion reichmark that was about the total sum of occupation costs/forced loans, etc. at the end of the war. Belgia and Netherlands paid about 2/3 of their national gross product every year.

They also stole food (they wanted to starve Ukraine/SU) and resources. From France they stole 137 train wagons of art.. after occupation of Poland it took 6 months to "take almost all art treasures of the country".

But, nazis even regretted (to some extent) when it became clear that war would last longer than expected (1942~) that they had killed so much POW's who could have been used as slave labour.

(source: The Rise and fall of the third reich II, chapt 27: New order)

 

[Menzies]

Okay, sick of reading this. Stalin's death camps where just as aweful, if not worse because of the climate of Siberia so that debate doesn't work. Stalin gained nearly nothing from the actual killing apart from scaring the people. His forced labour camps produced duds and as for collectivisation, the just got rid of those who resisted. The white sea canal was a good example of a complete dud. In fact, in my view Hitler isn't actually the most evil man in History. There are many more that are worse. Stalin is a definite. He killed more people for gains achivable without it, he killed relentlessly and with no actual target. He made people dob in others for 'crimes against the party' so they would be okay. At least Hitler only took on the minorities, and Hitler did gain from them more than just wasted resources. He gained a propaganda victory, even with their loss he had united the Germans under this nationalist vision and he had tried to show that he was a stronger leader than all those before or around him. And looking before the war and the ultimate solution I would say he was definitly one of Germany's greatest leaders. I mean if we ignore great leaders because they selfdestructed when they became over confident. All leaders who don't die in power destroy themselves. At least monarchs or dictators. Napoleon for God sack. He royaly screwed himself. Nobody debates him. If Hitler died around 1938 he would be fondly remembered as one of the Greatest Leaders in German History. HE revived them from a horrid economic outlook, he reunited the people beind the government, he stood up to the joke that was the Treaty of Versailles, HE SAVED GERMANY IN THE 1930'S!!! HIM, HE THEN WENT ON TO CHANGE THE CORSE OF HISTORY, SO WHETHER OR NOT HE WAS GOOD OR BAD IN THE END, THERE ARE ALREADY WORSE LEADERS AND HE IS DEFINITLY MORE SIGNIFICANT THAN ANY OF THE MESO-AMERICAN LEADERS, SHAKA, MANSA-MUSA, ISABEL I, BRENNUS (his existance is based on myth)... IT IS A JOKE TO NOT HAVE HIM IN THIS GAME. IF HE IS NOT IN BEYOND A SWORD I'LL GO INTO STANDUP WITH A PICTURE OF IT. IT'LL BE FUNNIER THAN ANYONE OR THING IN MONTREAL, AND THATS SAYING SOMETHING!!!

 

[Bast]

Hitler wasn't a good enough leader to be in the game.

 

[Menzies]

Nor was Shaka, montezuma, brennus, Mansa Musa, Sitting bull, Hannibal, Luis XIV, Stalin, Mao, Qin Shi Huangdi, Washington, Tokugawa... *names rest of the leaders*

If your standard is too high to accept at least pre-WWII Hitler, you have no idea of the History of a planet. Then again Sydney... Got Lockyer back and we're ready to slam so Blues black.

 

[Stilgar08]

I try to never participate in this kind of debate anymore - such a waste of time and being a German it makes me sick reading about this crap all of the time...
But after reading Menzies post I had to reply - and please, Menzies: No need to answer: I won't visit this thread anymore anyways!

At least Hitler only took on the minorities, and Hitler did gain from them more than just wasted resources. He gained a propaganda victory, even with their loss he had united the Germans under this nationalist vision and he had tried to show that he was a stronger leader than all those before or around him.

At least Minorities? So it's better to go after minorities than to kill your own people? Don't think so! And you're right when saying he "united Germany" but it's nothing to be proud of! He did it with terrorism and nationalistic propaganda. And he "invented" or "re-invented" genocide and optimized it with German accuracy and organisation - Again: Nothing to be proud of!

And looking before the war and the ultimate solution I would say he was definitly one of Germany's greatest leaders.

What an insult! And furthermore inadequate: It's like saying "Let's forget about the iraqi-war, the downslide of american-economy or relationships to other countries and the ongoing erosion of ecology and/or social-standards during G.W.Bush's presidency: He is a great leader! Please, come'on!

I mean if we ignore great leaders because they selfdestructed when they became over confident.

He not only self-destructed his person and his power, he killed a whole "minority" and left his country in ruins. At least the last point haven't been done by any of the other leaders, not even Stalin. And let me remind you that it's not about a "headcount" here (who killed more? who killed more? -disgusting!) and it's not about who was worse - It's about sensitivity about incidents not long ago with people who are still alive in our times (Just to let u know: I'm 34 so I know nothing about how it was in Nazi-Germany) and it's about unacceptability of those sick minds who still believe, AH was awesome!

All leaders who don't die in power destroy themselves. At least monarchs or dictators. Napoleon for God sack. He royaly screwed himself. Nobody debates him.

It's new to me that France was in ruins when his time was over and France had been diverted due to a lost war...

If Hitler died around 1938 he would be fondly remembered as one of the Greatest Leaders in German History.

Racism and holocaust started well before 1938. "Reichskristallnacht" is nothin to be fond of and I know no German with a brain who would say a thing like that.

HE revived them from a horrid economic outlook, he reunited the people beind the government, he stood up to the joke that was the Treaty of Versailles, HE SAVED GERMANY IN THE 1930'S!!!

The "joke that was the treaty of Versailles" was nothing but the consequence of the lost WW I.
I agree that it was not a well planned thing, but history is written be the winners so nothing to joke about...

He seduced Germany and revamped economy with making billions of debts and his war enabled him not to pay them back. He was a fraud! And a killer! And I don't care whether or not he's the worst leader ever: I simply refuse to have him in the game! Mod him in and please leave the survivors of the holocaust, the Germans with a brain and everybody else who feels he has nothing to do in a GAME alone! Thanks!

THERE ARE ALREADY WORSE LEADERS AND HE IS DEFINITLY MORE SIGNIFICANT THAN ANY OF THE MESO-AMERICAN LEADERS, SHAKA, MANSA-MUSA, ISABEL I, BRENNUS (his existance is based on myth)...

From your point of view and in the times we are living you might even be right here. But it's quite ignorant to only acknowledge modern influences - Leave Roosevelt and Washington, and Churchill and Elizabeth and Augustus out of the game...-ridiculous!

IT IS A JOKE TO NOT HAVE HIM IN THIS GAME. IF HE IS NOT IN BEYOND A SWORD I'LL GO INTO STANDUP WITH A PICTURE OF IT. IT'LL BE FUNNIER THAN ANYONE OR THING IN MONTREAL, AND THATS SAYING SOMETHING!!!

It's an insult to have him in the game! It's as simple as that...
I'm done and outta this topic. Thanks.

 

[Bast]

Nor was Shaka, montezuma, brennus, Mansa Musa, Sitting bull, Hannibal, Luis XIV, Stalin, Mao, Qin Shi Huangdi, Washington, Tokugawa... *names rest of the leaders*

If your standard is too high to accept at least pre-WWII Hitler, you have no idea of the History of a planet. .

I don't need to post a rebuttal. Stilgar08 has already done a great job above.

I actually didn't see your ridiculous posts before but it's you that have no idea of history.

 

[kcbrett5]

IT IS A JOKE TO NOT HAVE HIM IN THIS GAME. IF HE IS NOT IN BEYOND A SWORD I'LL GO INTO STANDUP WITH A PICTURE OF IT. IT'LL BE FUNNIER THAN ANYONE OR THING IN MONTREAL, AND THATS SAYING SOMETHING!!!

Oh please do. Because when the mob in montreal destroys you for spreading Nazi propaganda then none of us will have to read your ignorant posts anymore.

Honestly, why do people get so proud to show the world how little they understand of history?