WW2 - were the allies to blame?
Scroll to see replies
Original post by garethDT
He had an ideological motive to invade eastwards, but not westwards. If we had have waited for him to attack the Soviet Union, another superpower, then the combined attacked from both sides would have crushed the 3rd reich.
And just sat by and watched him destroy Poland? A country we had already guaranteed their independence
Original post by Aj12
And just sat by and watched him destroy Poland? A country we had already guaranteed their independence
The allies made no effort whatsoever to liberate Poland. After war was declared not much happened, they called it the phoney war. Because it was a war that neither side really wanted, just something polticians decided.
Hitler had claimed Sudetenland( Czechoslovakia) for the Sudenten Germans before the war started. His intentions of setting up a proxy government which would later submit to the Reich were well known. In short Hitler was on a collision course with the allies anyway.
If the allies are to blamed for anything, it would be for not properly assessing the security risk that was arising in Germany during the 1920s. Even when Hitler did come to power in 1933, British PM Chamberlain still insisted that conflict of any sort had to be avoided and marginalized his allies on the way. Hitler, Chamberlain thought, would back down. It was the same case with french. They did not reclaim the Rhineland after it had been invaded even though intelligence reports confirmed that the German battalions would retreat if the french were to counter attack.
Having said that an oppressive policy( the treaty of Versailles) on a force as strong as German national integrity and feeling was bound to be counter productive and a much more balanced treaty should have been drawn to normalize relations after WWI. It was economic Armageddon that bought National Socialism to the forefront in Germany in the 1920s.
Sadly we don't learn from history. Rather then trying to educate people in the troubled north west of Pakistan and Afghanistan and provide them with basic services, the western powers thought it best to once again try and oppress Afghan national integrity as well as religious sentiment by using military force. The result: Global terrorism is at an all time high and is not abating.
If the allies are to blamed for anything, it would be for not properly assessing the security risk that was arising in Germany during the 1920s. Even when Hitler did come to power in 1933, British PM Chamberlain still insisted that conflict of any sort had to be avoided and marginalized his allies on the way. Hitler, Chamberlain thought, would back down. It was the same case with french. They did not reclaim the Rhineland after it had been invaded even though intelligence reports confirmed that the German battalions would retreat if the french were to counter attack.
Having said that an oppressive policy( the treaty of Versailles) on a force as strong as German national integrity and feeling was bound to be counter productive and a much more balanced treaty should have been drawn to normalize relations after WWI. It was economic Armageddon that bought National Socialism to the forefront in Germany in the 1920s.
Sadly we don't learn from history. Rather then trying to educate people in the troubled north west of Pakistan and Afghanistan and provide them with basic services, the western powers thought it best to once again try and oppress Afghan national integrity as well as religious sentiment by using military force. The result: Global terrorism is at an all time high and is not abating.
(edited 13 years ago)
Original post by oxy402
Hitler had claimed Sudetenland( Czechoslovakia) for the Sudenten Germans before the war started. His intentions of setting up a proxy government which would later submit to the Reich were well known. In short Hitler was on a collision course with the allies anyway.
If the allies are to blamed for anything, it would be for not properly assessing the security risk that was arising in Germany during the 1920s. Even when Hitler did come to power in 1933, British PM Chamberlain still insisted that conflict of any sort had to be avoided and marginalized his allies on the way. Hitler, Chamberlain thought, would back down. It was the same case with french. They did not reclaim the Rhineland after it had been invaded even though intelligence reports confirmed that the German battalions would retreat if the french were to counter attack.
Having said that an oppressive policy( the treaty of Versailles) on a force as strong as German national integrity and feeling was bound to be counter productive and a much more balanced treaty should have been drawn to normalize relations after WWI. It was economic Armageddon that bought National Socialism to the forefront in Germany in the 1920s.
Sadly we don't learn from history. Rather then trying to educate people in the troubled north west of Pakistan and Afghanistan and provide them with basic services, the western powers thought it best to once again try and oppress Afghan national integrity as well as religious sentiment by using military force. The result: Global terrorism is at an all time high and is not abating.
If the allies are to blamed for anything, it would be for not properly assessing the security risk that was arising in Germany during the 1920s. Even when Hitler did come to power in 1933, British PM Chamberlain still insisted that conflict of any sort had to be avoided and marginalized his allies on the way. Hitler, Chamberlain thought, would back down. It was the same case with french. They did not reclaim the Rhineland after it had been invaded even though intelligence reports confirmed that the German battalions would retreat if the french were to counter attack.
Having said that an oppressive policy( the treaty of Versailles) on a force as strong as German national integrity and feeling was bound to be counter productive and a much more balanced treaty should have been drawn to normalize relations after WWI. It was economic Armageddon that bought National Socialism to the forefront in Germany in the 1920s.
Sadly we don't learn from history. Rather then trying to educate people in the troubled north west of Pakistan and Afghanistan and provide them with basic services, the western powers thought it best to once again try and oppress Afghan national integrity as well as religious sentiment by using military force. The result: Global terrorism is at an all time high and is not abating.
Every word of this post is true. + Rep.
Original post by jb9191
Hitler let the thought of global domination get to his head.
His commitment was nothing at all to do with Germany as well as he was an avid Austrian Nationalist. The reason he used Germany was due to their forces being stronger, the country economically stronger and the position they had to attack from. It was clearly premeditated.
He used his power of speech to brainwash a nation, he pretended he was on their side and used various methods of other propaganda to get them right behind him. This is why the Germans have been referred to as being a gullible nation and why a lot of Germans do not like talking about the war or Hitler as they blame him for the German people killed under his reign.
There was a good programme before which said that if he had got political power in a stronger country then their is a good chance that he would have succeeded due to the strength of the forces at his disposal.
His main reason of global domination was that he became a social outcast, a reject in a sense. His friends and family kept away from him (for reasons unbeknown), and he was rejected from an Art School which crushed his dream of becoming a painter. This then added fuel to the fire and he thought the world was against him so he took it upon himself to make his mark on the world even if it meant doing it infamously, rather than famously.
It has also been reported that he contracted Lyme (Spirochete) Disease.The disease affects the brain and can trigger genetic changes (mutations) that can change a persons attitude, personality, aggressive tendency and his outlook on life. I'm not saying this is an excuse for the power hungry control freak he became because in reality there is no excuse for the crimes he committed. However, it is a possibility that this had an effect on his mental state. During his later years he was showing signs of Parkinsons and this can come on when Lyme's advances and effects the brain and neurological system on a more advanced level. This led to his mental state getting so bad that he was scared of catching ' fresh air poisoning' unbelievably, which he thought was an actual disease.
Numerous other dictators have had or have had signs of similar diseases which have a mental effect on the brain.
Given that Hitler had this view that everyone was against him - from the Jewish doctor he claims failed to save his Mothers life, the Austrian authorities forcing him to return to Austria from Munich to join the Army and his educational rejection, then it is entirely possible that to him the allies were against him as well. By this time, it is more than likely that his view of the world had changed rapidly and felt that he was backed into a corner.
He was trying to sort a country out and when then all the sanctions imposed probably tipped him over the edge. At this stage he probably thought enough is enough and now its time for retaliation. This is entirely possible.
One must also note that Hitler was not at all racist towards black people or Arabian people. He shook hands with them on many occasions, let them fight in his army on behalf of Germany and a few even joined the SS. He had associates who were part of his government who had other warped ideas about the mass genocide Hitler wanted to carry out.
Hitlers main agenda was to kill all Jews simply because he had encountered a bad experience with them, and believed they controlled the world and were not distributing their wealth amongst other nations, people and races. He despised the Jews. It was also reported that he at the Olympic games was happy to let Joe Louis keep his medals for winning however, one of his associates was hell bent on a German winning and ordered for Joe Louis to be stripped of his accolade.
Hitler was not racist, he was hell bent on mass genocide of all Jews and was a firm believer of anti Semitism.
Karl Marx was the racist who took advantage later on of Hitlers mental state to convince him the Aryan race was superior (blonde hair, blue eyes) and that everyone else was not worthy of a place on Earth. If anything, Karl Marx was by far a more evil person who wanted to kill off more of the Earth than Hitler himself initially but rather than do it himself, because he was just a power hungry evil scientist, he convinced the mentally unstable Hitler to carry out his dirty work.
Before anyone says this untrue, please take the time to read Mein Kampf and other world wide unbiased material on what actually happened.
Even in our schools today history is taught in a biased point of view and is completely different to what is taught in America and the rest of the world. The real story lies between the lines.
For example
See how things are taught in a biased manner to restore national pride.
This is why we should never take one piece of evidence as being reliable, we should always compare it with other pieces from elsewhere in the world before making up our mind on something.
His commitment was nothing at all to do with Germany as well as he was an avid Austrian Nationalist. The reason he used Germany was due to their forces being stronger, the country economically stronger and the position they had to attack from. It was clearly premeditated.
He used his power of speech to brainwash a nation, he pretended he was on their side and used various methods of other propaganda to get them right behind him. This is why the Germans have been referred to as being a gullible nation and why a lot of Germans do not like talking about the war or Hitler as they blame him for the German people killed under his reign.
There was a good programme before which said that if he had got political power in a stronger country then their is a good chance that he would have succeeded due to the strength of the forces at his disposal.
His main reason of global domination was that he became a social outcast, a reject in a sense. His friends and family kept away from him (for reasons unbeknown), and he was rejected from an Art School which crushed his dream of becoming a painter. This then added fuel to the fire and he thought the world was against him so he took it upon himself to make his mark on the world even if it meant doing it infamously, rather than famously.
It has also been reported that he contracted Lyme (Spirochete) Disease.The disease affects the brain and can trigger genetic changes (mutations) that can change a persons attitude, personality, aggressive tendency and his outlook on life. I'm not saying this is an excuse for the power hungry control freak he became because in reality there is no excuse for the crimes he committed. However, it is a possibility that this had an effect on his mental state. During his later years he was showing signs of Parkinsons and this can come on when Lyme's advances and effects the brain and neurological system on a more advanced level. This led to his mental state getting so bad that he was scared of catching ' fresh air poisoning' unbelievably, which he thought was an actual disease.
Numerous other dictators have had or have had signs of similar diseases which have a mental effect on the brain.
Given that Hitler had this view that everyone was against him - from the Jewish doctor he claims failed to save his Mothers life, the Austrian authorities forcing him to return to Austria from Munich to join the Army and his educational rejection, then it is entirely possible that to him the allies were against him as well. By this time, it is more than likely that his view of the world had changed rapidly and felt that he was backed into a corner.
He was trying to sort a country out and when then all the sanctions imposed probably tipped him over the edge. At this stage he probably thought enough is enough and now its time for retaliation. This is entirely possible.
One must also note that Hitler was not at all racist towards black people or Arabian people. He shook hands with them on many occasions, let them fight in his army on behalf of Germany and a few even joined the SS. He had associates who were part of his government who had other warped ideas about the mass genocide Hitler wanted to carry out.
Hitlers main agenda was to kill all Jews simply because he had encountered a bad experience with them, and believed they controlled the world and were not distributing their wealth amongst other nations, people and races. He despised the Jews. It was also reported that he at the Olympic games was happy to let Joe Louis keep his medals for winning however, one of his associates was hell bent on a German winning and ordered for Joe Louis to be stripped of his accolade.
Hitler was not racist, he was hell bent on mass genocide of all Jews and was a firm believer of anti Semitism.
Karl Marx was the racist who took advantage later on of Hitlers mental state to convince him the Aryan race was superior (blonde hair, blue eyes) and that everyone else was not worthy of a place on Earth. If anything, Karl Marx was by far a more evil person who wanted to kill off more of the Earth than Hitler himself initially but rather than do it himself, because he was just a power hungry evil scientist, he convinced the mentally unstable Hitler to carry out his dirty work.
Before anyone says this untrue, please take the time to read Mein Kampf and other world wide unbiased material on what actually happened.
Even in our schools today history is taught in a biased point of view and is completely different to what is taught in America and the rest of the world. The real story lies between the lines.
For example
•
Here we are taught that the Americans joined the war late to help us out
•
In the US they are taught in some schools that the Americans joined a few months after the beginning of the war.
See how things are taught in a biased manner to restore national pride.
This is why we should never take one piece of evidence as being reliable, we should always compare it with other pieces from elsewhere in the world before making up our mind on something.
Is this a joke?
The Allies were at fault because they could have stopped Germany a long time before WWII started. After WWI, Germany was striped of its arms and its Army reduced to 100,000. It had no aircraft, tanks or heavy weapons like artillery.
At anytime before 1935, the Allies could have marched into Germany and occupied it because Germany's armed forces were too weak to opposed them. Things got a lot more complicated after that because Germany was rapidly rearming and greatly expanding its military forces under Hitler. It was also collabrating with the Soviet Union to practise and develop it tactics in secret from the Allies.
At anytime before 1935, the Allies could have marched into Germany and occupied it because Germany's armed forces were too weak to opposed them. Things got a lot more complicated after that because Germany was rapidly rearming and greatly expanding its military forces under Hitler. It was also collabrating with the Soviet Union to practise and develop it tactics in secret from the Allies.
Original post by Maker
Is this a joke?
No. Do some proper research in history instead of only listening to the biased nonsense spouted by the British educational system.
Original post by Maker
The Allies were at fault because they could have stopped Germany a long time before WWII started. After WWI, Germany was striped of its arms and its Army reduced to 100,000. It had no aircraft, tanks or heavy weapons like artillery.
At anytime before 1935, the Allies could have marched into Germany and occupied it because Germany's armed forces were too weak to opposed them. Things got a lot more complicated after that because Germany was rapidly rearming and greatly expanding its military forces under Hitler. It was also collabrating with the Soviet Union to practise and develop it tactics in secret from the Allies.
At anytime before 1935, the Allies could have marched into Germany and occupied it because Germany's armed forces were too weak to opposed them. Things got a lot more complicated after that because Germany was rapidly rearming and greatly expanding its military forces under Hitler. It was also collabrating with the Soviet Union to practise and develop it tactics in secret from the Allies.
Hitler actually over-stated Germany's military strength so the allies would think he had a lot more than he actually did, which not only worked in favour of appeasement but bought him a lot more time to build up his military forces.
My argument is that instead of saying we should have invaded Germany earlier, perhaps we should have invaded later? It would have given us and the French a lot more time to build up our armies to successfully defend the Western front and actually invade Germany. We declared war on Germany at a time when we were in no position to invade them whilst their military was wreaking blitzkrieg all over the show.
Original post by jb9191
No. Do some proper research in history instead of only listening to the biased nonsense spouted by the British educational system.
Its a joke. Lots of people get annoyed with stuff, get Limes disease and don't become a dictator. Your little story dosen't explain how Hitler became dictator Germany, it might explain how he was a bit cross with the world which is hardly a rare condition in most societies.
Original post by garethDT
Hitler actually over-stated Germany's military strength so the allies would think he had a lot more than he actually did, which not only worked in favour of appeasement but bought him a lot more time to build up his military forces.
My argument is that instead of saying we should have invaded Germany earlier, perhaps we should have invaded later? It would have given us and the French a lot more time to build up our armies to successfully defend the Western front and actually invade Germany. We declared war on Germany at a time when we were in no position to invade them whilst their military was wreaking blitzkrieg all over the show.
My argument is that instead of saying we should have invaded Germany earlier, perhaps we should have invaded later? It would have given us and the French a lot more time to build up our armies to successfully defend the Western front and actually invade Germany. We declared war on Germany at a time when we were in no position to invade them whilst their military was wreaking blitzkrieg all over the show.
Hitler used Britain and France's fear of the mass casualties of WWI to make them appease. British and French military doctrine and tactics were still wedded to a WWI style seige warfare with trenches and static defences such as the Maginot Line and the resultant mass casualites. Memories of WWI made them try to avoid war at all costs.
I don't think waiting until later would have made any difference to the Battle of France. The problem in France was one of out dated tactics and political confusion. The allies had more troops and tanks than the Germans but the way they were used was ineffective against the German Blitzkrieg tactics.
Original post by Maker
Its a joke. Lots of people get annoyed with stuff, get Limes disease and don't become a dictator. Your little story dosen't explain how Hitler became dictator Germany, it might explain how he was a bit cross with the world which is hardly a rare condition in most societies.
I'm not excusing Hitler for what he did. Its more than likely he would have done it anyway eventually as he must have had that evil nature in him somewhere to come out.
Hitler didn't just get annoyed though. He thought the world was against him.
•
Jewish Doctor he believed didn't try to save his mothers life
•
He was refused entry to study to become a painter - his dream
•
He was forced by Austrian Authorities to return to join national service - which he moved to Munich to escape
•
Constantly got beat by his father
•
Rejected by his friends and forced to hang around with younger pupils at school
•
His mother died of cancer, who he adored
•
The years before that he lied to his mother that he was an art student in Vienna when actually he had been rejected
•
In 1909 Hitler should have registered for military service. He was unwilling to serve Austria, which he despised, so he ignored his call-up papers. It took four years for the authorities to catch up with him. When he had his medical for the Austro-Hungarian Army in 1914 he was rejected as being: "Unfit for combatant and auxiliary duty - too weak. Unable to bear arms."
He volunteered for the German Army when WW1 broke out. The tests were easier and he wanted to prove that Germany and he were superior to all other nations. This is when things started to change for him.
He loved being in the army and would often risk his life for other soldiers. It was at this point he started to take his views to another level and discussed his past with his group of army mates at his regiment. He would sit in silence and then out of the blue give a speech about the theories of Marx and how he hated Jews. The power of being in a group and the power he had got to his head.
Hitler gained 5 medals. This was the first major time in his life he had been successful and it led to him believing that he could not be stopped. He wanted to go on from this. Especially with the numerous times he evaded death this belief grew further.
Although he had 5 medals, Hitler only reached the rank of corporal. This was probably due to his eccentric behaviour and the fear that the other soldiers might not obey the man they considered so strange. This was seen by Hitler as a stumbling block, another failure in his life which wound him up further, which added fuel to the fire that he wanted to rule all.
Hitler was then blinded by a British attack. Again, another failure in his head. He went into a state of depression and would regularly flip out at hospital.
To keep this shorter, Hitler was captured in Munich, he then gave up information and due to his hatred of Socialism was given a job as a political officer - he gave speeches. This was the first time in his life that he had an audience who would listen to him on a large scale and his theories.
This is when he realised just how much power he had and could use his position to tell the story of his life, to get people on his side against the Jews using emotional speeches and hatred of socialism and the Jews.
Its clear to see that a lot of Hitlers hatred was triggered by personal events in his life, especially the loss of his mother which infuriated him massively.
His power of speech was so strong that he convinced the population of Germany that the Jews, who were only about 1% of the population, were taking over the country.
----
This sort of context, in a way could be applied today, with the same as the BNP's leader Nick Griffin, going on about how Muslims are taking over Britain, when in fact, they take up a small proportion of the national population.
Its unbelievable how beliefs can relate so closely. Its also quite possible that if Griffin were to get into power he would attempt to carry out the same things Hitler did, rather than against the Jews though, against ethnic minorities in Britain.
The only difference is, from then and now, that Hitler was around in a time where religious beliefs and propaganda were a lot more powerful than they are today. The public of today are less gullible, far more likely to question someone and have a more developed outlook and understanding of the world.
If life was as simple as being able to point at a single entity as a cause for a major problem, we wouldn't need to discuss much. Heck, didn't I just mention what the Nazis did in the first place?
The Germans were what caused World War 2, without doubt. Yet the Allies were partially to blame for their actions in 1918-1920. The peace of WWI was with the motive of simply humiliating Germany, rather than peacefully ending war or even making sure that Germany doesn't wage war again.
This is well in contrast with how the US treated Germany after WW2.
Also, rofl at the Marx argument
The Germans were what caused World War 2, without doubt. Yet the Allies were partially to blame for their actions in 1918-1920. The peace of WWI was with the motive of simply humiliating Germany, rather than peacefully ending war or even making sure that Germany doesn't wage war again.
This is well in contrast with how the US treated Germany after WW2.
Also, rofl at the Marx argument
Original post by Brandmon
If life was as simple as being able to point at a single entity as a cause for a major problem, we wouldn't need to discuss much. Heck, didn't I just mention what the Nazis did in the first place?
The Germans were what caused World War 2, without doubt. Yet the Allies were partially to blame for their actions in 1918-1920. The peace of WWI was with the motive of simply humiliating Germany, rather than peacefully ending war or even making sure that Germany doesn't wage war again.
This is well in contrast with how the US treated Germany after WW2.
Also, rofl at the Marx argument
The Germans were what caused World War 2, without doubt. Yet the Allies were partially to blame for their actions in 1918-1920. The peace of WWI was with the motive of simply humiliating Germany, rather than peacefully ending war or even making sure that Germany doesn't wage war again.
This is well in contrast with how the US treated Germany after WW2.
Also, rofl at the Marx argument
How is it funny?
Marx did influence Hitler. He influenced Hitlers hatred of Jews.
I suggest you read these to get even the slightest understanding.
http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/GERhitler.htm
http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,,3190306,00.html
Marx hated Jews and he hated himself for being one.
this is what he thought of Jews:
"What is the secular basis of Judaism? Practical need, selfishness. What is the secular cult of the Jew? Haggling. What is his secular god? Money. Well then, an emancipation from haggling and money, from practical, real Judaism would be the self emancipation of our age...
...The social emancipation of the Jew is the emancipation of society from Judaism."
He didnt like them because they kept to themselves, and only really hung out with other jewish people. many of them were very good busineuss people, and they never really blended with the rest of society, the were there own race.
Hitler used this hatred to fuel his own beliefs, which combined together led to the brainwashing of a nation.
The sources you posted there don't even hint towards Hitler being influenced by Marx. If anything they say that Hitler hated Marx to the bone. Jew AND Communist AND a German that didn't live in Germany?! That there is pretty much the polar opposite of Nazism itself.
Just because Marx spoke against Judaism doesn't mean that he would influence Hitler at all. Anti-Semitism was the norm at the time among people and works concerning Anti-Semitism were widespread and was proper Anti-Semitism, while in comparison Marx was merely hinting Anti-Semitism.
You need to search towards the background of the discrimination of Jews before making such silly statements. It was well-established well before Marx was even born. And you may need to search a source that claims that Hitler admired Marx's apparent anti-Semitism.
Oh wait there aren't any, because Hitler hated Marx's guts.
Just because Marx spoke against Judaism doesn't mean that he would influence Hitler at all. Anti-Semitism was the norm at the time among people and works concerning Anti-Semitism were widespread and was proper Anti-Semitism, while in comparison Marx was merely hinting Anti-Semitism.
You need to search towards the background of the discrimination of Jews before making such silly statements. It was well-established well before Marx was even born. And you may need to search a source that claims that Hitler admired Marx's apparent anti-Semitism.
Oh wait there aren't any, because Hitler hated Marx's guts.
Original post by Brandmon
The sources you posted there don't even hint towards Hitler being influenced by Marx. If anything they say that Hitler hated Marx to the bone. Jew AND Communist AND a German that didn't live in Germany?! That there is pretty much the polar opposite of Nazism itself.
Exactly. You do realise you can be influenced by hate as well don't you?
Hitler and Marx both hated Jews, but Hitler hated Marxism as well. Hitlers hatred of Marxism made him more intent on carrying out what he did.
Just because Marx spoke against Judaism doesn't mean that he would influence Hitler at all. Anti-Semitism was the norm at the time among people and works concerning Anti-Semitism were widespread and was proper Anti-Semitism, while in comparison Marx was merely hinting Anti-Semitism.
Marx hated the Jews. He was full of self hatred as well. It was these beliefs Hitler took on and went extreme with.
You need to search towards the background of the discrimination of Jews before making such silly statements. It was well-established well before Marx was even born. And you may need to search a source that claims that Hitler admired Marx's apparent anti-Semitism.
Oh wait there aren't any, because Hitler hated Marx's guts.
Exactly. You do realise you can be influenced by hate as well don't you?
Hitler and Marx both hated Jews, but Hitler hated Marxism as well. Hitlers hatred of Marxism made him more intent on carrying out what he did.
Just because Marx spoke against Judaism doesn't mean that he would influence Hitler at all. Anti-Semitism was the norm at the time among people and works concerning Anti-Semitism were widespread and was proper Anti-Semitism, while in comparison Marx was merely hinting Anti-Semitism.
Marx hated the Jews. He was full of self hatred as well. It was these beliefs Hitler took on and went extreme with.
You need to search towards the background of the discrimination of Jews before making such silly statements. It was well-established well before Marx was even born. And you may need to search a source that claims that Hitler admired Marx's apparent anti-Semitism.
Oh wait there aren't any, because Hitler hated Marx's guts.
Again, I'll reiterate - you can be influenced by hatred. They both hated Jews and Hitler hated Marxism.
Also, a further note, I suggest you read Mein Kampf.
Hitler did not always hate Jews and was disgusted with the Viennese Press when they showed a lot of anti-Semitism. It was only later on when he got power hungry and influenced by hatred that he did.
This is another piece you should read.
Hitler was so hell bent on hating the Jews due to Marxism.
http://majorityrights.com/index.php/weblog/comments/why_hitler_hated_jews/
(edited 13 years ago)
I did read Mein Kampf but I think the problem is how you reason.
I mean what kind of logic is that? Marx hated Jews, therefore Marx influenced Hitler into hating Jews? Despite the fact that millions of others hated Jews? (Why do you think that people voted for Hitler in the first place?) You are yet to give me solid proof that Hitler admitted to being influenced by Marx. But so far the only source you can give me are sources that simply mention Marx and Hitler at the same page and for reasons other than your argument, if not against. Sounds like you are scraping, or more accurately: googling, for sources to support your argument, yet NONE are even helping you in the least.
And since when was Marxism Anti-Semitic? Fact is that Marx was against Judaism as much as he was against any other religion. That is why Communism turned out to be an purely atheist state. Marxism was Anti-Religious. But does it mean that Atheists are Anti-Semites then?
Hitler did have many influences towards his thinking, both in terms of written literature and also the society at the time. But don't come here expecting any credibility by saying that a person could be influenced by his ideological polar opposite. That is like simply saying that Ayn Rand was influenced by Lenin and surely equally as ridiculous.
I mean what kind of logic is that? Marx hated Jews, therefore Marx influenced Hitler into hating Jews? Despite the fact that millions of others hated Jews? (Why do you think that people voted for Hitler in the first place?) You are yet to give me solid proof that Hitler admitted to being influenced by Marx. But so far the only source you can give me are sources that simply mention Marx and Hitler at the same page and for reasons other than your argument, if not against. Sounds like you are scraping, or more accurately: googling, for sources to support your argument, yet NONE are even helping you in the least.
And since when was Marxism Anti-Semitic? Fact is that Marx was against Judaism as much as he was against any other religion. That is why Communism turned out to be an purely atheist state. Marxism was Anti-Religious. But does it mean that Atheists are Anti-Semites then?
Hitler did have many influences towards his thinking, both in terms of written literature and also the society at the time. But don't come here expecting any credibility by saying that a person could be influenced by his ideological polar opposite. That is like simply saying that Ayn Rand was influenced by Lenin and surely equally as ridiculous.
I think the French were mainly to blame but being part German it was a good thing as we got our revenge against the French. Ok Germany has historically the greatest army in the world I would say being slightly biased but still 6 weeks to take over one of the mot powerful countries in the world. In comparison it took the Russians 6 weeks to take over Berlin metro area even though they were fighting outnumbered 14 year olds 20 to 1.
Check out this article that claims George Washington and his lack of knowledge of the French language inadvertently led to the start of World War 2.
http://www.sickchirpse.com/2011/01/26/did-george-washington-cause-the-second-world-war-2/
Pretty crazy theory but well written article! worth a read.
http://www.sickchirpse.com/2011/01/26/did-george-washington-cause-the-second-world-war-2/
Pretty crazy theory but well written article! worth a read.
Quick Reply
Related discussions
- GSCE Cold war question help
- Who do you think is the best military commander ever?
- A-Level History Coursework
- Edexcel IGCSE History | DEPTH STUDIES
- Is the UK's future in peril?
- Will World War 3 happen soon?
- Access Alternatives?
- Childhood Plays/Performances
- is dietetics a good career?
- Tory MP William Wragg admits to leaking phone numbers in ‘honeytrap’ scandal
- Second masters degree funding sfe
- Mark IGCSE History Essay
- Aqa english lit. A level paper 2b 2023
- Can anyone rate my GCSE history 12 mark essay and give me tips to improve
- Exception Courses
- Tuition Fee Loan rejected for second degree - but it's an AHP course?
- I am an Israeli - AMA
- Bad A-level results
- Am I eligible for any more help after sandwich course?
- The Official Wrexham Applicants for 2024 Entry Thread
Latest
Trending
Last reply 5 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 5 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 5 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?Trending
Last reply 5 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 5 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 5 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?
