Would you have liked Hitler to win the war

MooseJam

What about this one would you have liked Hitler to have won the war ? or maybe not won it in the end but had more success - perhaps an invasion of England or to have taken Moscow and defeated the reds.

Heisenberg.

This post has been deleted.

Lockstep

While I've done my best to appear impartial on this forum, I really must say that I'm extremely happy Hitler was stopped.


The idea of him winning the war is sickening.


This post is valid under free speech etc, but tread carefully here folks.

Sherifu

The man had a vision. He just got sloppy.

castie

If he had won im sure we would all be loving him right now. Winners in history always come out on top.

Lockstep

Given the way he ruled, I'm sure resistance would spring up all over the place.


THe Irish were conquered by Cromwell in the 17th century and there were always opponents to him.

Chong

I am disgusted by this post , I cant put in to words what I want to say about this thread.

FFS think of the all the people who died, Both sides of my family fought in the war, one for the RAF and two others for Dutch Resistance. My Grand Uncle was a Dutch POW captured by the Germans, OP it sickens me when I see tripe like you post.

mikemac

From what perspective kickoutthejams?
An Irish person looking back at history now or if you were a German citizen at the time?

Edit: If you are asking an opinion of posters then I'd consider Stalin far worse than Hitler. So to see Stalin defeated would have no big great tragedy
Don't reply back with a what if scenario on how could the war be won then. I'm just directly answered the question here

Fratton Fred

micmclo wrote: »

From what perspective kickoutthejams?
An Irish person looking back at history now or if you were a German citizen at the time?

Edit: If you are asking an opinion of posters then I'd consider Stalin far worse than Hitler. So to see Stalin defeated would have no big great tragedy
Don't reply back with a what if scenario on how could the war be won then. I'm just directly answered the question here

Stalin was worse beecause no one stopped him. If Hitler had the free reign Stalin did God knows how many he would have killed.

Lockstep

micmclo wrote: »

From what perspective kickoutthejams?
An Irish person looking back at history now or if you were a German citizen at the time?

I was responding to Castie's claim that we'd all be loving Hitler if he'd won.

Both Irish people nowadays disagree with him as well as German citizens at the time.

Dictators always have to put up with dissent.

Lockstep

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Stalin was worse beecause no one stopped him. If Hitler had the free reign Stalin did God knows how many he would have killed.

He's right.

Stalin's death toll is around 30 million over his entire span.

The holocaust was around 11million in a much shorter expanse of time.

peasant

MooseJam wrote: »

What about this one would you have liked Hitler to have won the war ? or maybe not won it in the end but had more success - perhaps an invasion of England or to have taken Moscow and defeated the reds.

What kind of question is that?

I mean, seriously ...do you really expect an intelligent answer to this one?

Stick with "Daddy or chips"

mike65

We missed out on the road building schemes, its true...(or wtf??)

Mike.

Disgusting thought.

Evil ideology, fascism.

Fight it wherever you see it.

He would never have truly "won". Us Irish would have just got our independence, and not liked to see it removed (do you really think he would have stopped in Newry? What with one of the largest natural harbours in Europe closer to France than Scapa Flow?) Resistance would have ensued, and the US,egged on by both the Jewish and Irish lobby, would have continued.

So either Hitler gets defeated, or he dominates world politics and kill all "impure" people. Like him to win? I don't think so.

Agent Smith

Cruijff wrote: »

I am disgusted by this post , I cant put in to words what I want to say about this thread.

At least we Get to Ask it.


Personally, i would have Followed the call Of James Dillon and Signed up with the british army, had i been around at the time

Havermeyer

Although we may have gained some of the good traits of the Germans had Hitler won the war, I think the negatives would have greatly outweighed the positives of a German victory.

I am a believer in free speech, so therefore will not criticise the Op's decision to ask such a question. However, I think this question answers itself and therefore renders itself null and void.

No 'sane' person would have wanted a German victory on the grounds of what the nazi party stood for.

Havermeyer

castie wrote: »

If he had won im sure we would all be loving him right now. Winners in history always come out on top.

Stalin was a winner, when it comes to WWII. However, I don't know anybody who loves him or thought he came out of it looking like a saviour (for want of a better word).

Amazotheamazing

Of course not, but lets not pretend the Cold War that followed WW2 which inflicted untold misery to Asia and Africa was a great outcome either. Very few countries come out of WW2 with much credit imo, you have America developing and using atomic weapons, Russia subjugating the Eastern European states, we had wars in Korea and Vietnam, we had both the US and USSR propping up hideous regimes in Africa etc.

Hitler needed to be stopped, and I'm glad he was stopped, but that's a euro-centric view and i wouldn't be too surprised if people in other countries took a dimmer view of the US and USSR's rise to prominence.

EamonnKeane

Had Hitler won, most of Asia (and Australia too) would be under Japanese dominance also

jhegarty

EamonnKeane wrote: »

Had Hitler won, most of Asia (and Australia too) would be under Japanese dominance also

That presumes that peace was maintained between Germany and Japan.. .i can't imagine it would have lasted long.... .

Amazotheamazing

EamonnKeane wrote: »

Had Hitler won, most of Asia (and Australia too) would be under Japanese dominance also

Perhaps a huge portion would have been, but most of it?

Course, communism wasn't a raging success in China or North Korea either, could communism have succeeded in either country without the USSR's victory in WW2?

Do you think Japan would have had the time and resources, after subduing China, India etc, to turn it's attention to Australia? Would take a lot of troops to occupy Asia alone, let alone launch a long range invasion of a continent as inhospitable as Australia.

Mahatma coat

Although quite large, Australia was rather sparsley populated at the time, the Japanese could have easily take Australia in the early years of the wat when Australian Troops were being sent to Europe.

I for one would be curious to see what sort of world we would live in today had Hitler won, a much smaller global population would be one difference, I doubt that any of the problems that arose form the Welfare states that sprung up after the war would be troubling us, and there would be (well by now anyway) Global peace.

also by now we'd all be convinced that Hitler was a great fella and that churchill was a miserable drunk and Rosevelt was a rejectcripple

peasant

Mahatma coat wrote: »

I for one would be curious to see what sort of world we would live in today had Hitler won, a much smaller global population would be one difference, I doubt that any of the problems that arose form the Welfare states that sprung up after the war would be troubling us, and there would be (well by now anyway) Global peace.

also by now we'd all be convinced that Hitler was a great fella and that churchill was a miserable drunk and Rosevelt was a rejectcripple

How would a fascist, oppressive worldwide (or close to) dictatorship ensure "world peace" ?

I think (I hope!) that I speak for many people here in saying that nothing could have convinced me that Hitler was a "great fella" or that what he stood for was a good thing.

Remember ...when he got into power, only 33% of German population thought that way. That number would have fallen considerably a few years down the line, even before the war, but by then the Gestapo made sure that there was no opposition.

Mahatma coat

I'm not sayin there wouldnt be problems, just that there would be a whole different st of problems to the ones we have now. interestin to theorise how the world would have turned out

Lockstep

Mahatma coat wrote: »

also by now we'd all be convinced that Hitler was a great fella and that churchill was a miserable drunk and Rosevelt was a rejectcripple

Even in Stalin's regime, whereby a cult of personality was intrinsic, there were plenty of people who saw him as a psychotic nutjob.

Mahatma coat

was waitin for that, I remember watchin a few doccos whic equated the death of JFK for the Americans in a similar vein to the death of 'Uncle Joe' to a generation of russians

castie

America dropped Atomic Bombs on innocent people.
"Wrong place, Wrong time" for them.

At least Hitler had his reasons.

*I am in no way justifying or supporting those reasons, i am merely saying he had a reason to kill the people he did. What was Americas reason for using nuclear weapons?

Also consider that less than have of the nuclear material of those bombs dropped actually "worked" for lack of a better word. So think of it like this, How much damage did they actually want to inflict? Because alot less than half was done.

Yet History sees America as Heroes for entering the War to Defeat hitler.

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

uh..

america dropped the nukes so they wouldn't have to continue a long and costly ground invasion of each single japanese island.

seems to have worked too.
doesn't mean it wasn't sheer bloody murder, but they did have reasons.

seamus

castie wrote: »

*I am in no way justifying or supporting those reasons, i am merely saying he had a reason to kill the people he did. What was Americas reason for using nuclear weapons?

You're looking at it from our relatively safe, comfortable, stable, democratic and humanitarian chairs. The same standards expected of warring nations today, was not expected in times past when a war against a country was a war against its people, not just its Government.

The fact that it looked like most of the world was falling to ****, meant that very few Americans would have an issue with their Government taking pretty dramatic action to stop the war and maintain a safe country. The nukes were effective, you can't deny that. You also can't judge their actions based on today's morals. They didn't half a fraction of the information about the impact of such weapons that we have today.

On the topic of Germany having won the war, there may have been a lot of importance in who managed to defeat the Americans. Whoever did it, would have gotten their hands on some almost-there nuclear equipment. And we know that neither Germany nor Japan in those times would hesitate to use it.

Mahatma coat

America dropped the bomb, once it had been completed - the whole researchin and developin is a nother matter- because the general belief was - and this has borne out- it would bring japanese war efforts to a sudden stop instead of a prolonged campaign which would have ensued in the deaths of millions of people from both sides.

Hitler on the other hand had Specific personal reasons to want the deaths of large sections of society, this is never an acceptable proposition, that said large amounts of German people went along withthe extermination of elements of society for their own reasons

castie

So kill that many people to save money?

Who is more evil?

the person that kills for religious reasons

or

the person that kills to save money.

bottom line is they came out of that war looking like heroes despite what they did.

"The release at 08:15 (Hiroshima time) was uneventful, and the gravity bomb known as "Little Boy", a gun-type fission weapon with 60 kg (130 pounds) of uranium-235, took 57 seconds to fall from the aircraft to the predetermined detonation height about 600 meters (1,900 ft) above the city. It created a blast equivalent to about 13 kilotons of TNT. (The U-235 weapon was considered very inefficient, with only 1.38% of its material fissioning.)"

Taken from wikipedia. 1.38%!!!!! and still killed 140,000. Imagine if it was close to 70 or 80!