Who started both World Wars?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Belz... said:
Well, if it's in a book it must be true.

Thanks for not presenting an actual argument as to why I should believe you.
Click to expand...

I would suspect that the writer Kupchan is Jewish (not 100% sure). That should be enough for people with your mental structure to sink through your knees as an act of worship.
 
Belz... said:
No matter what single book your subscribe to, focusing on the conclusions of one man is a recipe for disaster. Nietzsche wasn't a god. He said a number of interesting things but he's not always right.
Click to expand...

If you read careful what I said than you will notice that I said 'if I had a a bible...'. Meaning: I don't have a (single) bible, not even the Zarathustra.

Did I tell you that I have read Mein Kampf? :D
 
But the times are changing, Corsair. Now it is you who is going to be destroyed. We have a united Europe (500 million), that is still whiter than America has ever been, plus a valuable trojan horse position within the Atlantic 'alliance' and we will never forget what you did to us. America is losing on all fronts: it has given Iraq to the Iranians, Europe is forced into energy dependence to the white christian nationalist Russians (a good thing from racial perspective), the US is facing an economic armageddon, and is controlled by a zionist faction who does not care about the fate of America. The US is invaded from all sides by hostile foreigners with an historic and racial axe to grind, an invasion encouraged by the anti-white zionist cabal that rules the joint. The European strategy must be to play the Russian card. Siberia alone constitutes 10% of the worlds land mass, a valuable asset in the new reality of global warming. The white race must sacrifice Australia and give it to the Chinese, Britain to the Islam, America will be torn apart as a result of ethnic strife, like it does everywhere and every time. We Europeans must be prepared to 'storm the opposite beach' once the dams start to break and participate in the coming land grab and secure land for our cousins, who will be simply recolonized by us Europeans. The coming zionist induced war of the US against Iran will be the straw that will break the camels back.
Click to expand...

I have seen some crazy crap on JREF (we seem to attract nutcases the way that honey attracts flies) but this just might take the cake.
And it is interesting that in some other posts this guy admits he want to see European Noblilty take supreme power again, and excluse the Lower Classes from any say in Government. Welcome back to the Middle Ages.
 
Last edited:
dudalb said:
I have seen some crazy crap on JREF (we seem to attract nutcases the way that honey attracts flies) but this just might take the cake.
And it is interesting that in some other posts this guy admits he want to see European Noblilty take supreme power again, and excluse the Lower Classes from any say in Government. Welcome back to the Middle Ages.
Click to expand...

I never said anything about 'going back to the (Christian) Middle Ages'. I am a self-declared post-Christian, remember. I did hint at Roman elements in my political system of the future. But that is probably too barbaric in your eyes as well. As will be anything that deviates to much from Bolshevism (ironically the most barbaric system ever, but very much open for elements of dudalb's beloved 'Lower Classes').
 
Last edited:
9/11-investigator said:
I would suspect that the writer Kupchan is Jewish (not 100% sure). That should be enough for people with your mental structure to sink through your knees as an act of worship.
Click to expand...

Not sure I follow you. I have neither love nor hate for the Jewish people. In fact you'll find I don't really care about them (or any other ethnic group) one way or another.

If you read careful what I said than you will notice that I said 'if I had a a bible...'. Meaning: I don't have a (single) bible, not even the Zarathustra.
Click to expand...

Sorry, then.
 
Hmm. No response to my little quiz. I guess we can chalk up Dutch, German and Russian history on nein11's ignorance list as well. Stunning he doesn't even know a part of history he's been taught in primary school. Or was the linked hint too artsy? ;)
 
9/11-investigator said:
So what are you then? A Cajun? Quebecquois?
Click to expand...


I'm a Canadian. I feel no need to subclassify more than that.


9/11-investigator said:
We could argue about Poland, but the invasion of the other countries was provoked by the British who started to prepare for similar 1914 kind of invasions themselves.
Click to expand...


You have to be pretty stupid to be provoked into falling into your enemy's trap if you know the trap is there. Congratulations, your own theory has just made the Nazis even more stupid than they were in reality.


9/11-investigator said:
This is like saying that you helped putting out the fire after you caused the burning in the first place!
Click to expand...


You still appear to be laboring under the delusion that the military of a industrialized nation-state does not require the total effort of the industry of that nation-state to support and maintain it. Destroy that industry, and that nation's military was finished. The western Allies did an excellent job destroying German industry once they have focused on the proper tactics and strategies. And the destruction of that industry gave the Russians an easier time than they would have had otherwise. Or do, for example, 1,200 German tanks without fuel constitute a useful military force in your bizarre alternate reality?


9/11-investigator said:
Nobody denies that Germany lost. But they lost honourably against an overwhelmingly outnumbering force.
Click to expand...


It didn't just lose, it was crushed. Its military forces wrecked, its economy shattered, its cities pulverized, its capital captured, much of its territory occupied by enemy troops, its airspace controlled by enemy air forces. Germany started the wind of total war and reaped the whirlwind of full results. You can thank the brilliant Nazi leadership for getting Germany beaten as badly as it was. Most of the decisions made by the Reich's leadership were the wrong ones, and Hitler was at the top. Cutting fighter production during the Battle of Britain? Brilliant move! The 1944 Ardennes offensive where German forces only had enough fuel to get halfway to their objectives? What genius!

Only a complete idiot would launch an offensive without enough fuel to get to the objectives. Only an utter moron would order fighter production reduced at the time a major battle was occurring and fighters were being lost. Just two examples of the stupidity which emerged from German leadership and Hitler in particular.


9/11-investigator said:
That might have contributed to the end result, but the Germans really lost due to the endless spaces of Russia in which the Russians could steadily retreat without losing the game.
Click to expand...


No, Germany lost, as I already demonstrated amply, due to hubris. It invaded Russian with inadequate force with inadequate logistical support. Had it not been for the Russians being so bad at the start, Barbarossa never would have gotten as far as it did.


9/11-investigator said:
Had the Germans captured Moscow, the spider in centralistically organized USSR, that probably would have dissolved the USSR. Unfortunately that did not happen, but it was close.
Click to expand...



It was only close because the Russians were so bad at the start. Even then, it wasn't really that close. By the time the Germans neared Moscow, their forces had already been stretched past the breaking point and the problems of inadequate force and inadequate supply had taken hold. Their attack had exhausted itself. The only way the Germans could have captured Moscow, given the state in which it started the invasion, would have been for the Russians to have performed even worse than they actually did.


9/11-investigator said:
But the physical fighting was done by the Russians...
Click to expand...


I wasn't aware that was under dispute. But their fighting was made easier by the western Allies progressively crippling German war industry as well as the huge amount of material that was sent to Russia. Perhaps most important of all were those 350,000+ transport trucks, which allowed the Russian infantry to keep pace with its armour as well as rapidly move the huge amount of supplies needed. This in contrast to Germany which never really developed an all-mechanized military, and relied primarily on horse-drawn carts to move much of its supplies.


9/11-investigator said:
Might all be true. Your point?
Click to expand...


"Might be true"? Trying reading just about any book on military tactics and strategies. These are well-known truths of warfare, and were especially true during WWII.

The point is that if Germany was so concerned about an attack from Russia, it should have negotiated to buy time and construct its defences. Defence is easier and more cost-effective than offence. And the Germans were noted for their ability to conduct defensive battles during the Normandy campaign.


9/11-investigator said:
But the peaceloving Soviets (your buddy) had an advantage of 7 to 1 in this respect!
Click to expand...


The Soviets aren't "my buddy," facts are. Having a 7:1 advantage in raw numbers of tanks means nothing unless (a) all of those tanks have the necessary fuel and ammunition; (b) all of those tanks have well-trained crews; (c) all of those tanks are of relatively modern design and not obsolete; (d) all of those tanks are not needed elsewhere to defend other fronts; and (e) all of those tanks could have been moved to the western lines to assault Germany.

Tactical airpower, artillery, mines, and obstacles such as tank traps and ditches are all further ways to blunt any advantage in armour one's opponent may have.

As a final note, using armour without infantry support was generally a very bad idea.


9/11-investigator said:
The chances for defense were bleak for the Germans; they had no vast hinterland like the Soviets had.
Click to expand...


You don't need vast terrain. You only need properly defended terrain. The German defenders made the most of the terrain at Omaha Beach and the assaulting U.S. forces paid a heavy cost. The bocage terrain of Normandy was a defender's dream which the Germans exploited to maximum advantage. The Japanese on Iwo Jima were in well-prepared defensive positions that took great effort and casualties on the part of the U.S. to dislodge. And so on. WWII history is filled with such examples.
 
Last edited:
9/11-investigator said:
If you read careful what I said than you will notice that I said 'if I had a a bible...'. Meaning: I don't have a (single) bible, not even the Zarathustra.
Click to expand...
It doesn't matter what brand of woo you subscribe to, now does it?

Did I tell you that I have read Mein Kampf? :D
Click to expand...
Did I tell you I believe everything you say?
 
Corsair 115 said:
You have to be pretty stupid to be provoked into falling into your enemy's trap if you know the trap is there. Congratulations, your own theory has just made the Nazis even more stupid than they were in reality.
Click to expand...

Seems like 9/11 Investor is saying that the Nazis never had a choice in anything they did. That they were not masters of their own actions.

Doesn't reflect well on ol' Hitler, does it ?
 
Belz... said:
Seems like 9/11 Investor is saying that the Nazis never had a choice in anything they did. That they were not masters of their own actions.

Doesn't reflect well on ol' Hitler, does it ?
Click to expand...

One of the really interesting aspects of the Third Reich was that the economic recovery Hitler brought about was a complete sham. His economic advisers created a system of vouchers to pay for re-armament. As described in the history books, the technique sounds to me a lot like check-kiting. If Hitler hadn't started his ruthless expansion into surrounding nations when he did (and looted their treasuries), the economy would have collapsed and the Third Reich would have come to an ignominious, but peaceful, end.
 
Last edited:
ddt said:
Your conclusion that nein11 had special education is consistent with dafydd's conclusion that he works at a sheltered workplace. I say we have some convergence of evidence here. ;)
Click to expand...

The Dutch system takes good care of the mentally disadvantaged.
 
Yes it would appear that in 9/11's world the German were complete moron's who oddly were better at everyone at everything but got suckered into doing everything the Jews wanted - to destroy themselves (however looking at modern German even that doesn't seemed to have occurred)

Can you say hyper contradiction? LOL
 
Gawdzilla said:
Paging Jeff Foxworthy! You're needed in the CT forum!
Click to expand...

"You might be a denier..."


(Living my entire life north of the Mason-Dixon line, you'd think I'd find little in common with Foxworthy and that his humor would be foreign to me, but I find it funny, because I grew up in rural Vermont, and there were plenty of rednecks around (my home town is about half hippy and half redneck, they got along because the hippies brought the weed and the rednecks brought the keg to any parties going on) that weren't much different to the people Foxworthy references in his humor.)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom