Are you referring us back to your last posting for silly remarks?
There was one the Hitler could have done, he could have stopped being a psychopathic maniac and listened to what his officers in the field were actually saying…
I agree.It seems that any officer that disagreed with him was dismissed.
- Not have attempted such a premature attack on the USSR
- Not been such an *** at the beginning and, instead, start killing Jews once you have many countries supporting you
- Not killed himself -.-, this seems obvious but maybe he missed it
I was watching the Movie “The Rise of Evil”, in which Robert Carlyle played a very convincing meglomanic Hitler. You got the feeling that all he had to do was nod his head at some one and that person would disappear. A true blooded maniac.
In that movie their is a scene right after the Beer hall putch of 1923, when the military is hunting to arrest him
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beer_Hall_Putsch
He hides in the house of his friend and is so depressed he is about to blow his brains out. But the friends wife stops him from doing this. If she had not stopped him , all history would have changed for ever.
Don’t take everything that movie shows for the truth. It is, after all, a TV-drama. There are plenty of scenes and ‘truths’ which this movie features which are still highly debated among historians whether they are true or not, and others are simply made up.
You should look at it more as a history-drama than a reenacted-documentary.
This might seem rather elementary, but no country could have, then or now, succeed in a long and protracted war against what was essentially “the rest of the world” without immediate control of adequate natural resources. Germany had a fighting war machine that was second to none; however, they had less and less fuel and natural resources to operate that machine as the war progressed. Germany’s road to victory turned into a holding action, and then a long hard withdrawal (for them and us) after they abandoned their strategy to take the Caucasus and the Middle East after the loss of North Africa and Stalingrad.
Um, how would “killing Jews” have helped Hitler win? Not killing himself? If he’d have done it in 1942, all bets are off on who wins–or at least gets a settlement…
I read krazedkat putting it the other way, i.e. that the "instead’ statement meant that Hitler killing Jews was counter-productive.
Although, even if that is the correct reading, I don’t know that it had too much to do with winning or losing the war. The Holocaust, and sundry other Nazi extermination programs of lesser note outside their own communities but equal or greater numbers (Russians) and perhaps similar proportional impact (Gypsies) had nothing to do with the war, apart from occurring during and being facilitated by it.
There was certainly a diversion of resources from potential military uses in pursuing these extermination and persecution programs, but I doubt that Germany would have won even if it hadn’t engaged in them. The Luftwaffe and Kreigsmarine didn’t lose resources to them but each was still defeated in its own arena. Even if the einsatzgruppen stiffened resistance in the East, the Heer certainly didn’t lose North Africa or Italy because of the extermination programs. but only because they were defeated militarily.
i agree with numbers 1 and 2, but the 3rd was kind of a given, even though he was in a bunker during the bombing, it would be a better idea in his mind to kill himself rather than be captured and taken as a POW. killing himself would bassically just end the war on the eastern front, even though it was bassically already coming to its end.
He said to start killing Jews once he has countries supporting him. Hitler started killing jews as soon as he got power in 1932. starting the war in 39, please correct me if i am wrong. but if he just tried to get other countries supporting hiom and the mass extermination, then maybe the war wouldn’t have started with such great intensity, because if many other axis countries like france and italy started killing jews with him, he would have been able to get away with more, gaining more power and so on…
That is essentially what I mean.
hmm… i think you should join the conversations about russian T34’s
Please refrain from going off topic. Back onto the topic Hitler winning the war.
i see, does anyone here think that if hitler had known about valkyrie, he would have prevented it, thus being able to sort out some sort of treaty with stalin, then winning the war?
And if he didn’t attack the USSR because they would have become close allies elsewise.
yea, but still if stalin wanted to join the axis, he could’ve, and won the war for hitler, there is no war hitler would deny that kind of offer.
Yes but what Hitler demanded of the Wehrmacht, Hitler got. Certainly the Wehrmacht did every thing in its power to achieve Hitlers demands. Hitlers demands shaped the entire prewar rearmament phase and most of the first half of the war. Had The Wehrmacht been left to pursuite things their own way, that path and the out come would have been completely different.
It is obvious that if they USSR was part of the axis the axis would have won, yes.
of course, considering they practically won the war on the eastern front single handedly, if they can defeat hitler and the SS, they can easily defeat britian, USA, and canada.