Understanding the WW2 nazi act

Do you understand the reasons for ww2 nazi actions (note: understanding is NOT agreing!)

  • Yes

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Somewhat

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • No

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • What is a nazi??

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    0
Playasia - Play-Asia.com: Online Shopping for Digital Codes, Video Games, Toys, Music, Electronics & more

Bold

-kenja sama
Retired
IMPORTANT: The question is NOT if you agree with those actions. The question is do you understand why a nation resorted to such horibles and terrible actions

As always, forum rules apply. Read them -> RULES
No disrespectfull, hainous or agressives coments will be tolerated

-----

This is a second general question thread. Keep in mind I am trying to explain the pasts events. Not condoming or supporting them.

The question is do you have an understanding of what happend in germany around 1939 that caused the german goverment to invade its neighboors and to start a genocide against jews.

I will simply start the discussion by saying the german people did not all sudenly turn completely mad and insane. And keep in mind that Hitler was supported by his people, so it was not a military coup where the country was forced into a war they did not choose.

As for the jews, why them? What made them, in the public eyes, so dangerous and despicable that they should be emprissoned (most people did not know about the death part of the death camps) A part of the answer might lie in the image that some jews had. They were often seen as rich people (banker and jeweler mainly). And Germany was having large economic issues partly due to the penalties inflicted on them for loosing the first war.

So in the mind of many people, the jews, which were some times immigrants, seemed a cause of the problem. After all, how could they be so rich while others were having such a hard time!

I will stop here for now and let others bring their thougths.
 

scar_ishbalan

-san
Kouhai
Man i was gonna vote "yes" but accidentally i give a null vote: but here´s what i have to say:

As you say the nacist and facist didn´t just pop out. At my point of view it is a matter of deception, rage, and finaly vengance.

After WWI finished, the survivors hated 1) the comunists and 2) the jews. They blamed them for surender, so hitler didn´t have any problem to reach the power. At the end of November 1923 German registered something called "Hyperinflation" (this I know for my macroeconomy class, but i dont know if this term is correct in inglish) they registered a 2 year inflation of 10,000,000,000 % "before the war, we carried our money in our pockets and returned with bread on a bag, then we carried our money on a bag and returned with the bread in our pockets"
In echonomy this means good and bad money, paper money reachs almos no value while coins value something, but nobody want´s to change them.

So in this story some guy called Hitler rescued the situation, he took the money from jews, and the rest is history
 

wceend

-Spama Sosei
Sempai
what a well timed poll .
yesterday a muslim boy in my class claimed the holocaust never took place, because they said on that Al jazeira (that arabian tv station) that it was a lie (dunno if it s true, i don`t have al jazeira on my tv , and i can`t make a word ou of it anyway) so he started a discussion with my history teacher about it , and i must say thought "what a dumb motherfucker" justbecause his favorite tv show says so , it didn`t happen , because it did and many people died, you can`t jsut deny that..
 

Bold

-kenja sama
Retired
QUOTE (wceend @ Mar 17 2006, 01:39 AM)yesterday a muslim boy in my class claimed the holocaust never took place, because they said on that Al jazeira
I would be supprised they said that. AlJazeira is usually a relatively good source of information (you can count on them to get the story out and the basic facts straigth). Maybe it was a guest who said something like that. But even then, to consider WW2 a conspiracy theory is rather BIG!

---

I wanted to add onto what scar_ishbalan said. Not only did you need a bag of money to buy a little bread, Germany was also forced to pay large sums of money to other contries to repay the damage of WW1. So everyone was broke including the goverment.

And when Hitler started and got elected, he was the leader of a left party (yes, I did say left, that is not a mistake). He came to power supporting socialistic ideas. As in supporting and helping his people. The one main difference was that his definition of "his people" was not everyone living in germany. It was more restrictive.

The idea was to make jews a good part of german socialty. As a side note, gypsie (or bohemians, people who always travel with no specific home) were targeted by the same messures as jews.

It is also important to remember that surounding countries were invaded before Poland. But the rest of the world ignored Germany because no one wanted another world war. But many countries had defense trities with Poland, so the situation could no longer be ignored. The first invations, before Poland, were to regain territory that once belongued to Germany

So in a sense, WW2 is a direct result of WW1. There was only a 20 years slow down of hostilities in between.
 

neutrality

-dono
Kouhai
You have to also remember that Hitler revived the economy of Germany mainly by increasing the military power of Germany, which was also ageinst what was agreed on end of the WWI. He would acheive nothing if he dosen't use the military an by attcking first, he gained an advantage,

As for the prosecution of Jews, what Bold said was correct, they were prosecuted mainly bcause of their image and people started hating them because of the propaganda.

Also, if you look at history, as a race, Jewish race has been prosected many times, infact I believe they were the most prosected race in the history.
 

noob

±ⁿ°°ɓ±
Retired
I don't care what you all say about Hitler, but in my opinion, he was a great leader at the begininng. However as time passed on, he became extremely racist. He was known as a Genius who you may not find a lot, but just like other geniuses in the past. Fame conquered most of the brain and made the person paralyze and unable to reconsider its actions.

Jews were not the only people who were slaughtered in WWII. But they were, indeed the only ones who were targeted from the very begininng of the Rise of Social Party in Germany. Hitler, who was seeking power for a very long time now found a solution to his problems. His problem was weakness and unpopularity and the solution was to blame others for everything. The jews in Germany, as we all know were the rich ones and Hitler blamed them. Because they were simply rich, had another religion, were very well educated, smart and talented (at most of the cases anyway). Therefore, blaming them wouldn't be a bad idea since Germans were seeking someone to be blamed and there it was, Jews, a prefect target in every possible way. But there still were some people who liked Jews a bit, so he had to bring down their status by giving Jews and Gypsies the same exact status. The story goes on and on, but unfortunately I have to stop right here and start re-activating my norton.
 

dchaosblade

- Lord of Chaos
Retired
QUOTE (noob @ Mar 17 2006, 02:28 PM)I don't care what you all say about Hitler, but in my opinion, he was a great leader at the begininng. However as time passed on, he became extremely racist. He was known as a Genius who you may not find a lot, but just like other geniuses in the past. Fame conquered most of the brain and made the person paralyze and unable to reconsider its actions.
Although I agree with you that Hitler was a political genius (not military, because he actually let his generals do most of that), I don't think he was a great leader. Being a great leader is taking into consideration everyone's side of the story, making decisions that will benefit everyone - or most of the people - retaining the peace, and gaining economic stability and growth. Of all these, the only thing he managed to do was to make the economic situation in Germany grow a little bit before crashing it into the ground again after the affects of WWII.

He was a political genius, a wonderful speaker and debater, but by no means a great leader - simply a very manipulative one.
 

Kashisu

-san
Kouhai
i agree that hitler was a genius... he pulled the country up from out of its first loss and launched an all out war with all the major powers and had almost succeeded..... however, his personal views are less than laudable.... the persecution of the jews and polish and etc was awful......

so i was reading dan brown yesterday and i thought this would be appropriate... "history is written by the winners".. i'm not saying that concentration camps didnt exist, but maybe there wasnt as many deaths as the US reported... like my grandparents were at Tianemmen (sp?) square and they swear that it wasn't as bad as it sounded on the news
 

neutrality

-dono
Kouhai
QUOTE (dchaosblade @ Mar 17 2006, 05:55 PM) Being a great leader is taking into consideration everyone's side of the story, making decisions that will benefit everyone - or most of the people - retaining the peace, and gaining economic stability and growth.
That is merely your opinion of what a reat leader should be. Although I don't like Hitler, you have to give him credit for what he had done. He made a dirt poor country into one of the most powerful countris in the world. Infact I think he had a indirectly responsible for successful German country that exist today.
 

scar_ishbalan

-san
Kouhai
There´s no point to argue hittler wasnt a great leader. and a general. One of the bad points, is that he lost the war and was wicked. But can you imagine the greatness of the goals he reched, Europe felt to him, he was the leader of the SS. Maybe his problem was that he let it get to his head, at some point he believed himself invincible, but of course, noone can go against the entire world
 

noob

±ⁿ°°ɓ±
Retired
He was too navie and scared of taking risks. He was also a very impatient person. There aren't much things that we can say about Hitler that no one else knows.
 

hamasusuke

-aniue
Retired
Noob's right. Also, his impatience led to the end of the war. He launched an all-out attack that nearly ended his reign. Refer to the middle-school/high-school history books, they mention alot about hitler's impatience.
 

noob

±ⁿ°°ɓ±
Retired
QUOTE (hamasusuke @ Mar 18 2006, 12:56 PM) Noob's right. Also, his impatience led to the end of the war. He launched an all-out attack that nearly ended his reign. Refer to the middle-school/high-school history books, they mention alot about hitler's impatience.
That too, but if you may recall. He had almost defeated the British air force RAF (Royal Air Force). However he ordered his airforce to retreat and stop the attacks. How about Dunkirk? Wasn't that a sign of his impatientness? Attacking USSR was yet another sign of this personality of his.
 

dchaosblade

- Lord of Chaos
Retired
had he not have dragged the U.S. into the war, he probably would have ended up winning. His biggest mistake was not taking heed to our warnings about discontinuing sub attacks on us. All he had to do was not shoot the U.S. ships, but noooo, he decided "to hell with them, we can take them! *RAWR* *shoots at U.S. ships and gets his ass kicked*"
 

Bold

-kenja sama
Retired
QUOTE (dchaosblade @ Mar 19 2006, 12:55 AM)had he not have dragged the U.S. into the war, he probably would have ended up winning. Actually, the US played a minor role in the european theater (they were the main force in the pacific war). What really brougth the downfall of germany was his attack on the USSR for the petrolum reserves. That created a double front for Germany. And the USSR is a rather large oponent, simply due to the amount of men they could throw! (and throw is actually the good word if we look at the battle of Stalingrad!)

Having to move troops from the western front to the easter one, splitted the army in two. If it had not been for that split, the allied landing in Normandie would have most likely failed. They barely pulled it off, so imagine if the garisson was twice the size!

Also consider that the reason Normandie was not that well garded was because the German were waiting for the invasion higher up north.

But in the end, the problem was that germany could not wait too much to invade the USSR because they were starting to run out of oil. And oil is extremely important to an army!
 

noob

±ⁿ°°ɓ±
Retired
LOL! USA came into WWII because of Japan not Germany. Where've you been dawg? :DDDDDDDD
 

Daedroth

-oni
Retired
QUOTE (Bold @ Mar 19 2006, 08:45 AM) Actually, the US played a minor role in the european theater (they were the main force in the pacific war). What really brougth the downfall of germany was his attack on the USSR for the petrolum reserves. That created a double front for Germany. And the USSR is a rather large oponent, simply due to the amount of men they could throw! (and throw is actually the good word if we look at the battle of Stalingrad!)

Having to move troops from the western front to the easter one, splitted the army in two. If it had not been for that split, the allied landing in Normandie would have most likely failed. They barely pulled it off, so imagine if the garisson was twice the size!

Also consider that the reason Normandie was not that well garded was because the German were waiting for the invasion higher up north.

But in the end, the problem was that germany could not wait too much to invade the USSR because they were starting to run out of oil. And oil is extremely important to an army!
Also, Hitler had a disease so he had to rush his attack on Soviet. When he attacked Soviet he only had 5-6 years left to live, so he didn't have much time.
 

dchaosblade

- Lord of Chaos
Retired
QUOTE (noob @ Mar 19 2006, 01:21 AM) LOL! USA came into WWII because of Japan not Germany. Where've you been dawg? :DDDDDDDD
USA entered the pacific theatre specifically to ward off the Japanese attack due to the bombing at Pearl Harbor; HOWEVER, that is not the reason the US joined the Allies against the Nazi party. The USA entered into the war against the Nazi's because their subs were attacking our supply ships. We gave them many warnings saying that if they discontinued, we would not go against them; but they ignored the warnings and continued attacks. That is the reason the US entered the war against the Nazis. Perhaps YOU should get your facts straight.
 

noob

±ⁿ°°ɓ±
Retired
QUOTE (dchaosblade @ Mar 19 2006, 12:08 PM) USA entered the pacific theatre specifically to ward off the Japanese attack due to the bombing at Pearl Harbor; HOWEVER, that is not the reason the US joined the Allies against the Nazi party. The USA entered into the war against the Nazi's because their subs were attacking our supply ships. We gave them many warnings saying that if they discontinued, we would not go against them; but they ignored the warnings and continued attacks. That is the reason the US entered the war against the Nazis. Perhaps YOU should get your facts straight.
USA had already entered WWII when they provided supplies to allies. Yes, that'd be before Japanese attacked them. When Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor, USA had officially entered WWII.


"We" ??? I'm sorry, I wasn't aware of your age and previous position in US government, my deepest apologize


Oh yeah, "You" only entered the European War, because Hitler sunk the "your" ships around the allies boarder. Seems reasonable to me, someone is feeding your enemy and you're starving. You wouldn't want your enemy get stronger by minute and you get weaker by second. Hmm... Yeah Hitler did ignore your warnings and sunk the supplies ships, I don't see a reason to why he shouldn't have sunk 'em.
 

Bold

-kenja sama
Retired
QUOTE (dchaosblade @ Mar 19 2006, 01:08 PM) That is the reason the US entered the war against the Nazis. Perhaps YOU should get your facts straight.
Need I point out Japan was working with Germany and Italy inside the Axis and it was well decided that the USA belonged to Japan. They were the ones assigned to conquering and ruling them in the axis ruled post WW2 time.

The general mind of US people during WW2 was that they were safe far away behind a safe buffer zone called the sea! Most of the population did not support the involvement against nazi subs, because they did not want to get dragged into an "unnecessary war". It took a very skilled admiral (Yamamoto of the japanease imperial navy) to change the public's opinion of the threat posed by the axis.
 
Top