Really sad. All thoose men were killed because of one man. I mean if Hitler had never existed, there wouldn't be a war. I'm not blaiming all on Hitler. But no Hitler = no war = no dead soldiers. 
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
osteles said:
Indeed... and Pitt, Churchill, Truman, Ford, Kennedy, Kissinger, Reagan, Bush...
Gurrah__ said:Really sad. All thoose men were killed because of one man. I mean if Hitler had never existed, there wouldn't be a war. I'm not blaiming all on Hitler. But no Hitler = no war = no dead soldiers.
Uh, I'm pretty sure the unstable political situation in Europe would eventually have led to a great conflict one way or another, especially if you look at Stalin's aggressive foreign policies. The Allies would not just have sat aside peacefully while Stalin gobbled up eastern and central Europe, not to mention the wide fear of communism in the USA.
Now, to blame exactly everything on Hitler is a bit simplistic, IMHO, there were a wide range of factor directly responsible for this particular chain of events (Versailles Treaty to mention one..).
Gurrah__ said:Really sad. All thoose men were killed because of one man. I mean if Hitler had never existed, there wouldn't be a war. I'm not blaiming all on Hitler. But no Hitler = no war = no dead soldiers.
Unfoutunately, the absence of Hitler do not equal to the absence of war (WWII?). He is just one of the many possibilities that can trigger war. This is a cruel world, afterall. The speech of Count Moltke in 1890 still carry weight even to this day, "its length will be incalculable and its end nowhere in sight... and woe to him who first sets fire to Europe, who first puts the flame to the powderkeg!"
Gurrah__ said:Really sad. All thoose men were killed because of one man. I mean if Hitler had never existed, there wouldn't be a war. I'm not blaiming all on Hitler. But no Hitler = no war = no dead soldiers.
Oh, there would have been a war, you can be sure of it. Just not that war, and perhaps not at that time. People are like that, unfortunately.
By the way, has the title of this thread struck anyone else as odd?
I don't think it was intended, but the wording implies that there was a "good side" of the war.
I don't think it was intended, but the wording implies that there was a "good side" of the war.
Well, to some degree there was a "good side" of WWII.
As a German I am (strange?) proud about what the German soldiers achieved on battlefield, outnumbered and outproduced. But I am also thankful that Germany lost the war. Life would not be the same if Germany had won - and not to speak of the many horrors and atrocies of WWII which ashame me.
But the point is that we saw how fragile a democracy is and how well propaganda works. We all should try to prevent things like those that happened in WWII from ever happening again. We all should listen carefully and ask ourself what the real intentions behind economical and political news are. We all should try to uphold values and morale and shouldnt let us blind by people - just because someone claims to be honest or a patriot, etc. doesnt mean he is. Especially it does not mean that his "companions" are.
Unfortunately we still let things like Bosnia happen - who knows what could have happened if they would have had the military power of a WWII Germany.
The sad thing is that humanity probably always needs the worst to "evolve" to a more human level. I would be happy if we could solve our worldwide economical, ecological and social problems without going through another nightmare again, but am sceptical that nowadays a real "good guy" could make it to the top and achieve the drastical changes needed.
And I doubt that there would have been no WWII without Hitler. Maybe we all are lucky that it was "just" Hitler and not someone more skilled.
As a German I am (strange?) proud about what the German soldiers achieved on battlefield, outnumbered and outproduced. But I am also thankful that Germany lost the war. Life would not be the same if Germany had won - and not to speak of the many horrors and atrocies of WWII which ashame me.
But the point is that we saw how fragile a democracy is and how well propaganda works. We all should try to prevent things like those that happened in WWII from ever happening again. We all should listen carefully and ask ourself what the real intentions behind economical and political news are. We all should try to uphold values and morale and shouldnt let us blind by people - just because someone claims to be honest or a patriot, etc. doesnt mean he is. Especially it does not mean that his "companions" are.
Unfortunately we still let things like Bosnia happen - who knows what could have happened if they would have had the military power of a WWII Germany.
The sad thing is that humanity probably always needs the worst to "evolve" to a more human level. I would be happy if we could solve our worldwide economical, ecological and social problems without going through another nightmare again, but am sceptical that nowadays a real "good guy" could make it to the top and achieve the drastical changes needed.
And I doubt that there would have been no WWII without Hitler. Maybe we all are lucky that it was "just" Hitler and not someone more skilled.
Last edited:
the mad russian said:
No, I'm german. I was born on the other side of the iron curtain, so I had my share of living in a "workers paradise". And I remember how the russian soldiers were treated by their superiors (and how nice they were to children).
It's easy to point at the weak spots of democracys, but it's even easier to forget the good things in it (for example that you can argue about politicians without the fear of beeing taken away for your opinion).
I served in the german airforce, so you can imagine how shocked I (and my buddies) were, when we realized that our lifes count (almost) nothing.
It's easy to point at the weak spots of democracys, but it's even easier to forget the good things in it (for example that you can argue about politicians without the fear of beeing taken away for your opinion).
Yup, maybe because of our special history (WWI WWII Cold War) and being continously "brainwashed" about it, Germans are probably more sensible and concerned about countries that turn in the same direction Germany did in the 30s. Indeed Hitler got the power he needed to turn Germany into a dictatorship by a democratic process. Many years later we probably ask ourself how for gods sake people could have been crazy enough to vote NSDAP or let Hitler do his "reforms". But in fact there are some similarities in Italy, USA and especially Russia where Putin just is about to do continue with reforms that for sure dont strengthen Democracy.
Yup, maybe because of our special history (WWI WWII Cold War) and being continously "brainwashed" about it, Germans are probably more sensible and concerned about countries that turn in the same direction Germany did in the 30s. Indeed Hitler got the power he needed to turn Germany into a dictatorship by a democratic process. Many years later we probably ask ourself how for gods sake people could have been crazy enough to vote NSDAP or let Hitler do his "reforms". But in fact there are some similarities in Italy, USA and especially Russia where Putin just is about to do continue with reforms that for sure dont strengthen Democracy.
well it is different between Stalin and Hitler. Who are saying Stalingrad is not worth it? Did you suggest that Stalin should surrender to save lives?!. Number of death may not a problems when we consider what we use that number for. Millions died for their country? That's good! But dying for the rich bastards? Can we say the US has some bargain trading hundred of GI lives for oil control in Irak?!What the ordinary US people received? Lower gas cost! What they paid? Some of their lives!
About Hilter seizing power in a democracy, well ordinary people many not know about Hitler' intention, but the rich German capitalists may know well. They are going to broke because of the Great Depresion and the rich English and Frech bastards' shameless demands. So they support Hitler and give him money for mass advertise. They hope Hitler's guns will bring the wealth, colonies, market, labor of the world for their corporations.
So the lesson is, democracy or dictatorship, is just a mean. Which is ruling, the rich or the poor, that is the matter! Romans is happy with republic, the big three,dictator, emperor. But Roman slaves don't care, like American black slave don't care if American is democracy, dictator or colonie of England!
He he you just read some communist idea! Is that appealing to you?
. Number of death may not a problems when we consider what we use that number for. Millions died for their country? That's good! But dying for the rich bastards? Can we say the US has some bargain trading hundred of GI lives for oil control in Irak?!What the ordinary US people received? Lower gas cost! What they paid? Some of their lives! About Hilter seizing power in a democracy, well ordinary people many not know about Hitler' intention, but the rich German capitalists may know well. They are going to broke because of the Great Depresion and the rich English and Frech bastards' shameless demands. So they support Hitler and give him money for mass advertise. They hope Hitler's guns will bring the wealth, colonies, market, labor of the world for their corporations.
So the lesson is, democracy or dictatorship, is just a mean. Which is ruling, the rich or the poor, that is the matter! Romans is happy with republic, the big three,dictator, emperor. But Roman slaves don't care, like American black slave don't care if American is democracy, dictator or colonie of England!
He he you just read some communist idea! Is that appealing to you?
It's not a conspiracy, it's Malthus' "An Essay on the Principle of Population".Gul Brown said:
Just imagine Chamberlain and Daladier would have STARTED a war in 1938 before Munich. Sometimes the love for peace and avoiding war at all cost backfires and something even worse happens.
cheers,
Brentor
cheers,
Brentor
Xipe said:
I respectfully disagree. The US (or any other country, believe me), puts whatever effort they deem necessary in terms of money and time into the development of better equipment (or doctrine). That is - if it doesn't seem cost-effective, they don't bother. Same goes for actually giving such equipment to the men and women on the battlefield. It doesn't matter much if a new rifle or new technology exists, if it hasn't been implemented yet. The cost of armoring all vehicles in Iraq in terms of money is larger than the cost of human lives that gets killed by bombs or firearms in unarmored vehicles. Or at least that is the govt point of wiev. (You never hear anyone actually say that, though).
Business is business as usual... unfortunately