How old were you when you realized Hitler's annexation of Czechoslovakia proved he was unwilling to cooperate with Britian and was only using German territorial claims as a pretext for seizing non-German land, his invasion of Poland both literally and figuratively paved the way for communism to conquer Eastern Europe and Poland's only diplomatic error was not mobilizing fast enough (you could argue trusting the eternal Anglo was a mistake, but they didn't have a whole lot of other options), the atrocities committed by the German army against civilians, especially in Eastern Europe, far outweighed any the Germans had suffered at their hands (even if things like Stormfront's account of the "Bromberg massacre" really happened), and none of the business about nonwhites invading Europe would have ever happened if a substantial portion of Europe's best fighters and statesmen hadn't killed each other in the ensuing World War because the Jews would have no basis to decry nationalism or villify white people, and ultimately Hitler is a large part of the reason why globalism as we know it exists?
How old were you when you realized Hitler's annexation of Czechoslovakia proved he was unwilling to cooperate with...
>not being a NatSoc
It's like you don't want the White Devil to go extinct.
should britain joined forces with reich none of that would have happened. and nationalism is stained only because of somethhing that never happened(holohoax)
ur a cuk yeh ok yeh u cukin
yeah, because fucking soviet union was so much better
Jeez, I can't believe I'm the one explaining this to you. Ever heard of a guy named Piłsudski? Poland was a first line of defense against the Soviet Union. Hitler literally declared war on that.
Hold up
>*Starves a ton of whites in Ukraine but it's okay cause they were hoarding grain from a regime they fought against*
So you be saying
*Invades Poland and Ukraine right after forming the USSR*
That
*Allows Banks to control your politics and economics since the 1700s*
Nazis
*Decides to continue mobilizing just because your Russian Ally is butthurt over some cunts getting fair retribution even though your militarized neighbor us telling you not to*
Ruined
*Turns Germany and the rest of Europe into a sex tourism capital because nationalism was already kind of ruined cause of serbs, splits up the largest Muslim empire while betraying other nationalists, refuses requests for peace while choosing a way larger threat to Europe over a guy that you should at least have a bit trust with*
Ruined nationalism and shiet???
I only believe that Hitler was meant to. He was sent by God in order to give us a sign of the world nearing its end.
See
Were your whole people genocided by the Soviets? No? Then dont bore us with your false equivalency, just because your dad has still a hateboner for the Ruskies.
It says on the page that he wanted to break up the Russians and further expand Poland
(phone posting)
You mean the part where he offered Poland a vague promise of more land in the East tomorrow if they give up their Western land today? You'd have to be a damn fool to take an offer like that, even disregarding what happened to Czechoslovakia.
not whole but a significant part of it(google katyn), plus that whole 50 years of occupation thingy
Yeah, at the expense of expanding into Soviet territory. That's not pretty smart. BTW are we talking Hitler or Pilsudski?
>policies I mostly agree with
Fuck right off.
You are making things worse.
We NEED more NatSocs. The more there are, the higher the chance of another inter whitoid war.
They are our only hope in cleansing this world of W*ite manace (and from liberating my beloved Croatia which is under Whitoid Occupied Government).
nobody claimed that but most natsocs act like niggers that dindu nuffin we wuz good boys saviours of europe n shiet.
I'm talking about Hitler and his pretext for invading Poland.
Ok
I say this because on the page of Pilsudski/Polish-soviet war (1919-1922 IIRC) he promoted the taking over and breaking down of the Soviet Union to expand polish territory.
He had actionable intel that the Soviets were planning to invade and annex Poland, so he launched a preemptive strike. He was wagering on the Ukrainians to rise up and help fight, and some did, but not enough to liberate the country permanently.
This is actually an interesting read. With points that I see supporters and anti-nazi people both gloss over.
Here's more for your reading pleasure.
Hitler saved Europe from communism, the "holocaust" would look like a tea party if the communists hadn't been stopped by the nazis and the mobilisation of the allies
*kills millions of military aged men, plus millions more women and children and leaves most of the continent in ruins*
We did it Männer, we saved Europe!
Conclusion of this is that we find the Soviets being inclined to territorial aggrandizement, but the poles guilty as well since they actually believed into expanding further east. Therefore, knowing the nature of both poles and Soviets, the Germans were justified in the invasion of Poland and betrayal of the USSR in Barbarossa. Also knowing there was a Communist revolution in Germany as well seeking to join the comintern or commie sphere of influence, we find the Germans also justified in what you can call a "pre-emptive strike".
I also like that post about German economy since it points out some things worth knowing for both Pro-Nazis and anti-Nazis.
>When you start an autistic war to maintain naval and economic supremacy and then do it again 25 years later but lose your supremacy in the aftermath, even though you won both times
Good thing they stopped those evil Germans though, I guess
Say what you want about German expansionism but the Danzig corridor should never have been given to poland.
You still want to apply his policies though. You were wrong and doomed the whites.
>blame the Germans for the things that the people who destroyed the German did
If Britain and France hadn't been retarded, then none of what you described would've happened. Stop trying to rationalize the fact that Roosevelt, Churchill, and Daladier fucked the Western world
All those deaths would never have happened had the Allies or whatever they were called never established the country of Poland, knowing it was going to be a shitshow. Also the yugoslavs. Those people were a mistake whom, had they not existed, WW1 would most likely have never happened.
Let me guess... you’re a kike mutt from Eastern Europe with no understanding of WWII outside of what your family and the MSM tell you.
Provide an argument instead of falling into their trap of being a caricature. We are nice to our /his/friends.
The purpose of Piłsudski's attack was to open a second front to delay the Soviet attack. It worked, and the war was and is considered a victory for Poland, even though it ended in status quo ante.
>Say what you want about German expansionism but the Danzig corridor should never have been given to poland.
Even if Poland had no claim to it, two wrongs don't make a right.
Ugh, this again. See
Read the OP again, slowly.
And guess what? None of that shit would've happened if Germany hadn't invaded France in 1914. Face it, there was a point where Hitler should've stopped but he didn't.
Wow, spectacular argument, A+. Now go blow your dog.
Ignore this. Fucking shitty discord with no one in it.
No Hitler, no mobilisation of allied forces, an unopposed conquest of Europe by communists and an even bigger bloodbath than WW2
How about you argue your points yourself instead of posting some random anons ramblings. They don't even have sources.
See
Europeans would've been much more able to resist Communist expansion if they weren't busy fighting each other.
Uh, yeah they are policies we mostly agree with. There's no other leader that was as relevant as Hitler who has more aligned policies with us. I really don't care for some niche mentions of people that never came into power and just wrote some stuff
How about you name some of Hitler's policies I agree with, if you're so sure I agree with most of them?
as a pole you should know better about the false dichotomy between genocidal maniacs and slightly less genocidal maniacs
>Read the OP again, slowly.
Fag. How am I wrong? Germany would've easily beaten the USSR if it didn't have to deal with the Western Allies, and that removes all of the serious issues with Communism that Europe faced. I don't care about what Germany's intentions were when annexing Czechoslovakia, nor do I care about some wartime atrocities when Western civilization as a whole is now on the brink
>Germany would've easily beaten the USSR if it didn't have to deal with the Western Allies, and that removes all of the serious issues with Communism that Europe faced.
Germany would've even more easily beaten the USSR if they didn't have to punch through most of the rest of Europe.
You should be grateful for Silesia and Pomerania, which is worth far more than the shithole Kresy you lost.
That’s retarded because it was clearly not when he took over small and insignificant countries. It was when the British made it look like Hitler was taking over a competing economic land power, to completely set the table against Britain, like the other industrial miracle that was the center of Poland. But the caricature still lives that Germany was set on war with its neighbors, even though it was agreed to be split with the Soviet Union.
Environmental protection laws, anti-smoking campaign, increased physical exercise during school, banking cartel acts.
-Ingraining a culture of pro government will to power into the right wing psychology, to ensure men seek to not only reach for gov power but want to use it as well
-Autarky, at least until domination is so obvious that trade is able to be subsidized by your ability to project power and bully foreign nations into you always having the better deal
>instilling racial consciousness into the masses so deeply as to ensure they will never be willingly compromised again unless forcefully conquered
>Germany would've even more easily beaten the USSR if they didn't have to punch through most of the rest of Europe.
That's what I said. What, are you that much of a "true principled conservative" that you'd rather have the USSR remain standing than have some massacres as German troops advanced East? What's your argument here if you admit that Germany would've won easily without Western Allied intervention?
Am I wrong or not about how they both had expansionist ambitions involving invasion of each other? I agree to what you said, but there was still Prometheanism which one could flip to be against your idea of "preemptive strike" (reread this if you need to)
And for why Germany invaded France was because France was allowed with Russia, where both IIRC were mobilizing for war. Germany invaded to launch a "preemptive strike", as you say. Also, Poland annexed parts of Czechoslovakia in 1938 and had an albeit small "war" with them, too.
I also want to know what policies you agree with instead of leading us on. We infer you're a nationalist, judging by your starting pic and statements about nationalism. Nationalism usually leads to war but that doesn't mean it's bad.
obviously I'm speculating, imagining how things could of been, Germany was in the grip of communism already and it was the rise of Hitler that curtailed that so, in a world without Hitler a communist Germany allied with the Soviets could of taken all of Europe and continued with a Europe wide genocide of unimaginable scale.
This idea that this terrible history humanity had endured was the worst possible history is not rational, things could of been different, they could of been far worse, who knows but it's interesting to speculate and it's possible that millions of people who denounce Hitler actually owe their existence to him
Brevity is the soul of wit, faggot.
as a pole i know i grew up in a postapocalyptic postsoviet flat, sufferring from over 50years of communism, learning about russian attrocities. you think nazis were so much worse than soviets? why? because soviets had their camps far east? i know you want to believe stalin was the good guy so you dont feel like crap about helping a bloodthirsty dictator become a word leader, but thats not really working for me here
I'll never get tired of this meme.
Is it just a "caricature" that German troops dashed over the Polish border with their guns blazing? How about when they did that to France and Belgium?
>Environmental protection laws
We have more of those than we need already.
>anti-smoking campaign
No way.
>increased physical exercise during school
Don't think this needs to be legislated.
>banking cartel acts
Ultimately useless in an economy run with fiat currency.
>-Ingraining a culture of pro government will to power into the right wing psychology, to ensure men seek to not only reach for gov power but want to use it as well
That's a vaguery, not a policy, and one that I'm not fond of because it'd be counterproductive.
>-Autarky, at least until domination is so obvious that trade is able to be subsidized by your ability to project power and bully foreign nations into you always having the better deal
I support this, but I think there are better ways to accomplish it than invading our neighbors (you should be grateful).
>instilling racial consciousness into the masses so deeply as to ensure they will never be willingly compromised again unless forcefully conquered
We wouldn't have to do this if Hitler hadn't besmirched racial consciousness in the most extreme way possible.
Imagine if Britain, France, Poland and maybe others all fought the USSR alongside Germany. That wasn't going to happen with Hitler pushing his borders.
>Am I wrong or not about how they both had expansionist ambitions involving invasion of each other?
It's a false equivalence. Piłsudski's intent was gaining the upper hand in the war, not expanding his own country.
>Also, Poland annexed parts of Czechoslovakia in 1938 and had an albeit small "war" with them, too.
It was one town, not the whole country.
>I also want to know what policies you agree with instead of leading us on.
See above.
Germany managed to avoid communism without Hitler. Meanwhile, in 1921 the Polish army was a disorganized, ragtag band armed with secondhand rifles and no tanks or aircraft. Imagine what they could have done in 1939, having developed their own tanks and bombers, and maybe having Europe at their back.
I try to be brief but there was too much to say.
no soviets were much worse, its like choosing between dog shit and horse shit
So you don't care the healt of kids and adults nor the state of nature but you are willing to subject them to debt slavery by private corporations.
I think I have enough info about you and your motives.
Nice strawman. I don't trust the government to legislate me or my kids into good health, and if you look into it it's clear that the problem of "debt slavery" is caused by central banking and fiat currency, problems which Hitler proudly exacerbated.
To not understand this as caricature is to not understand geopolitics. There is a reason why Hitler only wanted Danzig, and ended up paving Berlinka.
That's... crap. You cannot meme for SHIT.
That's like saying... damn you are stupid, never mind.
>There is a reason why Hitler only wanted Danzig, and ended up paving Berlinka.
Convince me he only wanted Danzig.
Search up Prometheanism. Their goal was to break up Russia. The intent was both.
Why are germanics so autistic? No wonder it took them 2000 years to catch up to the superior Italian.
Superb post, my friend.
Subtle.
And in 1921 the Soviets were still fighting a civil war.
>nationalism is stained only because of somethhing that never happened
This!
If there is a political ideology that worked was NatSoc.
Imagine if Britain, France, Poland and maybe others all fought the USSR alongside Germany. That wasn't going to happen with Hitler pushing his borders.
Irrelevant, since Germany could've done it solo. All that Britain and France had to do was stay out of the way. It's also doubtful that Britain and France would've ever intervened against the Soviets, much less participated in an invasion. Democracies are naturally slow to action unless under extreme measures. The only reason why they declared war on Germany was because they saw it as a threat to their hegemony. The Soviets, meanwhile, were generally viewed as weak and ineffectual
>We wouldn't have to do this if Hitler hadn't besmirched racial consciousness in the most extreme way possible.
Britain already had j*wish prime ministers in the 1800's * Benjamin Disraeli *
One of Americas foundational cultures is to replace racial identity with " national " identity. This proved to be extremely dangerous.
I won't even go into France in how they were so willing to bring in non European soldiers into European combat and tell their soldiers to fight side by side with them * Americans were guilty of this also *
So yes there was a massive racial identity issue occurring in the west and Hitler would have reversed this damage. He was needed.
Hitler invaded the Sudetenland because it was a majority German area that was being oppressed by the Czechoslovakian government. And Hitler intended on winning the war and very almost did, it is because of Hitler that Russia didn't have the manpower to take over the entirety of Europe like they planned on doing. Churchill was a piece of shit, literally controlled by the Jews who would have happily sent every last Britain to die in a pointless war with someone who wanted peace than allow Europe to be free of Jewry. You're just dumb and this is a shill thread.
sage
Corporatism is just a superior system, fuck off ancap.
I'm aware of Prometheanism, and in fact I'm rather fond of it. I don't see the relevance.
It was mostly over by then, and the Red Army was a much better trained and equipped force by comparison.
>It's also doubtful that Britain and France would've ever intervened against the Soviets, much less participated in an invasion.
They sent some troops to fight on the White side in the Russian civil war. I don't see why they wouldn't partake in an invasion if all of Europe were at stake. That is what they did with Hitler.
Hitler was needed to preserve racial identity by picking fights with nonwhites? I don't follow.
>And Hitler intended on winning the war and very almost did, it is because of Hitler that Russia didn't have the manpower to take over the entirety of Europe like they planned on doing.
You mean the one he started? You're no closer to convincing me Europe without Hitler would've been better able to resist the Soviets.
Fucking Catholics need the death penalty, I'm fucking sick of you civic nationalist, subversive faggots.The holocaust didn't fucking happen.
>Fucking Catholics need the death penalty
I'm with you. Just needed a good reaction image.
>Hitler was needed to preserve racial identity by picking fights with nonwhites? I don't follow.
Loaded question, only answering "Hitler was needed to preserve racial identity"
Yes he was, but more than that to articulate it for the modern emerging world. Even Italy showed signs of weakened identity when Mussolini, before being influenced by Hitler would say things like " being Italian isn't a racial thing, it's a feeling "
I'll also give you a small example of what one could argue in the case of the Japs or Asians in general. I don't know for sure but it probably goes like this:
>Unit 731 and Nanking all your Asian brethren
>Get nuked twice
>Nationalism still exists (forget the vice and vox "docs" about "evil right wing")
>Nobody bothers the yasukuni visits, memorials, uyoku dantai marches, and all the other shit
>Why? It supports their interests. Or they are too concerned with other things, possibly a mix
In the case of the Japanese, only other countries say something, but not the Japanese besides superficial "opposition" because they don't have a sense of 'altruism' like white people do. We ruin ourselves and our chances all the time because we're either too altruistic or egoistic to let things that are obviously in our favor get away with whats being done. Hitler didn't ruin nationalism, it's us. We're usually blinded by our own pride to know what's good for us.
>Even Italy showed signs of weakened identity when Mussolini, before being influenced by Hitler would say things like " being Italian isn't a racial thing, it's a feeling "
All the more reason why, if Hitler's social and economic policies were really so well founded, he could've developed Germany peacefully and led the world by example. Imagine if an ethnically conscious Germany ruled the world economically and never invaded its neighbors. The globalists wouldn't have a leg to stand on.
>They sent some troops to fight on the White side in the Russian civil war.
Using the most half-hearted intervention possible as an example isn't helping. They gave up almost immediately, since they didn't care to fight a long war against something that (they thought) didn't harm their hegemony. Intervening against the USSR would involve a significant investment against a nation that they saw as weak and non-threatening
> I don't see why they wouldn't partake in an invasion if all of Europe were at stake. That is what they did with Hitler.
They never would've considered all of Europe to be at stake until it was far, far too late. The Red Army was considered to be a joke by the Western Europeans in 1939. By 1945, they didn't have confidence that they could beat it even with the Americans supporting them.
You mean the one he started? All he did was fucking invade the land that was his, they were German territories, the war spiraled out of control because of fucking Zogged Churchill. Churchill was a fucking delusional piece of fucking shit and that is being fucking generous. Blaming Hitler for what his enemies were fighting for and what they would implement after the war is fucking stupid, it is completely fucking stupid. Wiemar Germany was a fucking degenerate piece of shit with a fucking stupid democratic system, it was fucking shit, and Hitler replaced it with a much superior ideology. You're a fucking shill. I know people like you do things like this because I've spoken to people like you. Someone should ban you. Get the fuck off Jow Forums.
>Intervening against the USSR would involve a significant investment against a nation that they saw as weak and non-threatening
So when it became strong and threatening they wouldn't have a different approach?
>They never would've considered all of Europe to be at stake until it was far, far too late. The Red Army was considered to be a joke by the Western Europeans in 1939.
Because it was. Dealing with the Germans forced Stalin to reevaluate his army from the ground up, and the Red Army became an overall more and more effective force as the war went on. Without having a real test like that, I doubt they would've made reforms like better NCO delegation and releasing officers from the gulag in time for invading Europe.
>All he did was fucking invade the land that was his, they were German territories
Kek, when was Warsaw ever a German territory?
Except the treaty of versailles needed to be undone, Hitler campaigned on this.
So ending the reparation payments and simply undoing the territory losses the treatie upheld.
If England/France are willing to risk hundreds of thousands potentially millions of their men dying in a war just to enforce that terrible treaty that even people nowadays say was a terrible treaty, then that is what they did and it only made sense if you thought diminishing European power was a good thing, which certain people did.
Well when you invade a country to take back the land that was taken from you and they decide that they wont let you take it and that they will keep fighting you you have to try an neutralize them, and you do that by taking their capital. If Poland had just given back the German land then maybe they wouldn't have gotten ass raped. Anyway, Hitler was justified in trying to grow the German empire, he didn't genocide millions of Europeans, millions of Europeans died in a war that the Jews continued.
>that terrible treaty that even people nowadays say was a terrible treaty
If you ask me there was nothing wrong with it at all. France and Britain should have been more assertive in enforcing it. Don't tell me it was unfair, Germany was lucky not to be partitioned off the map.
See
cope more Ante
THEY GOT THE LAND FUCKING NOTHING! THEY FUCKING STOLE THAT LAND FROM GERMANY! FUCKING SHUT UP FAGGOT! YOU ARE JUST FUCKING SHILLING A POINTLESS FUCKING DISCUSSION WITH YOUR SHIT TIER MEMES, YOU AREN'T EVEN LISTENING TO REASON, YOU ARE THE REAL FUCKING NPC! GO AWAY MASTER BREW!
>So when it became strong and threatening they wouldn't have a different approach?
The Red Army went from looking pathetic to being the dominant land army in Europe in less than four years, and that was with having angry Germans occupying half of their good land. Good luck to the British and French in identifying the build-up in time, much less getting their people to care about it enough to send troops.
> Dealing with the Germans forced Stalin to reevaluate his army from the ground up, and the Red Army became an overall more and more effective force as the war went on
What caused the Red Army to become a major threat was the massive industrialization effort that Stalin put the nation through after the invasion. There was nothing special about their organization, soldiers, or technology. They just had a lot of tanks, soldiers, and aircraft because they had a lot of industrial capacity.
>Germany was lucky not to be partitioned off the map.
How you got that opinion out of the shitfest that was WW1 is a complete mystery to me. There were no good guys in that abomination of a war
They cannot enforce because they aren't even powerful nations, they need either the U.S or Russia to tip the balance of power in their favor so the idea that these 2 degenerate nations were gonna " enforce " anything on Germany is deluded. They AT BEST would roughly match the strength of Germany. But obviously with Hitler at the helm Germany was much more capable than any British or French politician could have conceived. Their declarations of war were done out of ignorance, thinking that it was the same Germany that France was able to just occupy and extract resources from a few years earlier when they defaulted on treaty payments.
I'm Czech, so in about third grade.
> Czechoslovakia was the only true democracy in central Europe at the time.
> Britain used it as showcase of what progress can be made when you guarantee individual human rights to it's citizens.
> Germans in Czechoslovakia were mostly better off than Czechs. They were businessmen and skilled labor workers.
> When global depression hit, they were hit the most, since exports fell.
> This made Germans living in Czechoslovakia feel like Czechs are stealing money from them due to incompetence, but the reality was the entire world economy was down the drain.
> Here comes Hitler, promises he'll magically fix everything and Czechoslovak Germans fall for it.
> Germans start openly assaulting police stations in German-majority lands.
> Britain is like "welp, I guess this is civil war now, not assault by Germany", no reason for us to get dragged into war.
> Czech see this as being betrayed by "The West"
> Cue in 30% raise in sympathy for Communists, because Britain and France look like a bunch of liars.
> Cue in communist coup and 40 years of "building socialism" and "brotherly help" from soviet army, when they decided to outright invade Czechoslovakia in 89.
In other words: Britain backing off of their promise to protect Czechoslovakia made it and Poland look towards Russia as their diplomatic partner. It certain sense it is what triggered the Cold War, since without Eastern European buffer states Russia would be rather naked in Europe.
tl;dr: Britain and France manufactured their Russian Cold War enemy by breaking their promise.
> invade Czechoslovakia in 89.
Correction: in 68
DEMOCRACY IS FUCKING GAY! MULTI-ETHNIC SOCIETIES ARE FUCKING SHIT TOO!
Newfag, newfag, didn't you hear, with cruise control you still have to steer?
>The Red Army went from looking pathetic to being the dominant land army in Europe in less than four years, and that was with having angry Germans occupying half of their good land.
Don't forget America sending them most of their logistical supplies. American foreign policy has traditionally held "my enemy's enemy is my friend". Hitler really should've had that in mind before he declared war on us.
>There was nothing special about their organization, soldiers, or technology. They just had a lot of tanks, soldiers, and aircraft because they had a lot of industrial capacity.
Their industrial capacity was largely funded by America, and yes there was. To give you just one example, at the time of the Winter War Soviet units typically had the battalion commander issue all the orders down to the squad level, and this caused a lot of obvious problems. After Barbarossa Stalin rolled back the limitations on NCO authority.
>There were no good guys in that abomination of a war
All the more reason Germany was lucky to still exist after it.
SAGE
If Munich Betrayal taught Czechs anything, it was that significant minorities on your territory is a trojan horse and that you can't ever trust Eternally Butthurt Pole - as they were the ones who spearheaded the appeasement policy.
>On 22 May, Juliusz Łukasiewicz, the Polish ambassador to France, told the French Foreign Minister Georges Bonnet that if France moved against Germany in defense of Czechoslovakia: "We shall not move."
German imperialism was a known quantity, it was crystal clear what to expect. The back stab came from anglos.
The nazis didnt invade anyone but russia. They walked through poland and a few other countries to get there you absolute fucking retard.
Hitler did what his nation wanted
Yep. Also Eric and Dylan didn't shoot anyone but themselves, they just shot through a bunch of other kids to get there.
Exactly.