So I think the general consensus these days is that Operation Sealion wouldn't have worked

Rotterdam and Warsaw were both legitimate military targets occupied by actively resisting combat units. In both cases the Germans requested defenders to withdraw so as to prevent damage to the city and civilians. In Rotterdam specifically the local commander drew out negotiations to the last hour and the bombs were already dropping by the time he realized that the Germans weren’t bluffing. This isn’t even controversial, it’s accepted fact.

The history of the Second World War is not a black and white affair. Terrible things were done by all combatants. However anyone who actually cares to understand the conflict goes beyond the boilerplate cliched allied postwar narrative.
The information exists if you want it.
Or you can just read Stephen Ambrose and be proud of how your grandfather single handedly saved the world for the globohomogayplexmulticult. Whatevs.

>guys points out that the Allies did some questionable things
>"look at this guy saying that Hitler did nothing wrong"
Listen, I can't stand that kind of person either, but don't put words in peoples mouths, you only make yourself look bad

>'Poor lil' oppressed Hitler had to invade all his neighbours'
>'Hitler only acted in legitimate self defence'
>'Hitler never WANTED to gas all the jews, but they forced him to by being so jewy and evil'
>'If only the Allies had let Hitler do what he wanted, the world would be a better, more peaceful prosperous place now'
If you agree with any of these positions i have some awful news for you. I'll be charitable and assume you're arguing from a naive appeal to centrism and you're taking nazi propaganda at face value, but the position you're taking is like saying the earth is a cube because you're too much of a coward to call the flat earthers out on their shit.

>A whole bunch of things I didn’t say.
>accusations of blindly accepting propaganda
>not even being willing to reflect on who’s written 99% of the post war narratives for 3/4 of a century

Ok

> what is Danzig massacres
>what is Sudetenland massacres.

The Channel is not an ideal environment for U-boats to operate in

>
>It wasn’t even legitimately attempted. It was mostly a feint and psyop.
>All the nonsense about the Nazis invading Britain and holocausting half the population is post war propaganda cooked up to obfuscate things like terror bombing hundreds of thousands of civilians and ethnic cleansing of 15 million Germans from parts of Europe they’d lived in for centuries.
>the Allies are the evil ones! Ignore all the bad shit Hitler did, he was a good boy!
Yeah, nah, fuck off fag. I know exactly the subtext you were going for. The Allies didn't have the luxury of being saints because they were having to deal with putting down a mad dog.

I also like how you're accusing me of making shit up when not once have i seen a claim stating that Hitler was planning to kill half the UK population. Not even he was nutty enough to suggest that was his desired outcome.

>literal nazi fabricated propaganda used to justify invading neighbours
Awfully convenient that they only happened once and happened to occur just as the German army was holding massive 'training exercises' right next to the border.
How does it feel to fall for 70 year old lies?

Neither did osama

Imagine how delusional and brainwashed you have to be, to live in this modern day and talk about how “necessary” ww2 was

The war was inevitable with the way the First War ended and the allies behavior in the immediate aftermath and then later as they failed to keep up the forces and political will required to keep Germany disarmed. Hitler didn’t occur magically in a vacuum and he operated under the premise of realpolitik.

I did not accuse you of making anything up, merely strawmanning what I believe.

With regard to the supposed planned slaughter of a large portion of the British population post German invasion, that is very much a bugaboo thrown about by orthodox WW2 narratives, because some mid level German officer post war claimed it was planned. It’s something that was talked about in the decades immediately post war, my parents generation believed it. The source is out there on wiki iirc, I saw it at some point.
But then again there are a great deal of “known facts” about German actions during the war that have quietly been retconned as time moves on and people begin to look at things from a factual objective basis and not a nationalistic emotional one.

You're right, it was completely unnecessary. If Hitler had kept his dick inside his own borders the world would unironically be a much better place right now.

Imagine for a second he hadnt wasted all that time and effort on deluded racial purity and 'living space' bullshit and instead worked on forging a network of strong economies in central europe to counter any soviet aggression.

Imagine for a second he hadnt pointlessly invaded and wrecked his neighbours to fund his shitty economic reforms and forged a europe of equals rather than one based on vassalage and subjugation.

WW2 as we know it was entirely Hitler's fault and his folly. It was unecessary and blame should be laid entirely at his feet.

This take is so cold, science is currently investigating it for the mechanism which allows its temperature to fall below absolute zero

An actual navy?

But is he wrong?

>What would the Germans have needed to succeed?

Having a navy and air force thats well equipped for the task would be nice.

I want to expand on this by awknowledging that this could never happen because the web of power structures he'd tied himself and the german state into would prevent the return to anything resembling a democratic civilian government. The militant nature and large violent arm of the nazi party would preclude any transfer of power without violence and therefore a civil war would occur with any real change away from hitler being dictator for life.

>I did not accuse you of making anything up, merely strawmanning what I believe
Im just fed up of Nazi apologists trying to gaslight desu. The Allies methods were extreme but it was an extreme time. It was an extreme time thanks to the Nazis invading all of their neighbours. The Nazis were the first to implement large scale strategic bombing during the invasions of poland and the netherlands. It doesnt matter whether there were military targets there or not, both occured during pointless wars of aggression perpetrated by the Nazis and therefore the Nazis are unequivocally the bad guys. They sowed the wind. Thry reaped the whirlwind.

To put so much of their industrial effort into building ships that the army would have been relatively anaemic. At the start of the war the home fleet alone consisted of what, 7 battleships/cruisers and 2 carriers compared to the unfinished Bismarks, the Scharnhorsts and 2 pre dreadnoughts. In home waters was also twice the destroyers and cruisers of the entire Kreigsmarine.

Even if they shattered the Home Fleet they would have to perform an opposed landing without air superiority while every single remaining Royal Navy asset hauled ass straight back to Britain to fuck whatever was left

Actually coming close to defeating the RAF would have been a good start.

I accept your position. It’s not mine, but i’m Ok with you believing what you do.

It’s much better to not get emotional and resort to ad-homs isn’t it?

t. a crispy nazi

> (You)
>I accept your position. It’s not mine, but i’m Ok with you believing what you do.
How 'gracious' of you, i'm so glad you'll 'allow' me my position.

Go on, indulge me. What *is* your position?

>What would the Germans have needed to succeed?
Same conditions as any amphibious assault. They need a way to suppress the defenders, transport and land their forces in sufficient numbers to not be wiped out on the beaches, to supply and reinforce those forces continually, and to enlarge the beachhead.

In practical terms, this means the Germans needed to take control of the English Channel and the skies over it and their landing forces. They need to be able to prevent the RAF and Royal Navy from being able to interdict their lines of communication between England and the Continent. In real terms, this means rendering the RN inoperable and the RAF impotent. If both of these objectives are not achieved, the Germans have no way of sustaining an invasion, and any landed troops will find themselves running short of men and supplies and will wither on the vine before being wiped out by the British defenders.

>How does it feel to fall for 70 year old lies?
I choose to believe people know they're full of shit, but they don't want to admit it any keep parroting it to maintain their ego.

Fuck me bro, the level of logic you are on shouldn't be possible.

IT WAS REAL IN MY MIND

Hitler would have to be at least 250 meters tall

A little Energon and a lot of luck

I'll take Patton's Blues over Boomer Harris

Yes just let those ethnic Germans get slaughtered on the Danzig corridor. Don't do anything Goy while Russia lines up against Poland's borders.

air superiority

if they focused on military targets instead of taking british bait, it might've been possible.

>suited to maneouver warfare and solid plans to relocate govt first to north east england in the event of an invasion, preventing decapitation in the event of London coming under attack.
DA NORTHERN POWERHOUSE

Attached: 1536503042182.png (942x712, 79K)

DO

Attached: Wehraboos_and_their_goddamn_tiger__78e71d8f72fa3c4bd8247eb2de5955d9.jpg (988x688, 120K)

>ethnic germans
>slaughtered
>danzig corridor
Go back to your mouse hole in the wall, Goebbels

Attached: 1543220158008.jpg (764x1156, 105K)

Polite reminder, that glorious leader Adolf rose to power through American funding. As the good old Fed was looking for convenient tool to dismantle British Colonial Empire. The Britons themselves carry different burden, as they monstrous pet, the Soviet Union was getting ready to swallow continental Europe and create nice, Orwellian dystopia.

Not that guy but
>Germans did some evil shit during the war as has already been discussed
>Allies were at least mostly justified in their bombing campaign. Ends and means and all that

What's not excusable is the ethnic cleansing of Germans from modern Poland, Czechoslovakia, and Kaliningrad AFTER the war. I'll accept that the allies did what they had to to win the war. But how can you justify mass deportations and ethnic cleansing post-war in Prussia? The actual place where the German State originated from is today 0% German. And it didnt occur during the war. It occurred after the war from 1945-1948.

>WW2 as we know it was entirely Hitler's fault and his folly.

WW2 was all Woodrow Wilson’s fault for getting the US involved in WW1

Are you really going to trot out that tired old Dresden hoax again? That’s been thoroughly debunked. It’s well-documented that the firestorm was the result of Nazi children playing with matches in the gasthaus basement.

Or at least a leader who knows how to delegate and not micromanage.

In short 'Woe to the Vanquished'

In long, all of the Nazi's expansionism was predicated on 'protecting' German minorities living outside of Germany. Remove the minorities and a potentially resurgunt Germany V3 Is unable to use that justification again. It's worth noting however that almost all of this was done by Stalin and Stalin supported eastern europeans, not the Western Allies. Stalin was his own authoritarian piece of shit and the Allies had their own problems with trying to get a square deal for Poland out of the mess, which almost lead to them attacking the Soviets themselves (Operation Unthinkable). 'Organised' movement of people was seen as preferable to another ruinous ethnically predicated conflict 20 years down the line. I find it pretty disgusting that the Russians are making the same noise about ethnic Russians in the baltics right now, especially after suffering so much at the hands of those same justifications 70 years ago.

Nice strawmen, faggot. Face it, either side would be facing war crimes trials if they lost.

By that argument WW2 was Kaiser Wilhelms fault for liking boats (building a navy made the Brits mad, theyd likely not be involved otherwise and the whole thong would look a lot more like 1870) and getting rid of Bismarck (Willy fucked up Otto's delicate diplomatic ecosystem and it all came crashing down)

Lmao if you think a Nazi led war crimes court would look anything like as fair and just as Nuremberg you're sorely mistaken.

Actually, early in the war he ignored the advice of his generals several times and was correct to do so. This led to him later trusting his own judgement probably more than he should have though when it came down to the wire in Russia.

>In short 'Woe to the Vanquished
How is that any different from' the only thing Hitler did wrong was lose'?

It was saying it as a pithy way of turning Hitler's ideology back on himself. 'Start shit get hit'. As i said as I expanded on it though, it wasn't really to do with the Western Allies (although it was technically done with their 'blessing'; what were they meant to do short of Operation Unthinkable?),

The Germans had spent most of the last few years raping and murdering their way up and down eastern europe. It's hardly surprising there were reprisals when the boot was on the other foot.

But the ethnic Germans living outside of Germany in Eastern Europe didn't start shit. Those poor bastards were stuck in the middle. It's not their fault that their existence was used as one of the excuses for revanchism.

You can't really call a trial operated entirely by the accuser fair and just. Fair would have been to hold the trial in a neutral country, with judges from countries that hadn't participated in the war. Or as Senator Robert Taft put it in a 1946 speech, "The trial of the vanquished by the victors cannot be impartial no matter how it is hedged about with the forms of justice. About this whole judgment there is the spirit of vengeance, and vengeance is seldom justice. The hanging of the eleven men convicted will be a blot on the American record which we will long regret. In these trials we have accepted the Russian idea of the purpose of trials -- government policy and not justice -- with little relation to Anglo-Saxon heritage. By clothing policy in the forms of legal procedure, we many discredit the whole idea of justice in Europe for years to come."

Also, neither Taft or I are claiming the nazis who were hanged were in any way innocent. The point here is that the ends don't justify the means. The trial should have been done properly, in an impartial courtroom.

Nor did the tens of thousands of Czechs, Poles, Ukrainians and Russians that were actually murdered, not just displaced by the Nazis in Hitler's wars of aggression (and also by Soviets, but we're talking about Nazi crimes here). It's not fair, but not surprising either, and Hitler doing his whole 'protecting' thing meant that even if, as a German living outside Germany, you *actively opposed* Hitler 'liberating' them, you're getting deported when Hitler lost. Not fair at all, and all Hitler's fault by demarcating the conflict down ethnic lines and promising annhialation to his enemies.

Different user, but to be fair to Willy, the Bismarckian system was facing existential challenges it probably couldn't have usurped without another diplomatic genius heading Germany, unless somehow Germany was able to able to reconcile Austro-Russian relations and appease the Bongs by avoiding inflaming relations with the Frogs at all so it seemed the European balance of power wasn't on the edge. Anglo-German relations were actually quite good up to the start of the war, even including the crisis immediately preceeding; the naval arms race could never be won by the Krauts (needed money for army rearmament esp. when Russia was recovering from 1905 by the start of the next decade, and their budget was reaching its maximum regardless), and communication between the two governments was good, even if Wilhelm ballsed up his public image several times.

Attached: bongposting.jpg (288x288, 30K)

Should've flown several attacks on scotland/north england prior the invasion as a distraction. Also should've destroyed those radar towers

But now we're into the realm of 'where does an impartial courtroom exist'? Almost everyone had a horse in the WW2 race, or a desire to curry to favour with those who did. What court could possibly rule fairly and justly on crimes against humanity? Turns out there just wasn't a good option and setting this system up was one of the major founding justifications for the UNCHR.

I'd also like to point out that 'both side did crimes' is also a bit of a shit statement to make because they imply equivalency. German crimes were more regular (i.e execution of UK POWS in the battle of france and US POWS in the battle of the bulge come to mind, not even starting on the Holocaust stuff) and involved an order of magnitude more death, while (Western) Allied crimes tended to be more lone actors or technical, with them acting well the vast majority of the time. 'both crimes would be facing war crimes trials if they lost' betrays the nature of this. A German victory would likely see what would essentially amount to summary execution of the loser's leadership after a kangaroo trial. The Nuremberg trials, while controversial due to the aforementioned legitimacy and the question of prosecuting people for things that technically were legal were actually pretty well done otherwise. People were given a chance to defend their actions and some were acquitted or had their sentences reduced. There was justice there, more justice than the Nazis themselves gave anyone else.

1) actually winning in Egypt so as to seize Suez and make the Brits lose India

2) successful Barbarossa and plundering of Eastern Europe / Russia for precious oil and resources

3) the Japanese waiting to do Pearl Harbor and focusing their efforts on India and Burma instead, possibly Australia / NZ

4) an actually competent Italy capable of seizing and holding the Mediterranean

so yeah, fantasy land

>luftwaffe gets roflstomped over the UK
>somehow a reverse normandy would work well for them
That of course would have been the smart thing to do, some may have had a small amount of beef with Germany but everyone hated the Soviets far more. Funny considering Wilson only got involved at the ass end of it all and was highly against the Treaty of Versailles.

Not get into a war in the first place, indeed not fall into any ideal of authoritarianism.

Shouldn't have lost ww1

Hitler was a fucking idiot who invaded neighbors in an attempt to return Germany to their pre-WWI standing.

But history has shown removing Jews from your nation is in no way wrong. Even before WWII, I mean shit the socialist revolution in Germany was kicked off by Jews.

You’re not wrong, but the redditors here won’t acknowledge that