Thread 17912354

Name 1 reason why the British PEOPLE (not the political class, or the bankers, or capitalists) would've had it bad if they were annexed by Nazi Germany.

Note: The British central bank being dissolved is not an argument against Britain being annexed.

>>17912354 (OP)
Look at life in Vichy France you fucking idiot. Native French were treated as second class citizens, half the country became a militarized zone, and resistance movements were constantly rising up against the Germans

>>17912354 (OP)
Being used as German slave labor is a pretty bad existence. Which is exactly what the Germans did to the French when they capitulated. No posting vgh pictures of Paris with Nazis isn't an argument.

>>17912354 (OP)
OP, you're right, but I hope you realize the implication of your comment, which is that the communists in WW1 were absolutely right to militantly oppose the war.

>>17912354 (OP)
Maybe you should read something about the German occupation zone in Northern France and what the French had to go through there before you post dumb shit like this.

>>17912354 (OP)
Hitler admired the British Empire but considered the English lower classes to be racially inferior. He thought there was a greater concentration of Germanic blood in the high class English, which he thought explained the success of the British Empire, but he saw the lower class English as untermensch.


It is possible in the long term that the grandparents of the Chav council estate underclass would be euthanised by the SS.

>>17912358
>>17912361
>>17912364
They would've become integrated German citizens after the war as the Germans viewed them as ethnic kin.

Also Europe would've been united and become the dominant global hegemon, making for good economic bargaining power and prosperity.

>>17912354 (OP)
OP is a cuck who is baffled at the idea of other people not wanting to be cucks.

>>17912373
this, he's probably not even an actual German which makes it even more embarrassing.

>>17912366
>Hitler admired the British Empire but considered the English lower classes to be racially inferior. He thought there was a greater concentration of Germanic blood in the high class English, which he thought explained the success of the British Empire, but he saw the lower class English as untermensch.
Source?

>17912373
>17912379
The ad hom of instant concession, sublime

>>17912358
The French resistance wasn't real. Frenchoids hated Germany with a genocidal fervor prior to WW2; they were simply reeducated and now they hate England with that fervor instead. The French are always seething about their betters

>>17912384
Silence cuck.

>>17912361
France was treated with kid gloves

>>17912402
We don't sign our posts around here, newgod

>>17912354 (OP)
England was always going to end up as either a German vassal or an American vassal. They chose the latter. Was it the right choice? Perhaps it's too early to tell but currently it appears not to have been

>>17912410
Post German passport cuck.

>>17912368
>bro being treated like second class citizens was totally just temporary or some shit trust me

>>17912415
It would never had ended up as a German vassal state. Even if Germany had won WW2 it would have been a pyrrhic victory at best and the borders of the Reich likely would have contracted significantly over the years due to revolutionary groups and internal political conflict. Nazi Germany rose quickly but was never built to last.

>>17912480
They would have made living space by deporting Poles and Ukrainians. The ethnic boundaries of Germany would have greatly increased if they won the war.
Britain would probably have remained nominally independent but economically reliant on Germany (as opposed to being reliant on the US)

Literally 0 arguments yet. Curious.

>>17912361
Frenchtards deserved it, 400 years of obstructing germans from unifying paid back with dividents

>>17912415
Its tiresome seeing people scapegoat the US when there is clearly no financial or any other benefit to any level of American society going on. I can't really think of anything the US has directly done that has impoverished Britain as such and led to this massive decline. Mass migration was a top-down decision that started in 1945 and all such efforts have been a combination of internal rent-seeking behavior and almost comically bad decisions by political leadership.

Look at the AI development bill that Starmer crashed last year. There were literally no downsides. Every non-retard in UK politics supported this, from all different backgrounds and ideologies. I don't see how Trump or a president Harris or Newsom (makes me cringe just thinking that) would be opposed to such a path towards retaining native talent with native resources, for maybe something that works out. They are bleeding young ethnic Brits with entrepreneurial and technical skills to the UAE, Spain and elsewhere in the world. He still crashed it. There are so many examples like this that it baffles me.

It makes me think there is some kind of perverse stranglehold on Britain by a secret society or something. Sunak leading the Tories in itself is hilarious. But his departing speech being in front of the Titanic replica in the fucking rain ... I can't see it as anything but a massive shitpost, a cruel fraternity of some sort making these men crash the British nation and go through all sorts of humiliation for some incentive beyond simple corruption. Nothing other than "elite" malice and obfuscation explains modern Britain.

>>17912380
He made it up.

>>17912361
>slavery
I will admit this is slavery only if you admit America still practices slavery today by forcing prisoners to work.

>>17912477
Are African Americans treated as second class citizens still? Wow, its as if things change.

It would’ve been no different to the German occupation in France, as in:
>there would be zero physical evidence of any resistance (just like in france) because there wouldn’t need to be…nothing would happen
>the worst thing to happen to british men would be them getting mass cucked by german soldiers, just like what happened in france
>the brit pedo elite would probably get btfo, or at the very least have to go even more underground
In other words, in German occupied Britain nothing would EVER happen.

brown thread

Can you tards try to think in the long term? Yes, occupational forces might be mean here and there during the war.

But long term?
>Brits integrated into a united European state formed by Germany
>400 mil population, massive economic bargaining power and potential
>No free central bank, doing unhealthy lending practices unsupervised

That's obviously better than what the Brits and Europe have today.

>>17912607
>okay yeah they were second class but maybe in a few decades and having to resort to multiple protests/riots/and needing said state to boosts it pr then maybe they would get more right
>against the other scenario of none of that happens to them in the first place

>>17912772
>1940's
>ah yes this group that looks identical to the other group is going to be treated as second class citizens in their own country where they are the majority of the population

You're just being ridiculous honestly.

>>17912792
tell that to the French, or the Dutch, of the Belgians, or even the Italians when they got a taste of occupation

>>17912800
It wasn't very harsh at all and it would come to pass.

Anyways your argument is just high time preference ape nonsense.

>>17912772
>>17912792
All of this after the Germans lost a significant population after the war. Ahh yes, they would have enslaved them like Spartans with 1 German for every 20 frenchie. Obviously.

>>17912800
>tell that to the
I already know you're a retard but the dutch, Belgians and Polish got along fine with nazi occupation.

>>17912358
>Second Class citizens
life didnt change at all for them, in fact there was MORE upward social mobility than pre-war.
>militarized zone
the coastal plain that was an invasion target?
>rising up
less than 1% were apart of any organized resistance effort.
>>17912361
>Slave labor
Why would Germany use inefficient labor during peace time?
They barely used slave labor during the war, it was not even 10% of the German labor force.
It is WAAAAY overstated because of the holocaust.
The majority of French people by far were working for higher than their pre-war wages in Germany.
>>17912364
What DID they have to go through? They had higher wages, more social mobility, and their main problem was a war being fought over their land, wars being fought over land is not a necessary condition of annexation, if Britain was annexed it would obviously be in some post-war scenario.
>>17912477
>second class citizens
1. No one was a second class citizen, martial law during wartime is not "second class citizenship".
2. second class citizenship is PREFERABLE BY FAR to what the English have today.
3. what is so bad about "second class citizenship" in peacetime? give us an example of the Germans, during peacetime, mistreating a friendly Germanic adjacent people.

>>17912809
>having hundreds of thousands of your own getting taken away to be glorified slave labor isn't that bad
>neither are the instances of some butthurt ss units slaughtering a village or two
>or the cases of getting your shit stolen by said Germans (common dutch joke post war involved asking a kraut when his granddad/father will return the bike he stole)
>plus it will totally end at some point, I have no way of actually showing it but it will totally happen

>>17912837
>it will totally end at some point
Yes, wars end. This is the norm during war time, and what follows is integration.

>>17912480
>wasnt built to last
based on what you tard?
There is nothing actually wrong with Nazi Germany, sorry if that makes you feel a certain way but racism and whatever else you pile on them happened historically in nations that lasted millennia.

>>17912354 (OP)
Nazi Germany was an authoritarian regime that would’ve taken away our freedoms and destroyed our culture

>>17912358
Fpbp

>>17912958
Freedom to do what?

>>17912958
The UK today is authoritarian, just in a way that favors your particular elites
>crushing taxes
>speech laws
>elected politicians go against the popular will over and over for 40 years straight (sidestepping the democratic process)
>excessive bureaucracy, licensing and market fixing to benefit big capital
>conducts replacement migration towards it's own population
>central bank is not beholden to government, very undemocratic and authoritarian

And your culture is being destroyed by the incentives set up by a government that colludes with big capital and foreign powers (the US)

So those things you bitch about is happening right now, yet you are okay with it because you are a hypocrite.

Central banks are a good thing.
Anglo-Saxon civilisation is a superior stage to Hunnic barbarism. To be born English is to win first prize in the lottery of life.
Keep seething.

>>17913017
The problem is free central banks because
1. They are not beholden to the law
2. The control over a country’s currency has been completely relinquished and the country then loans amounts of currency that it needs to pay back in full + interest. A country that did not relinquish this function, could mint its own money and just eat the inflation hit when needed.
3. Free central banks constantly go against the wishes and plans of the government, they can stop giving loans to the host nation during war to orchestrate a loss for this nation. They can fuel bubbles with excessive bad loans to cause planned crashes that they bet on to make huge financial gains and power consolidation (like the deliberate market crash in Japan orchestrated by the BoJ).

They are a huge moral hazard

>>17913017
You're Polish

>>17913045
Problem with central banks is even deeper.
Fractional reserve banking. What? Its literally money counterfeiting by private banks. Why? Why do private banks need capability to print state's money?
Central Bank is band aid thrown on on the problem of fractional reserve banking (possible bank crashes with bank runs). But if fractional reserve banking doesn't exists then there is no need for central bank a we know it. Because bank runs don't crash banks be definition in 100% reserve banking.

>>17912964
Freedom of speech, freedom of association etc

>>17912989
>So those things you bitch about is happening right now, yet you are okay with it because you are a hypocrite.
When did I say I was okay with it? I hate the current state of the country. We’re becoming more authoritarian like regimes such as Nazi Germany, Soviet Union and so on

>>17912354 (OP)
>>17912358
>>17912368
Look at life inside schizoland even before the war started
>unions banned, any organisations that aren't hitler worship banned
>no welfare + government shakes you down for "donations"
>your boss can fucking whip you at work because muh furherprinzip
>anyone who does anything the government doesn't like is disappeared into death camps
>there's no fucking food, the babies are literally being born smaller from malnutrition

>>17912354 (OP)
Krauts would walk among them all smug and consider themselves superior.
kek

Not now the cuckOP has not posted his German passport? Curious...

>>17913366
Which would have been quite ironic considering that they were proven to be pretty much subhuman in comparison. The weak must fear the strong.

>>17912606
>it was a turdworlder all along
post your brown hand with timestamp (you won't)

>>17913381
Eurasians proved our superiority against degenerate Germanic civilization

>>17913284
Quick question? Do you or anyone you know have a savings account that pays interest and would you/they like to continue to receive that interest?

>>17912989
>crushing taxes
The UK has some of the lowest taxes in Europe, certainly lower than Germany.
>speech laws
As does Germany, and you can still say anything actually important
>>elected politicians go against the popular will over and over for 40 years straight
Obviously nonsense, Blair was very popular, even the war in Iraq was initially popular among the British public, and support only fell away later on. The conservatives were incompetent, but people kept voting for them.
>conducts replacement migration towards it's own population
Same with Germany
>central bank is not beholden to government, very undemocratic and authoritarian
Same with Germany (hell the bank of England was initially state controlled, it was made independent in an attempt to copy German success, which was believed to be as a result of independence inflation rates and whatnot)

>>17912989
>speech laws

What do you want to say in the UK that you feel that you cannot? Now it's Palestine Action supporters being arrested for hurty words all the right wing freedom warriors are fine with hate speech laws.

>>17913393
>the anglotard is actually a racist
figures.

>>17913415
>you can still say anything actually important
LOL. LMFAO even.

>>17913445
>Doesn't even attempt to argue

>>17913415
The majority of the public in the UK is against mass migration, and have been for the last 40 years and beyond. Every elected government either promises to reduce migration, bit doesn't (Tories) or makes vague statements about how they will regulate it and make it a net benefit for the nation, but they just increase the numbers and defacto deregulated any checks of the new migrants on entry (Labour)

>>17913468
>The majority of the public in the UK is against mass migration, and have been for the last 40 years and beyond
No one really cared until the last 15 years or so.
>but they just increase the numbers
https://www.ft.com/content/c8b3fcc3-b0af-450d-8ee9-178de69751ba
(Still to high imo, but it's on track to continue and flies in the face of your claim)
>defacto deregulated any checks of the new migrants on entry (Labour)
Yeah but they haven't really have they

>>17913445
See >>17913425

>>17913512
Fucking paywalls I swear...
https://www.reuters.com/world/uk/uk-net-migration-falls-sharply-2024-ons-2025-05-22/

>>17912354 (OP)
>another Churchill Derangement Syndrome thread

>>17913453
Calling him a faggot would be illegal
>>17913515
>you mock Europe limited speech laws
>this must mean you're a right wing chud nazi trumptard
Nice strawman there bud

>>17913545
>doesn't answer the question
I know what you are.

>>17913547
I answered the question in such a clever way you didn't even realize I had. No seriously, its literally illegal to call someone a gay nigger in Britian or to even suggest pakis raping women is a problem.

>>17913526
>haha immigration is just at 1,000,000 extra Pakis and Bomalians a year instead of 1,200,000!!!! Take THAT chud!

>>17913549
If it's illegal to say that pakis raping women is a problem, how are those crimes being investigated and prosecuted?

>>17913553
They're not

>>17913552
Its a classic midwit response. Ingoring the context and meat of the matter for a factoid gotcha moment that has nothing to do with the point.

>>17913552
>It's a bad thing things are improving actually

>>17913563
>1,000,000 Pakis and Bomalians a year are improving things

>>17913512
>50 % reduction in one year
This one year reduction comes off decades of ever growing numbers. This year could just be a fluke, and I'm not 100% convinced in any predictions made by economists. The world is undergoing a recession right now, so numbers might go down temporarily, before getting boosted back to 2022/23 levels.

>Yeah but they haven't really have they
I wasn't clear enough, I said defacto. The idea is that by allowing such vast numbers of migrants and having a slow and inefficient bureaucracy you create situations where government agents do their jobs as slowly as possible and the immigrants simply stay in administrative limbo, but they still are on UK territory, working. This seems like a way to skirt laws.

>>17913567
Also forgot to mention the blatant abuses of asylum laws.

>>17913338
>The freedom of regulated speech
I think Nazi Germany had that too

>>17912354 (OP)
80% of british population would be exterminated

>>17913567
>This year could just be a fluke, and I'm not 100% convinced in any predictions made by economists.
None of this is evidence of anything but your own opinions.
>I said defacto
I can read, it still isn't the case.
>allowing such vast numbers of migrants and having a slow and inefficient bureaucracy you create situations where government agents do their jobs as slowly as possible
This I agree with, but it was a Tory thing, it's not exactly labour's fault they inherited it. Data also shows things have sped up over the past year.
>https://migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/resources/commentaries/labours-pledges-on-migration-the-data/
>>17913574
>Also forgot to mention the blatant abuses of asylum laws.
Such as? I'm aware of individual judges making stupid decisions, but this hasn't anything to do with government policy.

>>17913576
Regular reminder that the Nazis beheaded a young woman with a guillotine for writing hurty words.

>>17913604
Abuses such as people moving to the UK, as well to other western nations while claiming to be asylum seekers without any proof of nationality. There were individual cases of Pakistanis, Iranians, Albanians, Kosovars, etc moving into the west while claiming to be Syrians during the 2015 refugee crisis. The state with the afformentioned slow bureaucracy keeps each individual case open for years while more and more move in. The issue is that the state seems to do this deliberately as a way of offloading blame, while keeping migration numbers high.

>>17913602
I assume there are physical documents of this plan, and not just a random picture as here.

>>17912354 (OP)
>why is being ruled by a death cult bad?

>>17913616
>There were individual cases of Pakistanis, Iranians, Albanians, Kosovars, etc moving into the west while claiming to be Syrians during the 2015 refugee crisis.
This hasn't anything to do with government policy you muppet
>issue is that the state seems to do this deliberately
I addressed this in my previous post

>>17913618
Yes, all well-documented.

>>17913621
>being ruled by a death cult is worse than being ruled by a pedophile death cult

>>17913339
Your culture is already dead as well. You'll be remembered as the place Harry Potter comes from lol.

>>17913627
Can i see it?

>>17913622
No all you did was post a study that shows a reduction in net migration and asylum applications. At no point are there any long term guarantees. Labour during Tony Blair opened the floodgates and greatly increased migration. Previous governments also wanted this cheap flow of people, and subsequent governments continued with the practice. Tories are worse since they lie to your face about reducing immigration, but Labour seem to try and obfuscate data, at least in my opinion.

>>17913400
Yes i do know such people.

>>17912560
The US is a naval empire the same way Britain was, they are by nature direct competitors. Nazi Germany would've been a land empire, coexisting with them without becoming irrelevant would've been much easier for Britain.

>>17913631
Being groomed is still better than being murdered by your own father

>>17912606
So it is right for random civilians occupied by a forign power to be enslaved?

>>17913695
>The US is a naval empire the same way Britain was, they are by nature direct competitors
Except they realised this early, hence the Monroe Doctrine was set as a guideline for America and Britain not to cross each others paths by dividing the Atlantic, similar to how Portugal and Spain divided the Atlantic between them in the treaty of Tordesillas.
USA even threatened to bankrupt Britain in an arms race if they did not void their military alliance with Japan after ww1, which Britain complied to do just to minimize the risk of war between USA and Britain.

A continental hegemony however was an unaccptable mortal threat to Britains national security, regardless if its Nazi Germany or Napoleonic France or the Habsburg. Anyone who controls Europe has Britain by the balls, the most sensitive part being the Lowlands since its in direct proximity to the British isles.

>>17913690
How do you think the money that pays that interest is raised?

>>17913786
>Except they realised this early
So? What you're saying essentially agrees with what I said, the US imposed itself on the world and Britain got cucked because they were natural direct competitors.
The Monroe Doctrine was the US saying fuck off to the old world and Britain agreeing to that, because they also wanted to keep other European powers off America and thus off the sea. It shows how by that time they were still oblivious to the idea that in due time the US would've become their real main competitor. It took WW1, and then WW2, and its aftermath, for them to slowly realize and finally accept their now inevitable fate.
>A continental hegemony however was an unaccptable mortal threat to Britains national security
Nazi Germany was not a real threat because Nazi Germany had shit tier navy. They knew it, which is why they wanted Italy and Japan on their side. You don't build up a navy in a day. And if they tried they would've become a threat not just to Britain but to the whole world, including the US.

>>17913656
>study that shows a reduction in net migration and asylum applications
Did you even actually read it? Look at pledge 4, the graph directly covers your point
>At no point are there any long term guarantees
You're grasping at straws for the sake of arguing. There is never any guarantee for anything, but that is where the trend is heading.
>at least in my opinion.
An opinion, without evidence, is worthless.

>>17913831
>Nazi Germany was not a real threat because Nazi Germany had shit tier navy
Dumb logic without any foresight. Not only would Germany becoming the most powerful country in Europe might allow them to focus on building a navy since they would have no land military threats for them to need to develop their army. But ariforces exist and there are also other threats that don't involve the military (economic dominantion for one)

>>17913846
Again, the only case in which Nazi Germany could have had any real interest in doing any of that is the case where they wanted to build up their own navy and get control of the seas, in which case there is simply no way the US would've stayed out. Britain failed to realize this. They took all the damage from WW2 by declaring war first and gave the US, their main natural competitor, the best possible situation to be in.

>>17912354 (OP)
Being forced to learn German instead of Arabic.

>>17912358
The main issue occupied France had was the American bombs. I would take the rationement bonds over the nightmare of modernity if I had the choice.

>>17913648
No.

>>17913627
The occupation of France, Belgium, Danemark or Poland is well documented.
In the case of Poland, Hitler wanted 90% of the Pole to not be in a third of Poland anymore, by one mean or another. He wanted the rest of the population to be denied education and to have a German elite.
Still, their population wasn't enslaved.
And that was completely different from what they have made in the west, where having a job, any job was mandatory but if you had one they would leave you alone.

As someone who work and pay his taxes, I would choose that over the welfare state that take my money to give it to people who refuse to work.

>>17913862
Did America declare war on Japan when Japan attacked a third nation after Japan had been building up it's naval forces for decades?
Even if America was to declare war on Germany in a case where the latter were to invade Britain with naval supremacy, calais to Dover is a much shorter trip than the Atlantic.
And you completely ignore the point about air supremacy or other less direct means of influence Britain might be worried about.

>>17913831
>Nazi Germany was not a real threat because Nazi Germany had shit tier navy.
Pic related.
Also Britain was on rations into the 1950s, specifcally because the Kriegsmarine blockade success.

Not gonna read the rest of your autistic rant because you're most likely a Hitler-dindu-nuffin stormfag.
Britain had every reason to fear a continental hegemony because.
1. Britain narrowly survived an armada by the Spanish Habsburg hegemony that politically/economically controlled most of Europe.
2. Britain narrowly survived an armada by the French/Spanish combined fleet at Trafalgar despite being horribly outnumbered.
3. Britain narrowly survived a potential combined fleet of Kriegsmarine, Regia Marina and Vishy France if the French had complied and the Italians had the oil.

Also no other country has ever been able to bomb British cities and kill British civilians by their tens of thousands, except for a German continental hegemony.
No other country has managed to inflict over a million casualties on British soldiers like the Germans did in 1914-1918.

>the US imposed itself on the world and Britain got cucked because they were natural direct competitors.
This is typically how fascist pigs like you translate a mutual diplomatic agreement to avoid potential confrontation. Everyone either cucks out or impose themselves.
It's no wonder ww2 started. The more I debate with you morons, the more I realise how inevtiable ww2 truly was.

>>17913862
>Again, the only case in which Nazi Germany could have had any real interest in doing any of that is the case where they wanted to build up their own navy and get control of the seas
Except Germany could absolutely build a blue-water navy that could rival the RN because they did just that prior to ww1, and that was a Germany not even half the size that Germany was in 1940, nor with even half the allies that had a powerful navy (both Italy and Japan were among the top naval powers of the world, as opposed to Austria-Hungary and Ottomans whom virtually had no navy).

Also, the threat isnt about navy, the threat was equally in air power. The war-scare in 1939 was that Germany would gain control of the Lowlands and thus have airfields with extreme proximity to Britain.

>>17913918
Britain was on rations into the 1950s to feed Europe dumb fucker.

>>17913938
(you)

>>17913529
Why does Zoomer Historian hate him so much
He was a giga racist who committed genocide against the Indians and believed in eugenics and the sterilization of the "weak". If he were to live today and joined some facist or neo-nazi "party" in UK they would considred him to be too radical and hardcore
Is it really just because he fought Shitler?

>Every argument boils down to LE NAZIS ARE INSANE THEY WOULD KILL AND ENSLAVE THEM ALL
This is a religion to you people. You don't see them as empire planners who followed game theoretical strategems, you see them as a caricature because it's axiomatic to your neoliberal religion.

>>17913988
>every other part of Europa the Germans invaded became slaves to Germany
What did they mean by this?

>>17913901
>Did America declare war on Japan when Japan attacked a third nation after Japan had been building up it's naval forces for decades?
Why would they? Japan wasn't a threat to them. It was more of a small regional power.
>And you completely ignore the point about air supremacy or other less direct means of influence Britain might be worried about.
I didn't.
>the only case in which Nazi Germany could have had any real interest in doing any of that is the case where they wanted to build up their own navy and get control of the seas
Why else would Germany one day decide to start bombing Britain?
>>17913918
>Pic related
Wow, a bomb fell on England, you got me.
>Not gonna read the rest of your autistic rant
Cool, me neither
>>17913927
>Except Germany could absolutely build a blue-water navy that could rival the RN
They could, maybe, one day, after taking the whole Europe and defeating the Soviet Union. I could start making up imaginary scenarios too. What's your point?

>>17913988
>>Every argument boils down to LE NAZIS ARE INSANE THEY WOULD KILL AND ENSLAVE THEM ALL
uh, yes? thats what they were doing for most of the war

>>17913993
>Wow, a bomb fell on England, you got me.
Is this your faggot tactic of checking-out from a debate?
Germany had the capacity to bomb British cities, blockade British isles, and route the British continental army.
And you're sitting there with your "lul German hegemony was no threat" bullshit, which you seemingly dont even try to defend anymore because you realised you're a retard.

>They could, maybe, one day, after taking the whole Europe and defeating the Soviet Union. I could start making up imaginary scenarios too. What's your point?
Imperial Germany never controlled the USSR yet could still reach an alarming naval production.
But like I said before, air, especially bombing, was the real worry.

I wonder how long it will take before you even understand the basic premise of the argument.

>>17913998
Anon seems to be unaware that the Germans were kidnapping random men off the streets of European cities to send them to Germany as slave laborers.

>>17913977
Because Zoomer faggot believes that Churchill was a supreme dictator whom virtually hijacked Britain to fight Germany against everyone elses wishes.
He thinks ww2 solely rested on Churchills decisions, and that no one else had any say.

>>17913741
>random civilians
I believe you mean prisoners of war. Is it right to bomb civilians, torture your enemies into false confessions in the most blatantly obviously rigged court the world has seen to date?

>>17913992
>>17913998
That's the norm during the occupation period and even more so as the war turns desperate.

Being unable to entertain a hypothetical is a sign of stunted intelligence btw.

>>17914024
>Germany enslaved all of Europe, both literally and metaphorically
>Yeah but what if they didn't?!

>>17914023
It turns out that anon WAS unaware that Germany kidnapped random civilians off European streets to be sent to Germany as slaves.

>>17913977
>kill some Indians in battle
>he was committing genocide against Indians!
Why are you people like this?

Churchill was a complete sell out drunkard, more interested in glory than anything else. He literally did not and would not care about the current state of Britain so long as he could pretend to be a great hero to feed his ego. Churchill would be the biggest leftist faggot in Britain if he were alive today so long as he believed that would preserve his image through history. He is very much like Trump.

>>17914024
>nazis are good guys they didn't enslave anyone!
>but they did
>UH MAYBE THEY DID BUT WHAT ABOUT THE OTHERS
geg

>>17914026
No, what would it look like after other European nations were integrated.

>But that didn't happen tho
Failing the breakfast question, as expected from a neolib cultist.

>>17913992
This didn't happen though. You're just over exaggerating again and equating the most minor of minor legal reforms as slavery.
>omg women couldn't heckin vote its literally slavery
How can anyone take you seriously?

>>17914032
What would it look like if a meteorite slammed directly into Hitlers moustache on the evening of 31st August 1939? He and the entire OWK get turned into dust. What then huh? What then?!

>>17914030
Stop shitposting on 4chan Sam and take care of your gypsy wife's children

>>17914014
I love this new narrative. its very recent, but we've got to make up any lies we can to make keep the liberal world order right? Just a shame for the jews that nobody talks about their holohoax anymore.

>>17914034
It litterally did happen anon. Why do you hate Evropeans?

>>17914029
yeah you keep saying that but never actually provide concrete proof
>inb4 I saw it happen when I was on a roller coaster of death!

>>17914037
>it's very recent
Just because you were born in a year that starts 20xx doesn't mean everyone is as stupid as you anon.

>>17914038
>it literally did happen
>trust me bro
Why do you want to genocide Europeans?
>>17914044
Really great attempt at gaslighting but you're too retarded for it to work. Why did this narrative just suddenly start out of the blue the moment jew hate became the norm in modern politics?

>>17914043
>/pol/brain rot
What does zwangsarbeit mean anon? What was Organisation Todt?

>>17913993
>Why would they? Japan wasn't a threat to them. It was more of a small regional power.
It had the third largest navy in the world you retard, it had more of certain ship types (namely aircraft carriers and Submarines) than the British. If they were a regional power, so would be Germany.
>I didn't
You wrote it in invisible ink I suppose

>>17914006
Oh, so you did read my post. Then why are you so angry to me to the point you're making up lies? Why would I take your argument seriously if even your premise is a lie?

>>17914047
>Jew hate became the norm in modern politics
The fucking state of zoomzooms.

>>17914035
Make a thread about it, Kitembe

>>17914030
lol Churchill made extremely racist remarks about Indians being vile and uncivilized, and he did this when India was having their famine, a famine that existed because Churchill had food prioritized to Britain.

Churchill was no doubt a narcissist but he was a conservative and a die-hard British imperialist who was prepared to burn the continent if it means British victory.
If the Labour party then rejected him as a bourgeoisie elite then modern left in Britain absolutely would.

Pic rel isnt Churchill but its a reminder how absurd the class contrast was in Britain in the late 19th century/early 20th century of which system Churchill belonged to.

>>17914056
No. Discuss it now. You're failing the breakfast test.

>>17914051
>If they were a regional power, so would be Germany.
What Germany are we talking about here? I thought we were discussing the imaginary Nazi Germany that conquers the whole Europe. No, that would most likely not be a small regional power.
>You wrote it in invisible ink I suppose
Are you intentionally dodging my argument? I will repeat it for the last time. Germany had no reason to do any of those things (including massive air bombings) other than wanting to become a naval power.

>>17914049
I believe it the thing Americans do with their prisoners and what they did with the Japanese.
>>17914055
What is your point, this is objective fact.

>>17914049
>more claims
Until you give proof there is simply no proof lol.

>>17914059
>Churchill made extremely racist remarks about Indians being vile and uncivilized, and he did this when India was having their famine, a famine that existed because Churchill had food prioritized to Britain.
Not genocide and making racist remarks is not an indication at all that he cares about the integrity of his own race.

>>17914069
What proof would you accept?

>>17914036
Zoomer Historian really broke the lefties here. No wait actually it was me kek. I didn’t even know about Zoomer Historian until the lefties and Poolish start spamming him.
>I do original research
>point out how fucking retarded England was and how heavily influenced by the Jewish lobby they were
>lefties frantically begin searching for the origin of this argument because they can’t defame anonymous 4trans BVLLs
HAHHAHAAHAHAHHAHHAAHHAAAHA

>>17914073
>trust me bro they were kidnapping millions of people off the streets like Ukrainians
Where is the proof? Oh did you think the term slavery is proof of its practice in Britain?

>>17914076
Documentation of nazis ordering soldiers to kidnap random people off the street for forced labor.

>>17914074
Churchill is also the man who wrote an entire romanticized novel history of the British people you moron.

Only you say he wasnt a nationalist, and you only say it simply because you've decided it.

>>17914073
>>17914076
There is no evidence of mass kidnappings. I would need to see Germans documenting mass kidnappings and orders for kidnapping. Not “this is kidnapping by another name” no, actual documents ordering specifically kidnapping, not conscripting labor but the word “kidnapping”.
OT was during the war using conscripted labor from POWs. Something that only became le bad after the fact but was otherwise practiced by every country before and during the war.

You are bad faith and have a grudge against Germans because the Germans in your life are taller than you and likely rude to you. You hate them too because they defeated you and correctly pointed out you are inferior people.

>>17914084
And if such evidence is provided, you won't shit yourself and start screaming about Jews?

>>17914090
>calls others bad faith
>insists it's not real unless it meets his retarded criteria

Why do you hate Europeans anon?

>>17914091
Why are you worried about jews? You’re not using jewish sources to describe non-jewish people are you?

>>17914079
>I do original research
Zoomer historian copy what others have written in already published books. That's not doing original research. It's the complete opposite. It's called plagiarizing when you call that original research.

>point out how fucking retarded England was and how heavily influenced by the Jewish lobby they were
Except Zoomer Historian focus only on Churchill, not the parlament, cabinet, ministry, monarchy, public opinion etc.
His entire game is to paint Churchill was an absolute dictator who just decided to war against the will of everyone else.

>>17914097
>immediately starts screaming about Jews
It's a genuine nervous tic with you "people" isn't it?

>>17914091
No I would concede the point but I still wouldn't go as far as to pretend there is some kind of morality to be learned from history as it should be studied as objective fact.

As time continues to march on Hitler and nazis will continue to be looked at with objective historical fact the same as Romans without moral compass. You despise this concept however as it seems your entire ego is built around the concept of there being bad guys and good guys in this world.

>>17914098
It's fortunate actually. Showing a complete lack of understanding of how the British parliamentary system works, much less how the wartime government was formed and by who and when, is the fastest way of spotting a /pol/tranny.

>>17914079
Sam if you are such a based nazi then why did you married a gypsy prostitue from eastern europe? Gaytler would hate you

>>17914091
>>17914093
>>17914098
>>17914099
Look at all this cope just because you have to have some biblical narrative of good vs evil in a conflict nearly a century old to justify your entire being. Sad.

>>17914100
People think the Romans were bad for slaughtering and enslaving their way across Europe anon...

>>17914093
>use a specific term for a specific claim
>ask for evidence of this specific claim using the specific term
> “this is retarded”
(You) are retarded
>>17914098
I didn’t claim he did original research. I do original.
>focus
Esl
>only on Churchill
Because Churchill was the Nexus of English politics at the time much like Tony Blair today.
>parliament
Blair (Also parliament was actively lobbied by Churchill)
>cabinet
Blair
>ministry
Blair
>monarchy
LOL (they were pro-Nazi btw)
>public opinion
HAHAHAHHAAHAHAHAHAHA
>Churchill was a dictator
He was.
>just decided to war
No one said this. However Churchill did everything possible to discredit peace, lobby for war, and ensure the people wouldn’t actually know what was going on.

>>17914102
is this what they call proof of nazis kidnapping people off the street? There's proof of conscription officers pulling Ukrainians off the street to die in a unwinnable war but I don't see any proof of nazis kidnapping people for slave labor?

Correct me if I'm wrong but Hitler did criticize America for slavery right?

>>17912358
The "resistance" was a utter meme until 1943 where everyone knew sooner or later Germany would had fallen. Thus thousands joined the "winning" side

>>17914107
cool story Sam, now follow your heroes

>>17914105
>People think the Romans were bad for slaughtering and enslaving their way across Europe anon...
Literally nobody thinks this. Like at all. Not the 80IQ pot head working 7/11, not the professor who spent his life studying Rome, not even the neopagan nordicist chud.

>>17914104
>says the stormtranny who has made 1939-1945 xor entire personality but knows absolutely nothing about what actually happened outside of zased and redpilled K/D ratio battle boxes.

>>17914107
>it's not kidnapping unless the kidnappers write the word "kidnap" on their plans

Why do you hate Europeans? Are you even European?

>>17914115
Thats a whole lot of projection lol.

>>17914104
Isnt it the opposite of the "good vs evil" narrative, to point out that complex geopolitical reasons was the motivation for Britain to confront Germany and decisions made did not rest on a single man but a century old foreign policy?
I also literally said earlier that Churchill diverted food from India to Britain which caused a famine, which is 'almost' similar to the Hunger Plan Germany did in occupied Russia.

>>17914118
So do you have documentation to support your claims that soldiers were re-educating random civilians on the street?

Literally anything would do.

>>17914112
That's not him. That's the ????? Amerimutt faggot.

>>17914122
You've just admitted you won't accept any evidence unless it says "hahaha kidnap the Europeans haha" on it. Because you hate Europeans. Post "I spit on Shiva and Rama by name".

>>17914122
nobody was re-educating them you retarded poltranny, nazis literally kidnaped random civilians from the streets to froce them into slave labour

>>17914123
Yes, the one who was mindbroke by Poles but it's still funny to shitpost about ZH

>>17914124
Where did I admit that anon? I literally admitted I would concede the point. Are you upset that I won't change my mind about the entire narrative of ww2 over proof of kidnappings?
>>17914125
Where is the proof?

>>17914129
>>17914090
>There is no evidence of mass kidnappings. I would need to see Germans documenting mass kidnappings and orders for kidnapping. Not “this is kidnapping by another name” no, actual documents ordering specifically kidnapping, not conscripting labor but the word “kidnapping”.
Xir hormone treatment is getting to the memory section of xir brain.

>>17914120
Diverting food isn't genocide. And yes, you are the most rational reasonable person here. However you were also building a narrative of Churchill being a valiant hero of British people when in fact he knowingly sold the entire empire out to earn glory in a European war.

>>17914107
>Because Churchill was the Nexus of English politics at the time much like Tony Blair today.
If the British cabinet, parlament, ministry, monarchy etc wanted peace with Germany, Churchill would have been forced to comply or be removed.

You fucks always portray him as some sort of demigod.
Churchill was actually a persona-non-grata just a few years prior to ww2 because of his long resume of fuckups since ww1.

Churchill was specifically selected because he had a do-or-die attitude towards the war. Everyone knew who he was and yet they still demanded he should be PM. It wasnt a surprise to anyone that he did not want peace with Germany, in fact it would have been a shock to everyone if he had wanted it because he would go against the very reason why he was selected.

Cope harder /pol/fag

>>17914129
what's the point of showing you one of the THOUSANDS pictures you can find after few seconds of using google if youre just gonna say that da joos fabricated them all? Anyone who wants to learn about this topic can do it right now and see tru your unhonest bullshiting

>>17914131
Fucking retard.

>>17914132
>starving people to death isn't genocide
what did the poltranny mean by that

>>17914138
>diverting food to your own troops is genocide
Did churchill plan to eliminate the entire Indian races? No? Its not genocide.

>>17914132
>when in fact he knowingly sold the entire empire out to earn glory in a European war.

Except he did no such thing you moron. The loss of India came under Attlee because the Labour party had no interest in preserving the empire.

All you do is seething because Britain under Churchill refused to kiss Hitlers ring, so you go on and make all this bullshit assumptions based on that fact.

>>17914139
>if you kill 3 million people but didn't kill the entire nation then it's not a genocide
????

>>17914134
I googled it, all I found was pictures of laborers. Mostly jews that they were apparently trying to kill but weren't mass starving them even though they had plans to starve all of Paris.

>>17914141
Objectively correct as per the definition of genocide. Mass muder, sure. Genocide it is not. For example, the Chinese did not commit genocide on the Chinese. They were just retarded.

>>17914142
>laborers
forced laborers aka slaves
also you are double wrong because most of those roundups were targetet at non-Jewish europeans who were sent to slave labour in Germany while the Jews were sent to concentration/death camps

>>17914144
>Genocide is not a genocide if you didn't kill everyone
??
You might want to look at the English Dictionary

>>17914149
Its the same moron who thinks the word "starving" can only be applied if there is literally no food at all.

We were having a debate on whether 6th army in Stalingrad were starving and he kept going like "lol they had some food so they werent starving".
Same shit happened during a discussion over why Germany sued for peace in 1918
"lol they were not starving, they had plenty of turnips and sawdust, they were fine. Jews made Germany surrender".

>>17914156
My favourite moment was when he thought that, just because the Nazis had conquered France in 1940, all of her colonies had automatically become under their control, as if it were a video game, infinite autism

>>17914137
>I just randomly started defending Nazi Germany kidnapping Europeans, in exactly the same way as the other guy
Wow those hormones must be doing a number on you.

>>17914142
>even though they had plans to starve all of Paris
?????

>>17914165
>if you ask for proof of something you are defending evil!

>>17914186
We all know it's you tranny.

>>17912354 (OP)
Not being German while ruled by German Ultranationalists.
Think about that.

>>17914102
>British Parliamentary
Do you have written statements from the personal diaries of every member of Parliament who voted for war?
No. Therefore we must go with Occam's Razor, they capitulated to the lobby pushing for war.
We are still waiting for you, my Polish friend, to explain how the British system of government works. We know how it works, like all democracies work, extra-political figures like Tony Blair call the shots and the political figures find a way to bend.
You dont like this because the corruption is undeniable, overt, and oft of a distinctly jewish character.
You can not allow this obvious fact to be brought to the forefront of the discourse because it would mean Hitler was right about (about this) and in your mind you think that means you cant get tranny pills, Poles and jews must be exterminated, and women have to behave like human beings.

Why even argue at this point? We have your number.

>>17914103
I am not Zoomer Historian.
Why do you care what Hitler would think of him?
>>17914112
I am following them on Telegram as they delete Mobiks in 4k with Erika playing in the background.
>>17914115
Literally no one is like this.

>>17914124
I said there would need to be documentation using the terminology you used.
Since you can not provide any, that means you shouldnt use that terminology.
You default to a strawman because you have clearly lost and do not know how to concede with dignity.
>>17914128
Otherway around.
I have completely destroyed the Poles. They immediately begin screeching when I post. I see them on /int/ and /pol/ talking about me in Polish generals kek.

>>17914140
Nope, Churchill was the one who sold off India.
Attlee was overseeing something Churchill already had put into motion.
>https://archive.org/details/richard-hilton-imperial-obituary
It was Churchill, The Tories, and Labor who sold off the British empire against the will of the people actually living in it.
Hilton even cites referendums and organizations by the British in India trying to sway Indian public opinion in favor of independence because something like less than 15% of them wanted to be independent a majority of them wanted to remain subjects.

read the book.

National Socialist economics sucked major balls and was only sustained through plunder.
The German economy was centralized and started gearing up for war since day 1, and that is not sustainable.

>>17914145
>concentration/death camps
no such camps existed, there were only labor camps and POW camps, that when the Americans bombed the Soviets declared them death camps and bombing test sites.
not even making this up this literally happened when a US bomber hit a Reinhard camp.
>aka slaves
conscripted labor isnt slavery, slavery is necessarily a social status, conscripted labor is a not a social status, your actual rights as a citizen arent modified.
Are soldiers slaves because there is legal penalty for them refusing to comply with conscription?
Is Ukraine practicing slavery? Was America practicing slavery during Vietnam?
No.
Conscription is a temporary measure, slavery is indefinite.
>>17914141
what race was being genocided?
>>17914156
>>17914162
I said they had 7 months worth of food in reserve specifically for a defensive campaign, then you, without evidence said "lol they were starving".
What does that even mean? If they have food and their rations are cut to a daily caloric deficit, what? They cant fight? Obviously they can, the majority of the Red Army fit the definition of starving throughout the entirety of WWII.

You are the type of retard to throw terms around and expect no one to dig into what actually happened and therefore you think no one will catch you.

I caught you.

>>17912833
What is every colonial empire ever.

>>17914209
If they were ultranationalists why did they get along so well with non-Germans?
>>17914241
This is just an outright lie, Germany surpassed Britian economically by 1937 and Germany was the third largest economy in the world and had there been no war Germany would have surpassed the USSR by 1940.
Germany and the USSR had a comparable productive output in 1937, if there hadnt been a war-scare and eventual war Germany would have, like they are today, become the European economic hegemon.
Germans are just better.
>not sustainable
Their largest productive sectors were textiles and steel for cars and trains.
Germany was the last major nation to shift over to a wartime economy and they didnt even fully mobilize their economy for war until 1944, something Britain did in 1941.

>>17914256
Such as?

>>17914217
>litterally noone is obsessed with K/D battle boxes while being unable to explain the actual events of the war
ComeNow.jpg

>>17912354 (OP)
>just let other people conquer you bro
nonwhite detected

>>17914257
Which non-Germans did they get along so well with?

>>17914268
Please quote the KD battleboxes in the thread.

>>17913804
>implying you can only lend money you made out of thin air
Do you know how lending worked before fractional reserve fraud?
You have 100 gold coins, you can lend these 100 gold coins.

>>17914272
Swedes, Italians, Finns, Hungarians, Romanians, Slovaks, half of the Yugroids.
They were much friendlier with chivalrous enemies like the Nordic peoples such as Norwegians and Danes than were the English.

>>17914065
>What Germany are we talking about here?
Now you're trying to evade my point entirely faggot. Its called a rhetorical question retard, to deliberately point out how stupid your claim is.
>Are you intentionally dodging my argument
Is this really your entire arguement?
>>the only case in which Nazi Germany could have had any real interest in doing any of that is the case where they wanted to build up their own navy and get control of the seas
Where in this statement is the air force or other various reasons such as economic power mentioned? Germany wouldn't want a large air force, or a strong economy? (Again, that's rhetorical)

>>17914274
>in the thread
>if I add extra stipulations I can pretend they don't exist
Kill yourself tranny

>>17914279
>Germany would go to war with and/or occupy 6 out of these 7 peoples

>>17914282
>get accused of something
>ask for evidence of this accusation
>"t-there isnt any YOUR DEMAND FOR EVIDENCE IS UNFAIR"
You are an actual tranny.

>>17914247
>not only the holocaust was fake, nazis didn't even had concentration camps!
damn, the poltranny is upping the game

>>17914202
>if you ask for proof you are a tranny

>>17914284
>Swedes
not at war or occupied.
>Italians
civil war and the Germans sided with the Italians who were allied to them.
>Finns
Declared war on Germany nominally, no occupation took place.
>Hungarians
The Germans prevented a coup and defended their border from the Red Army, that isnt actually an occupation.
>Romanians
The only occupation was the German army fighting the Red Army on Romanian soil.
That isnt an occupation.
Was Britain occupying France in 1940?
>Slovaks
Never at war with Germany and the claim of occupation is because the Slovak communists claimed the Slovaks themselves were occupying a Communist Free State of Slovakia lmao.
They were deemed an Axis power until The Soviets claimed them as "liberated".
>Yugroids
Croatia and Slovenia were never at war with Germany nor were they occupied by Germany beyond German soldiers defending them, which if thats an occupation then ALL countries are actively occupied by their own armies and own allies.


But so much effort just to dispose of your lies, why lie about this? Or is it ignorance?

>>17914290
Why dont we call them what they were? POW camps.

>>17914247
> the majority of the Red Army fit the definition of starving throughout the entirety of WWII.
Nope, because starvation means you dont get the nutrition or calories necessary to sustain life. It doesnt mean that there is no food, it means there isnt enough.
You're fucking American, I am ESL, yet I have to lecture you on the definition of the word starving and starvation.

You're also the same faggot who used the Turkish civil war as the ultimate reference to why Germany could win ww1 in 1918, something I noticed you quitely abandoned, but I'm just gonna add it to your long list of autism, along with Sealion being possible because one hill on Crete was taken, and USSR preparing for war in 1939 even without Hitler because of something Stalin said, yet you also say speeches means nothing.
What else? The RAF bombing raid on Berlin which you claim killed thousands of German civilians so the Blitz over English cities which killed 40.000 civilianss was a porportionate retaliation.

You're racking up quite a long list of failed arguments amerimutt. How long are you going to stay a nazi before you realise that some of your propaganda was wrong?

>>17914298
Slovenia literally got annexed by nazis holy shit just neck yourself you retarded lying poltroon

>>17914280
>Now you're trying to evade my point entirely faggot.
What? Your point was, why didn't the USA attack Japan, and my answer was that Japan was not a threat to the USA. A Nazi Germany who controls the entire Europe would be. So the USA would be opposed to a Nazi Germany that tries to become a naval power and attacks Britain. I'm not sure what you think I'm evading.
>Where in this statement is the air force or other various reasons such as economic power mentioned?
>doing any of that
Do you know the meaning of the word ANY? What do you think that word meant there in response to your post exactly?
>Germany wouldn't want a large air force, or a strong economy?
Of course they would. My point is that they would have no interest in using those things to attack Britain, unless Germany decided they wanted to become a naval power, as I've said multiple times now. And in that case the USA would not sit and watch while Britain gets attacked. You sound like Germany having a strong economy or military alone is enough cause for Britain to consider it a vital threat. Does the US not currently have full military and economic superiority over Britain? Is that a vital threat? No, because they don't have a reason to attack Britain.

>>17914306
Slovenia wasnt a country you fucking moron. The constituent lands of Slovenia today were at the time taken out of Yugoslavia when it fell apart due to Serbs overthrowing the leadership and given back to their former owners and Croatia.

>>17914259
Germany for example.
Invading and occupying a land that doesn't beyond to you is inherently antagonistic towards the people you are occupying.

>nazis didn't kill anyone
>nazis didn't persecute anyone
>nazis didn't invade anyone
>nazis never ever existed
at last, i truly see

>>17914321
>given back to their former owners
Who where given the rule over Slovenian nation and their land?

>>17914298
>no occupation took place.
Yes it did. By definition (temporary hostile control exerted by a ruling power's military apparatus over a sovereign territory that is outside of the legal boundaries of that ruling power's own sovereign territory) it was an occupation
And fuck you. The Germans burnt half the country.

>>17914257
>Germans are just better.
>lost the war

>>17914342
yes but Soviets cheated by using too many soldiers and tanks

>>17914298
>The Germans prevented a coup
You mean they launched their own coup and overthrew the Hungarian government?
Actual, unhinged, Orwellian-tier doublethink right here.

>>17914347
yes but consider vaccines and da joos

>>17914257
>why did they get along so well with non-Germans?
Because those non-Germans played to their tune. The second their interests diverged from Germany's they became enemies.

>>17914302
>you dont get the nutrition or calories to sustain life
This is in conflict with the statement, The German Army was starving but not dead.
If they couldnt sustain life, how were they alive? Right because intermittent starvation (otherwise known as malnourishment which is what you are talking about in WWI and Stalingrad) is completely different to Starvation death, which is literally dying due atrophic organ failure (which is what you want people to believe happened in WWI and Stalingrad).
yes, the first usage of 'starvation' that of malnourishment fits a majority of the Red Army during WWII. It fits the US Army TODAY in basic training.
Your ESL is only compounded by your dishonesty.
This is the source of your frustration.
>quietly abandoned
I didnt, I even made a follow up thread.
I checked every few hours but this shit-tier board has a fast rollover when good threads are up.
Turkey is proof, the Entente didnt have it in them.
The British army was fully mobilized and fully in the field in 1919 and 1920 when the Turkish War of Independence reached its Zenith. The British did nothing despite being heavily involved in the Mandate and Iraq, two regions in the area one literally bordering Turkey.
>Sealion
The whole point of that thread was an alternative to Sealion you fucking moron.
>something Stalin said
A private speech to his cabinet.
>Speeches mean nothing
I said Speeches arent legally binding.
You're not even ESL, you just straight up do not understand English.
>which you claim
no one said this
>proportionate
no one said this

My arguments arent meant to persuade (You), you have already made up your mind, they serve to entertain me by humiliating you, which they have done excellently as this very post illustrates.

>>17914322
>inherently antagonistic
Who did that land belong to?
What formal state held it? What letter of protest did their formal government body issue?
>>17914323
>Polish delusions have unironically reached this point
Hate to see it.
>>17914326
South Slavs like Croats and Slovenes themselves, Austrians, and Hungarians.
>>17914336
>The Germans didnt teleport away when the Finns declared war on them that means Germany occupied Finland
LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL
>>17914342
>lines on a map changed
>this means we are better
I am seeing Russia controls Ukrainian land, does this mean Russia is better than NATO?
I mean they have the land, who cares if 2m mobiks have died? The map color changed, that means they are better correct?

We should also presume Poland is inferior to Germany, greatly, as Poland not only lost the war to Germany, they lost their land to the USSR. Poland lost more land than Germany, more mapage lost means Poland is inferior correct?

>>17914123
>>17914128
>>17914156
>>17914162
I thought you guys were shitposting but it's really just the same one lolcow who has been spamming his fairy tales for year

>>17914317
>that Japan was not a threat to the USA
>Germany building up it's navy would challenge the USA
>But Japan doing the exact same thing didn't
Sure thing (Japan controled roughly the same population as the US in 1939 even when discounting the population of the areas of China proper they occupied, if victorious it argueby had greater potential than Germany)
>would have no interest in using those things to attack Britain
>Germans were gud boyz who'd never do nuffin
Hell even allies get into conflicts at times, European states clash with Germany over it's economic strenght, Britain and Iceland got into conflict over Cod fishing. France Vetoed Britain joining the EC, with Britain wanting greater markets to replace it's diminishing ones in the east while France wanted to be the primier continental power. Disputes over the North sea boundaries for who controls the oil. Since you like castigating America so much you'll be well aware of the suez Crisis. Even if we view the Germans with the kindest possible light something will eventually happen, and it's obvious who'd have the upper hand in any conflicts like these between Britain and a continent spanning Germany.
>. And in that case the USA would not sit and watch while Britain gets attacked
Sure, just like they didn't in 1940.
>Is that a vital threat? No, because they don't have a reason to attack Britain.
There are two rather big differences between the US and Nazi Germany. I feel like I shouldn't have to explain them, but I will offer two hints. The first is to look at a map, the second is to look at a political compass.

>>17914257
The words of actual historians that I am going to trust more than you:
>Even before the outbreak of war, shortages of butter, meat, and imported goods were common; substitutes became more frequent in the shops.
Detlev Peukert, Inside Nazi Germany
>From 1937 onwards, consumer shortages became more visible. The regime faced growing discontent in some quarters due to the declining availability of foodstuffs and everyday goods
Ian Kershaw, Hitler A Biography
>The German economy was being stretched to the limits of its capacity... The government faced increasing popular dissatisfaction with the scarcity of consumer goods, even before the war.
Tim Mason, Social Policy in the Third Reich
>The overriding priority given to rearmament was already producing clear signs of economic strain... the availability of consumer goods was deteriorating
Adam Tooze The Wages of Destruction

>>17914400
>>The Germans didnt teleport away when the Finns declared war on them that means Germany occupied Finland
>LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL
Again, by definition, it was an occupation. The same goes for Italy, Romania and Hungary.
And also, they took their sweet ass time leaving, because they didn't want to leave anything standing.

>>17914400
>Who did that land belong to?
The Herero people, for example, in the case of Namibia.

>>17914403
He is the epitome of the "are you winning yet son?" meme.

>>17914347
>keeping your ally in power and in the war is a coup
who was coup'd?
What is unhinged and Orwellian is stating the German's inability to teleport constitutes an occupation or that Germany keeping their allies in the war is itself a declaration of war.
These are all extremely bad faith and to say them about WWII especially where Britain ruthlessly assassinated the leadership of their own allies when they deviated from British command is just absurd.
The Germans were the most lenient of any nation in this war on both friend and enemy alike.
>>17914352
Why the bad faith?
>>17914358
>played their tune
Germany supported the war against Italy.
Germany dropped its land claims on former Austrian land held by Italy.
They werent playing the German tune.
Spain completely dropped the ball with Germany, Turkey literally declared war on Germany.
Germany remained friendly with both.

Nothing you say is ever remotely accurate.
You just say it because your retarded hick teacher told you this in your ultranationalist second worlder history class.

>>17914452
>who was coup'd?
The Horthy government, who was trying to save his country from being dragged to hell in a losing war.

>>17914452
>keeping your ally in power
ehhh what now?
>Germany dropped its land claims on former Austrian land held by Italy.
That was until they annexed them in all but name
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operational_Zone_of_the_Adriatic_Littoral
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operational_Zone_of_the_Alpine_Foothills

>>17914403
>>17914444
>unable to challenge the arguments
>unable to sustain their own claims
>devolves into more and more obscure shitposting and naysaying

You lost. you very quickly found yourself out of your element, and you lost, you went from arguing in bad faith to not even arguing anymore because the conversation has shifted so far beyond your Second World scope of history.
You guys literally thought Danzig was apart of the Poland (the country) in 1939.
You arent even on the cusp of knowledge, let alone well informed.
>>17914417
>the words of actual historians
The actual historians agree with me.
>https://www.researchgate.net/publication/4855867_British_and_German_Manufacturing_Productivity_Compared_A_New_Benchmark_for_193536_Based_on_Double_Deflated_Value_Added

You cited historical narrative works, I am citing actual production numbers.
Does Adam Tooze even cite a single industrial sector's output?
I dont think he does.

How about you go to historians using primary sources and not pop-historians writing narratives?
Look at the numbers given by professional researchers working as historians, not what pop-historians who dont even work for a university are saying, hearsay by a historian is still hearsay.
What I use is actual data.

>>17914224
Another victory secured by PoleGODS

>>17914400
>The Germans didnt teleport away
>>17914452
>German's inability to teleport
You don't get to talk about bad faith.m when making remarks like this.
The issue here is not that the Germans didn't instantaneously dissapear from the territories of their former allies when they switched sides.
The issue is with them stayong in those territories and dragging them into a war that they wanted to leave.

>>17914367
>If they couldnt sustain life, how were they alive?
Because it takes a while for the human body to die of starvation you fucking astronomical retard. You dont just drop dead if you recieve 200 calories per day, but you will eventually die because the human body cannot survive on 200 calories per day. It can take months but death is certain if nothing changes.
Are you fucking 6 years old?

>the first usage of 'starvation' that of malnourishment fits a majority of the Red Army during WWII. It fits the US Army TODAY in basic training.
Malnourishment means you're potentially recieving the calories needed to sustain life, but you're health will decline because you're not getting all the vitamins etc.
You can literally survive on only potatoes if you eat enough, but it will still lead to malnourishment if its rarely supplemented with something else.

And no, Red Army soldiers would recieve around 3000 calories per day, which is well above the calorie needed to sustain the human body. This is in contrast to the 6th army at Stalingrad where the average German soldier recieved a single slice of bread per day, which by definition is starvation. If you dont believe that then go ahead and live on one slice of bread per day and tell us when you're dead. Faggot.

>Turkey is proof, the Entente didnt have it in them.
Go on, make the case again.
Tell us just how committed France and Britain and USA was in the Turkish civil war. They never even made battle with the Turks. The French had one battle and it was with mostly Syrian insurgents.
You're literally retarded for even comparing it to the hundred days offensive, thinking the Entete was just gonna abandon the war because of some retarded volksturm 2.0

>The British army was fully mobilized and fully in the field in 1919 and 1920 when the Turkish War of Independence reached its Zenith
Liar
Any retard with google can find out that Britain did not commit to the civil war specifically because they didnt want to mobilize

>>17914429
>the powerline is leaning over
>this is what scorched earth looks like
LOOOOOOOOOOOOOL
>by definition not teleporting away means its an occupation
Then the term occupation is being used dishonestly because you are divorcing intentionality from circumstance.
It was circumstance that the Germans """"""""occupied"""""" Finland.
To use this, to literally say "the Germans were not out of Finland the second The Soviets forced Finland to declare war on Germany is an occupation" is so blatantly bad faith.

Will you admit this is bad faith?
Or do you not even have the courage to do that?
>Italy
Not an occupation if the Germans are acting on behalf of the Italian government.
>Romania
The Germans never occupied Romania.

Also the case the Germans didnt along with their allies because their allies were forced by the USSR to declare war on Germany, how is this a failure of German good-will?
You can say this is a political/miliary failure to keep their allies insulated from the Red Army, but this isnt a failure of German good-will.

You arent even sustaining the original case you made.

>>17914476
>https://www.researchgate.net/publication/4855867_British_and_German_Manufacturing_Productivity_Compared_A_New_Benchmark_for_193536_Based_on_Double_Deflated_Value_Added
This isn't actually contradictory to the post you are replying to.
Statistics like GDP or production beong higher does not translate into higher living standards.
You can see this *in real life.*
Like, The United States has the biggest economy in the world, and it has been only ever increased, yet the number of Americans in poverty, for example, has been rising.

>>17914516
>this is what scorched earth looks like.
Piece of shit.

>>17914516
>Not an occupation if the Germans are acting on behalf of the Italian government.
On the behalf of a government that was acting on the behalf of Germany.

>>17914468
Horthy wasnt an absolute monarch of Hungary lol.
>save his country
and how did that work out? Did he save his country by abandoning his allies and siding with the Red Army under dubious circumstances?
>>17914475
Was Hungary a German Ally or not?
>>17914475
>Annexed them in all but name
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Annexation
They didnt annex them.
and it wasnt "annexation in all but name".
These were operational zones created to defend the continent from potential incursion by the US.
Caling these annexations is retarded.
Did America Annex Iraq in all but name?
did America annex South Korea in all but name?
Vietnam, clearly annexed by the United States in 1965.
You agree with this right?
These are annexations in all but name?
no obviously not, and Germany only created these defensive sectors after the Italian government had fractured and was no longer able to fully defend itself.
Saying this is some great reveal of Germany's true intention of taking over Italy is beyond the pale.
And I suspect you know this, I applaud you for trying to sneak a half hearted lie past me (again) but youre not smart enough.
Why not just engage in good faith?
Are you afraid any good faith engagement with le heckin nazis will lead to auschwitz or the end of liberalism?
Liberal Democracy already ended, you are defending nothing, your bias against Germany is chasing ghosts.
Its nonsensical.
Why even lie about history at this point?

>>17914367
>The whole point of that thread was an alternative to Sealion you fucking moron.
Lol yeah and Germany was going to conquer and urbanized island nation because one batallion took one hill on Crete.
American paratroopers struggled to secure a few bridges but German ubermenchen paratroopers are going to capture entire cities. Youre literally retarded.

>I said Speeches arent legally binding.
No you constantly say speeches dont prove anything lmao, and you will say it again soon in some other debate whenever its necessary to defend Hitlers intentions. You literally tip-toe your argument based on whats the most convenient for the current debate and hope that nobody notice. In one thread you claim Hitler had the intention of breaking the M-R pact before it was even signed, in another thread you claim Hitler was going to absolutely honor the treaty.
And you will do it again.

>I checked every few hours but this shit-tier board has a fast rollover when good threads are up.
Sounds more like you REEEEEing that you've spent literally years here treating this board like some sort of conversion mission, dedicating your life, yet you've convinced pretty much no one. In fact I think you've achieved the opposite. I'm seeing way more wehraboo mocking threads popping up (tho I dislike them because they're also just shitposting), and I dare say you make roughly 80% of all the "Churchill bad - Hitler good" threads on this board.

>>17914546
>and it wasnt "annexation in all but name".
>The Italian influence was resisted and dismantled by the Germans, who decreed the restoration of the provincial borders of 1919 (plus the addition of Belluno), and forced the resignation of the ethnic Italian Podestà in South Tyrol who were replaced by German-speaking mayors recruited from the local population identifying with the Third Reich.[6] In September 1943, the German language was given equal status with the Italian language.[6] German and Ladin names of streets and localities were displayed alongside Italian names.[6] Fascist and Italian-language newspapers were shut down and the importing of newspapers from the RSI was banned.[6] The Fascist party was outlawed.[6]
Sure, banning Mussolini's own party and Newspapers was only done to stop American influence
Faggot, when did america do anything like this in south Korea or Vietnam?
>Why even lie about history at this point?
This is a good question, you should answer it.

>>17914546
>Horthy wasnt an absolute monarch of Hungary lol.
And?

>>17914486
I cant tell if that target dummy is male or female, what an accurate depiction of the average Pole
>>17914505
Its not bad faith, that is literally the case being made.
How could the Germans have extricated themselves from Finland without it being considered an occupation?
Literally how do they leave Finland without you calling it an occupation?
>staying in those territories
They literally left Finland as fast as possible because the Red Army was chasing them down.
The "they destroyed everything when they left"
1, no everything was not destroyed.
2, they were trying to slow down the Red Army which was speeding past the Finns and dragging the Finns along to chase the Germans and try to capture a slow quarry.
>they stayed which is a problem
Why? They stayed to defend their allies and their interests.
They defended the Fascist government in Italy from the undeserved fate it eventually received at the hands of the mutts.
>they wanted to leave
Who is they?
Did they poll 100% of the people of a country? no.
These countries fractured under pressure, its the epitome of dishonest to say Germany was some hostile aggressive power unable to get along with its allies because it was defending their own supporters from retribution in those former allies countries.

Is the ideal outcome what America has done where it leaves its supports out to hang, literally to hang?
Should Germany have done that?
That's rhetorical, but I half expect you to say, unironically, "yes people who disagree with me politically deserve to hang".

>>17914546
>Was Hungary a German Ally or not?
That's not what you said. You don't keep a nation "in power" you keep a person. Kindly tell us what happened to Horthy

>>17912415
How would germany a country with no chance of beating the UK that historically could never beat the UK magically beat the UK.

>>17914578
They couldn't.
But this entire threat is on the topic of a hypothetical German victory over the UK.

>>17912354 (OP)
Germanies economy was completely untenable. Being ruled by Nazi germany is asking for a greater great depression. Also being a second class citizen in your own country.

Also why is this even an idea. Germany never had a chance of beating the UK.

>>17914581
But I didn't eat breakfast

>>17914515
>it takes a while for the human body to die
Something no one denies, however it is you claiming that 200 calories a day (they got more than this btw) had rendered the German army combat ineffective.
>it can take months
and men survive on very little for months and can still win, case in point the Red Army, The PLA, VC, Gazans today.
Gaza is currently starving, has been for a while, if they are recognized next month by the G7 and the genocide ends, this would be a victory of survival.
DESPITE STARVING
>potentially receiving the calories needed to sustain life
no, it means you are on a caloric and nutrient deficit, this will eventually end in organ failure.
>Red Army soldiers would receive 3,000 calories per day
Source
>by definition is starvation
by definition the US army experiences starvation in basic training.
These are not ineffective soldiers upon completing basic training.
This is true for the training of all US direct action infantry.

Again, all of this would be unnecessary if you would stop trying to lie for political reasons.
Germany was not combat ineffective.
Starvation leading to combat effectiveness is something seen very clearly in the pacific, we can see Japanese soldiers literally unable to rise and fight. This was not something ever seen on either European front in WWI or WWII.
You are trying to say the Germans literally could not fight, I am saying they were still dangerous.
If theyre dangerous they should remain dangerous.
Why shouldnt they?

>>17914290
And you still haven't provided any proof of kidnappings an hour later. WoW. Does your mom support this life style? You should go for a walk. Its easy to not realize how disgusting and rancid you smell, especially with a gaping wound when you are living in it.

>>17914584
>The people who reigned in the central bank and created the German economic miracle don't understand economics
>Germany did not have access to top economists
Lol

>>17914591
> rancid you smell, especially with a gaping wound
but i'm not a 5 year old helga in berlin 1945

>>17914403
Its the same trannies denying reality in every thread year after year.

>>17914572
>The "they destroyed everything when they left"
>1, no everything was not destroyed.
Yeah. A few wooden cabins did survive by mistake
>2, they were trying to slow down the Red Army which was speeding past the Finns
The Red Army never oursued the Germans back beyond the armistice line. The Germans were scorching towns in areas the Soviets had never even been near to, months after the armistice, as can bee seen on this >>17914336 map
Stop lying like a Marxist.

>>17914536
America is the wealthiest nation on earth and they have to redefine poverty as being a 300 pound fat ass that east 20 McDonalds meals a day to claim that poverty is increasing(justification for more leftist control of the government)

>>17914572
>They defended the Fascist government in Italy
The Fascist government in Italy and the King of Italy forced Mussolini to step down from office, which was WITHIN THER LEGAL RIGHT.

>>17914599
Why do you want to genocide white people?

>>17914515
>just how committed
How committed were they to invading Germany?
If they began to take a few hundred thousand more casualties how do you know they wouldnt offer a good faith peace?
>Abandon the war
Abandon the war?
Did they abandon the war with the Armistice?
Why didnt they press for total and unconditional surrender prior to the Armistice if they were so invested?
Right because they werent actually invested in a to-the-death struggle with Germany.
>Volkssturm
The German Imperial Army in 1918 was larger than the Wehrmacht was in 1945.

You said this last time, the Volkssturm, why? Why the Volkssturm? The Germans had army divisions prepared for a defense of the Homeland, they had 7months of food ear marked for a defensive campaign when the Armistice was signed, they had raised half a million men in the final month of the war.
This is not a country which cannot defend itself like Iraq or Ukraine... or Poland in 1939.

>they didnt want to mobilize
They had more men ready in 1919 than they did in 1914 and more men in theatre in 1919 compared to 1914.

If they didnt want to mobilize to carry out their political goals, why would they continue to prosecute a war to carry out their political goals?

>>17914621
You are out of touch with reality.

>>17914626
You are such an obnoxious retard that you made me hate them by association (even tho you are a mixed amiermutt)

>>17914643
Nah, you've always hated white people and want to genocide them. Its probably because you're retarded and view historical events through biased moral lenses and narratives of good vs evil like its a story book.

>>17914653
I ploted the white genocide my whole life, you are going to be the first victim

>>17914656
I'm afraid you already victimized yourself when you cut your dick off.

>>17914536
>GDP or production
GDP no, Production yes.
Production DOES directly translate to higher HDI, also we werent talking about HDI, we were talking about sustainable economy.
Germany had a sustainable civilian economy based on their production, their high GDP is icing on top.
>The United States
has no productive capacity, thats why Americans are poor retards.
>>17914540
wow thats awful, what happened?
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Rovaniemi
Oh, an actual battle took place there.
Stop trying to pass off literal battlefields as scorched earth.
> The Germans used a preset timetable for determining when ground should be given in order to maximize effectiveness of the evacuation and this called for the German force (218th Mountain Regiment) to delay the Finnish advance. Finnish and German forces clashed several times along the road, first at Ylimaa and later at Kivitaipale, without decisive results.[2]
>The fighting near Rovaniemi achieved very little on either side. The most notable part of the fighting was the devastation inflicted to the town just prior to the fight. With the German rear guard troops still in town, during the controlled destruction of governmental buildings fire quickly spread to the wooden houses despite German attempts to prevent it.[4][5]
>despite German attempts to prevent it
>prevent it
Im the piece of shit? You're the one attempting to deceive, you're not Finnish you're finnished.

>>17914664
sorry chud, this dick is reserved for the next rape of Berlin

>>17914541
>Mussolini was acting on behalf of Germany
wow I had no idea the Nazi Party was secretly controlling Italian politics in 1922.
also your whole angle here would mean that EVERY country which supports friendly elements among foreign nations is engaged in a hostile form of exerting control if not outright military occupation.
In reality we just call this diplomacy, not occupation or hostility.
Does the US occupy Canada? What about the UK? Is the US occupying France?
by the reasoning of "foreign troops supporting elements friendly to the foreign regime" YES! the United States is engaged in a hostile occupation of the aforementioned countries.
Careful, youre getting into nazi chud territory here.

>>17914546
>>17914566
>Has massive spergout
>Immediately gets proved wrong
>Refuses to reply
lmao

>>17914412
>Sure thing (Japan controled roughly the same population as the US in 1939 even when discounting the population of the areas of China proper they occupied, if victorious it argueby had greater potential than Germany)
Population alone is not enough. Japan was terribly reliant on resource imports. You can't wage a war against your main exporter of oil.
>something will eventually happen
This is just baseless speculation, you could make this argument for literally anything. During early WW2 they made no effort to make an alliance with the Soviets to contain Germany, why?
>Sure, just like they didn't in 1940.
... except in 1940 the opposite actually happened, Britain attacked Germany. You're not even replying to my point. This is going nowhere.
>The first is to look at a map
Not that relevant considering that the US operates and has military bases all over the world.
>the second is to look at a political compass.
Completely irrelevant.

>>17914547
Germany was able to conquer a much larger militarily much more capable urbanized nation they had to cross three other nations to get into.
>because Crete
If you werent a 95 IQ chimp youd see Crete is proof of concept, something said in the previous thread.
Crete was a catastrophe, The Germans still won using handguns.
I like how you also ignore the other examples such as Kos and Leros, the entire Dodecanese Campaign is proof of concept.
>American paratroopers struggled
no? American paratroopers and British commandos/paras were the most successful elements during Overlord given their circumstances.

You are actually retarded because you lack the ability to abstract and wargame out potential strategies.
You unironically see history as a set of hyper rational decisions save for the case of Germany which was purely irrational then went back to being rational.
(You) dont actually know how many operations that failed were expected to be successful, and how many operations that succeeded appeared as guaranteed failures.
You think "they just did what looked best lol why would they take a risk??" because you are retarded.

>speeches dont prove anything
No, I say speeches arent legally binding in response to someone (You) saying "Hitler said".
Things Hitler says are not legally binding.
>Hitler had the intention of breaking the MR pact
No, I said Hitler was an actual opponent of Communism who made the MRpact as a cynical gambit to dare Britian into war with the USSR.
>Hitler was going to keep the MRpact
were it that Britain declared war on the USSR, yes I believe he would have.

Do you not understand these are people, they are dynamic, the field in which they labor is the most dynamic field imaginable? Politics? Do you understand what geopolitics are?
>Why Hitler do x and not y if a and not b
A two part political equation is too hard for you because you are a second world ESL who's concept of history comes from state media created to indoctrinate potato farmers.

>>17914692
"Italian Social Republic"

>>17914669
>The Germans used a preset timetable for determining when ground should be given
So they were occupying ground.

>>17914669
>Retreating German forces utilized scorched earth tactics, and though initially German General Lothar Rendulic ordered only the public buildings in Rovaniemi to be destroyed, on 13 October 1944 the German army received orders **to destroy all the buildings in Rovaniemi, **only excluding hospitals and houses where inhabitants were present.
From the exact same page you quoted.
And it wasn't just Rovaniemi they burned cinders, but every town they were came accross.

>>17914719
>Japan was terribly reliant on resource imports
Just like Germany!
>This is just baseless speculation
It's common sense, no two nations in history have ever been completely peaceful with one another.
>During early WW2 they made no effort to make an alliance with the Soviets to contain Germany, why?
What does that have to do with anything? And it's wrong, they did try. Initally the Soviets proposed an alliance then the British refused, then (after molotov ribbentrop) the British proposed an alliance and the Soviets refused.
>Britain attacked Germany
Oh that old chestnut.
>Not that relevant considering that the US operates and has military bases all over the world.
Military bases aren't an economic heartland, or even a military one. How many men can you fit on a military base? Maybe a few thousand?
Just compare the American attitude to Mexico and Canada to that of Europe
>Completely irrelevant.
Obvious cope. Why do all the world's democracies seem to get on well together?

>>17914547
>reeeing
I am not the one constantly seething at people.
I come here for fun because its easy to point to historical facts shitlibs, jews, and slavniks find inconvenient.
You're my punching bag.
>wehraboo
no one does this.
>you make
I dont make thread, I have made maybe 10 in the past decade and the majority of them by far were Y DNA oriented.
>>17914566
This was done prior to the fracturing of the Italian state right? Or it was done after the Italian government shattered?
I dont lie about history.
I dont need to use weasel words like "in all but name" either.
I only say what happened because I dont need to re-package for narrative pushing.
>>17914569
The Fate of Hungary is not Horthy's alone to decide.
Sinking his country for the USSR was silly.
>>17914574
That is what I said, you keep a nation in an alliance.
>what happened to Horthy
we dont really know because he was interrogated by hostile jews and communists at Nuremburg but he claimed to have resigned his position under duress.

Kindly tell us what alliance were the Hungarians apart of?
Kindly tell us what favoritism was shown the Hungarians in 1939 and 1940 by the Germans?
>>17914578
Germans defeated Britain in the yea 450.
a German house defeated England in 1688 and took over their entire country.
A German house rules England today.
africans in rowboats are defeating England today right now as we speak.

>>17914599
>tranny fantasizes about raping children
glad Zognald banned you freaks from schools and bathrooms.

>>17914774
also who need a dick, rifle is perfect for sodomizing some nazi whores

>>17914669
>Production DOES directly translate to higher HDI
Only if the produced good are of any actual use to the population, unlike rifles and tanks.

>>17914615
>The announcement on 2 September 1944 of the ceasefire and the Moscow Armistice between Finland and the USSR triggered frantic efforts by the 20th Mountain Army, which immediately started Operation Birke. Large amounts of materiel were evacuated from southern Finland and harsh punishments were set for any hindering of the withdrawal.[23]

>As the Finns wanted to avoid devastation of their country, and the Germans wished to avoid hostilities, both sides strove for the evacuation to be performed as smoothly as possible.[26] By 15 September, a secret agreement had been reached by which the Germans would inform the Finns of their withdrawal timetable, who would then allow the Germans to use Finnish transport for evacuation as well as to destroy roads, railroads and bridges behind their withdrawal.[27] In practice, friction soon arose both from the destruction caused by the Germans and from the pressure exerted on the Finns by the Soviets.[28][29]

>The Soviet Karelian Front, led by General Kirill Meretskov, initiated its Petsamo–Kirkenes Offensive and started to push the XIX Mountain Corps towards Norway from Soviet territory along the Arctic coast on 7 October.[61] By 25 October, the front captured the Norwegian port of Kirkenes.[62] The 14th Army pursued German troops withdrawing southwest from Petsamo and Kirkenes approximately 50 km (31 mi) into Finnish territory along Lake Inari. By 5 November, Soviet reconnaissance troops met with the Finnish Army at Ivalo.[63] Likewise, the 26th Army had followed the withdrawing XVIII Mountain Corps around 50 km (31 mi) over the Finnish border in southern Lapland to Kuusamo and Suomussalmi, but left the area in November. The Soviet troops in Ivalo did not leave until September 1945.[64]
These are not the actions of a people who want to stay and occupy.
It actually seems like they made the best of a forced war, so why lie? Finland wasnt occupied.

>>17914771
>This was done prior to the fracturing of the Italian state right? Or it was done after the Italian government shattered?
It was done in 1943, the same month when the germans saved their good ally Mussolini from a violent coup
>I dont lie about history.
Poor faggot doesn't even have the courage to admit he was caught red handed in a lie
>I dont need to use weasel words
Exhibit A
>keeping your ally in power
>That is what I said, you keep a nation in an alliance.
He doesn't even bother to put them in seperate posts!
>The Fate of Hungary is not Horthy's alone to decide.
Was it Hitlers?

>>17914623
The RSI was THE Fascist Government in Italy.
Its not a hostile occupation to support friendly elements in a friendly government in a friendly nation.

How many allied Nations did Germany go to war with prior to 1939?
none, because Germany actually DID conduct good faith diplomacy.

>>17914771
You are seriously claiming the glorious revolution was a German invasion? Tell me your retarded without using the word I guess. Also 450ad........ Neither country existed you fucking tard.
Germany never beat the UK and it tried. WW2 Germany could not defeat the UK. They couldn't even force the Raf out of their southern air bases.

>>17914804
>How many allied Nations did Germany go to war with prior to 1939?
How many facist nations did Britain and France go to war with prior to 1939?

>>17914676
Why does she hate White people so much?

>>17914771
>The Fate of Hungary is not Horthy's alone to decide.
Which is why he worked with the Prime Minister of Hungary too, who agreed with him on the issue.
>Sinking his country for the USSR was silly.
There is norhing silly about not wanting to prolong a hopeless war in order to save your country from unecessary devastation.

>>17914595
There was no German economic miracle. Believing in miracles is for children and retards. They re armed the country and spent lavishly on infrastructure, using debt, they never planned to pay back. You should read The wages of destruction. It has this thing called real information in it. Not just the delusional Nazi cocksucking you pass for reality.

>>17914770
>Just like Germany!
No you fucking idiot, Germany had the Romanian oil fields, and we are talking about the hypothetical where they take all of Europe and defeat the Soviet Union first, meaning they also get the Caucasus. How many times do I have to repeat this.
>What does that have to do with anything?
This is how nations protect themselves from the fear of being attacked - by making alliances. Your beloved Poland did so, you should know. Britain could do the same if they were actually scared of being attacked by Germany.
>Oh that old chestnut.
Idiot.
>Military bases aren't an economic heartland, or even a military one. How many men can you fit on a military base? Maybe a few thousand?
I thought economic dominance alone was enough to be a vital threat? Curious how that changes instantly.
>Obvious cope. Why do all the world's democracies seem to get on well together?
Because they're all vassals to the United States, retard. What a waste of time.

>>17914804
>The RSI was THE Fascist Government in Italy.
No it wasn't.
Mussolini lost a vote of no confidence by the Grand Council of Fascism and stepped down from his office.

>>17914697
>literally can not contain themselves waiting for the next round of humilating replies
You are a masochist.
>>17914731
The Italian Social Republic existed in 1922?
>>17914748
Yes, they were occupying physical space in the material universe. This does not constitute a military occupation as commonly understood.
There are German soldiers in The Baltic states right now is Germany occupying the Baltic states? no.
There are American soldiers in Canada right now, is America occupying Canada? no.
>>17914767
>German forces in self defense from pursuing troops avoided destroying civilian and medical infrastructure
This isnt an occupation.

>>17914795
Occupation is: control and possession of hostile territory.

>>17914828
>avoided destroying civilian-
Except they didn't.

>>17914828
>The Italian Social Republic existed in 1922
No. It existed from 1943 to 1945.
And it acted on the behalf of the German government. Because it was apuppet state of Germany.

>>17914822
>Romanian oil fields
So... imports?
>meaning they also get the Caucasus
Not enough, the Soviets had to import Oil from the US throughout the war, even after the nearby areas were liberated
>This is how nations protect themselves from the fear of being attacked
What European nations remain for Britain to ally with complete German domination of Europe?
>Britain could do the same if they were actually scared of being attacked by Germany
Which is what they tried to do?
>I thought economic dominance alone was enough to be a vital threat? Curious how that changes instantly.
Yes it is, but there's a difference when that economy is an ocean away and one right next door. Europe has always been Britain's largest trading partner throughout all of historying (baring two exceptions). That was my whole point of telling you to look at a map, I guess you didn't in the end.
>Because they're all vassals to the United States, retard. What a waste of time.
Even Mongolia and India? Alright, try dictatorships then
>>17914828
>>literally can not contain themselves waiting for the next round of humilating replies
I haven't seen any yet, just more spergouts

>>17914777
>mask off
youre too ugly, put it back on.
>>17914782
>rifles and tanks
so maybe you should read the paper where they list what is actually being produced, its not rifles and tanks.
Germany wasnt even allowed to make tanks in 1933 when they began rebuilding the country.
>>17914802
>done in 1943
Right after the strategic situation had changed.
Germany prior to 1943 had no intention of carrying out any designs on Italy, what you said is simply untrue.
The Nazis were willing to compromise and they compromised often.
>NO NO NO NO THAT MEANS SUICIDAL WARS AGAINST THEM ARE IRRATIONAL AND UNECESSARY
That is the unfortunate truth everyone needs to hear, especially you.
Fighting the Nazis was a mistake.
>lie
what lie?
>ally means a person not a nation
Ally can refer to any friendly element, I can understand why it would be ambiguous to an ESL in this context.
Yes, Germany wanted to keep their allies in power, whether those allied elements were entire nations or singular people, or groups and organizations friendly to Germany.
Yes, Germany is guilty of being loyal to those who are loyal to them.
>was it Hitler's
No, which is why Hitler relied on friendly Hungarians instead of declaring war on Hungary and decapitating the Hungarian army.
>>17914805
The Glorious Revolution was an invasion by a House originating in Germany, by an army of ethnically Central European Germanic speakers, they defeated the English in a battle after invading their island by sea.

These are Central Europeans, being lead by Central Europeans, invading the British isles, and winning.
>but they werent post-1871 German nationals
please do not be autistic.
Hitler was born in Austria, his ancestors were from Austria, he served in the Bavarian Army.
Numerous VolksDeutsch from outside of Germany as far afield as the Americas, Africa, and the Pacific fought for Germany in both world wars.
These people arent less German because their nationality is different.

>>17914852
who cares about being ulgy when there is 100 of you and one nazi whore and she has to service all of you while her aryan husband/father watches

>>17914844
You are unironically a sub 90 IQ retard. Stop wasting people's time. Log off the internet.

>>17914817
>You can't just expand the money supply and invest the newly minted credit in heavy industries!
Okay?

>>17914805
>never beat the UK
German people have defeated the British people before.
>it tried
No, Germany never tried to actually invade the UK.
>force the RAF out of their southern airbases
the RAF was unable to force the Luftwaffe out of their Western Airbases in Northern Hannover.
>>17914810
By Allied I meant Allied to Germany, not Allied powers as in the Anglo-French powers.
If Germany was such a bad ally because they "invaded and occupied" their allies, well when did they do this prior to 1939?
>>17914816
No, its pretty silly to sign yourself over to the Red Army especially as fractures between the First and Second world emerged as early as 1943.
>>17914827
The RSI was established in September 1943, Mussolini stepped down in July 1943.
There only legitimate fascist government of Italy was the RSI created by Mussolini two months after he stepped down.

>>17914838
But you say occupation as if the Germans were running a police state in Finland interrogating people, spying on the Finns, disarming them, when their """""""occupation"""""" was literally they could not walk out of the country the day the Moscow Armistice was signed.
Everyone can see the dishonesty here.
>>17914842
Except they did according to the sources.
>>17914843
Wow its almost like Mussolini was acting independently of Germany until the Italian government shattered.
meaning the Pact of Steel wasnt a grand ploy by Germany to take over Italy but an actual good-faith alliance for mutual benefit.

>>17914852
>Right after the strategic situation had changed.
>>17914358
So this statement, that you originally disagreed with, the one that started this conversation is correct then I take it?
Glad to hear you agree with us now
>what lie?
When you went on that massive spergout about how they didn't de-facto annex the land
>Ally can refer to any friendly element, I can understand why it would be ambiguous to an ESL in this context.
Are you just playing dumb or are you actually dumb?
take the statement "Keep your ally in power"
"Germany intervened to keep Horthy in power" is an English sentance that makes sense
"Germany intervened to keep Hungary in power" is not
This is why you started wesealing all about and trying to change it "Germany intervened to keep Hungary an ally", "Keep the nation an ally", would have made sense, but those are not the words you used.

>>17914860
>Polish people actually write
embarassing.
Not as embarrassing as Polish teenagers servicing German boomers along the Pomeranian coast.
Hitler wouldnt have allowed Polish girls to prostitute themselves to German men fyi.

>>17914540
My favourite German moment is when they retreated from Naples and decided to demolish the city's State Archives, which contained countless historically valuable documents, some of which were over 1,000 years old, just to spite the Italians for daring to tell them to fuck off from their country. And that was after they spend 3 years fighting the war together
What a satanic nation lmao

>>17914892
no, its not correct.
The strategic situation changing doesnt mean Germany is abandoning their allies.
The MRP wasnt even an alliance you mongoloid.
Are you being retarded on purpose?
>didnt defacto annex the land
They didnt, Annexation is a formal transfer of land from one state to another.
This didnt happen, therefore it didnt happen.
You throw that word around "annex" because you dont know what it means and I suspect its overused because its one of the only multisyllabic English words you know.
Germany intervened to keep Hungary in the war, to keep their allies in Hungary in power.

Learn English.

>>17914905
The source for this claim is one man and the Italians had already moved the historical archives out of the city.
>Polish tranime
Cringe. You will never be a woman you ogreheaded freak.

>>17914906
>The strategic situation changing doesnt mean Germany is abandoning their allies.
So why'd they (What word would you prefer?) seize and govern that land and even ban their good ally Mussolini's party there?
>They didnt, Annexation is a formal transfer of land from one state to another.
Hence the "De facto" and "in all but name"
You claim to be an english speaker, surely you understand this concept? Sometimes things happen in reality but are not recognised by the law. Ultimately you are clinging onto semantics, the last refuge of someone who has lost an argument. But I will concede if you so insist and use a different word to descibe the same thing.
>to keep their allies in Hungary in power.
Yes this is what you said and it's wrong. Sztójay and Szálasi held no government position prior to 1944 (I don't think ambassor counts in this case). The statement you want is "to bring their allies in Hungary to power"

The funniest thing was that they gained literally nothing from it. You blow up bridges, power plants, etc. to slow down the enemy, but they randomly decided to blast away their ancient library too, just for good measure

>>17914863
Not an aguement, it's nice of you to concede

>>17914957
They took over that zone because it was a strategic weak point in the Mediterranean front that could potentially be used as a springboard to penetrate the German border directly.
>de facto in all but name
Let’s instead just use terms when they apply instead of shoehorning.
>but annex sounds le bad and I have to make Germany look bad
We know.
>semantics
It’s not semantics.
It wasn’t annexed so don’t say it was annexed “in all but name”. It wasn’t annexed.
>the same thing
Let’s call it what it was: an operational zone.
Germany turning an exposed part of Italy into an operational zone is not evidence they had designs the Tyrolean Alps.
If Germany wasn’t able to compromise with Italy, they’d have pushed for them, they didn’t. Meaning even when Italy went against Germany’s wishes the Germans conceded in the name of maintaining good will with the Italian.
Now walk your statement back about Germany only having good will with countries when they’re playing to the German tune.
>Hungary
This is what actual semantics looks like.
Horthy was already their ally and already in power. They replaced him with another friendly element when he wanted to abandon his German ally.
Again, I must remind you, this is being used as evidence to say Germany was not on good terms with anyone.
The Red Army had to reach the Hungarian border for Horthy to even send out peace feelers.
How does this at all translate to Germany being on bad terms with Hungary?
It doesn’t.
That quip “well they invaded and occupied them” was retarded and you are retarded for making it. Now you are dying on this hill because you can not admit, yes the Nazis were goodfaith actors and had good faith diplomacy with other countries.
You can not admit this because the next thing would be “well why engage in a suicidal war?”

>>17914957
why engage in a suicidal war of the Nazis were engaging in good faith diplomacy and had good relations with other Europeans? The logical conclusion is the jewish lobby pressing for war in the UK, France, and United States. That you can not allow. You will die on hill saying “Germany’s inability to teleport out of Finland the day of the Moscow armistice is proof of a hostile German occupation of Finland” because the alternative is what everyone can see today and what everyone already knows, the jewish lobby orchestrated this war.

>>17914960
It’s good they didn’t actually blow up that ancient library.

>>17915330
>They replaced him with another friendly element when he wanted to abandon his German ally.
>Again, I must remind you, this is being used as evidence to say Germany was not on good terms with anyone.
That's what it pretty much is.