You know...

Holy fuck is /pol/ seriously that retarded about anything related to history?

>Tel-Aviv-vision is for educating people

LMAO-ing at your life

it's actually shocking how Hitler is one of the most well known and documented figures yet people routinely just say the most absurd lies about him and his motivations.

No but his chief “evil” was his persecution of Jews and gypsies, a narrative that has overstated his means and understated his justification

Exactly he was financed by the jews on Wall Street. But ultimately it was the middle and working class of Germany that put him where he was

>portraying Hitler accurately
Impossible to do so without living in the social and political context of the 1930s, unless by "accurately" you mean as an infallible messianic figure sent by divine will to rid the world of muh jewish boogeyman. He's portrayed as he is in this because it treats its audience as retards who aren't able to tell if someone is bad unless he literally kicks a puppy.

Here comes another cliche braying ass, We get it, you got propagandized.

Liberal indoctrination would do that. Ultimately he was right. Look at the state of the world today.

>working class
They usually voted for the communists or socialdemocrats. Poorer rural workers voted for NSDAP.

Starting an aggressive imperialistic war of conquest, becoming a savior of communism and ruining his country because of a hateboner for specific groups of the society that you blamed for everything is definitely a study in human failure.

Bro Hitler was a gay scatfag with one ball and three nipples

it's hard to satirize a guy with shiny boots

You read some blogs and infographics that openly spread false quotes and other manipulations and suddenly you claim to be an expert on the history of a country that's at least one ocean away from you

Hitler wasnt relatable though. He was a cartoon, just like his idol Moussolini. Obnoxious, clownish. Etc.

The file clerks, the bookkeepers I meant. The educated but pissed off class that made Germany as a machine operate day in and out. They inturned convinced everyone else. The same way how communism spread in this country

Attached: 1548545603376.png (720x715, 472K)

NSDAP was popular among the middle classed, peasants, rural workers and women.

The problem is that you think that "cartoon villains" don't exist in the real world.

Attached: MV5BNmZjMDgyMDgtYWI4OS00YjZkLWEyODktNzE0MmViOTFjMDA4XkEyXkFqcGdeQXVyNTA4NzY1MzY@._V1_.jpg (1000x1478, 440K)

>That's because portraying Hitler accurately would make people side with him OP

His own people didnt even side with him when he was alive and they got to see the real thing. There were 42 assassination attempts on Hitler and the vast majority came from other Germans - even by other Nazis.

Holy assumptions and straw man. You’re ready to go with this one aren’t you kiddo!

He was financed by many influential entrepreneurs both from Germany and abroad not sure about them being Jewish. German Jews were generally assimilated more than those in the east of Europe (one of many ironies of his retarded policies). If anything it were zionists who wanted to cooperate with him to establish a country in Palestine.

>hitler was financed by jews!
>hitler was a homosexual even though he gassed homosexuals!
Lol sad. Why do you wallstreet shills never provide a source?

Multi-front wars are simply unwinnable. The Germanic curse. (and Poland)

I remember there was one s
scene where Hitler killed a dog.
That would have never happened.

>hitler was a zionist shill

lol. another meme made reality

Most by Wehrmach officers who unlike Hitler, were conservatives. And military experts so they knew that Hitler was leading them straight to disaster. He was a hopeless fucking failure, him and Himmler and Bormann. Rosenberg was the only non-military official who wasn't clinically retarded but he was overruled by thugs like Koch. There's your idols.

I bet you also believe he shot heroin, had only one testicle, had secret sex parties, and had a secret gay past.

Bro, you have to me more educated than that. That's one side of the argument. The other is his people was a broken spiritually and financially. They were betrayed by their leaders. Like any politician he seized a movement that started long before him and used it to promote him to very corridors of power. History os written by the victors. America had its Manifest Destiny. Look at ot from a Historian point of view. He was no different from Attila the Hun, Ghengis Khan, Augustus, Napoleon etc.

Money is speech which equates to power. Who has a monopoly on that hmm?

>Multi-front wars are simply unwinnable.
Hitler was in a position to win WW2. His own idiocy fucked it up.
>let Generals go to Moscow
>this free up more troops for the western front
>getting Russian resources would have put him over the top.

Yeah, that doesn't mean many people didn't side with Hitler user. Even Caesar was assassinated.

The problem is Hitler's Mein Kampf is well thought out and accurate, if people compared what Hitler said about jewish control of media, banking, and their involvement in marxism then to now they would see the various parallels. They also would investigate and learn more about jewish influence in the Weimar era and how it mirrors our own time. This is why Hitler has to be demonized and derided, he exposed too much.

He supported zionism and established several agencies to ship people to Palestine. But at the same time he was conquering new territory increasing the number of Jews in his country forcing the agencies to start the entire process again. Then with the war with UK, blocking the Middle East and war with USSR blocking the way beyond Ural we know what came next.

>implying Operation Barbarossa wasn't doomed the moment the first German soldier stepped onto Russian soil.

They dont know if he himself was gay, but he had a very close relationship with his architect Albert Speer that made others suspicious.

Hitler also had an entire homosexual battalion. It was run by a well known out gay Nazi, Rohm.

Hitler only had Rohm and his gay band of brothers killed after outside pressure forced his hand i.e. too many rumors if gay men surrounding him and gay men in the Nazi party. After the Rohm purge you couldnt be openly gay in the Nazi party anymore.

Not really. They couldn’t sustain the defense for long with the USA entering the war and ramping up their own involvement. Saying this as a former wehraboo it really was just not a possibility with their resources. Their early success was due to the unprecedented use of mechanized divisions which need infinite amounts of fuel and aren’t as useful for defense

If you read into Weimar everything suddenly becomes very clear

I'm not disagreeing with you. Socialist movements were and still are for some popularity amongst the working class. I'm just saying he just ran with it and they followed in kind.

even if Germany could have taken Moscow it wouldn't have done shit

He was obviously gay, butt frustrated, didn’t care for his beard Eva

Speer was a sellout who wrote what he was told after the war to reduce his sentence and save himself. If he knew Hitler was gay he would have undoubtedly talked about it.

>, that doesn't mean many people didn't side with Hitler user.

Of course many did. But you have to remember that he only received 33% of the vote when he was elected. Most people in Germany did not vote for the Nazi party when Hitler was elected. So he had natural enemies within Germany and when the war started turning south, those people went after him.

This is not the reason why Rohm was killed. It had nothing to do with his homosexuality.

>>implying Operation Barbarossa wasn't doomed the moment the first German soldier stepped onto Russian soil.
It wasn't. If Hitler had let Army Group Center just drive straight to Moscow, they would have taken it. Moscow was the railway/communication/military/political nerve center of the entire country. Without it the Soviets could never have rebuilt (they would have retreated to the East, but the Germans would have chased them eventually).
Instead Hitler kept diverting Center and delaying the plan.

>Hitler was in a position to win WW2.
bullshit m8. The allies were simply too numerous

Wrong. People in Ukraine and Belarus and even Russia were greeting Germans as liberators, millions surrendered, most wanted to fight bolshevism. Those are all facts recorded in many texts, recollections, statistics and reports from Finland to the eastern front BUT the war was lost when Germans and namely Hitler refused to use that to their advantage, started genociding the population and forced them to unify against them. What a fucking failure, fucker was slave to his mass murdering bullshit doctrine and that killed him.

>They couldn’t sustain the defense for long with the USA entering the war and ramping up their own involvement.
It wasn't about defense.
Hitler could have taken Moscow in 42. This would have decimated the Soviets.
(and Hilter not declaring war on the US would have been interesting because the US was very anti-Japan after Pearl Harbor. The US might have had to delay their attack for a few years)

Yes, especially the fact that Weimar was never particularly progressive and the conservatives could openly conspire against the republic which ended with its destruction.

Reminder he was right about jewish degeneracy.

>Magnus Hirschfeld (14 May 1868 – 14 May 1935) was a German physician and sexologist educated primarily in Germany; he based his practice in Berlin-Charlottenburg. An outspoken advocate for sexual minorities, Hirschfeld founded the Scientific-Humanitarian Committee. Historian Dustin Goltz characterized this group as having carried out "the first advocacy for homosexual and transgender rights".[1]

>In 1930, Hirschfeld predicted that there was no future for people like himself in Germany, and he would have to move abroad.[51] In November 1930, Hirschfeld arrived in New York, ostensibly on a speaking tour about sex, but in fact to see if it was possible for him to settle in the United States.[49] Significantly, in his speeches on this American tour, Hirschfeld, when speaking in German, called for the legalization of homosexuality, but when speaking in English did not mention the subject of homosexuality, instead urging Americans to be more open-minded about heterosexual sex.[52] The New York Times described Hirschfeld as having come to America to "study the marriage question", while the German language New Yorker Volkszeitung newspaper described Hirschfeld as wanting to "discuss love's natural turns" - the phrase "love's natural turns" was Hirschfeld's way of presenting his theory that there was a wide spectrum of human sexuality, all of which were "natural".[53] Hirschfeld realized that most Americans did not want to hear about his theory of homosexuality as natural. Aware of a strong xenophobic tendency in the United States, where foreigners seen as trouble-makers were unwelcome, Hirschfeld tailored his message to American tastes.[54]

>Hirschfeld was born in Kolberg (now Kołobrzeg, Poland), in an Ashkenazi Jewish family

Hitler was surrounded by opportunist. He made a serious blunder by not hitting Moscow before the winter came. He paid for it

You're delusional. Taking the Moscow would not finish the Soviets. The Germans treated them like shit, so they had nothing to lose.

I dont mean to say that they ever had sexual relations. People thought Hitler had a kind of crush on Speer , perhaps because Hitler had always wanted to be an architect himself and he looked up to him. So Hitler scheduled a lot of time with Speer. They had a bromance.

>bullshit m8. The allies were simply too numerous
Irrelevant (given the timelines with a proper General).
If Hitler took Moscow in 42 (which was very possible), the Soviets would have been utterly wrecked. This would have given the Germans unlimited resources and the freeing up of massive amounts of troops/best commanders from the Eastern front to the West.
The US would have had to atomic bomb Germany, so yeah you're probably right they still would have lost via surrender.

Exactly. He shouldve taken Moscow when they had the chance. He wasn't expecting Siberian reenforcements let alone waiting out a Russian winter. He got cocky and didn't listen to generals

>You're delusional. Taking the Moscow would not finish the Soviets.
???
The entire Soviet structure was MOSCOW. It was the center of their entire railway network (which was essential for moving troops and equipment). It was the center of their intelligence, military, etc. The Soviets losing Moscow would have turned them into a scrappy rebel force instead of the big red machine.
The Germans were winning battles when the Soviets had more #s and better tanks.

>taking Moscow
Worked great for Napoleon.

>If Hitler took Moscow in 42 (which was very possible), the Soviets would have been utterly wrecked
idk Russia have always had the Ural as a retreat positions

The more I read about him, his orders, the way he handled his subordinates giving him sound advice the more I hate him. Starting the war was one thing but letting the communist win half of Europe is enough to condemn him to the coldest circle of hell even without taking all the genocide into consideration. Fucking burgers obsessed with him thanks to their stupid pop culture you really need to live here to appreciate how fucking hopeless it all looks.

essential viewing for ITT: youtube.com/watch?v=sbim2kGwhpc

No it wouldn’t have. There was no guarantee of surrender for anything as Russia is too vast and they kept moving military production to the East. One under appreciated aspect of communism was that they could quickly mobilize production. That aside, the border necessary to defend was impossibly big due to the multi front war aspect and they had enemies in everyone. It wasn’t sustainable at the pace they had set, you have to win over or slowly dominate the locals in order to empire build in order to make resistance and border defense feasibly under control.

Taken Moscow would have met the Russians switching to a Guerrilla style campaign similar to the French. At least till the Americas came

>idk Russia have always had the Ural as a retreat positions
They would have still existed as an insurgency, sure, but without Moscow they would have had no springboard to move the millions upon millions of troops and equipment.
The Germans would have built new airbases in Moscow and started bombing the shit out of the eastern factories.
With Moscow the Soviets literally had every egg in one basket (with the exception of arms production)

Moscow was taken at least twice in its history. Doable but that wasn't the case. The problem was that he refused to support counter-revolution instead it was supposed to be a typical war of conquest one nation against another. There is dumb and there is too dumb to live I agree with Napoleon.

Attached: 4356462.png (1360x768, 556K)

>There was no guarantee of surrender for anything as Russia is too vast and they kept moving military production to the East.
You still don't get it. I never said the Soviets would surrender, but how the fuck would they be able to mount ANY major offensives without the railway network and communications network? They would have become like French freedom fighters. The Germans would have rebuilt the airfields in Moscow and started bombing the factories non-stop.

>In the July November period 1,503 industrial enterprises were evacuated to the east. It took two and a half years to erect a blast furnace before the war but furnaces No. 5 and 8 were erected in eight monthes at Magnitogorsk. In October tank building plant No.183 was working in November it was evacuated and in December it resumed production. Tank production went from 4,177 in the second half of 41 to 11,021 in the first half of 42.
Military production increased 180% in the Urals in 1942 compared to 41 200% in the Volga area and 140% in Western Siberia.
In 1942 4.4 million industrial workers were trained or re-educated. The number of women operating for example forging and press machines rose from 11% 1941 to 50% end of 42.
No.

>Jewish Marxist get shot to death in broad by a literal Rothschild who was angry about being turned down by the Thule Society

And how do Nazis explain that?

Is this how /his/ is these days? Discussing Barbarossa with burgers? Dealing with /pol/ and whatever fake shit they learned from their favorite revisionist blogs? Is there anything more boring than that? All I wanted was to talk about cool discoveries and space and shit.

>he loses all relateability
I relate more to Pol Pot than him desu.

Again faggot.
Without the railway network and communications network, the Soviets would have been even slower and less organized/led (they were always poor in these categories) than ever. Those factories would have been mince meat once the Germans rebuilt the airfields in Moscow.

As I said, their factories were moved to the east of Moscow and they were already building up a counter offensive. America stopgapped their production shortfall for a time too. Russia is fucking huge and the Germans literally ran out of gas, Hitler’s hand was to force surrender not take an extended stay as it was logistically impossible.

well the thing is that he didn't because he was a terrible leader who used up all the supply trains to send jews on and sent more of his soldiers to die in stalingrad even after the first ones he sent all were easily killed because they were all wearing black in the snow which did not allow them to blend into the surroundings

>*disproves nothing*

Do you retards understand you're retarded or is that like a catch-22 thing?

>As I said, their factories were moved to the east of Moscow and they were already building up a counter offensive
And as I said. With newly rebuilt airfields in Moscow, they factories would have been a stone's throw away for the German air attack.
>were already building up a counter offensive
The Germans would have given the Soviets their Stalingrad if they had to fight for Moscow house by house. It took a lot of mistakes/learning for the Soviets to become a strong army. It wasn't until late 43 until they were "ready".
>Russia is fucking huge and the Germans literally ran out of gas
If they took Moscow, they would have been able to head south mostly unopposed.

I don't know too much about Pol Pot's personality other than that he was obviously a psycho. Hitler's most defining characteristic was probably that he was incredibly boring in personal contact and didn't have much inteligent to say (as he wasn't a political ideologue the way Rosenberg was and wasn't very fond of inteligentia).

More fantasies. All of the big industrial zones were evacuated at the start of the war.
>The remaining industry concentrated on immediate needs, however. In 1941, the Soviets built 6274 tanks. In 1942, they built 24,639. Newly transported factories contributed materially to these numbers, as they were reassembled with the same speed at which they had been dismantled. One Ukrainian factory was rebuilt in the Urals and delivered its first shipment of tanks (25 in number) at the beginning of December, some three months after it had been evacuated.
No, the war wouldn't be over even if the Germans took over Moscow and Leningrad.

You’re way into hypotheticals now. They couldn’t manage to get oil in the South much less capture Moscow, subdue the population, set up an airfield and start mounting assaults unopposed. This with a bunch of malnourished Romanian cannon fodder.

Then you have to defend all of that new front from the manufacturing titan that was the USA with assistance from the UK. And insurgenices your new territory over. Not happening man

Oh, wait he was educated by marxist professors in a French university and lite commies claim that it's not their fault because Pol Pot didn't think the French were hardcore enough and went to Cambodia to make real communism.

Pol Pot was 3x as evil as Hitler

Too bad the babies he bashed against trees don’t get to make movies about him forever

>just brushes off the railway and assumes Stalin is and the entire ruling party is just going to flee into the sub zero wilderness and somehow coordinate an entire country without a fucking railway

The war in itself had different geopolitical phases, so saying winning was flat out impossible when the U.S. was not yet involved is also retarded.

>More fantasies. All of the big industrial zones were evacuated at the start of the war.
Read faggot.
Losing Moscow would have lost their railway and communications network.
Their factories in the far east would have been vulnerable to the luftwaffe since Moscow much closed to them.

Killing Fields must be the only truly mature anticommunist movie made by Hollywood and it got the point accross even by including Lennon's Imagine. At least when it comes to anti-communist cinema Europe is still number one.

>sub zero wilderness
Idiot, the Soviets already built infrastructure in the Urals, Volga region, Central Asia, West Siberia and so on. They already had factories there before the Germans attacked.

>His own people didnt even side with him when he was alive

Up until the end of the war, people loved him. The Nazi party was voted in and people loved the idea of rebuilding the German Empire

Attached: 1524143380903.jpg (800x518, 84K)

>You’re way into hypotheticals now.
That's all this is.
>. They couldn’t manage to get oil in the South much less capture Moscow
Ugh. If you take Moscow, the Soviets would have done a MASSIVE retreat to the far east. Any troops left in the south that didn't also retreat would be completely cut off from their main force and supply lines. It would have been total destruction.
Once Moscow was taken the Germans would have done their typical "kill everyone" scenario and quickly built the airfields.
>Then you have to defend all of that new front
There is now new front.
You've got a bunch of poorly trained Soviet conscripts, no rail network to launch an attack, shit communications, and a flee force whose factories are for the first time vulnerable to air attack.
The only reason the US/UK invaded Europe was because of how poorly Hilter was doing in the USSR.

>Idiot, the Soviets already built infrastructure in the Urals, Volga region, Central Asia, West Siberia and so on. They already had factories there before the Germans attacked.
Are you fucking braindead?
INDUSTRY and FACTORIES is NOTHING without a RAILWAY NETWORK (at least in 1940s USSR).
How the fuck were the Soviets going to move/coordinate this attack? Without the railway it's mountains and dirt fucking roads. Watch the old clips of T-34s coming out of the factory. They put them right onto trains and shipped them out.

>luftwaffe
Yes, worked great for Stalingrad or even Moscow, lol. Why do you think shitty German planes would be able to easily bomb factories in the far East? German heavy bombers were fucking useless. They were not Americans with their B-17.
I'm also baffled why you think taking Moscow would be so easy.

>Yes, worked great for Stalingrad or even Moscow, lol.
You're a moron.
An air attack against a factory would be much more devastating than an air attack against a ground force. Troops are easily replaced (mostly) but factories take time to rebuild.
>I'm also baffled why you think taking Moscow would be so easy.
I didn't say it was.
But in 42 it was very, very, very possible. Hilter just made every wrong move on the approach.

Fantasies. Sure, it would be devastating, but taking over Moscow would not completely cripple the Soviet military.
I bet the Soviets would be the first to bomb Moscow rather than Germans Central Asia (or even Urals).

Attached: Map-Overview-1024x672.jpg (1024x672, 251K)

>not aware that factory workers need constant food and raw supplies transported via rail from the port cities all moving through Moscow

taking out the rail system was the right choice anybody can see it when you actually look at how the thing was designed and how integral a role it played in soviet troop movements

>Fantasies. Sure, it would be devastating, but taking over Moscow would not completely cripple the Soviet military.
When did I say it would?
What I said was, without a railway network, the Soviets would have been unable to launch/coordinate any attacks from the factories in the far east.
Any Soviet troops in the South would have been sitting ducks since they would have been completely cut off.

Pregnant Anne Frank posting is as strong as ever.

>without a railway network
Not without. The Urals were still connected with the West.
>completely cut off
No? Look at this map. It literally connects the Urals with the South.

Hitler was actually like that though. Dude was a total spaz.

I'm listening to Dan Carlin right now and it makes me think you'd have to be ultra braindead to still idolize Hitler or Stalin. The way they ruined their respective countries and how they treated their people just makes me sick.

Fucking /pol/tards

Attached: Europe Sea of Tranquility.gif (1412x997, 601K)

But they were influenced by his rhetoric. Everyone back then was racist and hated Jews. Its not like he turned a liberal progressive people into being nazis. Its like thinking that Trump influenced people to hate muslims and illegals. People already dislikes those groups in America. Or thinking that Bernie influenced people to want free college and healthcare. Its so stupid to say that his speeches influenced the country. His speeches made people like him, but its not like he changed the culture by talking to crowds.

I'd sooner believe someone who actually lived in Hitler's Germany regarding what it was like than some podcaster, and it sounds pretty fucking comfy.

Attached: 1536551770593.jpg (1899x1168, 774K)

That guy was literally a Nazi.

Doesn't make what he says any less true. Why would he lie after the fact when there was no risk of retribution? Wouldn't he have looked better if he said how terrible it was?

You guys focus too much on Jews. Watch Triumph of the Will, Hitler doesn't mention Jews once. Depending on the audience he usually talked about different things.
>Nazis
Fuck the Jews.
>normal people
democracy doesn't work, you guys are poor, some nonsense about a new stronger community
>industrialists
Fuck commies.

>you must be braindead to not form your opinions from podcasts like i do

Attached: 1520442812819.jpg (1129x1200, 118K)

People in the 40s didn't seem to side with him and he wasn't treated like a cartoon.

>Hitler
>charisma
>charm
Have you ever seen that spastic? People at the time commented on what a sperg he was with his wild feminine gesturing and screeching at the top of his lungs

why can't you just have sex?! is it really too much to ask?!