45
   

Was Hitler good for the World in any way?

 
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sat 5 Dec, 2009 12:12 pm
@fresco,
I totally agree with your opinion. Trying to justify megalomaniacs is stupid.
Lightwizard
 
  1  
Reply Sat 5 Dec, 2009 12:32 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Not to mention bereft of any empathy for the millions who died in WWII, many of them civilian women and children, and men who were too young or too old (well, not altogether for the Nazi's and Japanese) to fight. Hitler was clearly no genius -- he managed to take over and bungle all the military operations and a great deal of this was his being thwarted by the hatred in his own military leadership.
High Seas
 
  1  
Reply Sat 5 Dec, 2009 12:43 pm
@Lightwizard,
Lightwizard wrote:
....Then there were Albert Speer's monumental but throw-back, sterile concrete buildings when modernity was being advanced by the Bauhaus, which was closed down and the majority of the architects, designers, artists and craftsmen fled to other countries -- ...

It's odd you wouldn't like Albert Speer. Maybe the Bauhaus is an acquired taste, but as far as LightWizardry, doesn't his "cathedral of light" at Nuernberg remain unsurpassed to this day? I've seen any number of light shows but nothing to compare with it:
http://www.bytwerk.com/gpa/images/rpt37/rpt37e.jpg
High Seas
 
  1  
Reply Sat 5 Dec, 2009 01:16 pm
@High Seas,
P.S. there's an even better picture here: http://www.allposters.com/-sp/Albert-Speer-s-Cathedral-of-Light-at-the-Nuremberg-Rally-Posters_i3729624_.htm but it's copyrighted.
0 Replies
 
Lightwizard
 
  1  
Reply Sat 5 Dec, 2009 01:22 pm
@High Seas,
130 anti-aircraft searchlights was probably spectacular but there have been laser shows that trump it, like Hiro Yamagata's 2002 laser extravaganza:

http://aainter3-net.fromform.net/aseel/49.jpg
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Sat 5 Dec, 2009 01:31 pm
@Lightwizard,
You bring up a point i've made again and again in the many, many Hitler threads we've had here (i just don't understand the obsession people have with this putz). Hitler was a net liability to the German war effort. His only skill was as a politician, and a gutter politician at that. He correctly assessed Chamberlain's lack of balls, but that was the beginning and the end of his successful military prognostication. He was right that the western Allies would not attack him while he attacked Poland, because Chamberlain lacked the will. Daladier, on the other hand, knew the score. When crowds at the airport cheered him on his return from Munich in 1938, he turned to his aid and said <<O, les cons>>, meaning "Oh, the turds" (i.e., shitheads). Daladier told Chamberlain to his face that he had doomed Europe to another war.

The war which opened against France in the west in 1940 was only possible because Hitler correctly assessed Chamberlain's lack of will. In September of 1939, only ten divisions guarded Germany's western border--an attack by England and France then would have been devastating for Germany, and might well have saved Poland, which was the point of their alliance in the first place. Chamberlain was finally moved to fight when Germany invaded Norway, and most people miss the fact that Hitler's campaign against Norway lost Germany more than it gained. The purpose was to secure a route for Swedish iron ore and copper ore, through Narvik. Of course, it was necessary to garrison Norway for the remainder of the war. It also meant that the ore shipments sailed down the Norwegian coast into the North Sea, and English aircraft and submarines preyed upon them, something which would have been much more difficult if they had come south across the Baltic. All to save the higher cost for ore if the Swedes had been obliged to ship it south to the Baltic. What most observers have missed is not only that ships carrying ore were exposed to attack sailing from Narvik to the Kiel ship canal, but that the Kriegsmarine lost so heavily fighting the Royal Navy in the Narvik campaign. They lost ten destroyers, which was half of their destroyer force, and four others were damaged--the Royal Navy lost one destroyer, and had four others damaged. The Royal Navy could afford loses that high (but did not suffer them), the Kriegsmarine could not. The Kriegsmarine destroyer forces were gutted in Norway.

Hitler's insistence that Paulus not surrender the Sixth Army at Stalingrad doomed thousands of German soldiers to death, and thousands more to prison camps, which many did not survive. Three quarters of a million German and German allied soldiers were killed or wounded, and almost 100,000 made prisoner. Soviet losses were over a million in killed, wounded and captured. The Soviet Union could afford losses like that, Germany could not. The battle for Stalingrad was largely a symbolic fight, anyway--it was not essential to any German campaign then underway, nor any subsequent German campaign.

Hitler also insisted that German forces in North Africa would neither surrender nor be evacuated. At the time, the Allies did not yet have air superiority in the Med, and the Italian Navy was still a credible threat. The Germans in North Africa could still have been evacuated. In The Rommel Papers, Rommel referred to Tunisia as the largest self-supporting prisoner of war camp in history.

When the Allies invaded France, one of the ruses they employed was to use radio traffic in England to make the Germans believe that Normandy was a feint, and that they intended to land in the Pas de Calais, arguably the most heavily defended coast line in history. The 15th Army, which defended the Pas de Calais, was superior in numbers and equipment to the 7th Army in Normandy. Looking at the bombing patterns from Eisenhower's "Transportation Plan," Rommel correctly predicted that the landings would take place in Normandy, and that it would be the main effort. Rommel called for armored divisions to be stationed immediately behind the beaches, in order to throw the Allies back into the sea before they got a foothold. Hitler and von Rundstedt wanted to hold their armored divisions in the interior of France for a massive armored battle on the plains of France. Hitler believed that the Allies would virtually commit suicide by attempting a head-on attack against the Pad de Calais because that was what he wanted to believe.

Rommel predicted, accurately, that with Allied air superiority (something he never doubted would occur), German forces would never make the approach march, and that armored division held in the interior would be largely destroyed before they could engage. Once again, events proved him right. Rommel's old Afrika Korps division, the 21st Panzer, was strung out along the road leading to Caen on the day of the invasion. The lead elements were within a few miles of the city, the furthest elements were a scant 20 kilometers away. It took the 21st three days to assemble on the ridges south of Caen, and they lost 54 tanks in June and July, receiving 17 replacements. Plans to launch a counter attack against the invasion forces in concert with SS panzer units were scrapped when the divisional staff were wiped out in an air attack.

The 6th FS brigade (FS=Fallschirmjäger, which is to say, paratroops) were in Brittany, about 60 kilometers from the Cotentin peninsula where the Americans had landed and where the 101st Airborne and the 82nd Airborne were attempting to "hold the door open" for the troops from Utah beach. They lost almost all of their motorized and horse-drawn transport on the first day. What remained had to move at night, and in June in France, the nights are very short. In the end, four FS regiments had to walk from Brittany to Normandy, mostly at night or in the dusk before dawn or sunset, and it took them six days. The German SS panzer and panzergrenadier units which fought in Normandy suffered very heavy losses in getting to the battle area. The SS panzer and panzergrenadier divisions and regular panzer and panzergrenadier divisions which were held in the interior were blown to hell before they could ever engage with the Americans, and ended up constantly falling back from one prepared defensive position to another. Hitler and von Rundstedt's great panzer battle never took place.

Rommel was correct about Allied air superiority. In all of France, the Luftwaffe flew 160 sorties on June 6, 1944, and all but two of those were flown against a diversion in the south of France. The Allies flew 14,827 sorties in France that day, most of the over the invasion beaches and the countryside behind them.

Hitler was the among the best military assets the Allies had in Europe.
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Sat 5 Dec, 2009 01:41 pm
@Setanta,
Quote:
Hitler was the among the best military assets the Allies had in Europe.


Primarily because it was easy to rally the citizenry to fight Hitler, it would have been much more tricky to go through so much treasure to fight German efforts at empire building had Hitler been a model human being.
Lightwizard
 
  1  
Reply Sat 5 Dec, 2009 02:50 pm
@Setanta,
Very good little historical essay, as usual. I think people still don't get how a people could be hoodwinked by such an unintelligent, petty man. I think, no matter what the scope of the consequences, they should be pre-occupied with January 20th 2001 and the next eight years as far as a people being hoodwinked by an unintelligent, petty man. How was this good for the world in any way.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sat 5 Dec, 2009 02:52 pm
@Lightwizard,
They even tried to assassinate him, but failed.
Lightwizard
 
  1  
Reply Sat 5 Dec, 2009 05:05 pm
@cicerone imposter,
What, with a pair of shoes? If they'd been aimed right Bush might have gained a sole. Alas, they were aimed left. Oh, you mean ole Adolph. I think the bomb under the desk should have been enough to off Hitler, but it was placed post haste.
0 Replies
 
Lightwizard
 
  1  
Reply Sat 5 Dec, 2009 05:22 pm
Richard Neutra, and the Bauhaus designers and architects, followed the philosophy of the "less is more" as Mies van der Rohe had stated it. Albert Speer was more, on more, on more -- right in league with the excesses of the whole Nazi regime.

Speer's megalithic cold chunk of concrete:

http://www.ottens.co.uk/gatehouse/user/files/Zeppelinfeld%20by%20Albert%20Speer.jpg

Neutra's graceful, asymmetrically geometric use of structure with glass:

http://z.about.com/d/architecture/1/0/7/o/lovellFlikr313431375.jpg



Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Sat 5 Dec, 2009 06:11 pm
@hawkeye10,
As usual, you miss the point entirely. Adolf could have been a model citizen, but so long as he made war on more enemies than Germany could handle, and willfully interfered by making military decisions he was not competent to make, he would have been an asset to his enemies.
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Sat 5 Dec, 2009 07:36 pm
@Setanta,
Quote:
As usual, you miss the point entirely. Adolf could have been a model citizen, but so long as he made war on more enemies than Germany could handle, and willfully interfered by making military decisions he was not competent to make, he would have been an asset to his enemies.


I got your point, I was making a different point which is more important than all of those in your essay put together.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sat 5 Dec, 2009 08:17 pm
@Lightwizard,
LW, Is this the same building?
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v97/imposter222/NOV06CRUISEOLYM2077.jpg
Lightwizard
 
  1  
Reply Sat 5 Dec, 2009 09:10 pm
@cicerone imposter,
That would be the exact inside of the stadium facade.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  0  
Reply Sat 5 Dec, 2009 09:35 pm
@hawkeye10,
You're a legend in your own mind, Rapist Boy.

So your basic thesis is, that had Adolf been a model human being, the Poles, the Danes, the Norwegians, the Dutch, the Belgians, the French, the Soviets, the Croats, the Czechs, the Slovaks, the Slovenes, the Bosnians, the Serbs, the Macedonians, the Montenegrans, the Greeks--they all would have more or less taken the position: "Well, it really sucks to be invaded by a foreign power, but that Hitler, he's such a great guy, we really don't mind." That's pretty damned idiotic. I expect no more from you.
Lightwizard
 
  1  
Reply Sun 6 Dec, 2009 11:10 am
@Setanta,
Hey, don't upstage the Bush Doctrine -- I'm a benevolent leader so in invading your country, I have all the best intentions including an exit strategy. You mean that kind of "model citizen" bullshit?
0 Replies
 
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Sun 6 Dec, 2009 01:08 pm
@Setanta,
Quote:
So your basic thesis is, that had Adolf been a model human being, the Poles, the Danes, the Norwegians, the Dutch, the Belgians, the French, the Soviets, the Croats, the Czechs, the Slovaks, the Slovenes, the Bosnians, the Serbs, the Macedonians, the Montenegrans, the Greeks--they all would have more or less taken the position: "Well, it really sucks to be invaded by a foreign power, but that Hitler, he's such a great guy, we really don't mind." That's pretty damned idiotic. I expect no more from you.


My Premise is that Germany was thrown back only because America came to the aid of the lands which Germany wanted. Had it not been for Hitler we may well have let German Aggression stand. You being the expert in history that you are know full well that before the war there was nearly zero interest by the citizens in getting into another land war in Europe, WW1 being the expensive mess with little benefit that it was. If there was any way to live with the German empire we would have done so, and the rest of Europe had no chance of denying Germany what she wanted.
Wilso
 
  1  
Reply Sun 6 Dec, 2009 02:16 pm
@hawkeye10,
hawkeye10 wrote:



My Premise is that Germany was thrown back only because America came to the aid of the lands which Germany wanted. Had it not been for Hitler we may well have let German Aggression stand.


Umm, excuse me, but until Japan attacked Pearl Harbour the US it did let German aggression stand.
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Sun 6 Dec, 2009 02:24 pm
@Wilso,
Quote:
Umm, excuse me, but until Japan attacked Pearl Harbour the US it did let German aggression stand.


Thank you for supporting my point.
 

Related Topics

HAPPY ANNIVERSARY, EVERYONE! - Discussion by OmSigDAVID
WIND AND WATER - Discussion by Setanta
Who ordered the construction of the Berlin Wall? - Discussion by Walter Hinteler
True version of Vlad Dracula, 15'th century - Discussion by gungasnake
ONE SMALL STEP . . . - Discussion by Setanta
History of Gun Control - Discussion by gungasnake
Where did our notion of a 'scholar' come from? - Discussion by TuringEquivalent
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.52 seconds on 12/22/2024 at 05:35:55