Why are atrocities done by other countries during WW2 not as publicy displayed in the media? Japan has done way crueler warcrimes then germany yet Japan scientist were paid for their research and Mengele was guilty of warcrimes and hunted.
Japan has done way crueler warcrimes then germany yet Japan scientist were paid for their research and Mengele was guilty of warcrimes and hunted.Prepare for a whole ton of shit over this. Can't begin to fathom how we get so many deniers here.
I am NOT denying germans have done a lot of shit. They have killed a lot of people. But they have killed them with Otto-Motor gases and only 1-2 HL used Zyklon B a lot, most others used Zyklon B in small quantities and Motor Gas as a main source.
But all of this is accepted as a fact and nobody denies it. Yet Japan researches were found guilty, 1-2 were death sentenced, some others got a life time sentence but shortly after all of them were free to go and basically got scott free for their most cruel research. They got a stipend from the USA gov in exchange for their research data. No doubt, the KZ-Docs have done some evil things, too but Mengele is one of a very few who was really evil and inhuman.
No doubt, in war all armies are doing crimes. But using cities and villages as B-weapon test ground is something even the Wehrmacht has not done. Among other things. You can do your own research. There is enough data on the net.
Well, america would not talk german. The Marine and Luftwaffe had enough trouble with britain. they could never go to USA. ;)
The various brutalities and related atrocities OF WAR committed by the IJA are certainly appalling to our sensibilities, but they are framed within a different context of WAR, which perhaps while perverse, distinguishes them from the systematic well-organized isolation, dis-possession, and extermination of a targeted domestic demographic carried out by the Nazi government. It's not really fair, but the IJA's actions don't constitute the kind of comparable genocide we're talking here, although I do think the barbaric nature of that war should be talked about at least as often as that of the Jewish holocaust
Along with the events on the Eastern Front, this was huge conflict with huge death-tolls. World War II usually is said to start in 1939, but when you consider the significance of the Second Sino-Japanese War, it seems more accurate to say it started in 1937.
But that's Euro/Western-Centricism for you. If it doesn't involve White Westerners, it's simply not as important.
> Japan scientist were paid for their research
As were Nazi scientists employed by the US government after the war.
>[regarding his and Colonel Curtis LeMay's involvement in the bombing of Japan during World War II]
LeMay said if we lost the war that we would have all been prosecuted as war criminals. And I think he's right. He... and I'd say I... were behaving as war criminals. -Robert McNamara
History is written by the victor.
>>6
Nobody here is arguing that USAF and RAF’s massive bombing campaigns targeted at civilians are just dandy. The discussion's about why the United States, having put out a great deal of propoganda dehumanizing the Japanese, decided at war's end to clean the image they project of Japan, while at the same time making awareness of Germany's genocides a paramount point in education. Which is strange.
Correct.
Maybe because Japan went from enemy to friend later?
>>7
Generally, the holocaust is associated with the ideology of Nazism rather than the nation of Germany. The party members and military leaders were charged of war crimes, not the citizenry. Just like Tojo was.
> 'mericans say that we'd all be talking in German if not for the US, when quite obviously we'd be talking in Russian.
Well Russia would have crumbled if not for the arms sold to them. It was quite close.
>>9 speaks the truth.
The Germans were very, very good at war. Your history books may make it look like the Allied victory was inevitable. This is far from the truth.
The Allies only barely pulled it out, in the ETO, and there was a lot of dumb luck involved. The Russians very nearly collapsed in 1942. Had Hitler known how badly mauled the UK's army and RAF were in 1940, Operation Sealion would have gone forward and there's a distinct chance that it would have succeeded. And so on and so on.
It would have been a much different world. I leave to your imaginations how different, and in what ways.
The Germans were very, very good at war. Your history books may make it look like the Allied victory was inevitable. This is far from the truth.
It was inevitable. The Allied Powers sported a combine industrial advantage many times that of all the Axis powers combine. Even the United States alone have more than 8 times the industrial output of the entire planet. By the end of WW2 they actually made up more than 50% of world GDP.
The Allies only barely pulled it out, in the ETO, and there was a lot of dumb luck involved.
How so?
The Russians very nearly collapsed in 1942.
No they didn't. In fact, Russia's situation post 1941 had vastly improved. Lend Lease was running at full speed, and Russia's industry was safely distant from the front. The KV-1, T-34, and IL-2 were hitting the frontlines in obscene numbers.
Had Hitler known how badly mauled the UK's army and RAF were in 1940,
Blatent falsehood. The RAF had been keeping its most experienced pilots and a majority of its Spitfires in Scotland. So they could be put to use in the event the Luftwaffe got through the first line. They didn't. End of story.
Operation Sealion would have gone forward and there's a distinct chance that it would have succeeded. And so on and so on.
Hell fucking no. What in the name of christ would Germany even USE to get accross the channel? Do you think they're going to invade England with a bunch of submarines? Or just Transports? Even Reader could admit the German Navy was in no position to carry out an invasion of any kind. Ever.
It would have been a much different world. I leave to your imaginations how different, and in what ways.
No, you're just delusional, or a kid. Either way, you have no idea what you're talking about. Go away.
And obviously, because in 1940 the French outnumbered the Germans two to one, had five times as many tanks as the Germans did, and more advanced designs like the Char B heavy tank, over and above the advantage conferred by the Maginot Line static fortifications, obviously it was impossible for the Germans to defeat France, let alone France with most of the British Army on their soil to help.
Obviously, right? So the rapid defeat of France was, um. What's the word I'm looking for here?
Inevitable. I love how you mention only the factors that support your claims, but none of the ones that blatently disprove them.
In short, Germany kicked the ass of someone already on the ground and bleeding. Hardly a "stunning victory" of any kind.
Generally, the holocaust is associated with the ideology of Nazism rather than the nation of Germany. The party members and military leaders were charged of war crimes, not the citizenry. Just like Tojo was.This is actually reallly interesting. The most atrocious actions Nazi Germany made during the wars are attributed to Nazism and the organizations that comprise it like the SS. But as for Japan, it is the national army or the country itself rather than, say, Taisei Yokusankai or Nihon Gunkoku Shugi. So it's an example that shows the opposite: that Germany is sort of rehabilitated and humanized while Japan is an intrisically nasty land of nips and gooks.
>>13
Come on now. You're making a lot of assumptions that I don't think you've examined closely. Most of the British Army also got chewed to pieces in France in May of 1940. They lost so much equipment that new draftees were training with broomsticks, and village militias were training with spears, because they didn't even have enough rifles for the few men they had left.
In 1940, US involvement in the war was not a given.
I still think it's entirely possible that Sea Lion could have succeeded. It would have been a throw of the dice.
The main obstacle to the success of Sea Lion, in my view, was not the Germans' lack of landing craft, but a lack of good intelligence regarding the dire situation on the ground in England at the time. Had they brought most or all of their U-boat fleet off of convoy raiding duty and parked them all in the English Channel, they could have hurt the Royal Navy all by themselves. Restricted waters always favor submarine warfare, as the surface ships are denied room to maneuver for ASW operations. And the U-boats by themselves might not have been able to hold off the Royal Navy--but they'd have had the entire Luftwaffe raining death on their heads. The tattered remnants of the RAF would not have been able to protect them, they couldn't even really protect London (their "victory" consisted mainly of not disintegrating completely and inflicting disproportionate attrition losses on the Luftwaffe), and operating out over the Channel would have been vastly more difficult for the very short-range RAF fighter aircraft--and favored the Luftwaffe, which would have been that much closer to their own bases. The history of the war demonstrates that air power is decisive and lethal against WWI style battleship navies, such as the Royal Navy of 1940, and if they jam themselves together in restricted waters, they are that many more targets for the dive bomber pilots. The Royal Navy would have gotten mauled, fifty thousand German paratroopers would have landed in London to face only minor and scattered resistance, and captured merchant ships would have been pressed into service and loaded down to the gunwales with infantrymen and AFVs, to unload onto the London docks and return for another load.
There are a lot of what-ifs here, of course, and it would have been a gamble. But early on in the war, the German high command had a long run of high stakes gambles that turned out far better for them than one might have expected.
*Come on now. You're making a lot of assumptions that I don't think you've examined closely. *
Oh bull shit. It's no secret to anyone that the allies were able to VASTLY outproduce the axis powers on a scale they couldn't even imagine. It's not speculation at all. It's common fucking sense.
*
Most of the British Army also got chewed to pieces in France in May of 1940.*
Because of piss poor co-ordination and zero preparation for war. I'm so god damn tired of people who think Germany's invasion of France is a total war benchmark for the allied powers. Germany spent upwards of a decade getting ready for this war. While the allies did almost nothing. They actually CUT some resources prior to the start of the war. Despite this, in less than 2 years the allies still managed to make the axis powers their bitch.
They lost so much equipment that new draftees were training with broomsticks, and village militias were training with spears, because they didn't even have enough rifles for the few men they had left.
See above.
I still think it's entirely possible that Sea Lion could have succeeded. It would have been a throw of the dice.
No it wouldn't. It would have been a disasterous failure. Yet-a fucking-gain, I have to ask you how one intends to carry out a successful invasion WITH NO REAL NAVY? Even the Allies needed to use almost every surface vessel in their disposal to carry out the attacks on Iwo Jima and Normandy. And those were both well after axis air power was non-existent. Sorry son, but your Sea Lion wank fantasy is just delusional.
The main obstacle to the success of Sea Lion, in my view, was not the Germans' lack of landing craft, but a lack of good intelligence regarding the dire situation on the ground in England at the time. Had they brought most or all of their U-boat fleet off of convoy raiding duty and parked them all in the English Channel, they could have hurt the Royal Navy all by themselves.
Are you fucking kidding? This is SUICIDE for the U-Boats. Don't you understand why the Kriegsmarine had to move its area of operations out into the Atlantic in the first place? Hint: It wasn't because they wanted to see the Statue of Liberty.
Restricted waters always favor submarine warfare, as the surface ships are denied room to maneuver for ASW operations.
It's the complete other way around you dumbshit. Just ask any U-Boat crewman that tried to get through the English Channel/Straight of Gibraltar.
*And the U-boats by themselves might not have been able to hold off the Royal Navy--but they'd have had the entire Luftwaffe raining death on their heads. *
Except that it's already been established that the RAF was never close to its breaking point. And that the attrition was well in its favor. Thanks to Lend-Lease.
The tattered remnants of the RAF would not have been able to protect them, they couldn't even really protect London
Yeah, they did such a poor job protecting London from air raids, Hitler called off the Battle of Britain in celebration! Right?
Flat out lie.
*which would have been that much closer to their own bases. *
Flat out lie.
*The history of the war demonstrates that air power is decisive and lethal against WWI style battleship navies, *
So WHY do you think that an invasion force composed of nothing but submarines and transports would have ANY CHANCE OF SUCCESS?
such as the Royal Navy of 1940, and if they jam themselves together in restricted waters, they are that many more targets for the dive bomber pilots. The Royal Navy would have gotten mauled, fifty thousand German paratroopers would have landed in London to face only minor and scattered resistance,
Minor and scattered resistance? Yeah, I suppose the BEF just magically fucking disappeared right?
*and captured merchant ships would have been pressed into service and loaded down to the gunwales with infantrymen and AFVs, to unload onto the London docks and return for another load.
*
Nice fanfiction, too bad it isn't remotely realistic. Even IF we magically take the RAF and RN out of the equation, an invasion of England is still a non factor. Since Hitler never really intended to carry it out in the first place. It was paper planning that served no real purpose. So little in purpose in fact that Admiral Reader considered it a joke.
Restricted waters always favor submarine warfare, as the surface ships are denied room to maneuver for ASW operations.
It's the complete other way around you dumbshit. Just ask any U-Boat crewman that tried to get through the English Channel/Straight of Gibraltar.
*And the U-boats by themselves might not have been able to hold off the Royal Navy--but they'd have had the entire Luftwaffe raining death on their heads. *
Except that it's already been established that the RAF was never close to its breaking point. And that the attrition was well in its favor. Thanks to Lend-Lease.
The tattered remnants of the RAF would not have been able to protect them, they couldn't even really protect London
Yeah, they did such a poor job protecting London from air raids, Hitler called off the Battle of Britain in celebration! Right?
Flat out lie.
*which would have been that much closer to their own bases. *
Flat out lie.
*The history of the war demonstrates that air power is decisive and lethal against WWI style battleship navies, *
So WHY do you think that an invasion force composed of nothing but submarines and transports would have ANY CHANCE OF SUCCESS?
such as the Royal Navy of 1940, and if they jam themselves together in restricted waters, they are that many more targets for the dive bomber pilots. The Royal Navy would have gotten mauled, fifty thousand German paratroopers would have landed in London to face only minor and scattered resistance,
Minor and scattered resistance? Yeah, I suppose the BEF just magically fucking disappeared right?
*and captured merchant ships would have been pressed into service and loaded down to the gunwales with infantrymen and AFVs, to unload onto the London docks and return for another load.
*
Nice fanfiction, too bad it isn't remotely realistic. Even IF we magically take the RAF and RN out of the equation, an invasion of England is still a non factor. Since Hitler never really intended to carry it out in the first place. It was paper planning that served no real purpose. So little in purpose in fact that Admiral Reader considered it a joke.
>>Yet-a fucking-gain, I have to ask you how one intends to carry out a successful invasion WITH NO REAL NAVY?
Gee, I dunno, how'd a quarter million German troops get to Norway in 1940? Magic, I guess.
Also, NO U.
Yeah, Norway, that's a great country to use as a strategic proxy for Britian.
>>Minor and scattered resistance? Yeah, I suppose the BEF just magically fucking disappeared right?
They disappeared into German POW camps during May, except for the small number who left their rifles and heavy equipment behind and escaped from Dunkirk.
The Wehrmacht went through the BEF like shit through a goose and chased them all the way across France. They did not perform much better than the French did, though having their flanks unprotected for most of the campaign, due to the sudden and unplanned-for total collapse of the French military contributed. Weren't nobody left to greet 'em onna beaches, Sahib. Except maybe Churchill with his propaganda picture Tommy Gun, and a handful of farmers with shotguns and Bobbies with rubber truncheons.
Propaganda aside, during the Battle of Britain, German bombers ranged at will and bombed at will, and all the RAF could do was harass them. They were hampered far more by the fact that the Luftwaffe never had a heavy bomber worth of the name than anything else, and had no fighters available with longer range than the notoriously short-legged Bf109--and Hitler's sudden whim to end attacks on RAF airfields in favor of bombing London.
>>So WHY do you think that an invasion force composed of nothing but submarines and transports would have ANY CHANCE OF SUCCESS?
Because they'd have been the ones who had the massive air support. Jeezus. LRN2READINGCOMPREHENSION.
I don't say Sea Lion would have had a 100% chance of success but it could have been 50-50, or better. They might even have taken London more easily than the Japanese took Singapore from ITS British defenders.
>>Admiral Reader considered it a joke.
Because he didn't know how badly hurt the RAF and Royal Army were. He didn't know that the BEF was very nearly all they had left, and when 95% of the BEF were either captured or killed in France and only around 5% made it back to England alive (minus their rifles, tanks, trucks, artillery, ammunition...) there was not much more than housewives with brooms left to greet a German invasion force. Hitler and Raeder did not know this.
There is some question of what Hitler did or did not plan, and there is no knowing what really ran through the man's head. But if we're playing that game, what if Willkie had been elected in 1940, and the US had remained neutral? No Lend-Lease, no aid to Russia, perhaps even no commerce with belligerents? What if Hitler hadn't declared war on the US on December 8th, 1941?
You're entertaining when you get this wound up, though. Have you burst a blood vessel yet?
The Wehrmacht went through the BEF like shit through a goose and chased them all the way across France. They did not perform much better than the French did, though having their flanks unprotected for most of the campaign, due to the sudden and unplanned-for total collapse of the French military contributed. Weren't nobody left to greet 'em onna beaches, Sahib. Except maybe Churchill with his propaganda picture Tommy Gun, and a handful of farmers with shotguns and Bobbies with rubber truncheons.
Did I deny that the BEF got its ass kicked in France? No, what I said was that it was still present. And even if it had been destroyed, Britian took the defense of its own land far more seriously that it took the defense of France.
Propaganda aside, during the Battle of Britain, German bombers ranged at will and bombed at will, and all the RAF could do was harass them. They were hampered far more by the fact that the Luftwaffe never had a heavy bomber worth of the name than anything else, and had no fighters available with longer range than the notoriously short-legged Bf109--and Hitler's sudden whim to end attacks on RAF airfields in favor of bombing London.
And why do you think all of this happened? That's right kids! Because the battle of attrition was in the RAF's favor! I don't know how many fucking times i'm going to have to repeat it. I consider this part of the argument over and done with. Don't bring it up again.
Because they'd have been the ones who had the massive air support. Jeezus. LRN2READINGCOMPREHENSION.
What's that Flipper? Want another fish? Oh i'm sorry, I think you were totally ignoring the fact that already discussed this. What did I say? That's right, that even though the Allies had overwhelming air supremacy at Iwo Jima, Normandy, and a host of other invasions, they STILL needed a dedicated surface force to carry out the invasions successfully.
It had no chance of success. Period. Using the Japanese attack on Singapore as a proxy is just fucking dumb. Britian never took the defense of its Pacific Possesions seriously. It was confident in the ability of the United States to hold down the IJN.
Because he didn't know how badly hurt the RAF and Royal Army were. He didn't know that the BEF was very nearly all they had left, and when 95% of the BEF were either captured or killed in France and only around 5% made it back to England alive (minus their rifles, tanks, trucks, artillery, ammunition...) there was not much more than housewives with brooms left to greet a German invasion force. Hitler and Raeder did not know this.
You're quite good at pulling numbers out of your ass. Let's see you back them up.
This is the only scenario that allows for a partial German victory. But like it or not, the Allied powers were going to be getting Lend-Lease aid. EVENTUALLY the United States was going to get into the war, either via act of Japanese aggression or building distrust of Nazi Germany.
They likely would have declared war on him.
You're entertaining when you get this wound up, though. Have you burst a blood vessel yet?
Nope. I actually find you quite comical. I mean, it's not often I encounter someone who thinks submarines work BETTER in constricted waters. That's truly messed up.
> It was inevitable. The Allied Powers sported a combine industrial advantage many times that of all the Axis powers combine. Even the United States alone have more than 8 times the industrial output of the entire planet. By the end of WW2 they actually made up more than 50% of world GDP.
You are wrong. First, the Wehrmacht lost a lot of soldiers in russia because Hitler gave direct orders to the OKW/OKH. If the Wehrmacht would have retreated several thousand soldiers lifes would have been safed.
I will not mention the vastly powerful german engineers who researched a lot of weapons which might have been able to turn the war and pushed the allies out of europe. Kugelblitz, Sturmgewehr, Stausstrahltriebwerk and a lot of Sub inventions.
> Blatent falsehood. The RAF had been keeping its most experienced pilots and a majority of its Spitfires in Scotland. So they could be put to use in the event the Luftwaffe got through the first line. They didn't. End of story.
They won because their pilots, when shutdown, are readily available the next day if lucky. German pilots are shut down above enemy territory. LW and RAF lost round about equal machines.
> Hell fucking no. What in the name of christ would Germany even USE to get accross the channel? Do you think they're going to invade England with a bunch of submarines? Or just Transports? Even Reader could admit the German Navy was in no position to carry out an invasion of any kind. Ever.
It might have happened, IF the airbattle above brittain would have been in germanies favor. But Barbarossa came anyway.
> And obviously, because in 1940 the French outnumbered the Germans two to one, had five times as many tanks as the Germans did, and more advanced designs like the Char B heavy tank, over and above the advantage conferred by the Maginot Line static fortifications, obviously it was impossible for the Germans to defeat France, let alone France with most of the British Army on their soil to help.
Obviously, right? So the rapid defeat of France was, um. What's the word I'm looking for here?
German won because of the Blitzkrieg and because of the stupid Maginot.
The german lost 25k soldiers, france alone 100k or something.
> Are you fucking kidding? This is SUICIDE for the U-Boats. Don't you understand why the Kriegsmarine had to move its area of operations out into the Atlantic in the first place? Hint: It wasn't because they wanted to see the Statue of Liberty.
Do you even read up about the plan the OKW and OKM made? Subs? They had not used subs...
> Propaganda aside, during the Battle of Britain, German bombers ranged at will and bombed at will, and all the RAF could do was harass them. They were hampered far more by the fact that the Luftwaffe never had a heavy bomber worth of the name than anything else, and had no fighters available with longer range than the notoriously short-legged Bf109--and Hitler's sudden whim to end attacks on RAF airfields in favor of bombing London.
The atrition war was lost for the LW. The RAF had increased their fighter production way more then germany. The facilities could pump out machines faster. Britain also hired foreing pilots, something the germans can't do. And, as I said, living pilots could jump into the next fighter after they are shot down, german pilots are either shot on the spot or POW.
Also, Göring made a mistake as he ordered to stop bombing the radar stations.
You are wrong. First, the Wehrmacht lost a lot of soldiers in russia because Hitler gave direct orders to the OKW/OKH. If the Wehrmacht would have retreated several thousand soldiers lifes would have been safed.
No doubt Hitler hastened the defeat of the Wehrmacht. But again, they were fucked from the moment they came into existence. German industry simply could not stomach the load of a prolonged conflict. Something the allies would get no matter what happened.
I will not mention the vastly powerful german engineers who researched a lot of weapons which might have been able to turn the war
Actually, the allies would have loved it if they tried to produce more super weapons. Since many of Germany's so called superweapons created massive economic backlashes throughout its industry resulting from Germany's craftsman oriented society. The use of super weapons actually hastened Germany's defeat.
All of which the allies were either aware of, had contingencies planned against, or had already developed a better models. (See: P-80 shooting star, american heavy armor concepts and prototypes.)
They won because their pilots, when shutdown, are readily available the next day if lucky. German pilots are shut down above enemy territory. LW and RAF lost round about equal machines.
Which was why Germany was fucked. They could only pull, on the best days, a 1:1 kill death ratio. Britian had far more aircraft and pilots at its disposal than Germany did. A war of attrition always favors the more numerous opponent. Especially one with the industrial monster that the is United States supplying it.
It might have happened, IF the airbattle above brittain would have been in germanies favor. But Barbarossa came anyway.
In order for Sealion to occur you would need to re-write history and drastically alter Adolf Hitler's childhood. It wasn't going to happen. Not in the most fantastic of circumstances. Period.
*German won because of the Blitzkrieg and because of the stupid Maginot.
The german lost 25k soldiers, france alone 100k or something.*
Read the thread. I already made it clear that France and the other allied powers were not in the position to carry out a war against an aggressor that had spent the past decade preparing for it. And ironically, despite all of Germany's many years of preparation, the allies still managed to leave the Nazis dead and bleeding on the ground within a few years.
The atrition war was lost for the LW. The RAF had increased their fighter production way more then germany. The facilities could pump out machines faster. Britain also hired foreing pilots, something the germans can't do. And, as I said, living pilots could jump into the next fighter after they are shot down, german pilots are either shot on the spot or POW.
Thank you for agreeing with me then that SeaLion stood no chance of success.
Also, Göring made a mistake as he ordered to stop bombing the radar stations.
Hastened defeat, but again, made no difference in the long run.
>>25
Homosexuals were indeed persecuted and systematically murdered under the Nazi regime.
But why didn't they get they're own country?
>>26
Only if they are not powerful. Böhm was gay and Hitler knew it.