Exactly. People always change their minds when their lives are threatened. And if changing your mind leads you to join the winning team, (at the time anyway) then it makes it all the more easy to become one of those monster types. I’m only saying that it’s perfectly simple, using the Nazis as THE example here, to turn ordinary guys into a$$holes. The Fascist point-of-view being drummed into their minds is what led them to believe that they were superior, that they could kill anyone they wanted, and that the ascendance of the master race was paramount. Because of all that, Herr Hitler had at his disposal a fighting force that, besides being exceptionally well-trained and equipped, was also ruthless and cold-blooded. Like a pack of blood-thirsty rabid dogs, they literally hungered for violence and bloodshed, so long as it was the “weaker non-Aryans” who were being killed. And as far as being brainwashed, of course it happens! That’s what the H.J. was all about. Grabbing kids at an early age, and “educating” them in the ways of the Aryan master race.
But as you pointed out, and also to go along with my point about peer pressure and conviction, there were definitely those who resisted the idea of genocide and cold-blooded murder. Unfortunately, such things had already become a growing trend, and thus such dissenters were killed and replaced with another willing zombie.
…and for the record, I voted Yes for this poll.
Sorry, AgentOrange but brainwashing =/= peer pressure.
I didn’t say that brainwashing and peer pressure are the same thing, just that BOTH of them were going on under the Nazi regime.
See how all 3 of these were used by Hitler and his goons to mold themselves “the perfect army”?
Stalin was much better at brainwashing… If his soldiers didn’t like the fact they had to fight Germans and carry one rifle and 5 rounds for every 5 soldiers… the NKVD would shoot them by machine gun on the way back.
If you said one ill word you were sent to gulag for 20 years
If you didn’t like the way your treated you could participate in “reconnaissance thru combat” essentially being forced to run to the Germans, while getting cut down by machine gun fire and having no weapons for the sole point of allowing Soviet observers the observation of German positions. Thus you die to gain knowledge so artillery could aim better.
Even Hitler doesn’t do this crap. That is barbarity --worse to kill your own people for less reason than you kill the enemy.
@Imperious:
Stalin was much better at brainwashing… If his soldiers didn’t like the fact they had to fight Germans and carry one rifle and 5 rounds for every 5 soldiers… the NKVD would shoot them by machine gun on the way back.
If you said one ill word you were sent to gulag for 20 years
If you didn’t like the way your treated you could participate in “reconnaissance thru combat” essentially being forced to run to the Germans, while getting cut down by machine gun fire and having no weapons for the sole point of allowing Soviet observers the observation of German positions. Thus you die to gain knowledge so artillery could aim better.
Even Hitler doesn’t do this crap. That is barbarity --worse to kill your own people for less reason than you kill the enemy.
stalin killed out of paranoia not because he was a sadist. hitler killed all those jews out of sick and twisted pleasure. :x hitler is just plian sick and evil. i think stalin was psychotic. trotsicky would of been a much better leader
Yes Stalin was Psychotic and paranoid, but so was Hitler.
Just because one dictator killed for a “less evil reason” than the other dictator does not make them comparable in terms of which one I’d rather be subject to.
Stalin purposely starved his subjects to death during the years of collectivization, and during the war Stalin murdered the very partisans who were fighting against Hitler on Stalins side!
Watch the documentary series “Russias War: Blood Upon the Snow”, it provides alot of insight into what Soviet Russia had become and how it came to be.
The first part of the series is here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IX5GxMpgDas
A very interesting debate.
I also voted that the Germans would have beaten the Russians.
There is also a couple of other points that I don’t believe where mentioned but could have helped Germany achieve greater Military success in the war. If Hitler let his generals actually be generals and gave them more free reign, they could of done a lot more damage. The Germans were master tacticians, they were always outnumbered.
The extra Airpower alone the Germans could have used against the Russians instead of guarding the coast/raiding the atlantic/fighting off bombing raids would have been huge.
So my Points are:
If the Generals had more free reign (to many times on the eastern-front they could have done more…or have coordinated better attacks if it wasn’t for Hitler calling all the shots)
If they actually done any planning and prepared for a winter war… (I know they thought the war would have been over before Winter but seriously…no plan for winter fighting at all?? wow)
if Germany could have used her full-power early on, Russia would have been falling so fast they wouldn’t have much time to create defensive lines/counter-attack and sit-back and buildup in the rear…
Yes all of Russia would have been very hard to keep under control… But I think they had plans to “control” the population… Most likely kill a lot of them…, use a lot of them as slave workers and mass re-locations. Hitler wanted the land for his people so they could expand there…
20% of German ammunition production was for the air defense system to fight the British. Thousands of 88mms where deployed to defend against the British and U.S. bombing campaign. 99s where excellent anti tank weapons, and could have wrecked havoc on Russian armor. Not even the famed T34 could stand against an 88. Hundreds of thousands of men where deployed just to operate the 88s of the air defense network, and thousands more for the recovery operations after allied raids.
If Germany has only fought Russia, there would have been no allied air war, German factories would have been immensely more productive, hundreds of thousands of personnel would have been freed up, as well as tons of weapons and munitions.The Luftwaffe deployed thousands of aircraft for the air defense network, all of which where annihilated once the P-51 Mustang showed up. Even with the air campaign, German production still went up, because Hitler had failed to begin a war economy until 1942. Imagine the matterial the Germans could have produced without the air war.
:-o
I vote No.
My reasons are posted in the Barbarossa thread, but I will reiterate here. Germanys’ industry just was not geard up for a war of this magnitude in “41”. And since Poland was already a done deal, and the French and British were already at war with Germany, they had to hold men and equipment on the "Western Front’ even if it was “All Quiet”.
The biggest problem for the Germans in the far expanses of the Soviet hinterlands was supply. The more men out there the more supplies are required for them and this requires more resources to get it there, a compounding effect. The drain is enormous! Another point about supply is that even in the modern era, armies still required the land that they were in to help supplyment their food supply. The Russians practiced a "scorched earth’ policy. They burnt everything that they couldn’t take with them; Homes, barns, fields, and even outhouses! They slaughtered livestock, and put the carcuses in the wells. They created a ‘no mans’ land as they retreated, starving even their own people. This all put an even greater strain on an already streached supply network. An Army moves on its’ stomach is a famous quote, I don’t remember who said it, be he knew what he was talking about.
So, it does not matter how many guns you have at your disposal, if you can’t feed your troops in the feild to shoot them.
And it is a given, if Hitler had not interfered with his Generals, the war would have draggedon another 3 to 5 years perhaps.
And a lot more human suffering.
Crazy Ivan :roll:
Napoleon said it. i knew excataly who said it when i saw it ( pretty sad but i did have to be napoleon for my science project)
:-o
Ah Yes!
It was the little corperal!
Who became an Emperor.
:roll:
Sorry M36 was it not an SS unit that massacered US troops at Malmady?
I was unaware of this.
But regardless of what the bastards did, you cannot label an entire military organization because of the actions of one unit. There are Marines who have done such things, that does not make the Marine Corp an evil organizations. We are still the best warriors on the planet.
@M36:
I was unaware of this.
But regardless of what the bastards did, you cannot label an entire military organization because of the actions of one unit. There are Marines who have done such things, that does not make the Marine Corp an evil organizations. We are still the best warriors on the planet.
What about le grand armee?
@Crazy:
So, it does not matter how many guns you have at your disposal, if you can’t feed your troops in the feild to shoot them.
And it is a given, if Hitler had not interfered with his Generals, the war would have draggedon another 3 to 5 years perhaps.
And a lot more human suffering.
Crazy Ivan :roll:
will with the Germans taking moscow and other cities (Stalingrad and the Caucauses) and Leningrad more easily and fast they could have setup more logistics support for there troops (more railroads setup to supply and move troops fast back and forth)
the question was if it was just Germany vs Russia then the Russians would have lost to much ground and troops to fast to fight back.
if they burn there fields in the fall/winter, by spring they are growing nicely again…
it’s the extra civillians that would have suffered to feed the advancing german army.
@M36:
I was unaware of this.
But regardless of what the bastards did, you cannot label an entire military organization because of the actions of one unit. There are Marines who have done such things, that does not make the Marine Corp an evil organizations. We are still the best warriors on the planet.
This was not merely the actions of a rogue division or a “Bad Apple” company of soldiers, the SS organization as a whole was committing atrocities all across the board wherever they went.
Also a notable difference between the Marines and the SS is that the Marines punish soldiers who commit a crime, the SS encouraged it.
The SS was a volunteer unit and trained to be the best and were around before World War 2 started… I am under the understanding they knew full well what the “SS unit” was all about… and even more so when the war was going on.
A lot of German soldiers were condemmed for not following orders (like shooting Jews or civilians for no reason)
it was the SS unit that was the worst…
Most Germans had no choice but to serve there country and this is where I think a lot of them were actually good men and women…
Actually I think everyone had to fight unless there was a pretty good reason why you couldn’t (some bad medical condition)…I mean they were recruiting children near the end of the war in the very last days…
Hitlers plans of extermination where well kept secrets. Privates where not made privy to these secrets just by joining the SS.
@M36:
Hitlers plans of extermination where well kept secrets. Privates where not made privy to these secrets just by joining the SS.
nazi is a nazi no matter how you spin it and nazi’s are evil.
Yes … Nazis are Nazis but normal soldiers in the Army were not necessarily Nazis
