> Why did Hungary, Slovakia, Romania, and Bulgaria join the Germans in a massive attack on the Soviet Union?

On June 22, 1941, Germany looked like the winning side, and it made some sense to join. To give credit where it’s due, Franco was a lot more cautious.

You write: “Curious what anyone thinks of Johnson’s book. This is a VERY widespread / widely believed synopsis of what we call the Holocaust, so I’m curious if anyone has any specific criticisms of Johnson.”

My response: Paul Johnson is writing complete nonsense.

Holocaust Revisionists have shown that: 1) there were no homicidal gas chambers in any of the German concentration camps; 2) Germany did not have a program of mass murder against the Jews; and 3) the standard estimate of 6 million Jews who died during World War II is a ridiculous exaggeration.

Thanks

It never ceases to amaze me that intelligent, bah, brilliant people can be watching the events in the world surrounding us right now, seeing how it tethers on the brink of WW3, and how complicated and complex the overall situation is, and yet the same people will be searching for a naive, simplistic, all-in-one, “shortcut” explanation for why WW2 happened.

Interestingly, in their search for a short answer on whom to blame for WW2, they’re never interested in the most obvious evil, clearly and undoubtedly responsible for the start of the war, namely Hitler (it needs to be clearly spelled out on this forum, I’m afraid). Instead they need like the “second worst culprit”, or in fact often the “third worst”, because Stalin for many of them is also not acceptable, as “too obvious” of a choice.

And so we have this ongoing quest for whom is it that we could blame for starting WW2, as long as his name does not start with H or S? Churchill? Chamberlain? Brits overall? FDR? Jews in general? Rothschilds in particular? Poles? Gdańsk? etc etc

And the simple (and yet very complex) reality is that WW2 happened because too many people wanted it to happen. Yes, Hitler wanted a war, Stalin wanted a war, Brits wanted a war (and not just Churchill), FDR wanted a war, Jews wanted a war, even enough of stupid Polish “colonels” wanted a war. It’s just that each one of them wanted a different war then the one that actually happened. Hitler wanted to conquer Poland, and then be happy and have peace until the next one. Stalin wanted to conquer the whole world. Brits wanted Hitler to fight with Stalin. Jews wanted Palestine. FDR wanted to replace the British empire. Interestingly I have no clue what is it that Polish colonels really wanted. But it’s safe to say that none of them got what they really were hoping for.

It’s actually way easier to list those who didn’t want another world war: Hacha didn’t want a war, Swiss didn’t want a war, Swedes didn’t want a war, Franco didn’t want another war. As far as everyone else – I’m not so sure.

So in many aspects all these books listed above are various variants of “Reasons for WW2 for Dummies”. Those here who are of Marxist inclination, will probably say that although each of these books taken individually is a failure when it comes to a correct diagnosis of the reasons of WW2, taken together, quantity will turn into quality. But I seriously doubt this.

If any one person is to blame for WW2, it would be Woodrow Wilson who oversaw and approved of the unrealistic and overly harsh conditions imposed on Germany by the Treaty of Versailles, including depriving Germany of historic German territory and unrealistic war reparation demands.

I think there must have been some misunderstanding. When I wrote: “It never ceases to amaze me that intelligent, bah, brilliant people …”, in no way it was addressed at you. Based on your sample writing above, you’re just a simple neonazi, who does not need any books at all. In fact, I’m sure if any one makes its way to you, you burn them whenever your HOA Karen is not looking. Unless it’s Mein Kampf, of course 🙂

The Second Great War was begun by the powers that initiated conflict with Germany. The Poles were abusing the German minority because they refused to give up control of Danzig and permit German access to East Prussia. If they didn’t want war, they could have avoided it. They had no interest in avoiding it. They trusted the English and the French!

The German conquest of France in 1940 was no more an act of German aggression than the war on Louis Napoleon’s France in 1871. Louis Napoleon declared war on Germany, the French declared war on Germany, because they were controlled by Jews. Britain because they were forced by Roosevelt and world Jews. Germany’s bombing of British cities was retaliatory. The British were determined to bomb Germany, they had built their bomber fleet and doctrine in anticipation of just such a war. The US bombers were designed for that purpose as well, well ahead of the war, the air campaign was planned long in advance.

The war with Japan was caused by Roosevelt cutting off Japan’s access to resources that they could not go without. That act was tantamount to an act of war, and Roosevelt’s provocations (like the undeclared naval war) were only going to intensify.

I think you’re that fellow who constantly spams lots of threads with extremely long comments claiming that Hitler was a Rothschild and/or a Jewish agent. I’ll admit I eventually lose patience with that sort of nonsense, so those sorts of comments often get trashed.

And that’s perhaps the crappiest thing a website host can do, set him on fire, kick him in the balls. I’m not complaining that you did it to me, just remarking how wonderful it is to watch you shit on a homeless person. Or hemeless, I don’t know the guy’s situation but the fire and ball kick is there for all to see.

Another fact that destroys the myth that a crazed Hitler attacked the Soviet Union in 1941 because he wanted to conquer it. Why did Hungary, Slovakia, Romania, and Bulgaria join the Germans in a massive attack on the Soviet Union? Were their leaders also mad, or did they see Soviet aggression as a serious threat? Stalin had already bullied Romania to cede chunks of territory. He had invaded the Baltic states, Finland, eastern Poland, and northern Iran. Stalin was building up forces along his new western borders. Why?

There were virtually no French Alsatians. Alsace-Lorraine was German-speaking, and France conquered Alsace and made it part of France in the 17th century. “Alsatian” is one of the different German dialects that existed before Germany became a united country and Germany adopted Hochdeutsch as the German that all Germans spoke in order to communicate. The populations in Germany, Austria, and Switzerland spoke different dialects, including Swiss-Deutsch. Germany took Alsace-Lorraine from France when it became a unified country in 1871.

Hoffmann is not a Jewish name. E. T. A. Hoffmann was a major German writer and he was not Jewish.

According to Wikipedia Frederick Lindemann was born in Baden-Baden, Germany. I stayed there in 1988 on my train ride from Strasbourg, Alsace to Munich. Wikipedia also says Frederick Lindemann’s father was born “to a Roman Catholic family.”

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frederick_Lindemann,_1st_Viscount_Cherwell

I am looking at my emails. On October 30, 2013 I wrote to British historian David Irving.

Dear Mr. Irving,

I just started reading your Churchill biography a few days ago and I have a question regarding Professor Frederick Lindemann. I heard you mention his name before and I always assumed he was Jewish based upon his attitude towards Germany.

I don’t know if you can answer this question because you might have to know someone pretty well to know why he thinks a certain way. So far I haven’t read anything that would explain why someone with German blood (even though he was a citizen of wartime Great Britain) would advocate “the “area” bombing of German cities” during the war. I would expect someone with his background to advocate peace between the two countries.

Do you know why he thought the way he did and why he apparently had strong anti-German feelings?

Peter

A few minutes later David Irving wrote back.

There is a very good book about LIndemann called The Prof by Roy Harrod. Try and find a copy

David Irving

I have not read that book, but I think Mr. Irving would have confirmed Lindemann was Jewish if he was.

Albert Weeks is a US historian & former Professor of International Affairs, fluent in Russian, who has closely followed the Russian historians’ disputes which arose [after the fall of the Soviet Union and the partial opening of archives, already closed again] over the Stalin regime’s offensive war plans against NS Germany. Despite being very ignorant of the German side, basically repeating the usual anti-Hitler line, professor Weeks nevertheless concedes that several Russian historians and former Red Army and intel veterans have reached the conclusion that Stalin was indeed planning to attack.

Nevertheless, what the (Russian)researchers have produced is a pattern of Red Army deployments and concentration of troops along the Soviet western frontier in spring 1941 that strongly suggests that the General Staff and Stalin were planning eventually to get the preemptive jump on the Wehrmacht. The fact that in addition to Russian historians a number of informed ex–Red Army or security officers make this allegation cannot be ignored. As it turned out, of course, the Germans got the jump on the Soviets. …
It is significant and worth recognizing that a number of “new” Russian historians are opting for the offensist interpretation as to Stalin’s and the Red Army General Staff’s war planning on the eve of Barbarossa. In the meantime, it is unhelpful to assume, as some Western writers have, that these Russian historians take the positions they do, like the notions proffered so vehemently by émigré Viktor Suvorov, because they blindly hate Stalin or for some other reasons unrelated to the facts and documents that they have collected.
Note that some of the historians of the offensist persuasion are connected with the Russian Ministry of Defense. Others (unlike the much despised Suvorov) show pro-Soviet tendencies in their interpretations of events. Yet they hew to the offensist thesis concerning Stalin war planning.15
It behooves Western specialists and observers to pay attention to the Russian historians’ latest findings as well as to their interpretations of their findings. The Russian historians say that they will keep on pressing the authorities for more archives to be opened because, they insist, additional top-secret information from the period of 1939–41 continues to be kept concealed. …
Source: Stalin’s other war

However, Putin’s government has come to the rescue. As Russian historian Nikolay Koposov said:

…The “defense” of the national past against the “blackeners” is seen as the foundation of national cohesion…World War II that became central to the new “history politics” (or, to use a term that is probably more familiar to historians in other countries, the new “memory politics”).
The Second World War had strongly marked Soviet society. Some historians consider it as the formative experience that forged the collective identity of the Soviet people. In the 1970s, the mythology of the war was cultivated by Leonid Brezhnev’s administration. Its promotion to the role of the nation’s foundational myth under Putin was thus well prepared.4

After the fall of the Soviet Union, a considerable degree of freedom to exercise the historical profession in regards to WW2 did indeed come into being, BUT it did not last long. The so called New Russian Historians were poking too many holes into the great patriotic war mythology…
The answer by the Russian government has been to close most of the archives and even pass laws punishing historians.
The fear of a ‘great patriotic war implosion’ has forced the Russian government not only to keep 100s of thousands of secret documents sealed but also to enact a “Memory Law” recently(2014), with fines & prison terms for “infringements on historical memory with regard to the events of WW2.”
In the 2018 book ‘Law and Memory: Towards Legal Governance of History’, chapter 14( Defending Stalinism by Means of Criminal Law ), Russian historian Nikolay Koposov writes:

On 5 May 2014, Russia’s President Vladimir Putin signed a law that introduced criminal liability for ‘infringements on historical memory with regard to the events of the Second World War’. That law added the following article to the Penal Code of the Russian Federation:
Article 354.1 Rehabilitation of Nazism
The denial of facts established by the Judgment of the International Military Tribunal for the trial and punishment of major war criminals of European countries of the Axis, the approval of crimes established by the above-mentioned Judgment, as well as dissemination of knowingly false information on the activities of the USSR during the Second World War, committed publicly, are punishable by a fine of up to three hundred thousand roubles… or by deprivation of liberty for up to 3 years.”
The law also increases the punishment to up to 5 years of imprisonment if ‘the same deeds[have been] committed with the use of one’s official position or through the mass media, as well as with an artificial fabrication of prosecution evidence’.

In fact, the Russian authorities have been blocking files as innocuous as those which could be used by Russian researchers to determine the REAL scope of Soviet military losses, in particular, irrecoverable ones(the irrecoverable losses were much higher than the semi-official figures, possibly higher than 14 million)… and that seems to be just done out of a sense of false pride or something, since they won the war.
So, the answer by the Russian government to the work of the ‘new Russian historians’ has been to close/restrict most of the archives and pass laws punishing historians who might probe too deeply. .
Of course, the Russians are not the only victorious power keeping their archives closed/sealed. In fact, the British have kept tons of files locked away, not to mention all they have destroyed or redacted… going back to the 19th Century. The Americans too. England has engaged in a massive, systematic cover-up of her diplomatic documents since before World War I. The Guardian reported in 2013 under ‘Foreign Office hoarding 1m historic files in secret archive’:

The Foreign Office has unlawfully hoarded more than a million files of historic documents that should have been declassified and handed over to the National Archives, the Guardian has discovered.

The files are being kept at a secret archive at a high-security government communications centre in Buckinghamshire, north of London, where they occupy mile after mile of shelving.

Most of the papers are many decades old – some were created in the 19th century – and document in fine detail British foreign relations throughout two world wars, the cold war, withdrawal from empire and entry into the common market.

They have been kept from public view in breach of the Public Records Acts, which requires that all government documents become public once they are 30 years old – a term about to be reduced to 20 years – unless the department has received permission from the lord chancellor to hold them for longer. The secret archive is also beyond the reach of the Freedom of Information Act.[…]

What are these people hiding, eh? wink, wink.

“AI Overview
German scientists pioneered synthetic gasoline production through processes like the Bergius process (coal liquefaction) and the Fischer-Tropsch process (converting syngas to fuel). In the early 20th century, German scientists Friedrich Bergius and Franz Fischer were key figures, with Fischer developing his process with Hans Tropsch. Today, Germany is also researching modern e-fuel production using renewable energy, seawater, and captured CO2.”

Friedrich Bergius received the 1931 Nobel Prize in chemistry for that work.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friedrich_Bergius

You are another moron brought up on the 100 years of ceaseless daily hatred of the Germans, having your pea sized brain filled with tales of Jews made into soap and lampshades, and many other lies. Germany was the most advanced country in the world, known for its high culture and leading the world in the sciences. When the British, Soviet, French and American war mongering cowards ganged up and attacked Germany for the second time, they destroyed Europe and ended its leadership of the world. As the only country whose cities and country were untouched by the war. the vulgar Americans (who stole Germany’s technology and patents) took world leadership, but since their know how was stolen, these big mouths are being surpassed by China now. This ended the West’s leadership of the world.

“Spoiler alert for our panzerjugend interlocutors – above German historians confirm the following:”

Spoiler alert for you. Germans who expose the lies of the Judeo-Bolsheviks and their British and American allies, and reveal the war crimes and savagery of that uncultured filth, risk imprisonment in Germany, and many have been jailed under censorship laws imposed on Germany by the filth. In neighboring Austria, which has similar censorship laws, Great Britain’s best-selling historian of the last 100 years, David Irving, was thrown in jail in 2005, and within the last five years a German woman in her nineties was thrown in jail for countering the lies of the uncultured allied filth.

Right now, Tolkin’s ahead on points. Can you offer any evidence that refutes his argument?

Nazis were the least Judeo-Christian party in modern times. Apparently Quisling was an exception and followed his Jewish desert religion to the end, and despite considering Jews foreign to Norway, essentially was one. Leave it to a Christian European to follow a Jewish religion while decrying Jews for being foreign!

The first thing any real Norwegian nationalist leader who wanted to preserve their country from Jewishness would do is destroy all the churches, usually built on top of their own historical temples and holy sites. It must have been sickening to Himmler and all SS (but especially those in the Ahnenerbe) seeing such places openly defiled, and idiot Scandinavians continuing to celebrate their own destruction and domination.

https://westsdarkesthour.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/Hitlers-anti-Christianity.pdf

The messianic thrust of the Hitler cult manifested itself frequently, as in this Hitler Youth song at the 1934 Nuremberg Party Rally:

We are the joyful Hitler Youth
We need no Christian virtue
For our Führer Adolf Hitler
Is ever our Mediator.

No pastor, no evil one, can hinder
Us from feeling as Hitler’s children.
We follow not Christ but Horst Wessel,
Away with incense and holy water.

The church can be taken away from me,
The swastika is redemption on the earth,
Its will I follow everywhere,
Baldur von Schirach take me along!

“Today a new faith is awakening — the Myth of the blood; the belief that to defend the blood is also to defend the divine nature of man in general. It is a belief, effulgent with the brightest knowledge, that Nordic blood represents that Mysterium which has overcome and replaced the older sacraments.”—Alfred Rosenberg

“It’s easy to idealize “would have been” consequences. Communists can claim their system would have brought about worldwide peace and brotherhood if only real Communism had been tried instead of a Stalinist version.”

The difference is that while communists claim a hypothetical cornucopia of benefits that would be showered upon people, despite the brutal debunking of such promises in every single country where communism was installed, the German National Socialism provided a real model of such prosperity extended to all social classes, which was reached in an unprecedented short span of time, and was defeated only by huge external forces brought to bear upon it.
So, what’s wrong with speculating on the consequences of of an imaginary win of Germany is only that It would never have been allowed to happen by the enormous financial and military power of the “Allies.”
Even if Germany had not attacked the Soviet Union, NS Germany could not be allowed to continue to exist and provide a model that disempowered the Jewish banking system and exposed the rot of the “Judeo-Christian values” that destroyed national identity and culture.

“Had Hitler Won the War”?
There you go again, Mr. Hans Vogel [such a jewish last name!!!].
Once more into the breach.

Hitler WON the war for the tippy top of the most powerful jews.
Hitler accomplished EVERYTHING for them.
Hitler was put in power by them so that he could win the war for them, which he did.

Your jewish deception has been dismantled, uncovered, exposed for what it’s been all this time.

The jig’s up. All you jews falsy putting Hitler on a pedestal in the limelight aren’t getting anywhere anymore. People are on to you. Like Hamas that you jews financed by way of Quatar. Like the USS Liberty that you jews attacked. Like JFK that you jews killed. Like 9/11 that you jews did to us Americans. Like your fictional Jewsus Christ. Like your rabbi Muhammad that you shoved down the throat of your Arab and Persian victims. We could go on and on and on. Once the truth has been revealed, the kitty’s out of the bag, there’s no going back.

You and your false jewish narrative are finished.

I write: “do you think that Stalin had no plan or intention of invading Germany?” and you respond “Certainly nothing imminent of the sort was planned in 1941, and any hypothetical future case would have depended on multiple contingencies.”

My response: My comment #617 on this discussion thread lists 44 reasons indicating that Stalin had plans to invade Germany. Please go back and read them.

Many thousands of German soldiers soon found out the extent of the Soviet preparedness when they invaded the Soviet Union. A prime example is German pilot Hans-Ulrich Rudel, who flew a Ju-87 and completed 2,430 battle missions during the war. He wrote shortly after the German invasion of the Soviet Union:

“While flying over these numerous airbases and fortifications, we all had the same thought in our heads–how lucky we were to have struck first. It seemed that the Soviets were feverishly readying the groundwork for an attack on us. And which other Western country could Russia have attacked? If the Russians had completed their preparations, there would have been almost no hope of stopping them…” (Source: Source: Suvorov, Viktor, The Chief Culprit: Stalin’s Grand Design to Start World War II, Annapolis, MD: Naval Institute Press, 2008,, p. 252).

Soviet soldiers and officers were issued Russian-German and Russian-Romanian phrase books as part of their preparations for an invasion of Europe. Thousands of Soviet troops did not think to get rid of this compromising evidence when they were captured in the German invasion of the Soviet Union. The Russian-German phrase books were composed very simply: a question in Russian, followed by the same question in German written in Russian letters, then in German in Latin letters. If the Soviet soldier did not know how to pronounce the needed German phrase, he could point to the corresponding lines in the book and the Germans could read the lines themselves.

The phrases indicated that the Soviets were planning to conduct an offensive war in Europe. For example, some phrases asked: “Where is the burghermeister? Is there an observation point on the steeple?” There were no burghermeisters or steeples in the Soviet Union. These questions are relevant only if the Soviet soldiers were in Germany. Here are other examples: “Where is the fuel? Where is the garage? Where are the stores? Where is the water? Gather and bring here [so many] horses [farm animals], we will pay!” These questions and phrases would not be relevant on Soviet soil. The following phrases are also revealing: “You do not need to be afraid. The Red Army will come soon!” These phrases are not relevant for a war conducted on Soviet soil. (Source: Ibid., pp. 257-258).

I could go on. The evidence that Stalin was preparing to invade Germany in the near future is overwhelming.

Yet another tirade from one soo glorious but heavily oppressed (out of “Panzer” envy?) proto-human Pole.
It wouldn’t surprise me if the rapidly growing delusion of grandeur was inspired by the “great” Vincenty Kadlubek. You are truly unique, but not in a good way.

Asshole

There are hundreds of holohoax monuments in countries around the world.

They should all be reduced to rubble, because they are based on a stinking lie.

The next generation must be well versed in what Jewish supremacism is, and how it acts.

Just now saw this. I admit I’m not keeping up, but in my defense keeping up with the Polish mafia on this site (and on Wikipedia) is as frustrating as doing same with the Jewish mafia. The former has learned from the latter.

I’m going to answer you just off the top of my head, as the saying goes, as I recall it from my accumulated study/reading, because I’m not willing to spend any more time than this on it. What was the official name of the “German list” you are referring to? We may be talking about two different things.

People who refused Volksdeutsch status when offered …

Not every Pole was eligible; it was not the choice of the Poles but a selection by the Germans according to their standards, seen by Germans as a privilege/benefit for those who could/would “fit in.”

The Maximilian Kolbe story as presented by Wikipedia is not the true story. Kolbe, as many, possibly most, Polish, Catholic priests was working actively against the Germans (who had been victorious in battle sought for by the Polish elite, but when they lost refused to surrender. They formed a resistance, with the help of the British.) Because of that Resistance, Kolbe was arrested and sent to Auschwitz, where he was treated decently as were all Catholic priests. They were in fact given “special treatment” like a ration of wine everyday, and etc. The popular “Kolbe Story” is a total fabrication. Where are your sources for verification? Are you ashamed to give them?

Kolbe was militantly anti-Communist and had attitudes towards Jews that would be considered anti-Semitism in most quarters today,

Kolbe was as anti-German as he was anti-Communist — you leave that out. So not someone the Germans would arm and give free rein to. “Eliminating the Polish (and Czech) nations” was NOT a German “Nazi” goal (although bc of their troublesome nature, I don’t think the Germans would have missed them if they disappeared.)

Ah, the easy way out! Well, be my guest. If you would have been younger and with a more open mind (willing to question all those fairy tales), I would gladly have furnished some reading suggestions.

What horseshit snd bullshit by two jew trolls mcnallynerger and French shit poopedon But AH doesn’t hold a grudge
and sends his disregards from argentina

Hitler’s Lebensraum was more to get back lands stolen from Germany after the first world war (notably East Prussia aka Poland) and reunite German tribes that have always been living in Central and Eastern Europe (from Austria to western Russia).

His mistake was to see the British as being a noble race but missing the point since Britain was under the control of Jews already and their first servant was Churchill. Hitler knew that, it’s impossible he didn’t know.

He made the same mistake Napoleon did, focusing on Russia while his worst enemy was always the jewish controlled British.

Now, it is true that Wall Street funded Hitler as much as they funded the Bolsheviks. It is also true that the jews benefited the most by the creation of “Israel” and the manufacturing of a status of untouchables with the holohoax. In Russia, they finally took revenge on the Tsar and exterminated millions of ethnic Russians. Hitler didn;t do half of what the Bolsheviks did and yet, Lenin still has mausoleum in the Kremlin, and Karl Marx statues in Russian cities.

Hitler has certainly been used.

As for the US before 1945, their racial laws were similar or harsher than the Nuremberg laws, so they would have easily made agreements with Hitler if the British weren’t there to do what they do best: sowing discord and chaos in the European family on behalf of their Jew masters (a role that the US has taken now).

Either way, the fact remains that Hitler’s defeat was Europe defeat and the price Europeans have been paying since is unfathomable.

Your comments are superficial and are based on banal observations and click bait level sourcing.

Arrogant much? My comments must trouble you. One is bound to get the most flack when flying over the target. I don’t know you, or what you post about, nor do I care, but are you truly so obtuse, or is this an act?

{My response:}

Another long winded non response.

I characterized the Luftwaffe bombing of Rotterdam as “terror-bombing”.
You wrote it wasn’t. (in so many words)

I then produced evidence that Hitler, in fact, had Luftwaffe practice terror-bombing a civilian target back in 1937. Whereby Luftwaffe deliberately targeted and murdered — albeit upon Franco’s request — 1,000s of Basque civilians.

Do you deny that?

So instead of addressing the issue at hand — Luftwaffe terror bombing of civilians — you again go on a tangent, in a vain attempt of misdirection and obfuscation.
Won’t work.

You write: “Naughty, naughty Dutch: how dare they put up a fight when foreign troops — armed to the teeth — were dropping out of their neutral sky. After all these were German Nazi troops: ‘We come in peace; We mean you no harm; Take us to your Leader’.”

My response: After Great Britain and France declared war on Germany on September 3, 1939, the war stagnated and entered a phase called The Phoney War. Hitler, who very much desired peace with Great Britain, made numerous peace offers that were rejected by Britain and France.

On May 10, 1940, Germany invaded Belgium, Holland, and Luxembourg as the only viable pathway into France, which was Germany’s primary goal. Since their declaration of war on Germany, both Great Britain and France had been building up their military forces in preparation for an all-out offensive against Germany. A combined British/French army of 500,000 men was being organized for an invasion of Germany as soon as the Allied military build-up was ready. Britain and France had also been conducting a relentless naval campaign against Germany which included a naval blockade against German ports. (Source: Bradberry, Benton L., The Myth of German Villainy, Bloomington, IN: AuthorHouse, 2012, pp. 361-362).

Since France’s heavily fortified Maginot Line blocked a German invasion across the German/French border, Germany had to invade the Netherlands, Belgium and Luxembourg to get into France. Germany’s occupation of the Low Countries was thus a result of her need to bypass the Maginot Line, and not a result of Germany’s desire to conquer the world. Germany had tried to avoid war with both Britain and France. However, Britain and France had rejected all German peace offers, making it necessary for Germany to invade France and the Low Countries. (Source: Ibid., pp. 361-363).

High time you accept facts or stop posting @UNZ.com.

You are too cowardly to debate facts with me directly: you know I will crush you like all your other Hitler-groupie panzer losers.

You wanna rock & roll?
Let’s go.
Otherwise don’t bother me with your childish posts and insinuations.

Thanks Ariadna.

Correct – it can’t be emphasized enough that the ‘allies’ were a cobbled-together gang against Germany. Not one of them ON THEIR OWN would have dared to take on Germany. Whether they call it the ‘allies’ or the ‘coalition of the willing’ or whatever else, it’s always a gang because they can’t beat anyone on their own who decides to fight. NATO is also a gang who I’m sure will disintegrate under pressure – you can’t expect all those countries to jump on the bandwagon just because demented Limeys want to start another war.

That’s interesting. Thanks.

You’re ignorant, That’s what was done to Germany, the most advanced country in the world at the time, known for its high culture and leadership in the sciences. American gangsters, jealous Brits, gang raping Soviets and the French could never win on their own so they ganged up on Germany a second time.

That’s why Europe and America are now second rate. Europe lead the world and WWII destroyed Europe and now China is on the verge of surpassing the uncultured Americans. Good for China.

I am not aware that Hitler suspended nuclear research. The bomb originated with the discovery of nuclear fission, but my understanding is Heisenberg made a calculation mistake that delayed progress on the bomb. Still, they were moving forward but the “Americans” beat them to it. I don’t think the Americans got information after Germany’s surrender, but they learned of Germany’s discovery of nuclear fission and that is how the Manhattan Project originated.

Germany led the world in science and German Jews contributed a lot to Germany’s success, but there was a feeling among some German scientists that Jews were getting too much unearned publicity. This article explains it.

https://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2010/03/31/ethnic-conflict-in-german-physics/

Here is a good documentary on Germany’s nuclear program. The documentary maker is an acquaintance of David Irving. I believe all his work is based on David Irving’s books.

You write: “Please feel free to explain the Terror bombing of Rotterdam by the Luftwaffe.”

My response: As I wrote in my comment #522 on this discussion thread, the Dutch in a four-day battle tried to wipe out the German paratroops and glider-borne infantry that landed at Rotterdam and The Hague. German bomber squadrons had already taken off to relieve the pressure on paratroops at Rotterdam on May 14, 1940, when word arrived that the Dutch were capitulating. Only half of the German bombers could be recalled—the rest dropped nearly 100 tons of bombs on Rotterdam, resulting in the death of approximately 900 people. Holland formally surrendered the next day. (Source: Irving, David, Hitler’s War, New York: Avon Books, 1990, p. 286).

I would not characterize the bombing of Rotterdam as terror bombing. The German bombing of Rotterdam was designed to relieve the pressure on German paratroops and glider-borne infantry that had landed at Rotterdam. These bombings did serve a military purpose.

You write: “Manstein was a willing facilitator of a ‘war of extermination’ designed to maximize collateral killing and summary executions. In Ukraine 7 million (including Jews) were killed, 700 cities and towns and 28,000 villages were destroyed [Burleigh ‘The Third Reich’ p.533]. The killing was lubricated by crackpot racial theories and brazen territorial acquisitiveness.”

My response: There is no question that the war between Germany and the Soviet Union was extremely vicious. I write about some of this vicious fighting in Chapter Ten of my book.

For example, I write: “One of the hardest hit areas was Belorussia, which struck an American journalist as “the most devastated country in Europe.” In Belorussia, German figures indicate that the average ratio of Belorussians to Germans killed was 73 to 1. This statistic gives some indication of the scale of violence that the civilian population suffered. A total of 345,000 civilians in Belorussia are estimated to have died as a result of German anti-partisan operations, together with perhaps 30,000 partisans.” (Source: Mazower, Mark, Hitler’s Empire: How the Nazis Ruled Europe, New York: The Penguin Press, 2008, p. 487).

Partisan warfare has traditionally been considered illegal, since it undermines the convention of uniformed armies directing violence against each other rather than against civilian populations. Soviet partisan warfare was extremely brutal and capable of severely disrupting German military planning. Because German forces were always limited and always in demand at the front, German military and civilian authorities were all the more fearful of the disruptions partisans could bring. Consequently, German army officers were trained to take a severe line against partisan activity in the Soviet Union. (Source: Snyder, Timothy, Bloodlands: Europe Between Hitler and Stalin, New York: Basic Books, 2010, pp. 233-234).

The combat of Soviet partisans in forests and swamps was regarded by German troops as the most dangerous of all types of warfare—favoring the hunted rather than the hunter. The partisans almost always killed captured German soldiers, frequently after inflicting brutal torture. The German anti-partisan forces operated in an extremely unpleasant environment that made the German units resent the partisans whose activities had caused them to be there. In summer huge swarms of flies and mosquitos made life miserable; in winter frostbite and trench foot were rampant. (Source: MacLean, French L., The Cruel Hunters: SS-Sonderkommando Dirlewanger Hitler’s Most Notorious Anti-Partisan Unit, Atglen, PA: Schiffer Military History, 1998, pp. 69-70).

The German High Command recognized both the importance and difficulty of combating partisans as the war progressed. Anti-partisan activity was originally handled by the Army, but in October 1942 responsibility for anti-partisan activity was transferred to the SS. In January 1943 Hitler declared that the Geneva Convention and the traditional rules of chivalry did not apply in anti-partisan activity. Hitler also decreed that German soldiers could not be brought to trial for atrocities committed during anti-partisan operations. The result was extraordinarily vicious fighting in which no quarter was given and none was expected in return. (Source: MacLean, French L., The Cruel Hunters: SS-Sonderkommando Dirlewanger Hitler’s Most Notorious Anti-Partisan Unit, Atglen, PA: Schiffer Military History, 1998, pp. 110, 153).

You write: “Naturally women, infants and children were among the fiercest partisans.”

My response: There were some Russian women who engaged in partisan fighting. However, men engaged in the bulk of partisan fighting.

Soviet partisan warfare against Germany became increasingly barbaric and murderous. In February 1943, 596 German prisoners were killed and many of them mutilated by Soviet partisans at Grischino. A German judge who interrogated witnesses and survivors of this atrocity remembers: “You have no idea how much trouble the commanders and company chiefs had…to restrain the German soldiers from killing every Russian prisoner of war of the Popov Army. The troop was very bitter and angry. You cannot imagine the vehemence of the soldiers after they had seen what had happened.” (Source: De Zayas, Alfred M., The Wehrmacht War Crimes Bureau, 1939-1945, Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1989, p. 106).

I write: “in his trial, Manstein and his attorney provided evidence that many of the Einsatzgruppen reports are not valid” and you respond: “No kidding. Yet German records are otherwise meticulously correct. Maybe it had something to do with the booze the SS needed to help pull the trigger.”

My response: Actually, there is strong evidence that many of the Einsatzgruppen reports are not valid.

The originals of the Einsatzgruppen reports have never been produced, and many of the copies that have been produced show clear signs of postwar additions. For example, Einsatzgruppen Report No. 111 contains garbled wording and a clear addition of the words “Jews in general” at the end of a paragraph:

“These were the motives for the executions carried out by the Kommandos: Political officials, looters and saboteurs, active Communists and political representatives, Jews who gained their release from prison camps by false statements, agents and informers of the NKVD, persons who, by false depositions and influencing witnesses, were instrumental in the deportation of ethnic Germans, Jewish sadism and revengefulness, undesirable elements, partisans, Politruks, dangers of plague and epidemics, members of Russian bands, armed insurgents—provisioning of Russian bands, rebels and agitators, drifting juveniles, Jews in general.” (Source: Winter, Peter, The Six Million: Fact or Fiction?, 4th edition, The Revisionist Press, 2015, pp. 24-25).

Dr. Arthur Butz writes about the Einsatzgruppen documents:

“They are mimeographed and signatures are most rare and, when they occur, appear on nonincriminating pages. Document NO-3159, for example, has a signature, R.R. Strauch, but only on a covering page giving the locations of various units of the Einsatzgruppen. There is also NO-1128, allegedly from Himmler to Hitler reporting, among other things, the execution of 363,211 Russian Jews in August-November 1942. This claim occurs on page four of NO-1128, while initials said to be Himmler’s occur on the irrelevant page one. Moreover, Himmler’s initials were easy to forge: three vertical lines with a horizontal line drawn through them.” (Source: Butz, Arthur R., The Hoax of the Twentieth Century: The Case Against the Presumed Extermination of European Jewry, ninth edition, Newport Beach, CA: Institute for Historical Review, 1993, p. 198).

Dr. Butz explains why many of the Einsatzgruppen documents were forged:

“It is not difficult to see why these documents exist; without them the authors of the lie would have no evidence for their claims except testimony. We have seen that with Auschwitz there was an abundance of material facts to work with and whose meanings could be distorted: shipments of Jews to Auschwitz, many of whom did not return to their original homes, large shipments of a source of hydrogen cyanide gas, elaborate cremation facilities, selections, the stench. The situation with the Einsatzgruppen was different; there was only one fact, the executions. Standing alone, this fact does not appear impressive as evidence, and this consideration was no doubt the motivation for manufacturing these documents on such a large scale.” (Source: Ibid., p. 200).

Even Jewish historian Gerald Reitlinger had trouble with the existence of the Einsatzgruppen reports. Reitlinger wrote:

“It is not easy to see why the murderers left such an abundant testimony behind them, for in spite of their wide circulation list, Knobloch’s (the Gestapo official who edited the reports) reports seemed to have been designed primarily to appeal to Himmler and Heydrich. Thus, in addition to much juggling with the daily death bills in order to produce an impressive total, there are some rather amateur essays in political intelligence work.” (Source: Ibid.).

In addition to fighting partisans, the Einsatzgruppen had numerous tasks involving the reorganization of civilian life in the Soviet territories occupied by the Germans. In their reports, the Einsatzgruppen addressed such issues as morale, politics and administration, propaganda, cultural life, public health, church, economy, the food situation, agriculture, industry and trade, the resistance movements, as well as the Jews. The Einsatzgruppen were involved in a truly staggering number of tasks. The mass murder of Jews was clearly not the primary function of the Einsatzgruppen. (Source: Rudolf, Germar, Lectures on the Holocaust: Controversial Issues Cross-Examined, 4th edition, Bargoed, UK: Castle Hill Publishers, January 2023, p. 325).

I will continue answering your comment in a later comment.

Yes, I’m sure more people worked on it too. Oppenheimer was the American I mentioned. He went to Germany before WWII, the world’s center of science at the time, to earn his PHD in physics. The American atomic bomb project was started after Albert Einstein (a German Jew) wrote a letter to FDR encouraging the project when Leo Szilard ( a Hungarian Jew) encouraged him to do so after the Germans Otto Hahn and Fritz Strassmann discovered nuclear fission and their colleague the Austrian Jew Lise Meitner explained what happened and made it public against Hahn’s wishes.

The people that I read that were key were Enrico Fermi (Italian), Edward Teller (Hungarian Jew), Hans Bethe (German Jew) and maybe a few others. The key scientist that gave the Soviets atomic secrets was the German Klaus Fuchs, who may have also been Jewish.

Maybe. Maybe not. But the “American” scientists (all but one being a recent European immigrant) would not have even worked on an atomic bomb if the German discoverers of nuclear-fission in 1938 (Hahn and Strassmann) had kept what they found to themselves.

Sorry, but in this case it was preemptive as the British WERE planning on occupying at least Norway, if not multiple countries.

“You write about Erich von Manstein: ‘It’s equally improbable he was blind to the Einsatzgruppen, deportations, forced labor, pillage, executions, starving POWs and civilians, etc.’.”
My response: “Erich von Manstein was not blind to any of these things.”

Manstein was a willing facilitator of a ‘war of extermination’ designed to maximize collateral killing and summary executions. In Ukraine 7 million (including Jews) were killed, 700 cities and towns and 28,000 villages were destroyed [Burleigh ‘The Third Reich’ p.533]. The killing was lubricated by crackpot racial theories and brazen territorial acquisitiveness.

“Manstein knew that the Einsatzgruppen engaged in extremely vicious anti-partisan fighting”

Naturally women, infants and children were among the fiercest partisans.

“in his trial, Manstein and his attorney provided evidence that many of the Einsatzgruppen reports are not valid.”

No kidding. Yet German records are otherwise meticulously correct. Maybe it had something to do with the booze the SS needed to help pull the trigger. And, though their orders say otherwise, the Wehrmacht knew nothing of the killing. It was a big surprise.

“Manstein was not in favor of Hitler’s Commissar Order.”

Many said the same thing in 1945 (far fewer in 1941). Yet, somehow, up to 580,000 commissars were executed [Burleigh ‘The Third Reich’ p.522]. It was always the other general, the other army group that did it.

“Manstein also modified Hitler’s order to execute German soldiers who abandoned battle.”

15,000 German soldiers were executed by courts marshal in the east; 100,000 were sentenced to penal battalions or prison [Burleigh ‘The Third Reich’ p.525]. Britain executed none (one hung for treason and espionage in 1946). The US shot one (1) for desertion (102 were executed for murder or rape).

Germany easily wins the execution-for-desertion sweepstakes, with or without Manstein’s help.

“Manstein was the only man who told Hitler that he should relinquish military command.”

Brave indeed. But, after all, it really was the longstanding elephant in the room.

“Manstein argued with Hitler so persistently that Hitler dismissed him as an army group commander at the end of March 1944.”

Big deal. He had plenty of company: Blomberg, Fritsch, Rundstedt, Bock, List, Kluge, Brauchitsch, Guderian, Halder, Arnim, etc.

“Manstein’s critics fail to realize that the British improperly convicted Manstein of war crimes.”

Nonsense. Cold War politics and British pragmatism mitigated the seriousness of the crimes. Paget and co-council Silkin tried to rehabilitate Manstein and the Wehrmacht to sooth sore relations and look towards the future. Liddell Hart was on board; even Churchill donated to the defense. It was time to bury the hatchet and get West Germans on board against the Soviets. Wolfram Wette writes:

“The specific features of the German war of annihilation in eastern Europe, the aims to conquer territory, the racism and extermination of Jews were played down, and the Wehrmacht’s participation in the planning and execution of this campaign was passed over” [‘The Wehrmacht’ p.225].

The irony must have been thick as lead for those still licking wounds on both sides. To say nothing of Manstein’s victims.

So, we are told, honourable men served innocently in a notoriously dishonourable campaign. They may have wrestled with moral conscience, but each knew they’d better win. Meanwhile, any qualms they may have had vanished like swamp gas, flushed by Hitler’s secret largess. For Generalfeldmarschalls the tax-exempt 4,000 RM ($30,560 in 2025) per month more than tripled their already generous salary.

And if that wasn’t enough, the Führer’s thoughtful 250,000 RM ($1.910,000) tax-exempt ‘birthday bond’ could do wonders for the conscience. All told it amounted to 324,000 RM annual compensation ($2,480,000), 92% tax-exempt. 216 times the average German income.

For some that still wasn’t enough: only a landed feudal estate would do. Ritter von Leeb asked for and received a 519-acre country estate at Seestetten near Passau valued at 660,000 RM in 1943 ($4,600,000). Guderian shopped Warthegau with wife Margarete, choosing a 7,000-acre estate called Schöngarten that wasn’t on offer. Instead they were given Deipenhof, a 2,000-acre property worth 1.24 million RM [$8,820,000] in October 1942. The former Polish owner was made to disappear. When Manstein asked, Guderian claimed he was unaware.

Few in other militaries took secret payments and estates directly from a head of state (who exempted himself from taxes). Churchill and FDR paid tax. British field marshals brought home £6,500± (±$500,000 in 2025); American five-stars $10,000 ($177,000). All taxable.

The real question is why Hitler felt he had to use this corrupt tool to secure the loyalty of men supposedly at the pinnacle of selfless duty. In the end, it was all quite pointless. The wars highest paid generals lost.

“Manstein should be recognized as a hero whose military brilliance prevented the enslavement of all of Europe by Soviet Communism.”

Great, except he didn’t. He failed to prevent the fall of Germany, let alone ‘enslavement of Europe’. He lost. He was a loser.

John Wear’s Nazi Romance Transference Guide:
• Swap Credit from Winners to Losers;
• Swap Guilt from Losers to Winners;
• Rinse and Repeat.

You write: “You asked why Molotov made ‘ridiculous demands’ of Hitler in November 1940 [#441]. Answer [#518]: they were his to make under the consultation clause of the Treaty, a clause Hitler didn’t observe invading six countries (including five neutrals).”

My response: You write that Molotov’s ridiculous demands of Hitler in November 1940 “were his to make under the consultation clause of the [Molotov-Ribbentrop] Treaty.”

So, do you think that Molotov’s demands were reasonable? Don’t you think that Hitler had every reason to be concerned about Molotov’s aggressive demands? You have not answered these questions.

My comment #522 on this discussion thread explains why Hitler invaded six countries (including five neutrals). These German invasions resulted from the fact that Great Britain and France declared war on Germany on September 3, 1939. These German invasions do not constitute a violation of the Molotov-Ribbentrop Treaty.

“As a young man he flirted with Trotskyism before, by his own account, turning decisively against Stalinism at age 22. The move from Communist dogma to the anti-Communist Left signaled more than a change in ideology. It revealed how Jewish intellectuals, once deeply embedded in revolutionary movements, could recalibrate their politics as global realities shifted. In doing so, they helped fuse anti-Stalinist ideals with the emerging priorities of American power.”

That a one-time communist could gain such a position of power immediately after WWII illustrates again that despite murdering tens of millions of people in the Soviet Union, long before WWII even started, communism’s reputation never really suffered despite having such a horrific record. When WWII started in 1939, the USSR stood out as the country that had killed far more people, its own people, than had any other country on earth. Its record was 100 times worse than National Socialist Germany’s (as well as Great Britain, France, and every other country), and despite that, the USA in particular jumped to its aid immediately at the beginning of WWII, and ever since then, communism and communists or former communists have enjoyed a good reputation in the US. At most, probably most educated Americans view communists as “misguided idealists,” a description that is a compliment.

That the founding government was dominated by a tiny Jewish minority (80 to 85%) and the government destroyed tens of thousands of churches also stands out. AI and Wikipedia, their defenders, point out that the regime not only destroyed Christian sites of worship, but also destroyed those of other religions. I think it would have been too obvious, even for them, if they had just burned down only Christian churches. I could not imagine a National Socialist (Nazi) who later rejected the ideology ever being forgiven. Presumably he is guilty for eternity in most westerners’ eyes.

In another article on this website there is an ongoing “discussion,” and one of the commenters calls the large numbers of Soviets that welcomed the Germans as liberators and formed military divisions to fight against the USSR collaborators. The fact that many of these people had their relatives sent to gulags from which many would never return is no excuse. That is how misinformed many people are.

I wrote: “As we have previously discussed, Hitler indicated his belief that Stalin was planning to invade Germany in his letter to Mussolini on June 21, 1941….I thought I had fulfilled your request to “prove Hitler expected an imminent Soviet attack by quoting German sources up to 22 Jun 1941…”

This is your eighth comment (337, 355, 378, 393, 441, 455, 490, 521 = 5,200-words) pushing a phony rendition of Hitler’s letter – a rendition that plucks out and enumerates random text as a ‘verbatim’ summary.

You leave out salient points on potential Anglo-Soviet ties, Soviet vulnerability and the efficacy of destroying Russia to force England to negotiate. Finally, you still fail to prove Hitler feared an imminent Soviet threat, the original request and the object of all your efforts.

Your ‘verbatim’ report of the sinking of RMS Titanic would leave out the iceberg, sailing at top speed and six ice-flow warnings.

“The fact that Hitler gave additional reasons for his invasion of the Soviet Union in this letter does not mean that Germany did not also invade the Soviet Union for preemptive reasons.”

Hitler invaded to destroy Russia and force Britain to negotiate. Getting rid of a long-term ideological rival, lately a bosom ally, was a fringe benefit, not the main cause.

“However, you have continually stated that I have peddled a false narrative, committed fraud, and engaged in trolling. I have done none of these…We have discussed this matter enough. This is the last comment I will ever make on this issue.”

Peddling a flawed account as true is fraud; doing it eight times in 5,200-words is trolling.
√ 3. Repetition: Post false and unproven claims until accepted as true.
√ 4. Denial: Never accept an answer or concede a point, no matter how obvious.
√ 8. Stonewalling: Fail to acknowledge evidence, repeat questions already answered.
√ 13. Finality: Always have the last word.

I write: “Unfortunately, since Germany lost the war, many of these Russians [colaborators] were shot, hung, or starved to death by the Soviet government after the war” and you respond: “Nice to see you’re branching out into comedy.”
My response: “There is nothing funny about the crimes the Soviet government was committing both before, during and after World War II.”

Welcome to Planet Germania, where tears – unshed for millions of victims of the Nazis – are reserved for Nazis and their Russian collaborators. Collaborators that Hitler, least of all, cared a whit about.

There follows 1,300-words of spam on Anne Applebaum’s Gulags, reasons Germany lost against the USSR, Allied Aid, etc., etc. All designed to change the subject and transfer guilt from losers to winners.
√ 5. Swapping: Answer questions that haven’t been asked.
√ 14. Condescension: lecture with patronizing superiority and thinly veiled disdain.

I write: ““Petermx is correct that many Russians hoped that Hitler would free them from Stalin” and you reply “Whatever hopes some may have had quickly died in Hitler’s inept ‘war of extermination’”.
My response: “A major reason Germany lost the war against the Soviet Union was the extensive military aid given by the Americans and British to the Soviet Union.”

That’s a good thing, nicht wahr? Or would you prefer having your 50-mission bomber pilot father shot down? BTW what rank did he finish with?

Germany also lost because its dilettante war-lord refused to believe the annual production figures of his adversaries, just as he later conjured armies on paper that no longer existed.

“So, Hitler probably made some military mistakes during the war”.

No kidding. As Thomas Jefferson might say ‘we hold these truths to be self-evident’.

“However, the massive Soviet military buildup prior to Germany’s invasion of the Soviet Union, combined with the extensive American and British military aid given to Stalin during the war, made it exceptionally difficult for Germany to win the war.”

The massive German military buildup 1934-39 helped start the war. Go figure.

Congratulations to China. They deserve credit for rising and surpassing the West, which preferred spending time on things like LGBTQ+ studies and parades.

You write: “It should be noted Hitler didn’t consult Molotov before invading neutral Denmark, neutral Norway, neutral Luxembourg, neutral Belgium, neutral Netherlands, and France before the November meeting, so he was by far the more aggressive partner.”

My response: You are correct that Germany invaded all of these countries. However, you fail to mention the reasons for these invasions. These German invasions resulted from the fact that Great Britain and France declared war on Germany on September 3, 1939.

Germany had no plans to invade Norway or Denmark when World War II began. Hitler considered it advantageous to have a neutral Scandinavia. On August 12, 1939, in a conversation with Italian Foreign Minister Ciano, Hitler stated that he was convinced none of the belligerents would attack the Scandinavian countries, and that these countries would not join in an attack on Germany. Hitler’s statement was apparently sincere, and it is confirmed in a directive on October 9, 1939. (Source: Lunde, Henrik O., Hitler’s Pre-Emptive War: The Battle for Norway, 1940, Philadelphia and Newbury: Casemate, 2010, p. 44).

Hitler eventually became convinced of the need for a preemptive strike to forestall a British move against Norway. Adm. Erich Raeder in a routine meeting with Hitler on October 10, 1939, pointed out that the establishment of British naval and air bases in Norway would be a very dangerous development for Germany. Raeder stated that Britain would be able to control the entrance to the Baltic, and would be able to hinder German naval operations in the Atlantic and the North Sea. The flow of iron ore from Sweden would end, and the Allies would be able to use Norway as a base for aerial warfare against Germany. (Source: Ibid., pp. 50, 57).

In a meeting on December 18, 1939, Hitler let it be known that his preference was for a neutral Norway, but that if the enemy tried to extend the war into this area, he would be forced to react accordingly. Hitler soon had convincing evidence that Britain would not respect Norwegian neutrality. German naval intelligence in February 1940 broke the British naval codes and obtained important information about Allied activities and plans. The intercepts indicated that the Allies were preparing for operations against Norway using the pretext of helping Finland. The intercepts confirmed Adm. Raeder’s fears about British intentions. (Source: Ibid., pp. 55, 63)

Both Britain and France believed that the threat of Germany losing badly needed iron ore would provoke Germany into instigating military operations in Scandinavia. However, Britain and France had somewhat different objectives. Britain believed that German operations could be challenged effectively and successfully by the Allies, resulting in quick military victories for the Allies in a war that had stagnated. France wanted to open a new front in order to divert German attention and resources from her border. Both Britain and France felt the maritime blockade of Germany would become more effective once Norway was conquered, especially if they succeeded in severing the flow of iron ore to Germany. They were willing to accept great military and political risks to this end. (Source: Ibid., p. 80).

German intelligence reports continued to indicate that the Allies would invade Norway even after the conclusion of peace between Finland and the Soviet Union. On March 28, 1940, the Germans learned about the decision taken by the Allied Supreme War Council to mine Norwegian waters. A diplomat’s report on March 30, 1940, indicated that the Allies would launch operations in northern Europe within a few days. British mining operations in Norwegian territorial waters began on April 8, 1940. Although no armed clashes with Norwegian forces took place, the British mining operations were a clear violation of Norway’s neutrality and constituted an act of war. (Source: Ibid., pp. 34, 85-86, 95-96).

Germany’s decision to invade Denmark was based on the plan of Gen. Nikolaus von Falkenhorst, who concluded that it would be desirable to occupy Denmark as a “land bridge” to Norway. Denmark quickly surrendered to German forces on April 9, 1940. (Source: Keegan, John, The Second World War, New York: Viking Penguin, 1990, p. 50).

The campaign in Norway lasted 62 days and unfortunately resulted in a substantial number of casualties. Most sources list about 860 Norwegians killed. Another source estimates the number of Norwegians killed or wounded at about 1,700, with another 400 civilians estimated to have died during the campaign. Norway also effectively lost her entire navy, and her people experienced increased hardships during Germany’s five-year occupation. (Source: Lunde, Henrik O., Hitler’s Pre-Emptive War: The Battle for Norway, 1940, Philadelphia and Newbury: Casemate, 2010, pp. 542-543, 545).

The German invasion of Norway on April 9, 1940, was made to preempt Britain’s invasion of Norway. The Germans achieved most of their objectives in what must be viewed as a stunning military success. The occupation of Norway complicated British blockade measures and cracked open the door to the Atlantic for possible interference with British supplies coming from overseas. The air threat to Germany by a British presence in Norway was also avoided, as was the possibility of Sweden falling under the control of the Allies. Most importantly, Germany’s source of iron ore was secure, and the German navy was able to remove some of the limitations imposed on it by geography. (Source: Ibid., p. 544).

British hopes that quick victories could be achieved by enticing the Germans into an area where they would confront enormous British naval superiority were not realized. The hoped for British victories in Norway turned into a humiliating defeat. The French objective of reducing the threat to her homeland by opening a new theater of war was also not achieved. A protracted war in Norway and the consequent drain on German resources did not materialize. The only major advantage to the Allies was a hardening of public opinion against Germany in neutral countries, especially in the United States. Most people did not know that Germany’s invasion of Norway and Denmark had preempted an invasion of Norway by Allied forces.

Winston Churchill later acknowledged that Britain had planned to mine Norwegian waters. Churchill wrote: “On April 3, the British Cabinet implemented the resolve of the Supreme War Council, and the Admiralty was authorized to mine the Norwegian Leads on April 8.” Despite these British plans, the International Military Tribunal convicted German Adm. Erich Raeder of conducting aggressive war. (Source: Churchill, Winston, The Gathering Storm, Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1948, p. 579).

William Henry Chamberlain wrote:

“The hypocrisy of the war-crimes trials is well illustrated by the case of the German, Admiral Erich Raeder, who was given a life sentence for plotting aggressive war, namely, helping to plan the Nazi invasion of Norway. Lord Hankey revealed some years back that the British were making identical plans at the same time. Winston Churchill admitted this to be a fact in his book, The Gathering Storm. Final confirmation has recently been offered by the publication of the first volume of the British Official History of the Second World War. This sets forth in detail the plan approved by the British War Council as early as February 6, 1940. It embraced the seizure of Narvik and the occupation by force of northern Norway and Sweden, even including the Swedish port of Lulea on the Baltic.” (Source: Chamberlain, William Henry, “The Bankruptcy of a Policy,” in Barnes, Harry Elmer (ed.), Perpetual War for Perpetual Peace, Newport Beach, CA: Institute for Historical Review, 1993, p. 535).

On May 10, 1940, Germany invaded Belgium, Holland, and Luxembourg as the only viable pathway into France, which was Germany’s primary goal. Since their declaration of war on Germany, both Great Britain and France had been building up their military forces in preparation for an all-out offensive against Germany. A combined British/French army of approximately 500,000 men was being organized for an invasion of Germany as soon as the Allied military build-up was ready. Britain and France had also been conducting a relentless naval campaign against Germany which included a naval blockade against German ports. (Source: Bradberry, Benton L., The Myth of German Villainy, Bloomington, IN: AuthorHouse, 2012, pp. 361-362).

Since France’s heavily fortified Maginot Line blocked a German invasion across the German/French border, Germany had to invade the Netherlands, Belgium, and Luxembourg to get into France. Germany’s occupation of the Low Countries was thus a result of her need to bypass the Maginot Line, and not a result of Germany’s desire to conquer the world. Germany had tried to avoid war with both Britain and France. However, Britain and France had rejected all German peace offers, making it necessary for Germany to invade France and the Low Countries. (Source: Ibid., pp. 361-363).

Germany’s invasion of the Netherlands unfortunately resulted in a substantial loss of life. The Dutch in a four-day battle tried to wipe out the German paratroops and glider-borne infantry that landed at Rotterdam and The Hague. German bomber squadrons had already taken off to relieve the pressure on paratroops at Rotterdam on May 14, 1940, when word arrived that the Dutch were capitulating. Only half of the German bombers could be recalled—the rest dropped nearly 100 tons of bombs on Rotterdam, resulting in the death of approximately 900 people. Holland formally surrendered the next day. (Source: Irving, David, Hitler’s War, New York: Avon Books, 1990, p. 286).

France quickly fell to Germany primarily because French intelligence failed to predict how the German invasion would take place. The strongest German force pushed through the Ardennes while smaller German forces fought Allied troops in the north. The Allied armies were soon surrounded by German divisions on three sides, with the sea on the fourth. Philippe Pétain, who had replaced Reynaud as prime minister of France, announced on June 17, 1940, that it was time to stop the fighting and sue for peace. Approximately 120,000 French soldiers were killed or reported missing in the conflict, with 1.5 million French troops taken prisoner by the Germans. (Source: Evans, Richard J., The Third Reich at War, 1939-1945, London: Penguin Books, 2008, pp. 124-125, 127, 131).

Similar to Germany’s invasion of Norway and Denmark, the German invasion of France and the Low Countries was primarily preemptive in nature. Germany had no designs on Britain or France, and wanted above all else to avoid war. It was Britain and France that had declared war on Germany, and it was Britain and France that had ignored all German peace overtures. Hitler had even offered German military assistance if needed by the British empire. He had made repeated attempts to establish friendly relations with Britain, all of which were spurned. Germany’s only viable option was to attack France and continue fighting a war it had never wanted. (Source: Bradberry, Benton L., The Myth of German Villainy, Bloomington, IN: AuthorHouse, 2012, p. 363).

He had a television program sometime in the late 1970s to mid 1980s in New York that I would watch.

You have not mentioned the Zulu armed forces because they are relevan too.

You’re wasting a lot of space. You don’t know what you’re talking about and I won’t waste the time to address every smear and lie you write.

I’ll address your first lie. You wrote “The numbers stand for themselves: National Socialists killed 600,000 Germans and forcibly sterilized another 400,000. They launched a war that killed millions, not least their own people.” No, the numbers don’t stand for themselves. When you continuously lie, you’re not trusted any longer. The allies found the Germans guilty at Nuremberg for murdering over 12,000 Poles at the Katyn Forest even though Germany did an investigation into what happened and invited allied countries to participate during the war, but they refused to come. The evidence pointed at the Soviets but that did not matter. The American led Nuremberg show trials found the Germans guilty. In 1990 the Soviet Union’s leader Gorbachev admitted the Soviets murdered those Poles.

Also, at Auschwitz for many years after the war it was claimed that four million people were murdered there by the Germans. In the early 1990s the authorities tore the sign down at Auschwitz claiming four million deaths and reduced the number to about one million deaths. They lied and then reduced the number of claimed victims. While the the rest of the world said little about Auschwitz and the other camps after the Nuremberg trials, it was in the USA, thousands of miles from where it supposedly happened, that the Holocaust was resurrected or invented in the 1960s-1970s and spread around the world. This was done despite the fact that in the thousands of pages that make up the memoirs of Churchill, de Gaulle and Eisenhower, there is no mention of Nazi “gas chambers,” a “genocide” of the Jews, or of “six million” Jewish victims of the war. More than any other country, the USA has spread propaganda and lies about WWII around the world. You are proven liars. That is why the number of victims of the Germans you claim in your comment don’t “stand for themselves.”

Germany did what could be done to protect their people from the uncivilized filth, especially from the USSR and USA. Two million German women were brutally raped and many murdered afterwards by allied filth.

You add “They launched a war that killed millions, not least their own people.” No, they didn’t. I’ll quote Ron Unz in his review of Patrick Buchanan’s book Churchill, Hitler, and the Unnecessary War.

He wrote

“Buchanan described the outrageous provisions of the Treaty of Versailles imposed upon a prostrate Germany, and the determination of all subsequent German leaders to redress it. But whereas his democratic Weimar predecessors had failed, Hitler had managed to succeed, largely through bluff, while also annexing German Austria and the German Sudetenland of Czechoslovakia, in both cases with the overwhelming support of their populations.

Buchanan documented this controversial thesis by drawing heavily upon numerous statements by leading contemporary political figures, mostly British, as well as the conclusions of highly-respected mainstream historians. Hitler’s final demand, that 95% German Danzig be returned to Germany just as its inhabitants desired, was an absolutely reasonable one, and only a dreadful diplomatic blunder by the British had led the Poles to refuse the request, thereby provoking the war. The widespread later claim that Hitler sought to conquer the world was totally absurd, and the German leader had actually made every effort to avoid war with Britain or France. Indeed, he was generally quite friendly towards the Poles and had been hoping to enlist Poland as a German ally against the menace of Stalin’s Soviet Union.”

https://www.unz.com/runz/american-pravda-understanding-world-war-ii/

Germany’s attack on Poland, a country that didn’t exist until it was resurrected 20 years earlier did not have to lead to a world war. The British, Americans and French have no qualms about starting wars. In this article by Ron Unz, he describes how the British and French planned to attack the Soviet Union before Germany did in a pre-emptive strike. But their planned strike was not pre-emptive. They believed the USSR was Germany’s source of oil and raw materials needed for the war. They didn’t declare war on Germany because Germany attacked Poland and they are so opposed to war. The idea that these countries are so aghast at war is ridiculous.

“In the Early Days of World War II, Britain and France Planned to Bomb Russia.”

https://www.unz.com/runz/american-pravda-how-hitler-saved-the-allies/

France and Great Britain also attacked Russia in the Crimean War (1853 – 1856). Other countries didn’t attack them for starting that war.

In 1954 to 1962 the French attacked and fought Algeria in an attempt to keep their colony. Other countries did not attack France because they started a war with Algeria. France attacked Vietnam in the 1950s to keep that colony. Other countries did not attack France because they started a war in this case either. In fact, later on, the US attacked Vietnam. Later the US attacked Iraq twice, totally demolishing a country that had not done anything to the US. No one attacked the US because they started those wars. Then the US murdered many people in Libya. No one said a word about it. The Spanish-American War in 1898 did not break out into a world war.

Germany’s attack on Poland was after months of Hitler attempting to arrive at a solution to the lands stolen from Germany, and Poland refusing to negotiate, and then later attacking ethnic Germans.

This is what US Secretary of Defense James Forrestal (1947 – 1949) wrote in his diary about who started WWII:

“27 December 1945

Played golf today with Joe Kennedy [Joseph P. Kennedy, who was Roosevelt’s Ambassador to Great Britain in the years immediately before the war] … Chamberlain, he says, stated that America and the world Jews had forced England into the war. In his telephone conversation with Roosevelt in the summer of 1939 the President kept telling him to put some iron up Chamberlain’s backside. Kennedy’s response always was that putting iron up his backside did no good unless the British had some iron with which to fight, and they did not …”

Starting on page 128 of James Forrestal’s diary.

https://ia601401.us.archive.org/17/items/the-forrestal-diaries/The%20Forrestal%20Diaries.pdf

James Forrestal died in 1948 at the age of 57. There is strong suspicion that he was killed.

You are a typical know nothing big mouth. Your worthless opinions on things you know nothing about are taking up space here.

You’re ignorant. You grossly exaggerate mistreatment of Germans by their own government. Americans mistreated their people, deliberately infected blacks with syphilis. Put 150,000 Japanese in camps and stole all their property. Germans were loyal to their government when Americans would have begun rioting immediately when life became hard. They have never faced the hardship the Germans have. They could not. But you do have a big mouth, That you excel at. You have no idea how many people were executed for defeatism, big mouth, and you big mouths have never faced the challenges that Germans have. The German military did what had to be done to keep fighting.

There was mistreatment of German Jews, but that has been grossly distorted and lied about. There were also German Jews that were loyal to Germany.

Have you heard of how Israel treats their soldiers and citizens?

“The Israeli army did deploy its so-called Hannibal Directive, which allows the military to use all necessary force to prevent the capture of soldiers, during the October 7 Hamas-led attacks on Israel, resulting in the loss of both civilian and military lives, an investigation by the Israeli newspaper Haaretz has found.”

“The directive allows soldiers to use potentially massive amounts of force to prevent a soldier from falling into the hands of the enemy. This includes the possibility of endangering the life of the soldier in question in order to prevent his capture.

“Some officers, however, understand the order to mean that soldiers ought to deliberately kill their comrade in order to stop him from being taken prisoner, not that they may accidentally injure or kill him in their attempt.”

I think the Israeli policy is ruthless, and they’re not in immediate danger of being overrun. Germany was.

Your country has never been faced with extinction, and never even been seriously threatened due to its geography. That’s why you know nothing, and what is required to keep fighting.

Massie for Senator and/or Governor!

Serbia was a small country and a Serb terrorist assassinated the Austrian heir to the throne and his wife. When Russia declared war on the Austro-Hungarian Empire, that made it a big war and it got bigger from there. France played a key role. They wanted the German speaking Alsace-Lorraine back. France and Great Britain escalated it to a world war. Each of those countries: Russia, Great Britain, France and the USA had a long history of bullying small countries. A world war only broke out when Austria-Hungary attacked Serbia.

LOL. The Schlieffen Plan was correct in stating that if Russia attacked, France would attack from the other side.

I would put your book next to the books on gas, soap and lampshades from WW II in the fiction section of a library.

Here is a picture of an American woman with a Japanese skull her sick soldier boyfriend sent her. The Americans did not take Japanese POW’s. They killed most Japanese captured. That was a huge war crime.

I think the Nuremberg Trials revealed the allies to be criminal liars. I believe the Germans are a more civilized people than the Americans, British, French and the Russians. The Americans and Soviets appear to be the biggest criminals.

You write: “Hitler’s 21 Jun 1941 letter to Mussolini doesn’t prove Barbarossa was launched to preempt an imminent Soviet invasion.”

My response: Hitler indicates in this letter that he is concerned about an attack from the Soviet Union in the near future. I list seven quotes from this letter in my comments #337 and #441 on this discussion thread that show why Hitler is worried about an attack from the Soviet Union. Please go back and read them.

Hitler certainly does discuss other factors in his letter to Mussolini. However, these factors do not mean that Hitler is not concerned about an attack from the Soviet Union in the near future.

You write: “To render a false account you:
• claim “I did not insert any enumeration not in the original letter” – a boldfaced lie;
• claim “verbatim” text despite glaring omissions of principle content and salient points;
• defend your distortion with a ridiculous “Ctrl+C to copy and then Ctrl+V to paste” defense;
• continuously repeat a false narrative while accusing others of “lengthy comments”.”

My response: I did not insert any enumeration not in the original letter. I used Ctrl+C to copy and then Ctrl+V to paste the seven items I quoted from Hitler’s letter to Mussolini. I am not repeating a false narrative or committing fraud as you claim.

You write: “Hitler clearly reaffirmed his prime objective to staff, in press releases and in a Memorandum to OKW 22 Aug 1941:

“The aim of this campaign [Barbarrosa] is to eliminate Russia as a continental ally of Britain [and thus] deprive her of any hope of escaping [her] fate with the help of the remaining great power.”

My response: Hitler did want to remove the Soviet Union as a continental ally of Britain. However, Hitler was also concerned about an attack from the Soviet Union in the near future. He makes this clear in his letter to Mussolini on June 21, 1941.

You write: “You depend on Taylor’s ‘Origins’ as a vital source in ‘Germany’s War’ but completely blackout his ‘Course of German History’, a far more critical text that destroys your ‘Hitler was the victim’ mime. Worse, you continue to cite Harry Elmer Barnes, a paid shill and crackpot, as a legitimate source.”

My response: I have never read AJP Taylor’s book ‘Course of German History’, so obviously I did not use it as a resource when I wrote my book ‘Germany’s War.’ You like to call Taylor egocentric when he writes something you don’t agree with, but then use him as an authority when he says something you do agree with. Here you are using Taylor as an authority.

Harry Elmer Barnes was definitely not a crackpot. Barnes had a PhD in history from Columbia University and wrote numerous scholarly history books. I consider Harry Elmer Barnes as a legitimate source of historical information.

I quote David Irving: “Irrevocable and terrible in its finality, the decision Adolf Hitler now took [Barbarossa] was one he never regretted, even in the jaws of ultimate defeat” and you respond: “Charismatic megalomaniacs seldom, if ever, regret anything they do: they ‘go the way that Providence dictates with the assurance of a sleepwalker’. Suicidal variants like Hitler drag everyone into the abyss.”

My response: Hitler never regretted his decision to invade the Soviet Union because he had no other choice. If he had not invaded the Soviet Union on June 22, 1941, Germany and probably all of Europe would have been taken over by the Soviet Union.

Hitler did not know exactly when the Soviet Union was going to attack, but he knew he had to attack the Soviet Union first before the Soviet Union attacked Germany. German intelligence correctly saw the massive concentration of Soviet forces on the German border, but it did not see all of the Soviet military buildup and preparedness. The real picture was much graver than Germany realized. Hitler invaded the Soviet Union to prevent the inevitable attack of the Soviet Union on Germany and all of Europe. (Source: Suvorov, Viktor, The Chief Culprit: Stalin’s Grand Design to Start World War II, Annapolis, MD: Naval Institute Press, 2008, pp. xxi-xxii).

Near the end of my comments #337 and #441 on this discussion thread, I asked you the following questions concerning Molotov’s ridiculous demands made in November 1940 in Berlin to alter the Molotov-Ribbentrop Agreement: “Don’t you think that it was unfair of the Soviet Union to make such ridiculous demands less than 15 months after the signing of the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact? Don’t you think it was reasonable for Hitler to have felt threatened by such aggressive demands?

You have yet to answer these questions.