Supreme
Banned
The interview as such existed.
Hitler was certainly influenced by the fear of a Soviet invasion (see link 2)
Was Operation Barbarossa a preventive invasion?
- Thread starter Supreme
- Start date
- Status
Hitler was certainly influenced by the fear of a Soviet invasion (see link 2)
In my book it's not a pre-emptive invasion if you were intending to invade regardless of what the other guy was planning.
It’s a bit rich of Germany to be talking about “preventative wars” given that they’re were one of the most expansionist regimes in world history.
I think the term preventative is too passive a term to describe Barbarossa given that its aim was genocidal. One of the central tenets of Hitler’s ideology was invading and genocide t the USSR. That was his main intention with Barbarossa and we should never lose sight of that.
It’s very telling that this is the same kind of language they used to justify their invasion of Poland. Hitler “feared communist expansion” in much the same way Stalin “feared imperialist expansion.” Totalitarian regimes will use language like this to disguise their evil intentions. Don’t buy into the propaganda.
Last edited:
*Looks at the entire pantheon of the great men and empires of history...*
Germany? Really?
The interview existing is not evidence it is true. Frankly, you’re coming off as someone who’s pretending to be asking a question, but actually trying to convince us it definitely is.
Nazi Germany - definitely. In-terms of the sheer scale of what they tried to conquer and in the timescale they tried to do it.
I think it is a bit much to be comparing the Soviets to the Nazis like this. The Soviet Union's analysis of the global situation was correct about the Imperialist powers of the British, French, and Germans considering the former two fought tooth and nail to keep their empires intact well after the cost-benefit ratio had changed severely, and the Germans had been blatantly land grabbing throughout the late 30's.
That the Soviets were pretty hypocritical about it doesn't necessarily make their propaganda completely unfounded.
I would say the Germans and Japanese would be up for the spot, topped by the British, Mongolian, and Russian Empires. The US as well in all fairness. But for what development there was in the areas that the Germans invaded, I think the Nazis did a terrifyingly good job of getting up the list considering their material situation.
Fair enough. I simply meant to state that Stalin probably would have gotten involved in the war eventually but Hitler was always going to try and conquer the USSR come what may.
The interview with Remer is a fanatical general trying to justify Nazism after it killed millions of people. Any grain of truth in that interview is distorted in every way possible to portray the Nazis in a better light, despite literal tons of documents talking about how the Bolsheviks needed to be eradicated well before the Soviets even shared a land border with Germany. And even them, I'm sure Remer is still lying through his teeth about even basic facts.
Hitler's speech is similar BS retroactively justifying years of propaganda that portrayed the Soviets as allies. The "500,000 Germans forced to leave their homes" were done so at the request of the Nazis, who not only agreed with the Soviets to a massive population exchange, but also pressured hundreds of thousands of Germans in Romania and Yugoslavia to also relocate. Stafford Cripps got absolutely nothing done as Ambassador to the USSR until the actual invasion occurred, but here Hitler depicts him as some mastermind that manipulated the Soviets into joining the British (and mind you, Hitler would have to have a legendary spy and decryption network to be able to infiltrate the Soviet Union and break British diplomatic codes to accurately determine the extent of pre-invasion Anglo-Soviet cooperation). And that's only the surface of all the claims he's making.
Hitler's speech is similar BS retroactively justifying years of propaganda that portrayed the Soviets as allies. The "500,000 Germans forced to leave their homes" were done so at the request of the Nazis, who not only agreed with the Soviets to a massive population exchange, but also pressured hundreds of thousands of Germans in Romania and Yugoslavia to also relocate. Stafford Cripps got absolutely nothing done as Ambassador to the USSR until the actual invasion occurred, but here Hitler depicts him as some mastermind that manipulated the Soviets into joining the British (and mind you, Hitler would have to have a legendary spy and decryption network to be able to infiltrate the Soviet Union and break British diplomatic codes to accurately determine the extent of pre-invasion Anglo-Soviet cooperation). And that's only the surface of all the claims he's making.
Last edited:
Hitler’s entire regime was based around the idea of Lebensraum he wanted nothing more than to crush the Soviets Union who he saw as a lesser race of communist Slavs. While many leaders might just say idealistic talking points for the cameras and actually think much more practically behind the scenes I don’t think this is the case for Hitler. He and those in the Nazi government were driven by their ideology above all else and they saw the invasion of the Soviet Union as something they wanted to do not something they had to do.
Also - this is a Nazi General giving an interview to a Neo-Nazi group. You might as well be citing a Goebbels speech.
Last edited:
Stalin was an opportunist but this was tempered by caution. The guy was not about to pull a Red Alert anytime soon unless he had good odds of actually winning.
well modern countries and their administrative structures mean they're able to accomplish a lot more than what ancient countries could've ever have hoped to dream of, but removing them from the argument is ridiculous. What, does Genghis Khan or Alexander the Great not count anymore? In fact, it's probably more of a distinction in terms of expansionism that they accomplished what they accomplished or sought what they sought given the tools they're working with.
It's why we distinguish Isaac Newton far more then we do a Nobel Prize winning Physicist.
Last edited:
Okay.
That will be more than enough.
You open a thread with a quote from a well known, thoroughly documented,l Holocaust denial site (it is actually LABELED as Holocaust denial site at the top of its Wiki page). Reviewing a number of your other posts they parrot various "Reich supporting" myths that have been debunked for decades (e.g. that everyone in the Gulag system was liquidated by Stalin during the war, total, easi8ly disproved BS).
True colors always show through.
To Coventry with you.
- Status