Let's talk about WW2

Who do you guys think was responsible? How could've it been avoided? And who was ultimately in the wrong?

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_Imperial_War_Council_of_8_December_1912
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nero_Decree
youtube.com/channel/UC0gfrvHpcCaFMubWBwwEDBg/videos
youtube.com/watch?v=WqREtbt__O8
europathelastbattle.wordpress.com/watch/
idope.se/torrent-list/europa the last battle/
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

Everyone was wrong in one way or another. Hitler kept invading country after country. Churchill was pounding the war drum for over a decade before the war even started. The Allies declared total war on the Axis but not the commies. Gave half of Europe to the commies after the war.

It was just an utter disaster on all sides.

It was pretty fun.

>Churchill was pounding the war drum for over a decade before the war even started

Really? How so?

>The Allies declared total war on the Axis but not the commies

to be fair it would've made zero strategic sense to declare war on two of the largest land powers in Europe. France was not legally obliged by any pact to attack Soviet Union or to send troops to Poland to help. The 1921 Franco-Polish treaty specified the extent of help, which amounted to keeping the communication lines free between France and Poland (France and her Eastern Allies, 1919-1925). The 1939 pact, already ratified on September 4, was strictly against Germany, and had no provisions against Soviet Union (Britain, Poland and the Eastern Front, 1939).

Britain, on the other hand, was legally obliged to attack Soviet Union, literally "at once" and to provide "all the support and assistance in its power", per the 1939 pact. There was no legal trick that allowed Britain to avoid this. Britain recognized Poland as a country, and the pact obviously didn't require Poland to be recognized by invaders. The pact did not require Poland to declare war on an enemy. Moreover, ambassador Raczyński requested such help from Britain as soon as Soviet Union attacked, and Halifax declined without any meaningful reason (Britain and Poland 1939-1943: The Betrayed Ally). Halifax said, 'As regards Soviet aggression we were free to take our own decision and to decide whether to declare war on the USSR or not.' (Britain and Poland 1939-1943: The Betrayed Ally)

anglo for angloing, hitler for his shitty memes logistics and tactics wise, japan for going full retard and poking the sleeping atomic bear, Russia for letting the kikes rape their leaders tender boipuccies

Yea I never understood why Hitler declared war on the U.S when Japan attacked. He was not obligated to and at that point I believe the war could've swung in either direction

>Hitler kept invading country after country
There is nothing wrong with invading other countries.

>There is nothing wrong with invading other countries.

I take it you had no issue when the Allies invaded Germany then?

Britain was using Poland to start the war
They wanted war with Germany since 1914 and were dedicated to destroying them
They knew what they were doing the whole time and didnt care about anyone in europe if they destroyed Germany
They didnt even care if the commies ruled the east side of the continent for 50 years
Britian has been the (((eternal anglo))) for over 400 years, ever since the Rothschilds became the controlling interest in their government

>Yea I never understood why Hitler declared war on the U.S when Japan attacked.
Because they were in a military alliance with them. If Germany didn't declare war they would be betraying an ally.

Would have been a more precarious situation for Germany if they did that, and Mussolini would have lost confidence with Hitler.

I have issues with us even declaring war on Germany in the first place. Eastern expansion was the number one goal for the Nazis, and why not? We took their colonies away and gave them no chance for self-determination. What the fuck do I care about the conquering of land? We don't invade every country on principle of them being expnationnalist conquerors.

>They wanted war with Germany since 1914 and were dedicated to destroying them

While blame can not entirely be placed on one nation or the other Germany had arguably been seeking a war since 1912

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_Imperial_War_Council_of_8_December_1912

>didnt care about anyone in europe if they destroyed Germany

To be fair it didn't seem like Germany gave much of a shit about Europe when they were bombing cities like Warsaw. Hell, Hitler ordered Germany be destroyed when the Bolsheviks were marching in

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nero_Decree

Because he was in the axis with Japan. He agreed to fight with them and defend them if need be correct?

>Because they were in a military alliance with them. If Germany didn't declare war they would be betraying an ally.

They were in a DEFENSIVE alliance. The stipulations meant that Germany would only support Japan if they were attacked. Again, Hitler had no obligation to declare war

>Eastern expansion was the number one goal for the Nazis, and why not?

Well the Nazis didn't exactly have anything good in mind for the native Poles and Slavs

>What the fuck do I care about the conquering of land?

I'd imagine you care about people right? Well Hitler's intentions for the people of East weren't exactly noble nor good

It was strictly an offensive pact, Hitler had no obligation to support Japan if they were the aggressor

The moment nazi Germany rearmed Rheinland,that was the Allies' ultimate failure to stop a new world war.After Germany saw the treaty can be abused,it was far too late to do anything.

France and Britain, but mostly France are fully responsible not for WW2 directly but for creating the conditions for German revenge by making the treaty of Versailles so harsh on a industrially, economically and socially superior nation.

WW2 would've happened with or without Hitler and the NSDAP. France and Britain signed their own faith when they signed the treaty on 28th of June 1919.

But if you look way back at the roots of European hostilities during the 20th century, the only two people truly responsible are Conrad von Holtzendorf and Gravrilo Princip.

>Britain was using Poland to start the war

If Britain were so intent on war prior to the outbreak, tell me why Britain didn't modernise its forces whilst watching Germany doing just that and being grossly unprepared at the outbreak of war

Why would a nation so intent on war watch a known-rival modernise and prepare for war and themselves not prepare before hand, it doesn't make sense

Who were the ones responsible? Jews.

...

Also why would they have a policy of appeasement? The Allies had all right to declare war as early as when Germany militarized the Rhineland

This. It was a total disaster. Europe literally destroyed itself and has yet to recover.

...

For the less literate.

Balfour Agreement 1917 - Saxe-Gotha-Coburg
Treaty of Versailles 1919 - European Black Nobility
Council on Foreign Relations 1921 - Committee of 300
Bank of International Settlements 1930 - Rothschild clan
Those are the reasons for WW2, everyone else was a puppet or a victim

I don't think the German Revolution is justification for things like the Nuremberg Laws. The persecution of innocent Jews for the actions of some Commies is not fair in my mind

>People complain about us not accepting (((peace)))
>Hitler shits on every single signed deal we make with him

BUT THIS TIME HE WILL KEEP HIS PROMISE

>They were in a DEFENSIVE alliance.
And it DOESN'T matter.

>The stipulations meant that Germany would only support Japan if they were attacked. Again, Hitler had no obligation to declare war
There were no stipulations. The merging of both theatres of war was inevitable.

Japan declared war on the United States at exactly the same time they needed to, but nobody even bothers to mention the United States embargoed Japan and they lost something like 80% of their oil supply. That's an act of war in and of itself when your entire military and industrial sectors are dependent on oil.

>Well the Nazis didn't exactly have anything good in mind for the native Poles and Slavs
...and? They had a ethnic and geographical claim on the land. We don't invade every country on the basis of them being bad guys. Bad guys are very useful.

>I'd imagine you care about people right? Well Hitler's intentions for the people of East weren't exactly noble nor good
Sure I care about people, but the type of "caring' it seems you're talking about is becoming the world police. Your OWN fucking country have intentions for millions of lives on this planet right now, why shouldn't the United States collapse into rubble from foreign intrusion?

Because that's how the fucking world works.

I'd wager that Europe has yet to recover from WW1. After that god damned war most of Europe lost their Empires and the continent never achieved its former glory. 1914, what a disaster, the collective suicide of the West

has bad intentions*

History is written by the victors.

Now, my Friend, the biggest and condensed Red-pill you can take to start your Amazing, so fucking Frustrating, but yet Beautiful journey to the Truth is here:
(might blocked in your country [see: they don't want you to see it], but there are many places to watch this, search.)

youtube.com/channel/UC0gfrvHpcCaFMubWBwwEDBg/videos (all chapters)
youtube.com/watch?v=WqREtbt__O8 (Chapter one, watch em all)

europathelastbattle.wordpress.com/watch/ (Main website, can watch direct)

idope.se/torrent-list/europa the last battle/

I guarantee you it's worth it, please watch it. It started many journeys before and it will start yours. Don't get too sad about it, we were all born into this fucking lie, and we all can't change it. We Love you user, Start your journey.

>And it DOESN'T matter.

lmao it absolutely does, Hitler had no obligation to declare war

>but nobody even bothers to mention the United States embargoed Japan and they lost something like 80% of their oil supply. That's an act of war in and of itself when your entire military and industrial sectors are dependent on oil.

Japan shouldn't have occupied French Indochina like they were repeatedly warned not to. Don't act as if Japan was innocent here, the U.S didn't just decide to cut them off for no reason

>...and? They had a ethnic and geographical claim on the lan

They did not have claim on most of Poland as it was mostly ethnically Polish and had been for hundreds of years

>who is the blame
How new do you have to be to not know that it was, is, and always shall be those servants of Satan: The Jews.
>became rich industrialists
>hated that they were subservient to royalty
>started or financed every anti-royal movement in Europe
>assassinated Franz Ferdinand
>convinced the Anglos to attack their German cousins to protect their eternal enemy.
>Bolsheviks were entirely Jewish
>utterly destroyed Russia
>were doing the same to germany
>Jews prove they own Britain when support USSR invasion of Poland.
>Make up lolocaust story to eternally btfo Germany

>History is written by the victors.

lmao I'm so sick of this meme. A lot of the post-war accounts were written by former Nazi generals. Von Manstein's book, Lost Victories, was a best seller. It was actually the root of a lot of modern myths about the Nazis such as that of the Clean Wermacht

>>assassinated Franz Ferdinand

lmao the Jews had nothing to do with the assassination of Franz Ferdinand

>convinced the Anglos to attack their German cousins to protect their eternal enemy.

They didn't have to convince anyone the Germans invaded Poland. More than enough reason

I think it's a bit intellectually lazy to boil down the causes for something as complex as WW2 as just the workings of a Jew

>lmao it absolutely does, Hitler had no obligation to declare war
You are fucking retarded. Germany was already aware of Japan's intentions to attack the United States by late November of '41 and signed a separate agreement made on the 8th of December. Sure he didn't have any obligation, but he'd be losing an important ally if he didn't support Japan.

This is the entire point.

>Japan shouldn't have occupied French Indochina like they were repeatedly warned not to. Don't act as if Japan was innocent here, the U.S didn't just decide to cut them off for no reason
Because that fucks with French and American interests, there is no moral connotations there. Japan had every right to expand wherever capable.

>innocence
kek

>They did not have claim on most of Poland as it was mostly ethnically Polish and had been for hundreds of years
That's really interesting. By this logic the bell beakers still own vast swarms of European land.

>Germany was already aware of Japan's intentions to attack the United States by late November of '41 and signed a separate agreement made on the 8th of December

Citation Required, where in this supposed document did Germany agree to declare war on the U.S?

>Because that fucks with French and American interests, there is no moral connotations there

I never claimed there was. Japan knew the consequences of invading French Indochina and did so anyway

>That's really interesting. By this logic the bell beakers still own vast swarms of European land.

Well Germany annexed rightful Polish Clay in the late 1800s I believe. If you wanna play who's rightful land that was historically by all accounts it is the Poles

History is written by Victors.
The truth is the first thing that dies in War.

An embargo is not an act of war. A blockade is, and if American ships were parked outside of Japanese ports preventing shipments of oil from coming in they would have every justification to declare war. However, just because America was by far the largest producer of oil in the world at the time and they decided not to sell oil to the Japanese because it would be against their interests does not mean it was an act of war.

the jews started it, it could of been avoided if we all just gassed the jews, ultimately we were wrong and hitler was right

you couldnt gas the jews sitting in the bank of international settlements and on the british throne, but they're the ones who are responsible for both world wars

sad but ture

...

This is one of the most intellectually honest statements I've ever read on pol.

You could fill a library with books on this one subject. To try to boil it down to less than a paragraph is a fools errand.

>Citation Required, where in this supposed document did Germany agree to declare war on the U.S?
the no separate peace agreement

>I never claimed there was. Japan knew the consequences of invading French Indochina and did so anyway
You seem to be giving off the holier-than-thou attitude, and I really think you believe that we had some sort of obligation to the Poles and Slavs. I'd like to know what that obligation is.

>Well Germany annexed rightful Polish Clay in the late 1800s I believe. If you wanna play who's rightful land that was historically by all accounts it is the Poles
By all accounts we're living on land of the natives and aboriginals. Fuck them. See how that works?

>An embargo is not an act of war
20th century? You bet it was and still is.
Just watch Europe if Russia ever decided to turn off the gas.

>they dindu nuffin

>the no separate peace agreement

That was from WW1 you mong

>You seem to be giving off the holier-than-thou attitude, and I really think you believe that we had some sort of obligation to the Poles and Slavs. I'd like to know what that obligation is.

I'm just against your claim that Germany was totally in the right for expanding eastward when they sought to subjugate the natives populations. I'm not being holier-than-thou I'm just telling you why I think an Eastward expansion by Germany would've been detrimental to Europe overall

Thanks user I appreciate it. I know Sup Forums loves to meme with the whole Jew thing but I find it ignores the nuance that are critical to understanding complex historical events such as WW1 and WW2

People that say Hitler was in the wrong have literal down syndrome. It's not even British bias, Hitler must must of invaded Czechoslovakia and re militarized the Rhine after we told him not too, as if the fucking British Empire is just going to let you walk over them, that was Hitlers full retard moment. Im a National Socialist but you cant Larp and be so dedicated to the point you think that Churchill 'started the war'

>this is different though you guys

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tripartite_Pact#"No_separate_peace"_agreement

>I'm just against your claim that Germany was totally in the right for expanding eastward when they sought to subjugate the natives populations.
Alright so let's say they weren't right in that. Okay, so their entire nation should crumble and be divided for the next half century? Sure, makes sense.

Now what about your nation's expansion throughout the world under the guise of NATO? It's brought us to war and then some before, more or less in the name of American geopolitical interests. Why should the United States not fall and crumble in upon itself for the very same "crimes" as Nazi Germany?

Kike.

So what should have happened instead? Would you force these nations to sell their oil to Japan, violating their sovereignty to make decisions for themselves?
Would Russia be justified in declaring war over the sanctions they're receiving?

>Okay, so their entire nation should crumble and be divided for the next half century?

WHAT? Before their land grabs they were doing fine. They had no obligation to subjugate millions in the East

>Why should the United States not fall and crumble in upon itself for the very same "crimes" as Nazi Germany?

It would take some extremely impressive to suggest the United States has done more evil than Nazi Germany

>Kike

And there it is

Probably not considering the economic sanctions against Russia does not impact their self-sufficient energy generation as music as a 80% of your oil supply in 1940 getting cut off.

>WHAT? Before their land grabs they were doing fine. They had no obligation to subjugate millions in the East
No but they did it anyway and had as much right as the mongols did to invade the steppes.

>It would take some extremely impressive to suggest the United States has done more evil than Nazi Germany
Killed millions in Vietnam under a war drummed up by a false-flag operation and CIA covert operations in south-east Asia. Millions in Syria and Iraq for Israeli interests. Guerrilla wars in South-America, revolutions if Africa and the Middle-East. Support of dictatorships.

See? You're using the moral argument by comparing evilness. Fuck off, you're dumb bud.

Great Britain. They caused all of the bullshit in the 19th century and which caused all of the bullshit in the 20th. They ruined the west.

...

WW2 is what finished Europe.
The only victors of the war were either off continent jews in the US or fucked up rapey commies with no respect for the local populace.

After WW2 we saw:

>Bankrupt European countries unable to maintain empires
>The destruction of economic freedom and culture in the east
>Decolonization that both the US and soviets wanted, resulting in millions of whites being killed or displaced at the hands of sub 80 iq shitskins
>A rejection of any kind of pro white policies on the excuse that they are similar to nazism
>the flood of minorities into former colonisers, resulting in the creation of enclaves of foreigners leeching off and destroying western european states

And much more terrible shit. Europe, at least western Europe, is doomed.

>No but they did it anyway and had as much right as the mongols did to invade the steppes.

I guess we just don't see eye to eye on this. I don't think Germany had a right to that land and you do.

>Killed millions in Vietnam under a war drummed up by a false-flag operation and CIA covert operations in south-east Asia. Millions in Syria and Iraq for Israeli interests. Guerrilla wars in South-America, revolutions if Africa and the Middle-East. Support of dictatorships.

They did not kill "Millions" in Syria. The U.S body count pales in comparison to Germany's

>See? You're using the moral argument by comparing evilness

I'm not appealing to morality Jackass I'm speaking common sense. Germany had no right to take over nearly half the European continent

>Fuck off, you're dumb bud.

Says the guy who believes an embargo is as good as an act of war