|
|
Post by SwordandCompass on Aug 17, 2004 1:38:43 GMT -5
Relax SwordandCompass, CrimsonGuard is simply saying that Nordicism was a niche view within the Nazi party that was ultimately unworkable because few Germans fit that ideal. The real Nazis were infact racialists who divided Germans according to specific subraces- Nordic, Faelish, Dinaric, Mediterranean and mixes of. If Nazis only allowed Nordics in their party it would have been a fairly lonely group, just look at the senior hierarchy. Gerir,im not fighting with him.The thing is he uses these "revisionist" sites.Which makes me question his motives.Like you said Gerir The "nazi" theorys all fell apart.It was a joke to begin with.First going from "the aryan ideal" then going to "ayran spirituality".Yes the germans gave out specific classes to races BUT WAS THE IDEAL? WHO DID THEY LOOK UP TOO?" Nazis only allowed Nordics in their party it would have been a fairly lonely group, just look at the senior hierarchy." My point is just that!The founded there ideals on "nordicism"But when it did not fit to all germany it changed! btw LET ME SAID IT AGIAN NAZISM DID NOT EQUAL "EUROPEANISM" |
|
|
|
Post by nordicyouth on Aug 17, 2004 3:55:18 GMT -5
Berlin at one time befriended Teheran as an abortive attempt to procure Iranian oil, claiming that Iranians and Germans were linked through Aryan blood.
No matter who the Germans recruited to serve in their armies (which incl. Poles, Russians, Romanians, and even Americans), they idolized Nordish aesthetics.
On the other hand, that did not mean Scandinavians were superior...
Hitler and the Party wanted German supremacy with Nordish looks, because obviously Sweden was not going to start a race war. The Nazis were not racialist either, or else they would have never attacked Poland and simply gone to Africa and China and started colonies there to exterminate non-Whites (why go after the Slavs first?). He made friends with the Italians and Hungarians. He was more interested in German hegemony over Europe, from where he could wield its resources as one. If he had ever accomplished that, he probably would have finished off the Jews and turned on non-Whites, but he never got that far.
IT WAS PRO-GERMAN in practice, anti-non-German, non-White, non-Nordic, in ideology.
|
|
|
|
Post by geirr on Aug 17, 2004 6:23:04 GMT -5
IT WAS PRO-GERMAN in practice, anti-non-German, non-White, non-Nordic, in ideology. Exactly, and that's why the Nazis bombed the shit out of the Poles and Russians because they are mostly non-German and were considered untermenchen despite how blonde and blue eyed some of them appeared to be. |
|
|
|
Post by 88mmFlaK on Aug 22, 2004 19:31:07 GMT -5
Himmler was a crackpot,BUT HIS MEN DID NOT THINK SO!His men would of followed him and his orders without question and they did.They admired him!! Himmler was often refered to as the "Reichsheini" by W-SS troops on the front line, meaning "man who is obsessed with his own importance". W-SS men admired Hitler and Dietrich,among others who had actually seen combat, but their respect for Himmler was minimal. |
|
|
|
Post by Crimson Guard on Aug 26, 2004 17:12:11 GMT -5
Exactly 88mmflak!
Some people just think they know history without reading up on all the facts first.
BTW..Sooner or later Stalin and his Communist armys would of invaded Europe,Hitler striked first!
|
|
|
|
Post by SwordandCompass on Aug 26, 2004 18:12:21 GMT -5
Himmler was often refered to as the "Reichsheini" by W-SS troops on the front line, meaning "man who is obsessed with his own importance". W-SS men admired Hitler and Dietrich,among others who had actually seen combat, but their respect for Himmler was minimal. I dont know the history of the ss or there love for Hitler or Himmler.But This is not the question,what is the question is the view of the blonde hair blue eyed "aryan" myth.Did the ss men feel superior because they "fit" the qualifications?Was not the n/s idea based on greman superiority?and was not the idea of this "greman aryan" ideal the "nordic"=blonde hair blue eyed?Oh yea the greman military was to honor its "fuhrer" .So yes ss admired hitler. |
|
|
|
Post by 88mmFlaK on Aug 26, 2004 18:51:42 GMT -5
Well, yes, it's pretty clear (at least to me) that National-Socialism was borne as a Nordicist, Germanicist, and Supremacist ideology.
Most folks consider the Slavs to be white, yet the National-Socialists of Germany considered Slavs to be subhuman, to the point of excluding a great many willing Slavs(such as the famous Vlasov, the Russian who led the defence of Moscow)from helping against Stalin until the very last moment. Just because the NS used non-nordics as police and meat shields doesn't mean that most NS thought they were "equal" to nordics.
|
|
|
|
Post by 88mmFlaK on Aug 26, 2004 19:11:58 GMT -5
BTW..Sooner or later Stalin and his Communist armys would of invaded Europe,Hitler striked first! That's probably so, but Hitler's consistently belligerent attitude towards the Slavs and towards the Soviets sure didn't help to ease any tension, or prevent any wars. The Soviets were indeed planning on sweeping into Europe pre-1940, but that quickly faded when they saw the decisive victory that the Germans had won against France; Stalin thought that both sides would slug it out in a protracted conflict, and then the Soviets would come in and clean up the broken remnants of the western armies.When this was not to be realised, instead Stalin put his antique weaponry on the front, put his new shiney T-34's near Moscow, and waited for Hitler to make the biggest blunder of his career. If Stalin was on the verge of an invasion, those fast and powerful T-34's would have been near the front; instead, Stalin did what any good tactician would do if expecting an attack- keeping the best armour at the rear, where it is used to strike the enemy when they become overextended. |
|
|
|
Post by Crimson Guard on Aug 28, 2004 21:57:01 GMT -5
<<Stalin thought that both sides would slug it out in a protracted conflict, and then the Soviets would come in and clean up the broken remnants of the western armies.When this was not to be realised, instead Stalin put his antique weaponry on the front, put his new shiney T-34's near Moscow, and waited for Hitler to make the biggest blunder of his career. If Stalin was on the verge of an invasion, those fast and powerful T-34's would have been near the front; instead, Stalin did what any good tactician would do if expecting an attack- keeping the best armour at the rear, where it is used to strike the enemy when they become overextended.>>
Stalin a good tactian,lol Hardly!He was to busy wiping out his own generals & officiers to bother to care about any invasion.He also couldnt believe Hitler Invaded Soviet Eastern poland and swepth through Western Russia in a blink of an eye like his forces did!
The Soviets lost millions within the first few months alone!
Hitler's only blunder was deverting his troops to attack Stalingrad instead of take Moscow,when they where right at the very gates,that plus Gorings failure to properly support and supply the ground troops,was diasterious.Surpirisingly the Germans recovered and stemmed the Soviet breakthrough.
|
|
|
|
Post by 88mmFlaK on Sept 1, 2004 17:15:38 GMT -5
Perhaps "Stalin, being a wise strategist..." would be a better way to phrase it. In the case of Stalin's troop deployment, and his relocation of industry to the Urals, it was wise strategy. Granted, not everything that Stain did was smart, but then again, neither was what Hitler did either.
Hitler made numerous blunders, often disregarding the idea of elastic defence in favour of the outdated "hold your ground at all costs, do not give an inch of ground" static defence, which cost his armies plenty, especially in the year 1944; also the ill fated assault on the Kursk salient 1943, which broke the back of the panzer divisions whic would have been instrumental in organising counterattacks against Soviet breakthroughs, . Another Hitler blunder was diverting first rate equipment and much manpower to raise the Luftwaffe field divisions; also the reluctance to use the numerous captured soviet anti-tank guns; as well as his policies toward the slavs which were previously mentioned.
|
|
|
|
Post by Crimson Guard on Sept 1, 2004 19:44:30 GMT -5
<<Perhaps "Stalin, being a wise strategist...">>
i wouldnt even go that far,he relied on the able General(marshal) Zhukov ,To whom he later sacked after the war.
but i know what your saying.buts not that simple as all of that..Hitler made some crucial blunders,alot of his generals where also a problem.But even the American-Allied Forces made major errors .The Germans came close to winning the war a few times,it was a close war.
The Kursk battle actually the Germans made great breakthrough(Waffen SS divisons),but couldnt keep the momentum going.The main reason for its failure was that the Germans lost the element of surprise.The British broke the German codes,and informed Stalin of plans,and he had his own spy network aswel.So the Soviets where prepared,that really doomed it.
As for the backs of the Panzer divisions being broken,well I dont think so.But they did loose mass amounts of men and materials.
German Production was accually up and at the hightest late in the war(1944) then it was at the beginning of the war.
The amount of Equipment and manpower they built up for Ardennes Offencive and again for Hungarian counter Offencive was testomony of the uncanny ability of the German Forces.
The Luwaffe Field units where excellent division like the Elite "Herman Goring" Divison!
|
|
|
|
Post by alex221166 on Sept 1, 2004 22:42:17 GMT -5
<<Perhaps "Stalin, being a wise strategist...">> i wouldnt even go that far,he relied on the able General(marshal) Zhukov ,To whom he later sacked after the war. but i know what your saying.buts not that simple as all of that..Hitler made some crucial blunders,alot of his generals where also a problem.But even the American-Allied Forces made major errors .The Germans came close to winning the war a few times,it was a close war. The Kursk battle actually the Germans made great breakthrough(Waffen SS divisons),but couldnt keep the momentum going.The main reason for its failure was that the Germans lost the element of surprise.The British broke the German codes,and informed Stalin of plans,and he had his own spy network aswel.So the Soviets where prepared,that really doomed it. As for the backs of the Panzer divisions being broken,well I dont think so.But they did loose mass amounts of men and materials. German Production was accually up and at the hightest late in the war(1944) then it was at the beginning of the war. The amount of Equipment and manpower they built up for Ardennes Offencive and again for Hungarian counter Offencive was testomony of the uncanny ability of the German Forces. The Luwaffe Field units where excellent division like the Elite "Herman Goring" Divison! Zhuvok was a not an able general. He is seriously over rated. He was extremely lucky and he was barbaric to the point of sending his troops barely armed to fight against machine guns, Stukas and tanks. He was a barbarian, no different from the rest of the Soviet generals in that aspect. The Germans lost the war on the moment they declared war on America, and they compromised the war when they invaded Yugoslavia and Greece (both delayed Barbarossa for 4 weeks which later proved to be crucial). There were other aspects worth mentioning such as the cracking of the Enigma machines, the fact that the Germans didn't have a heavy bomber, the fact that until the FW-190 arrived, they didn't have a fighter to oppose the Spitfire, or the fact that the German tanks while for the most part superior, were to complicated to build: when the Germans built one Pz-III, the Russians built ten T34s. Hitler could have won the war had he secured North Africa and the Middle East first instead of invading Russia in 41. Rommel would have reached India if given the necessary resources, and by then, Hitler would have a second front from where to launch Barbarossa: the Caucasus. Without the Georgian oil fields, Stalin's T34 would be as valuable as a rock in the pavement. Another thing he should have done was to give more importance to the submarine war. England was one week away from starvation at a given point. |
|
|
|
Post by SwordandCompass on Sept 2, 2004 0:01:30 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Crimson Guard on Sept 2, 2004 5:51:28 GMT -5
<<Zhuvok was a not an able general>>
WHAT??? He was the best the Soviets had,I'll tell you that much!
A big important fact is that America was breaking its own law at the time,and sending weapons and aid to Britain.Hitler had no choice in the end,America under Roosevelt was pushing him to war,.
Japan screwed up ,by not invading Russia from the East as Hitler had hoped.Had this occured The Soviet Union would of been utterly devastated by late 1941.The Japs screwed up royally for not doing their part.
The Tiger tank was ready by 1942,its development actually started before the invasion of the Soviet Union.The initial T34 arrival was painful ,but the Germans managed to to hold their own, until their Panzer's where up-gunned with the long 50mm on the Pzlll and the long 75mm on the Pz1V.
The amount of T34's and KV's they destroyed during "Operation Citidel" was staggering by the Tiger alone .The Russians though had resources to loose millions of men,and literatly thousands amounts of tanks and equipment. Its a gigantic country.
The battle of Berlin 1945 alone the Russians lost over 1 million soldiers taking the city!
The Panther was the best tank of the War.Excellent vehicle.
The FW 190 was used in britain. And the BF109 was an excellent fighter,it wasnt equipped with drop tanks,so it didnt have the range.Goring also pushed for the BF110 destroyer,which was to big and heavy and could not handle the Spitfires.
The british where also fighting for their country,which makes that more of the fighter.They (british) lost huge amounts of fighters aswel.
The Air battle of britain really ended in stalemate.The germans where never able to secure airsuperiority .But the British werent able to counter the Night Raids either.So the invasion fo britain never happend,in 41,it was put off,and Hitler invaded Russia instead.
It should be noted that Hitler never ordered the Bombing of Cities and civilians.It wasnt until Churchill ordered the City raids on Germany,that civilians where now a target.
The U-boats where still in production,and even a new breed of U-Boats armed with heavy gun turrets and others with V-2 missle Launchers(like they do today) where almost and some where ready in 1944/45.
And Germany's new Jet Fighters,and newer tank modifications,it would be a whole new ball game today.
And GErmany's new Jet Fighters,and newer tank modications,it will be awhole new ball game today.
Had the war continued ,with them holding out longer until summer of 1945 forget it! But for such small country like Germany,to last as long as they did, and take on what they took on,its amazing all in itself.
Reminds me of Ancient Italy(Rome!
|
|
|
|
Post by geirr on Sept 2, 2004 8:23:37 GMT -5
The british where also fighting for their country,which makes that more of the fighter.They (british) lost huge amounts of fighters aswel. The Air battle of britain really ended in stalemate.The germans where never able to secure airsuperiority .But the British werent able to counter the Night Raids either.So the invasion fo britain never happend,in 41,it was put off,and Hitler invaded Russia instead. It should be noted that Hitler never ordered the Bombing of Cities and civilians.It wasnt until Churchill ordered the City raids on Germany,that civilians where now a target. The Germans were attempting to bomb the British into submission but it only had the effect of pissing them off, their losses were high but not as high as the Germans.  The British were initially attacking industrial sites and it was only later in the war after thousands of British civilian casualities that they decided to target German civilians. Whether you think it's right or wrong, by this point, the allies were quite keen to wrap things up as quickly as possible. You clearly have a romantic view of Nazi Germany. You can describe as many hypotheticals as you like but ultimately the Germans lost because they were not only morally wrong but their entire idealogy was not flexible enough to take into account the major errors made by the senior leadership and Hitler himself, the fact is that the best and brightest were working for the allies. Its been 60 years since the Nazis lost, Europe is free and Germany has moved on and is a better place today, which is what millions fought, died and were ultimately victorious for. |
|
The British were initially attacking industrial sites and it was only later in the war after thousands of British civilian casualities that they decided to target German civilians. Whether you think it's right or wrong, by this point, the allies were quite keen to wrap things up as quickly as possible.