German vs. Russia - No England.

The Romanians were not Slavs but Latins who have even less Nordic blood than Ukrainians as observed by Himmler and Rosenberg.
And I know full well about the Iron Guard and Corneli Codreanu. (ive even met two former member some years ago).
I think you need to read about Stepan Bandera and how he and the Ukrainian Nationalists were treated by the Nazis.
Had the Nazis help set up a National Socialist Ukrainian state they would have had mass support.

 

Lets be clear here Hitler was loved by the majority of Germans and for most life in Germany was very good compared to most European states.
Lets not forget Nazi Germany had borders to keep people out the USSR had borders to keep people in.

This is life in the USSR go to 1.30 into the video.

YouTube - Communism is Evil

 

Have I?

No

Irrelevant

The most recent case was the removal of the Taliban regime.

Indeed you are. The Russians may or may not have felt in need of liberation but many of the other peoples who made up the USSR clearly did.

And your point is?

Your implying they didn't?

Here you are missing the point. Ask that question of the Jews, Gypsys, etc and what do you think the answer would be?

Where did I say they would?

Of course it was particularly in the short term.

 

You'll need to document this and note the time frame.

I've read that life was pretty difficult for the German people in the inter war years as well as during much of the war.

 

So you think his support dropped from 44% in the 1933 German election even after wiping out unemployment and crime and creating the Greater German Empire?

Best living conditions in Europe.
Full employment and German workers holidaying abroad while the British working class went on hunger marches.

 

We have had many trolls here in the past who had their own agenda. They wouldnt listen to anyone just keep spitting their rubbish (that said they didnt last). It is clear to me that you are not one of that bunch. You seem to have asked a legitimate question and scenario which I have interpreted wrong and might have come off a bit rough, my apologies. In retrospect you might even have a point (to a degree ) we know that option one didnt work (historically) maybe option two might be better?

But you will understand if I still disagree.

BE,

I am quite familiar with Stepan Bendera, the Ukranian Nationlists and their movement throught the war and post. They were by no means a majority and are still considered traitors by many Ukranians themselves (this is why when Yushenko gave him title of "hero" easter Ukranians were shocked). Most wanted nothing to do with Bandera and setting up a National Socialist State in Ukraine would have resulted in even more of a rift between East and West Ukraine.

lwd,

You answering questions which have not been asked of you but of HaoAsakura.

Not sure this is a good example. The entire country does not view the NATO troops as "liberators" The Taliban have a HUGE support base from the locals which is why they are still such a threat. From my understanding, most of the support for the NATO troops are from those fighting the Taliban (primarily their formal allies, the Northern Alliance) and they are not the majority.

This may very well have been the case, but I was talking solely about Russia. Even then, not ALL from the surrounding countries felt they needed to be liberated either. The amount of people from the Soviet Union which greeted the Germans as liberatores (before changing their minds) only reinforces this. Historically most people in the Soviet Union did NOT welcome the Germans. only in some cases did this occur; Western Ukraine (not majority), Baltic States, a few in Belarus, Chechens, Kossacks and a few other mionorities... Most put aside their hatred of Stalin (those that had it) and came together as patriots fighting for a common cause, the motherland.

Just that. Domestic means solve the problem amongst each other not from help of foreign powers which invade you country.

No I am not. I am speaking only of the MAJORITY, the Jews, Gypsy's were not. Sure they would join (at least some) just as some joined the Germans when they invaded Russia but the majority of the Germans would not, something tells me they would fight for the fatherland. I wonder what Kruska's opinion might be here.

You did not. Once again, please revert to my original post. If you look closely you will notice that I had quoted 3 rogue's (you are one of them). From where I am sitting, I can clearly make out what each rogue said as their names are in Bold letters right above their posts. I had thougth I made this clear but evidently had not. If you have other ideas on how I may improve the clarity of my posts please let me know so such confusion can be averted in the future.

 

Haha, dont worry I accept the apology, I know myself trolls are annoying so I understand you, is nice to find someone who admits and know when an apology is needed, you wouldnt imagine the ammount of prideful dudes I have encountered in some forums, good to know you are not 1 of them.

Of course I understand if you disagree, this is a debate after all, but then can you tell me how could Germany had defeated the USSR? I mean do you think they had a chance to defeat the Red Army in a full battle? If so I would like to hear how because I find no way, in my opinion I think the only way Germany has to win is to force the Red Army into surrender rather than destroying me, in my opinion any strategy that involve having to destroy the Red Army was doomed, you could give Hitler the Infinity Gauntlet and would still had been unable to destroy the Red Army.

 

Well he didn't have 44% support in the 1933 election his party did and he had expected over 50%. Indeed in the elections the previous year he couldn't generate the support of more than a third of the voters.
See: How Hitler Became a Dictator
Furthermore he didn't wipe out unemployment or crime. Certainly in 1940 and 1941 he would have been popular. Far less so in 1944 and 1945.

From what I've read not many were "holidaying abroad". Indeed with the shortage of foreign exchange Germany was having a very difficult time getting the raw materials she needed. During the war years there may have been full employment but there was also the GESTAPO. Certainly not my idea of best living conditions in Europe.

 

Unemployment figures : 1933 26.3 %, 1934 14.9 %, 1935 11.6 %, 1936 8.3 %, 1937 4.6 %, 1938 2.1 %

The workers in Nazi Germany enjoyed unprecedented social benefits such as paid vacations under the Strength Through Joy program.

By 1938, the crime rate was at an all-time low

Add to this the seizure of the Rhineland, Sudetenland and Austria plus the numerous social benefits bestowed on the German working class made Hitler in the 1930's most likely the most popular national leader of the modern age.

 

Everything that includes the Soviet Union and Germany at war ends in utter defeat for Germany I dont see Germany defeating the Red Army on any situation their sheer numbers are just ridiculous, the only way I see Germany winning (Thats why I say the only chance for Germany is to convince the Russian population, I know its a small chance but its better having 20% chances than ZERO) is to avoid facing the entire might of the Red Army, you can give Germany 10 Tsar Bombs (bombs with 50 kilotons), superman in their lines and a reality warping device that can warp reality on a universal scale, they will still lose if they cant force the Red Army into surrender without fighting it, in other words, Red Army = Rape.

 

There is no chance that the USSR can win.
By the end of 1942 the population of the un-occupied USSR will be on par with that of Germany.

 

But how about their salaries? and then there's the question of what they could buy with them.

Depending on your defintion of crime I guess.

For a brief period of time he may have been very popular but the most popular in the modern age? I seriously doubt it.

 

Name me a leader that was more popular.

 

Your the proponent it's up to you to prove your point. Do you even have any sort of decent popularity numbers for him?

 

IMHO: It was a fake. The employment of Nazi Germany was based on an unsustainable deficit. The fiscal deficit was manageable in 1935, but it was brought unimagined levels by 1939, instead of solving the problem, it seems that the Nazi regime deliberately increased, the Nazi government considered that returning to a classic market economy after 1935 without painful adjustments was almost impossible.

If Germany had not appropriated the money resources of Austria and Czechoslovakia had been almost certain that Germany would have had to face a period of crisis.

They were marching to war, a war they couldn´t win.

 

On March 29th 1936, the German nation was given as promised the opportunity to express their approval or disapproval of the National Socialist state. It was an entirely free election without fear or intimidation with adequate provision made for monitoring by neutral observers.

THE GERMAN NATIONAL DEMOCRATIC ELECTIONS MARCH 29th 1936
TOTAL QUALIFIED VOTES 45,453,691
TOTAL VOTES CAST 45,001,489 99.0%
VOTES 'NO' OR INVALID 540,211
VOTES FOR HITLER'S NSDAP 44,461,278 98.8%​

 

Nearly every state in the world runs on deficit spending difference is in Nazi Germany the GNP growth rate every year from 1933-39 was between 5-11%.

 

Welll let's see a quick search turns up the following on wiki at:
German election and referendum, 1936 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Seems rather in contradiction with your post.

 

Not back then they didn't.

There were a lot more difference than that. For instance the lack of foreign exchange which resulted in severe problems importing raw materials. Then there were the loans coming due. Not to mention the sleight of hand financing ...

 

Er yes they did.

Like just about every other major economy of the era then.