That's a unique and interesting take on history. It also contradicts everything I've read about the war and the kaiser. Maybe you can explain how an absolute monarch like wilhelm could end up invading nuetral countries against his will?

__________________
A nation of slaves is always prepared to applaud the clemency of their master who, in the abuse of absolute power, does not proceed to the utmost extremes of injustice and oppression.
Edward Gibbon

I think the Versailles Treaty did in fact pave the way for Hitler's rise to power in that the Nazi's wouldn't have gained a political foothold had it not been for the crushing economic conditions it imposed.

__________________
Who does vote for these dishonest shitheads? Who among us can be happy and proud of having all this innocent blood on our hands? Who are these swine? These flag-sucking half-wits who get fleeced and fooled by stupid little rich kids like George Bush?

--Hunter S. Thompson

Auschwitz was not a death camp until 1942. Even when it was a death camp, the Nazis did not kill Poles for simply being Slavs.

I did read the quote, and I also noticed that no sources were sited for that "fact". It also is very vauge in its description of why those Poles were killed in the camp. They were killed for being Jews, Communists, homosexuals, mentaly retarded. NOT for simply being Slavs or Poles.

Since when are all slavs Polish? I am sorry you were taught this BS in school, but it simply does not stand up to historical evidence. Indeed, the Nazis even had Slavic allies in their war in the east (Slovaks, Hungarians, Romanians, Bulgarians, Ukrainians, Croats, etc...). How do you explain that? Didn't they want kill all the slavs, as you claim?

__________________
There can be no bystanders in the battle for survival. Anyone who will not fight by your side is an enemy you must crush.

We are at war with forces too terrible to comprehend. We cannot afford mercy for any of its victims too weak to take the correct course. Mercy destroys us; it weakens us and saps our resolve. Put aside all such thoughts. They are not worthy of those in the service of country.

Russia mobilized before Germany did, thereby forcing Germany too. Kaiser Wilhelm even wired the Russians demanding they cease their mobilization and let the Austrians and Serbs sort this out. When Russia refused, Germany declared war. Hell, occording to Tuchman’s The Guns of August, the Kaiser even ordered Moltke to call off the invasion of France, in hopes of keeping Britain out of the war. Moltke replied "once settled, it cannot be altered", refering to the train schedule for the German troops moving towards the border with Belgium.

__________________
There can be no bystanders in the battle for survival. Anyone who will not fight by your side is an enemy you must crush.

We are at war with forces too terrible to comprehend. We cannot afford mercy for any of its victims too weak to take the correct course. Mercy destroys us; it weakens us and saps our resolve. Put aside all such thoughts. They are not worthy of those in the service of country.

so the world wide depression had nothing to do with their economic hardship? it was all versailles? germany did not benefit from the fact that very little fighting happened on their soil, especially compared to france, which was devastated?

It was the global depression, as well as the reparations Germany was made to pay.

__________________
There can be no bystanders in the battle for survival. Anyone who will not fight by your side is an enemy you must crush.

We are at war with forces too terrible to comprehend. We cannot afford mercy for any of its victims too weak to take the correct course. Mercy destroys us; it weakens us and saps our resolve. Put aside all such thoughts. They are not worthy of those in the service of country.

given that logic, where was the extreme right wing racial national movements in france? britain? united states? all of these countries were experiencing hardship..

the nazis were also allied with the soviets for a period of time...

They existed. However, they did not have a treaty to blame.

__________________
There can be no bystanders in the battle for survival. Anyone who will not fight by your side is an enemy you must crush.

We are at war with forces too terrible to comprehend. We cannot afford mercy for any of its victims too weak to take the correct course. Mercy destroys us; it weakens us and saps our resolve. Put aside all such thoughts. They are not worthy of those in the service of country.

They were never allied, per se, but they did have a non-aggression pact.

__________________
There can be no bystanders in the battle for survival. Anyone who will not fight by your side is an enemy you must crush.

We are at war with forces too terrible to comprehend. We cannot afford mercy for any of its victims too weak to take the correct course. Mercy destroys us; it weakens us and saps our resolve. Put aside all such thoughts. They are not worthy of those in the service of country.

actually, they physically divided up eastern europe and pursued simultaneous operations of aggression. be technical all you want, in all practical understandings of what an alliance is this just that.

your argument can be applied to their east european collaboraters just as well.

the bottom line is, slavs were not Volksdeutsche, which means they would have been subject to extermination/expulsion eventually,(plenty of evidence shows that these were one and the same in the nazi 'dictionary') and they already were in 1939, during the invasion of Poland. case and point.

I think Thor has already summed up very well why this would not come to pass. Why not read his posts again? Might help to comprehend.

Non-aggression packt in order to build up military and to focus on other fronts first cannot, by anyone rightminded, be called "alliance".

__________________
En uneksi. I do not dream.

actually he did not. he simply said that he was glad the nazis did not get a chance to implement their plans for the east, suggesting that i might even be right. no adequate case was presented to me suggesting that mass murder would not have befell millions of slavs who were in the way of "living space."

i believe that drawing a line through eastern europe with the soviets and simulateneously invading the territories counts, in the least, as "cooperation." like i said, it may not fit your technical definition of an alliance. but it simply suggests that hitler was not beyond cooperating temporarily with perceived enemies, shattering thor's thesis that because the nazis found slavic collaborators, no mass murder could have been planned. the fact that the nazis signed a mutual anything were their highest and most ideologically defined enemy, the bolshevist/jewish establishment, suggests that we cannot read too far into other alliances which were equally temporary and pragmatic.

I am simply going off existing evidence that points to mass murder not being what the Nazis had in mind for the Slavs. Your own evidence, Generalplan Ost, shows that deportation and expulsion was what they were shooting for.

The difference between Russia (who was never a German ally) and Germany's actual allies is that those allies fought side by side with Germany. Russia and Germany never fought on the same side. Hell, Slovakia didn't exist until Germany invaded Czechoslovakia. The same is true of Croatia. How much sense does it make, if Hitler planned to wipe out all the Slavs, that he would create nations of them.

You are venturing into the realm of speculation, htp. Part of your speculation was your use of Generalplan Ost (whether or not it actually existed), which doesn't even support your claims. If anything, it supports mine.

__________________
There can be no bystanders in the battle for survival. Anyone who will not fight by your side is an enemy you must crush.

We are at war with forces too terrible to comprehend. We cannot afford mercy for any of its victims too weak to take the correct course. Mercy destroys us; it weakens us and saps our resolve. Put aside all such thoughts. They are not worthy of those in the service of country.

given that nazis referred to the final solution as evacuation, one must question what deportation would have meant. there is no evidence that suggests it wouldnt have resulted in the deaths of millions. show me one forced deportation that didnt result in a high death rate. your argument is simply apologetic.

there is actually evidence that supports General Plan Ost. It regards Himmlers plan for Auschwitz. Auschwitz was going to be the model eastern city for a reconstructed german eastern europe. now, we already know it involved the enslavement of Poles, slavs, russians, and any non volksdeutsche for use as labor for the reich. and we know that the lives of slaves were regarded as expendable. given that the whole war to begin with was about "race and space" it is not mere speculation to conclude that eastern european slavs would have been worked to death as slaves of the reich or deported to places like siberia with little chance of survival, while volksdeutche emigrated to inhabit their land, assisted with their slave labor.

a logical reason for the support given to eastern european national movements by the nazis was to prevent any kind of large organized resistance once they realized what the nazi war of expansion was all about. in the case of the croations, they were simply manipulating a situation to serve their own ends. in other cases, they were simply playing two sides against the other.

once again, given the nazi ideology, its behavior in russia and poland, it is not simply speculation to argue that millions of eastern europeans would die as the germans made room for the thousand year reich.


it should be noted that eichmann had conversations with zionists (jewish national movement) about the possibility of deporting jews to palestine. in fact, if the brits had allowed it, some, obviously not all 12 million, would have came. does that lead us to conclude they were pro-Jew? or could this have been a temporary operation?