TOPIC: Not About Adolf Hitler

Moderators. Read the title of this thread. So don't bury it in the post of some other thread.

The Costs Of Not Backing Hitler

It is disasterously ignorant to think that backing Stalin was better. In the early 30's, Stalin caused up to 10 million Ukrainians to starve to death. He didn't even need "death camps" to do it. Not to mention all of the other atrocities he committed. Germany was at least a more civilized and "Western" country.

Then after the National Socailists were beaten, the "Iron Curtan" went up across Europe. Just five years after the war, we had the Korean war. One American soldier talked of being attacked by so many communist Chinese, he could have blindly fired a shot in the direction of the enemy and have been sure of hitting one of them. Apparently the Chinese weren't very grateful for our having helped them against the Japanese.

Since then, there have been many proxy wars fought against the communists. Vietnam certainly didn't do the U.S. any good either. There were also a couple of times that we nearly had nuclear war with Russia. There would have been an incredibly high price to pay had that happened. The U.S. also spent huge amounts of money in the arms race with Russia.

Also, quite a while ago I heard that the Chinese had gotten the nutron bomb. This may have happened through spying. But it is equally likely that some Chinese "American" scientist thought the homeland should have such a weapon too. The U.S. also spent huge amounts of money in developing weapons technology. That money has basically gone down the toilet. Because according to a couple news things I saw, Chinese hackers were able to steal most of, if not all of our weapons technology. The cost of that has yet to be seen.

Another cost concerns an incedent I saw on a Vietnam war documentary. Apparently some White U.S. soldiers put up what was probably a fairly small confederate flag on their tent pole. A negro soldier told an officer that if it wasn't taken down, there was going to be trouble. The officer made them take the flag down. That's one cost of giving a gun to a nig... The rights of White people go right out the window. But if we hadn't backed Stalin, the costs of such things, along with the rioting and protests of negros, wouldn't be happening. We would also be much safer from Muslim "extremist" terrorists.

Know this. Without racial patriotism, there can be no real National patriotism. That's why so many of our jobs have gone overseas. Because if what you are supposedly doesn't matter, why would it matter who makes what. There is also the ecological costs of sending those jobs to poor countries with lax environmental laws. Another cost is not doing anything useful in stopping the flow of overpopulating illegal invader scab scum from crossing our southern border. Etc. times zillions.

Do you still believe that backing Stalin was worth the many costs involved? If so, tell me your brainwashed lies.

So it's ''Not About Adolf Hitler'' it's about his void.

Translation - I'm going to flip this so that I get ''my thread'' on the topic (I mean not the topic, the void left where the topic would have been)

Blue Tackler,
The last time I wrote this thread, it was buried deep into the posts of somebody elses thread about Adolf Hitler. Where just about nobody would ever read it. If you read this thread, you would see that it is about some of the consequences to the U.S. for not having backed him. In all of what I said in my thread, is there anything you would like to debate me over?

Frothy wrote:
Surely you must have some BS about the costs of not backing Hitler. Such as how Nazis and the Japanese would have taken over the world. But all that aside, I think it's more likely that Hitler would have preferred having the U.S. as an ally rather than the Japanese. But instead, we sided with Stalin. And all told, Russian communists are said to have been responsible for the untimely deaths of 80 to 100 million people!

steamroller wrote:
Problem is, even before the war started, Adolf and his henchmen were threatening to bomb the USA, so there was no way the USA wanted to be his pal.
Then he started clobbering Britain with bombers, flying bombs and rockets, so although America and Britain certainly didn't like Stalin, they had to side with him to help get Hitler stopped-

"I completely lack the bombers capable of round-trip flights to New York with a 5-ton bomb load. I would be extremely happy to possess such a bomber which would at last stuff the mouth of arrogance across the sea."-Hermann Goering 1938

Ugh wrote:

steamroller wrote:
Not backing Hitler?

The US American industrialists LOVED Hitler. And they supported him and he them (the industrialist symbiosis, parasitic for the common people) all along. Many of the industrialists were supporting both the Axis and the Comintern and some of them shifted their support towards more Stalin after 1941.

Dolfy was, just as Josif, a puppet of the big industrialists. That's how it has always been in statism and will always be.

steamroller wrote:
Adolf started the war by invading peaceful Poland, so Britain and Europe stepped up to the plate and told him to get out; would you rather we left Poland hanging out to dry?
And within hours of us telling him to get out on Sept 3rd 1939, he ordered a U-boat to torpedo the harmless passenger liner Athenia that was heading from Britain to North America with heavy loss of life including American citizens.
What he should have done after conquering mainland Europe was to leave Britain and America alone and concentrate all his efforts on conquering Russia, and he'd probably have won.

Ugh wrote:
Ugh your post is a bit insane, first you allude that you think it's a good thing that ''Britain and Europe'' helped Poland by having ago at Dolfy about his invasion. Then you state Dolfy should have conquered Europe but should of left Britain and the US alone. It was they that went after him because of his invasion of Europe....

...So I guess you think that Britain should have not got involved, so why do you allude that it was good that it ''stepped up to the plate''?

Are you on the same medication as Rocco?

Both Doublethink splitters agreed.

Gaia wrote:
Many people in the U.S. back then supported Hitler. But jew money and the jew controlled media trumped them. Which ended up biting America in the ass. Among the many other things, it is only by luck that at this moment you aren't just radioactive dust. Also, about 10 years before Hitler came to power, the German people literally needed a wheelbarrow full of money to buy a loaf of bread with. Whare were the industrialists then. And how would you feel if you had to do the same. And by the time Hitler came to power, unemployment was rampant in Germany. Hitler fixed all that. Mainly by creating a fiat currency that wasn't directly tied to the reichsmark. The Russian economy and everything else was shit compared to what Hitler turned the German economy into. Our economy was shit compared to Germany's economy too. That is why the U.S. wanted war with him. Not because if the industrialists. As for 1941 and Japan, I watched a program some time back about it. There was a list made up by the U.S. government of five or six things that needed to be done to provoke Japan into war. They were all done.

Ugh wrote:
As for your first statement, a thread has now appeared in the history section called, "Why didn't the allies back Hitler." It will tell you the real story. As for England telling Germany to get out of Poland, it wasn't ethnic English being murdered there. It was ethnic Germans. Hopefully the Germans told England to kiss their ass. As for that ship being sunk, I doubt the whole story. If the allied version of events said the sky was blue, I wouldn't believe them. Because just about everything that is said about Hitler or WW II in general is a complete LIE! As I said, read the thread "Why didn't the allies back Hitler." Feel free to leave a reply there.

steamroller wrote:
But mate, just after the end of WW2 I saw with my own baby-blue eyes the rubbled houses in Leicester which the Luftwaffe had trashed, so if Hitler didn't do it who did, Mary Poppins?..

Ugh wrote:

steamroller wrote:
History says the Nazis killed 6 million jews, how many are you saying were really killed?

Ugh wrote:
Ask Mary Poppins for her-story.

Ugh wrote:
The victors write history and you believe every word.

That's why Youtube make you say you understand and agree to view this video.

That's why comments are not permitted. The Truth is ugly and they don't want people to know.

Roastie wrote:
The message comes up- "This video is not available in your domain" whatever that means, so I couldn't watch it even if I wanted!
All I know is there are plenty of photos and newsreels around showing piles of dead bodies in concentration camps, so I don't see how that could be faked..

Ugh wrote:
truth-zone.net/forum/gaia-s-sphere/69094-key-skills-for-truth-seeking-photo-analysis.html

Ugh wrote:


On April 15, 1945, British forces liberated Bergen-Belsen. The British found around sixty thousand prisoners in the camp, most of them seriously ill. After evacuating Bergen-Belsen, British forces burned down the whole camp to prevent the spread of typhus.

backtonormandy.org/the-history/army-groups/2-army-/xxx-corps/11-armoured-division-uk/195-11th-armoured-division-uk-liberartion-of-bergen-belsen.html