- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: TikTokers are using AI to translate Hitler speeches
Posted on 9/26/24 at 10:22 am to OBReb6
Posted on 9/26/24 at 10:22 am to OBReb6
The premise of the UK and France plunging the entire continent back into war over recently established Poland only two decades after destroying a generation of men makes no sense from a practical standpoint yet it's been blindly accepted and is a historical law.
This post was edited on 9/26/24 at 10:24 am
0
Posted on 9/26/24 at 10:25 am to OBReb6
you didn’t say:
quote:
The very same Poland the allies went to war over?!? Surely not. If the Soviets had invaded Poland Winston Churchill would have definitely declared war on the Soviets! Because that is why they went to war with Germany!
Posted on 9/26/24 at 10:26 am to SammyTiger
Why was the Soviet invasion excused? Why did the allies align with the Soviets who did the exact same thing?
This post was edited on 9/26/24 at 10:29 am
Posted on 9/26/24 at 10:28 am to SammyTiger
Hitler claimed Russia invaded Poland first and was slaughtering ethnic Germans. If the Axis had won the war that’s what history would show
Posted on 9/26/24 at 10:35 am to OBReb6
quote:
Why was the Soviet invasion excused? Why did the allies align with the Soviets who did the exact same thing?
Who does France share a border with?
and the argument isn’t the Soviets are better than the Nazis. Because they are also horrible.
The argument is if you are looking at 2 aggressively expansionist empires, the one next door is probably your biggest concern.
This post was edited on 9/26/24 at 10:44 am
Posted on 9/26/24 at 10:39 am to Gaggle
quote:
Hitler claimed Russia invaded Poland first and was slaughtering ethnic Germans. If the Axis had won the war that’s what history would show
Hitler claimed that Poland was invading. See the Gleiwitz Incident.
Posted on 9/26/24 at 10:46 am to SammyTiger
That’s excuse is dog water dude. Germany and the Soviet Union signed the Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact a week before the invasion, and they invaded at the same time
But it’s not just that the allies didn’t declare war, they actually took the Soviets into the alliance later! That is outrageous, and the whole Poland thing is a load of shite. No one actually cares or cared about them
But it’s not just that the allies didn’t declare war, they actually took the Soviets into the alliance later! That is outrageous, and the whole Poland thing is a load of shite. No one actually cares or cared about them
This post was edited on 9/26/24 at 10:47 am
Posted on 9/26/24 at 10:47 am to SammyTiger
Yes, you’re right as part of the Bolshevik spread from the east.
USSR and France signed an alliance against Germany years before the Poland invasion, which Hitler took as aggression. Of course they did it because they took Germany’s rearmament as aggression.
The ultimate point is everyone on every side justified themselves, all the measures taken were defensive and retaliatory according to them. And we get the victor’s side. I don’t think this is really widely taught outside of serious history majors, we are at a basic level taught about lebensraum and racial superiority, as if Germany openly just wanted to take over the world. The very fact that they were actually justifying all their actions as defensive and necessary is probably eye opening to many
USSR and France signed an alliance against Germany years before the Poland invasion, which Hitler took as aggression. Of course they did it because they took Germany’s rearmament as aggression.
The ultimate point is everyone on every side justified themselves, all the measures taken were defensive and retaliatory according to them. And we get the victor’s side. I don’t think this is really widely taught outside of serious history majors, we are at a basic level taught about lebensraum and racial superiority, as if Germany openly just wanted to take over the world. The very fact that they were actually justifying all their actions as defensive and necessary is probably eye opening to many
Posted on 9/26/24 at 10:48 am to OBReb6
quote:
That’s excuse is dog water dude. Germany and the Soviet Union signed the Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact a week before the invasion, and they invaded at the same time
technically it was about 2 weeks apart.
And again, it’s a pragmatic purpose.
England and France needed Russia and America to beat germany the first time.
It’s not like Hitler was shy about saying he thinks Germany should have won the first WW. You think France wasn’t sweating that?
Posted on 9/26/24 at 11:00 am to SammyTiger
quote:
Saying Hitler invaded Russia because Russia invaded Poland
Did someone say that?
Posted on 9/26/24 at 11:02 am to NC_Tigah
He implied I did, but I didn’t
In fact, Hitler and Stalin got together ahead of time and planned out their joint invasion
In fact, Hitler and Stalin got together ahead of time and planned out their joint invasion
Posted on 9/26/24 at 11:05 am to OBReb6
quote:The Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact as noted
Hitler and Stalin got together ahead of time and planned out their joint invasion
This post was edited on 9/26/24 at 11:10 am
Posted on 9/26/24 at 11:09 am to SammyTiger
quote:France was justifiably sweating repercussions of Versailles. Versailles (Polish Corridor) was Hitler's basis for invading Poland.
You think France wasn’t sweating that?
Posted on 9/26/24 at 11:10 am to NC_Tigah
Right
The fact of the matter is Britain and France wanted war with Germany, but it was for an array of reasons primarily pertaining to their empires, and their own standing as the European hegemony.
These official narratives involving Poland and atrocities are just fodder for simpletons, and its full of hypocrisy and holes
The fact of the matter is Britain and France wanted war with Germany, but it was for an array of reasons primarily pertaining to their empires, and their own standing as the European hegemony.
These official narratives involving Poland and atrocities are just fodder for simpletons, and its full of hypocrisy and holes
Posted on 9/26/24 at 11:10 am to Buryl
quote:
What schools did you go to? That’s not how Hitler was taught in my schools. We learned about how ww2 was essentially an extension of ww1 (treaty of Versailles) and the issues in Germany that allowed Hitler to rise to power. His skill as a persuasive orator was always acknowledged. What I don’t get is how people here are failing to understand Hitler’s speeches within their historical context - they’re propaganda. His words are chosen for a reason, primarily to manipulate and gather support for his desires. They may or may not reflect his true beliefs. It’s what he needed to tell the German population to get what he wanted. I see the same with how Putin’s speeches are accepted as gospel as well. It’s crazy how easy some people are to manipulate.
This is an upsettingly normal and rational post. We are here for a second look at Hitler taking his words at face value, Sir.
Posted on 9/26/24 at 11:10 am to OBReb6
Lord of Hogs said this:
You replied to my reply to that statement.
I didn’t mean to imply you said it.
I wanted to point out I was talking about something else.
quote:
Barbarossa was a pre-emptive strike against a Soviet invasion of Europe. Remember, Stalin had already invaded Finland, Poland, the Baltic states, and was demanding to put troops into Romania, who was allied with Germany.
You replied to my reply to that statement.
I didn’t mean to imply you said it.
I wanted to point out I was talking about something else.
Posted on 9/26/24 at 11:13 am to NC_Tigah
quote:
France was justifiably sweating repercussions of Versailles. Versailles (Polish Corridor) was Hitler's basis for invading Poland.
Hitler was very open about feeling like Germany should have won WWI. That Germany would have won if they weren’t betrayed.
People forget that The Versailles Treatyy Slammed Germany with reparations at the same rate the Versailles Treaty after the Franco-Prussian War slammed france with reparations, at the same Rate Napoleon slammed Germany after one of the Napoleonic wars.
Posted on 9/26/24 at 11:15 am to SammyTiger
quote:
People forget that The Versailles Treatyy Slammed Germany with reparations at the same rate the Versailles Treaty after the Franco-Prussian War slammed france with reparations, at the same Rate Napoleon slammed Germany after one of the Napoleonic wars.
Got anything to back this up? I’m not saying you’re wrong, I just don’t know anything about it
Posted on 9/26/24 at 11:18 am to OBReb6
quote:No. Neither was in a military position to "want" war. Politically, Chamberlain certainly wasn't.
The fact of the matter is Britain and France wanted war with Germany
Posted on 9/26/24 at 11:38 am to OBReb6
to be fair i heard that in Mike Duncan’s podcast. He’s usually pretty solid.
I have seen other sources that Bizmark for his number post Franco-Prussian war from the Napoleon indemnity. I have not seen how they calculated the WWI Versailles Reparation outside that podcast.
Regardless retaliatory war indemnity wasn’t new.
I have seen other sources that Bizmark for his number post Franco-Prussian war from the Napoleon indemnity. I have not seen how they calculated the WWI Versailles Reparation outside that podcast.
Regardless retaliatory war indemnity wasn’t new.
This post was edited on 9/26/24 at 11:39 am
Page 6 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News