Is Donald Trump unintelligent or just dishonest?

[James_Joyce]

Originally Posted by Lune [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

It's debatable. Nazi Germany would have been the first to create both nuclear weapons and intercontinental ballistic missiles, technologies which were looted from Germany during and after the war.

The scientific revolution that created the core of modern chemistry, physics, and biology, largely occurred in Germany in the early 1900's. Max Planck, Werner van Braun, Werner Heisenberg, Wolfgang Pauli, Robert Koch, Niels Bohr, and Hendrik Lorrentz. were all either Germanic (Dutch/German/Austrian/Danish) nationals or residents of Germany. Both Einstein and J. Oppenheimer were German but had emigrated.

[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

This is true. From what I've read of Nazi economics however, they were dependent on war industry and the seizure of assets to even keep government lights on. Supposedly the regime was on a very short rope financially and had a skyrocketing national debt.

I don't claim to know enough about economics to really fact check a statement like this and separate it from the mountains of propaganda but if true, it provides a motive for the hurry. Whether they could have sustained their 1939 leads over the world is debatable, to us and perhaps to them at the time.

[Lune]

Originally Posted by James_Joyce [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

This is true. From what I've read of Nazi economics however, they were dependent on war industry and the seizure of assets to even keep government lights on. Supposedly the regime was on a very short rope financially and had a skyrocketing national debt.

I don't claim to know enough about economics to really fact check a statement like this but if true, it provides a motive for the hurry. Whether they could have sustained their 1939 leads over the world is debatable, to us and perhaps to them at the time.

Operation Barbarossa was undoubtedly their best chance to defeat the Soviet Union, and they came surprisingly close (They encircled and destroyed something like 2 million Soviet soldiers in the opening part of the war).

One thing you have to consider is that it wasn't just Hitler who underestimated Stalin, it was the Allies as well. Given a bit more time, Britain and the US may have been more reluctant to side with the Soviets against Germany for balance of power reasons (which was all they really cared about).

There was also the prospect of a gradual increase in tension between the US and Great Britain, if the British Empire hadn't fallen apart during and after WW2. Interesting to think about.

[Oooruk]

Originally Posted by James_Joyce [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

This is true. From what I've read of Nazi economics however, they were dependent on war industry and the seizure of assets to even keep government lights on. Supposedly the regime was on a very short rope financially and had a skyrocketing national debt.

I don't claim to know enough about economics to really fact check a statement like this and separate it from the mountains of propaganda but if true, it provides a motive for the hurry. Whether they could have sustained their 1939 leads over the world is debatable, to us and perhaps to them at the time.

You are going to tell me that I know nothing about World War Two and then a few posts later insinuate that Germany had an economic and scientific lead over the world in 1939?

You need to do some serious research and critical thinking, and stop regurgitating pseudo-history you find on the internet.

[James_Joyce]

Originally Posted by Oooruk [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

You are going to tell me that I know nothing about World War Two and then a few posts later insinuate that Germany had an economic and scientific lead over the world in 1939?

You need to do some serious research and critical thinking, and stop regurgitating pseudo-history you find on the internet.

they had a lead in the arms race, nerd. That's in the military/scientific sphere. i've already acknowledged their economy was flagging. and don't tell me your argument that there was no scientific lead in 1939 hinges on leading (german) scientists having emigrated by 1939. German aeronautics and chemistry and pharmacology were all leaps and bounds above the Allies in numerous ways even in 1945, even if there were technologies in the other bloc that the germans didnt share.

You don't have to be so butthurt about your American public school tier understanding of WW2. We've all been there. Although, in my own public school I learned that Nazis were mad scientists with long moustaches and loony superweapons.

Azzar, I'm being a little more coy than I really feel about this, that post is blatant shilling and I have little doubt about it. After witnessing reddit circa Torture Report I am ready to consider the possibility there are shills posting even here and keeping tabs on our macequest activities. I can't read anything, from youtube comments on news-related videos to mainstream algorithmically generated news to any message board larger than this one without the overwhelming sensation of being a mouse in a lab, my click reactions to experimental shilling psyops added to a database for the purpose of cracking the human psyche scientifically.

I haven't seen any good leaks from these scum though, other than the GCHQ dox. We taln bout this? Would be interedasted in seeing how these organizations work and how they define success when they aren't state actors with the ability to pull metadata from facebook.

[Oooruk]

Originally Posted by James_Joyce [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

they had a lead in the arms race, nerd. That's in the military/scientific sphere. i've already acknowledged their economy was flagging. and don't tell me your argument that there was no scientific lead in 1939 hinges on leading (german) scientists having emigrated by 1939. German aeronautics and chemistry and pharmacology were all leaps and bounds above the Allies in numerous ways even in 1945, even if there were technologies in the other bloc that the germans didnt share.

You don't have to be so butthurt about your American public school tier understanding of WW2. We've all been there. Although, in my own public school I learned that Nazis were mad scientists with long moustaches and loony superweapons.

1.) I'm not American

2.) I've never stated anything resembling "the Nazis were mad dogs" or "mad scientists"

3.) A large part of Germany's military success was because they had brilliant tacticians as generals. People such as Romel (sp). Not because they had an economic and scientific lead on the world. But, you think invading the soviet union (an ally at the time) was a good idea, demonstrating utter incompetence and a total lack of understanding about strategy and military maneuvering. The idea was Hitlers, and was a large part of why his top generals decided to try and assassinate him.

4.) You know what they say about assuming.

[James_Joyce]

Originally Posted by Oooruk [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

1.) I'm not American

2.) I've never stated anything resembling "the Nazis were mad dogs" or "mad scientists"

3.) A large part of Germany's military success was because they had brilliant tacticians as generals. People such as Romel (sp). Not because they had an economic and scientific lead on the world. But, you think invading the soviet union (an ally at the time) was a good idea, demonstrating utter incompetence and a total lack of understanding about strategy and military maneuvering. The idea was Hitlers, and was a large part of why his top generals decided to try and assassinate him.

4.) You know what they say about assuming.

that's a whole lot of nonsequiturs avoiding the fact that nazi germany indeed had a demonstrable technological advantage up to and including on the last day of the war before berlin fell, and that you are wrong. Whether any of your nonsequiturs have merit on their own I know not. I don't have the tenacity to dig through this boring forgotten argument to find out.

[Oooruk]

Originally Posted by James_Joyce [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

that's a whole lot of nonsequiturs avoiding the fact that nazi germany indeed had a demonstrable technological advantage up to and including on the last day of the war before berlin fell, and that you are wrong. Whether any of your nonsequiturs have merit on their own I know not. I don't have the tenacity to dig through this boring forgotten argument to find out.

Hi nuclear bombs. The pursuit of which they were forced to abandon due to the lack of both technological sophistication and know how.

[James_Joyce]

Originally Posted by Oooruk [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Hi nuclear bombs. The pursuit of which they were forced to abandon due to the lack of both technological sophistication and know how.

On 30 April, Adolf Hitler, the Nazi leader, committed suicide during the Battle of Berlin. Germany's surrender, therefore, was authorised by his successor, Reichspräsident Karl Dönitz. The administration headed by Dönitz was known as the Flensburg Government. The act of military surrender was signed on 7 May 1945

Trinity was the code name of the first detonation of a nuclear weapon, conducted by the United States Army on July 16, 1945

ohaio gozaimasu

[James_Joyce]

ok ill respond more constructively just this once.

Originally Posted by Oooruk [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

But, you think invading the soviet union (an ally at the time) was a good idea, demonstrating utter incompetence and a total lack of understanding about strategy and military maneuvering.

the idea that the soviet union was an ally in the sense that US and Britain were allies is retarded. the idea that invading Russia required "utter incompetence" at military matters when the Nazis were the first to push the Russians back against the wall since Napoleon, and had the Soviets on the brink of collapse, is retarded. If a military blunder was committed, it was in overextending German forces in the winter and dooming them to unsupplied isolation and death when the final seizure of the Soviet capital was inches from achieved. A more noncommittal approach probably would have been advisable. The decision to invade itself, however, was sound and very nearly successful.

The idea that war between Germany and the Soviet Union was viewed by both sides as inevitable and German leadership decided to strike while the Soviets were reeling from the great purge, before Stalin could build a regime on par militarily with Hitler's, is much better-informed than points of view that center on what an insane autocrat Hitler was. Germany didn't come inches from conquering the Earth on insanity alone, I promise.

You're oversimplifying to a laughable degree by saying "dere wuz a mutual nonaggression pact, derefore the overtly jewish-dominated Soviet Union wuz good good loyal friends with dose mad dog overtly anti-semitic nazis until they backstabbed the russian bear because Hitler was rabid && evil && masturbated to ppl being flayed alive". You never addressed the fact that the Soviets were massing for invasion when preemptively struck. You never addressed the fact that the ideologies of the two nations were diametrically opposed and both knew that the other was an existential threat from the beginning. The entire rise of fascism in Germany was predicated on fear and hatred of the catastrophe going on in Russia, among other things.

Peace for Germany in the long-term involved crushing Communist Russia; if you deny this you are buying too deeply into the "Germany as mad dog and sole aggressor" mythos. These conflicts were mutual. Communism had global aspirations in this era, and had spread so far so fast that those aspirations were to be taken seriously and put in check. Are you really so mindfucked that you see Stalin as the hapless leader of a peaceable nation suddenly and unexpectedly attacked by its closest ally, Nazi Germany? That's sad as fuck. Turn off the history channel.

By the way, the fact that some German traitors wanted to assassinate Hitler, take over the German government and surrender to save their own skins and assume massive amounts of power as they saw the war being lost is in no way a specific argument for your point of view, regardless of what you saw in the movie Valkyrie starring Tom Cruise. Ambition is plenty to explain this; don't read war-propaganda "they saw the evil" horse shit speculation into things when you're trying to have a real discussion.

I'm not better than personal insults when your response to being destroyed on one point is to sidestep, ignore it by making another retarded argument, and then backtrack and restate the original debunked premise when the secondary premise is also handily destroyed. This discussion is shitty and boring and I feel like a tool for debating WW2 facts in public like a 14 year old who just discovered Band of Brothers. Also you're a nerd.