Why are the Nazis considered the bad guys?

[Winston]

Maybe Japan would have taken over the whole of Asia? I'm not sure the USA would have stopped them if Pearl Harbour hadn't happened.

No. You forget that the reason the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor was because they knew that the US would enter the war against them. It had already become inevitable. So they wanted to get a head start and have an advantage in the beginning. It was a very logical move.

The mistake they made is that after they sunk the ships at Pearl Harbor, they pulled out and retreated. Had they continued attacking, the US carriers would have returned and been subject to their attack. If they had been able to sink the US carriers, they would have had an even bigger head start and prolonged the war further.

When you are winning and have an advantage, you do not retreat and pull back. You go in for the kill and capitalize on it to finish off the opponent. That was their huge mistake. After Pearl Harbor, the US fleet was crippled and at its most vulnerable. The Japanese should have taken advantage of that and attacked the US Naval ship building facilities in San Diego too, to cripple them further. That would have been the logical next move. The US was really worried that San Diego would be attacked, since they were vulnerable. I wonder why they didn't do that.

[Cornfed]

Hitler had some pretty bad weapons that would have killed huge numbers of people if he wasn't stopped. Many projects were smashed by the RAF dropping tall boy's - the frontrunners of today's bunker busting bombs.

That's another thing. The Nazi era shows what brilliant innovations white Aryan people are capable of when they are not stifled by the Jew/bankster system or subjected to racial pollution.

[zboy1]

Hitler had some pretty bad weapons that would have killed huge numbers of people if he wasn't stopped. Many projects were smashed by the RAF dropping tall boy's - the frontrunners of today's bunker busting bombs.

That's another thing. The Nazi era shows what brilliant innovations white Aryan people are capable of when they are not stifled by the Jew/bankster system or subjected to racial pollution.

Some conspiracy theorists believe the Nazi's received Alien technology that enabled them to develop weapons and spacecraft that were ahead of their time:


UFO - The Third Reich: Aliens, Nazi Technology and the Vril Society



UFO Conspiracy-Full Length Documentary

[Jester]

Here is an article about how the Nazis defied Jewish banksters:
http://www.freestatevoice.com.au/politi ... he-bankers

Thanks, this is the info I was looking for.

I guess non-debt-based, non-Rothschild currency was the key difference, plus typical Larouche or Peron or FDR style infrastructure investment.

[noog]

Why are Nazis considered the bad guys? Because Hellboy is just that awesome.

[Jester]

Maybe Japan would have taken over the whole of Asia? I'm not sure the USA would have stopped them if Pearl Harbour hadn't happened.

No. You forget that the reason the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor was because they knew that the US would enter the war against them. It had already become inevitable. So they wanted to get a head start and have an advantage in the beginning. It was a very logical move.

The mistake they made is that after they sunk the ships at Pearl Harbor, they pulled out and retreated. Had they continued attacking, the US carriers would have returned and been subject to their attack. If they had been able to sink the US carriers, they would have had an even bigger head start and prolonged the war further.

When you are winning and have an advantage, you do not retreat and pull back. You go in for the kill and capitalize on it to finish off the opponent. That was their huge mistake. After Pearl Harbor, the US fleet was crippled and at its most vulnerable. The Japanese should have taken advantage of that and attacked the US Naval ship building facilities in San Diego too, to cripple them further. That would have been the logical next move. The US was really worried that San Diego would be attacked, since they were vulnerable. I wonder why they didn't do that.

We knew the Japs were coming, I know from my dad who was a radar officer on a carrier in 1943, and he heard it from those who were there - radio operators etc who detected the Japs way off, and sent warnings. Plus it's been published, mainstream, hardcover. FDR and his cabinet let them come, in order to get the U.S. into the war with "Fascism".

The Japs thought they were smart, playing all sides against each other. Axis treaty with Germans, secret treaty with Russians, Look what it got them.

If they had stood pat, kept Korea and Manchukuo, they would today be dominating Asia.

If you have to fight, go all the way (as Winston says).

But if you don't HAVE to fight, live in peace, and keep getting stronger.

Germany and Japan both failed to do that.

[Jester]

Hitler had some pretty bad weapons that would have killed huge numbers of people if he wasn't stopped. Many projects were smashed by the RAF dropping tall boy's - the frontrunners of today's bunker busting bombs.

That's another thing. The Nazi era shows what brilliant innovations white Aryan people are capable of when they are not stifled by the Jew/bankster system or subjected to racial pollution.

Freedom, yes... self-belief, yes... also, necessity.

The challenge for men of any race is how to create that same spark, that same fire within, here and now.

[gsjackson]

Without WW2 the USA maybe wouldn't have been able to assume its role as international peacekeeper.

Say what??? Except for maybe the Suez crisis, when did we ever play the role of peacekeeper in the post-war era? Our role has been to start wars.

[Winston]

Here is the website of a German historian and military officer who dug into the original historical archives and discovered that Hitler did not really start WWII as we were all taught, but tried his best to prevent it.

http://www.vorkriegsgeschichte.de/

It's in German but you can translate it with Google Translate at:

http://translate.google.com

If you are on Google Chrome browser, it will ask you automatically if you want to translate it.

[momopi]

We knew the Japs were coming, I know from my dad who was a radar officer on a carrier in 1943, and he heard it from those who were there - radio operators etc who detected the Japs way off, and sent warnings. Plus it's been published, mainstream, hardcover. FDR and his cabinet let them come, in order to get the U.S. into the war with "Fascism".
The Japs thought they were smart, playing all sides against each other. Axis treaty with Germans, secret treaty with Russians, Look what it got them.
If they had stood pat, kept Korea and Manchukuo, they would today be dominating Asia.
If you have to fight, go all the way (as Winston says).
But if you don't HAVE to fight, live in peace, and keep getting stronger.
Germany and Japan both failed to do that.

The Japanese invasion of Manchuria took place in 1931. The KMT leadership knew that they were militarily inferior to Japan's technology, and went to Nazi Germany for assistance. The Chinese military modernization plan, outlined by German advisers, were to train 80 NRA divisions to German standards, as well as domestically manufacture military armaments under license from Germany. In exchange, China would export much-needed raw materials to Germany. The Chinese government at the time had serious financial issues and could not afford to pay in cash, but did have bountiful resources such as tungsten that is critical to making armor piercing ammunition, which Germany needed.

From the Japanese perspective, knowing that they were the one who invaded Manchuria and China wants it back, they watched the Chinese military modernize with German assistance and realized that if they sit on their asses, the Chinese Army would eventually have 80 divisions of modernized troops trained by German advisers, and equipped with German hardware. The Germans were willing to export their modern armaments to China, including Panzer tanks and a variety of aircraft. Once the modernization program is complete, the Chinese army would most likely march north and crush the Japanese army in Manchuria.

The Japanese Army decided that they could not afford to "stood pat" and invaded South, then the rest is history. They were able to nip the Chinese military modernization program in the bud, and force Germany to officially discontinue their military assistance to China, though relations continued to early 1940s. From the US perspective, had Japan successfully conquered China, it would make Japan a much larger competitor and long-term threat to US interests in the Pacific. Thus, it was not in America's best interest to allow that to happen.

Unfortunately for the Japanese, Tojo was in charge instead of Yamamoto. Had Yamamoto been the boss, he would have prevented the Japanese army from invading Manchuria in the first place. Much of what Yamamoto said about attacking the US is widely reported and do not need to be repeated. He was a Navy man who believed in using gunboat diplomacy to get the most favorable treaties for Japan without being dragged into a massive land war. He knew very well that the Japan would have a time-limited advantage in both China and the Pacific.

At the beginning of the second Sino-Japanese war, the Chinese NRA (Army) had approx. 1.7 million men. By the end of WW2, after 8 years of fighting across China, the NRA numbered over 5 million. When Pearl Harbor was attacked, the US had 8 carriers vs. Japan had 16. By end of WW2 the Japanese had built 27 aircraft carriers (+4 under construction) and lost most of them, versus the USN had built 119 carriers with another 20-25 under construction. In 1941 the USN had 790 ships in commission, in 1945 the USN had 6,768 ships in commission (a total of 8,312 USN ships were in service during WW2). Yamamoto had correctly predicted that Japan would be fighting against impossible odds in a protracted war against opponents that grew in size over time.

The kind of odds that Japan was up against can be described as, fighting against an army that grew in size by ~500,000 every year, and fighting against a navy that grew by ~2,000 ships every year. This is why the Japanese ended up committing themselves to suicide attacks in later stages of the war.

[Winston]

Ok I just saw this documentary that Mr S recommended and posted that presents the other side of WWII that we were never told:

Hitler's War: What the Historians Neglect to Mention
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7g0XyosEza8

And checked out this website by a German historian who found out from the historical archives that we were not told the truth about WWII:
http://www.vorkriegsgeschichte.de

Wow that was very eye opening. Apparently, WWII isn't what we've been told it was. We've been taught that Hitler was a cartoon villain who wanted to take over the world, while the Allies were good guys who were fighting for freedom and liberation. But according to the facts of the film:

- Hitler didn't actually start a world war and never intended to either. He only attacked Poland because of irreconcilable border disputes over land in Poland occupied by German immigrants there who were being treated badly. He only intended the war to be between Germany and Poland.

- It was France and Britain who declared war against Germany first, not the other way around. In response, Hitler tried to avoid fighting them by asking for a peace negotiation. He even offered to pull out of Poland as long as he could keep the land in dispute. But France and Britain refused his peace negotiations and were dead set on war with Germany for some reason. I wonder why. Why were they so set on destroying Nazi Germany? Were they or their elites threatened by it?

What this means is that it was FRANCE and BRITAIN who turned Hitler's war with Poland into a WORLD WAR, by declaring war on Germany and doing everything they could to escalate a world war. In other words, Hitler wanted peace, but the Allies didn't. Isn't that shocking? Doesn't it go against everything we've been taught?

- So we gotta wonder, if France and Britain wanted to attack Germany for invading Poland, what was their motivation? If it was moralistic or altruistic (as they would have you believe) then why didn't they attack Russia for invading Eastern Europe at the same time that Hitler invaded Poland? In fact, why don't they attack every invading country in the world, including the USA (for invading Vietnam and Iraq)? Why did they single out Germany?

The Allies' logic is not consistent. It seems that something else was going on. But what? Here is a conspiracy theory I heard. It goes like this:

Hitler was brought up and funded by the international banking elite. He was funded by US corporations after all. Otherwise, there's no way his orating skills alone could bring Germany from bankruptcy to super power. Western historians never mention this and erroneously attribute German's rise to world super power on Hitler's orating skills alone, which is nonsensical and unrealistic. But that's all Western historians know for some reason.

But somehow, he betrayed this international banking cartel (mostly run by Jews) by issuing currency through German banks rather than borrowing from the banksters to put Germany in debt, which is what the banksters wanted. Hitler cared more about the German people and about being virtuous, not corrupt. So he did what he felt was best for the German people, and ended corruption in his country as well. Furious and feeling betrayed, the banksters decided to take him out and make an example out of him. Hitler and his ways which made Germany successful in economics and societal life, were a threat to the banksters, who feared that other countries may follow the successful example of Nazi Germany. In fact, Hitler was even named "Man of the Year" in Time magazine for what he did for Germany.

So these banksters started a plot to take out Hitler and end Nazi Germany. Since they owned the politicians and government in Britain, France, and the USA, they pulled their levers in these countries so that they would be aiming to start a world war against Hitler to take him and his shining role model society out. They also tried to manipulate Stalin into attacking Germany as well. So, the Allies, under control of the banksters, did everything they could to bait Hitler into attacking Poland so that they would have an excuse to start a war with him. In fact, in some of Hitler's speeches that are available on video archives, he even said that the Allies had a tendency to bait him into fighting, and that he preferred peace and saw war as a waste of his time and resources. Hitler said he preferred to build his society rather than fight wars.

In engineering WWII, these banking elites accomplished several goals that helped consolidate their power:

1. They took out Hitler who was a threat to them and whom they felt betrayed them. And they made an example out of him. How dare he defy them!
2. They profited from the war which forced governments to borrow money from the international bankers and put themselves in debt. And from military industrial profits as well.
3. They created chaos in Europe and Asia, which they then provided the solution for after the war in the formation of the United Nations, which consolidated their power by giving them more control over more countries. Thus, power went into fewer hands after WWII, just as was intended with the League of Nations after WWI (but which failed for some reason). This is known in conspiracy research and coined by David Icke as "problem, reaction, solution", which works like this:

a) They (the banking elite) first create the problem by engineering a conflict or war.
b) Then the public cries for help and solutions from their leaders, who in turn provide the solution which works in their interests and escalates their hidden agenda (possibly for a New World Order).

4. If the elites and their secret societies (Illuminati, Freemasons) do in fact worship demons, Satan, reptilians, aliens, or occult entities, as theorized, then wars also serve as mass sacrifice rituals for them. Plenty of research has been done to show that these elites are into occult symbolism, which is embedded into every fabric of society - from words, meanings, traditions, and the architectural designs of Washington DC, London and the Vatican. So it does seem that they are into occult practices, symbolism and numerology. Based on that, wars could be a mass sacrifice event for them to appease their "gods" or whatever they worship, in order for them to keep their power and get help in what they want done.

I know that sounds out there, but intellectual conspiracy researchers/gurus like David Icke, Michael Tsarion, Jordan Maxwell and others, have done a lot of published research on this. It would also explain why the elites that run Britain and America love war so much and always seem to want to escalate it, using any excuse they can, which they've been doing for over a century. In fact, America has been involved with more wars than any other country has, and very often, has started them or escalated them. And in doing so, has lied about the reasons for escalating these wars as well. So you gotta ask: Why does the USA want war so badly? Why does it constantly go looking for it? Why is it so gun ho on finding excuses to start wars, that it even has to lie about them?

Surely you don't believe that the reasons are moralistic or altruistic do you? War is never a good thing and never benefits the common people, only the elites, who never even fight in them but always send peasants to fight them.

So what do you all think? Is this how WWII really started and why it was engineered? Or is there another theory that better fits the data?

How many of you believe the official portrayal of WWII that we've been fed, about the Nazis being evil cartoon villains who tried to take over the world and wipe out the Jewish race, for no reason other than hate, lust, greed, and warped ideologies? Is that realistic? Is history, humans or reality ever that black and white? If so, what is the data you have to support this version of WWII? And how do you know it's not been propagandized or distorted to fit the agenda of the victorious? Isn't there a famous quote that says: "History is the propaganda of the victorious"? If so, how do you know if all the propaganda that you've been fed is the actual truth? Especially when you've never even heard from the other side (as the above documentary presents). After all, aren't there two sides to every story? If so, why do you assume that only one side has the whole truth? Haven't you falsely believed that "authority=truth" simply because that's how you were programmed and conditioned?

What's the truth here?

[Winston]

Some claim the Nazis were installed in power as part of a conspiracy to bring about a war to end the racial and cultural aspirations of the German people, in which case they would be the bad guys along with everyone else. If on the other hand they were on the level, I don't see how such a belief can be maintained, given post-war events. Surely, taken at face value, they were the last non-traitor regime in Europe, arguably the last Europeans. In just six years they raised Germany from crushing poverty to probably the richest country in the world and eliminated unemployment, largely by standing up to the global bankster system. They made corporations spend a lot to improve the condition of workers and society in general and spread a culture of extended family all-in-this-togetherness. If they had won the war then Europe would be without all the social pathologies currently infesting it - no feminism, nihilism, cultural Marxism, self-loathing, mass immigration of third world genetic trash, depopulation, debt slavery to Jewish banksters etc. Tragically the banksters won, with the men most likely to stand up to them on both sides being killed, and look at the mess we have now.

Good question. See my last post. If Hitler didn't even start WWII, then that puts the "Nazis are bad guys" concept into serious question. After all, why are they worse than the Allies, who bombed Dresden and killed many innocent civilians and destroyed Hiroshima and Nagasaki unnecessarily with an atomic bomb which was not needed since Japan was about to surrender anyway?

Especially considering that Hitler made many peace offerings to Poland, Britain and France, which they refused.

[colinberry1]

Well just look at what we have now, just try getting out of that,
http://youtu.be/GX0PHt1HDQI

http://www.pearltrees.com/#/N-s=1_83480 ... =1_8348062

[Mr.Darcy]

It just doesn't make any sense. If Hitler was an insane racist idiot, how did he come to power and have most of the population favor him? Why would he ally with Japan if he was so focused on race? Why would he use other cultures to influence his ideas? Yet, the allies were racists and immoral as well. and they allied with Stalin which people now argue to this day that he was worse than hitler. The jews got back at Germany after ww1 and they did the same after ww2.

[fschmidt]

It just doesn't make any sense. If Hitler was an insane racist idiot, how did he come to power and have most of the population favor him? Why would he ally with Japan if he was so focused on race? Why would he use other cultures to influence his ideas? Yet, the allies were racists and immoral as well. and they allied with Stalin which people now argue to this day that he was worse than hitler. The jews got back at Germany after ww1 and they did the same after ww2.

Hitler wasn't insane and wasn't an idiot, but he was racist. Being racist doesn't mean he couldn't ally with other races that he thought were acceptable. Jews didn't get back at Germany after WW1, that is just absurd.