Hitler Lost the War Because He Was a Drug Addict

Discussion in 'Politics & Religion' started by diex, Dec 3, 2007.

  1. northpointaiki

    northpointaiki Guest

    Messages:
    6,876
    Likes Received:
    187
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #41
    Absolutely disagree with the first paragraph, absolutely agree with the second.

    Zhukov was a blood in the teeth offensive general, who took Stalin's quote:

    -Literally. After the Fall of Stalingrad, the Soviets turned the heat up and chased Germany everywhere through Eastern and Southeastern Europe in a series of rabid offensives. The most obvious evidence would be - if the Soviets couldn't wage an offensive campaign, why did we shake hands in Berlin? The Soviets kicked the crap out of the Germans westwards across Europe on into Germany.

    I do agree with you second paragraph, as I earlier said in my post above. As I said, absent either the U.S. or the U.S.S.R., the entry of the other would have meant Hitler's end - only much later.
     
    northpointaiki, Dec 4, 2007 IP
  2. browntwn

    browntwn Illustrious Member

    Messages:
    8,347
    Likes Received:
    848
    Best Answers:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    435
    #42
    We are eternally grateful for their help, but that does not prevent an honest appraisal of their efforts in WWII.
     
    browntwn, Dec 4, 2007 IP
  3. Will.Spencer

    Will.Spencer NetBuilder

    Messages:
    14,789
    Likes Received:
    1,040
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    375
    #43
    You didn't even READ the URL you posted.

    The "Race to Berlin" was between two Soviet Generals -- Zhukov and Konev.

    It was NOT a race between the US and Russia.

    Eisenhower unilaterally decided to give Berlin to the Soviets because it was going to be in future East Germany -- which Roosevelt and Churchill had given to Stalin during their wartime conferences.

    Ughh... you should apologize to everyone in the thread for that post.
     
    Will.Spencer, Dec 4, 2007 IP
  4. astup1didiot

    astup1didiot Notable Member

    Messages:
    5,926
    Likes Received:
    270
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    280
    #44
    No, I'm stating a belief and an opinon, is that your response to every comment made? Is this what you fall upon when you have no response to the issue at hand? You fit perfectly into the below definition.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_attack
     
    astup1didiot, Dec 4, 2007 IP
  5. northpointaiki

    northpointaiki Guest

    Messages:
    6,876
    Likes Received:
    187
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #45
    Agree wholeheartedly, a point I all too often, sadly, see lacking in the discussion of our two countries.
     
    northpointaiki, Dec 4, 2007 IP
  6. astup1didiot

    astup1didiot Notable Member

    Messages:
    5,926
    Likes Received:
    270
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    280
    #46
    Hence the "first" comment in the entry The Race to Berlin refers to the competition of Allied generals during the final months of World War II to enter Berlin first. Second, it is an incompete article still being built, do you understand how wiki works?
     
    astup1didiot, Dec 4, 2007 IP
  7. northpointaiki

    northpointaiki Guest

    Messages:
    6,876
    Likes Received:
    187
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #47
    France was moribund by military science stuck in 1915, not by any lack of native courage. I don't think anyone was ready for the concept of the Blitzkrieg, but by the time France, Belgium and Holland had fallen, uh, we woke up.
     
    northpointaiki, Dec 4, 2007 IP
  8. Will.Spencer

    Will.Spencer NetBuilder

    Messages:
    14,789
    Likes Received:
    1,040
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    375
    #48
    And we are also thankful for the French efforts in WWII. :rolleyes:
     
    Will.Spencer, Dec 4, 2007 IP
  9. techblog

    techblog Banned

    Messages:
    1,126
    Likes Received:
    42
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #49
    common guys, we all get our information from different sources. All of Will's comments were factually based as far as I am aware.
     
    techblog, Dec 4, 2007 IP
  10. astup1didiot

    astup1didiot Notable Member

    Messages:
    5,926
    Likes Received:
    270
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    280
    #50
    astup1didiot, Dec 4, 2007 IP
  11. Will.Spencer

    Will.Spencer NetBuilder

    Messages:
    14,789
    Likes Received:
    1,040
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    375
    #51
    No. "Wow, you really are under educated apparently..." is clearly a personal attack and you should apologize to everyone here for lowering the conversation to that level.
     
    Will.Spencer, Dec 4, 2007 IP
  12. astup1didiot

    astup1didiot Notable Member

    Messages:
    5,926
    Likes Received:
    270
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    280
    #52
    You are in directly attacking back, plain and simple, attempting to provoke futher comments, most people would just ignore it, not entice it, and contiune to go off topic. Nice try.
     
    astup1didiot, Dec 4, 2007 IP
  13. Will.Spencer

    Will.Spencer NetBuilder

    Messages:
    14,789
    Likes Received:
    1,040
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    375
    #53
    It's a good article, but it's on a very different topic.

    The U.S. (with invaluable aid from Great Britain) won WWII -- militarily.

    The Soviets won WWII politically. Stalin kicked our butts at the peace table. Roosevelt was a lamb. He should never have attempted to negotiate with a wolf like Stalin. It is a national embarrassment.
     
    Will.Spencer, Dec 4, 2007 IP
  14. Will.Spencer

    Will.Spencer NetBuilder

    Messages:
    14,789
    Likes Received:
    1,040
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    375
    #54
    That's not quite an apology, but I do appreciate your admission of guilt.

    I do not, however, appreciate the completely unfounded accusation against myself which you attempted to slide into the sentence.

    If you would like to continue to make personal attacks, please continue this via PM.
     
    Will.Spencer, Dec 4, 2007 IP
  15. techblog

    techblog Banned

    Messages:
    1,126
    Likes Received:
    42
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #55
    You guys just ruined a good thread.
     
    techblog, Dec 4, 2007 IP
  16. Will.Spencer

    Will.Spencer NetBuilder

    Messages:
    14,789
    Likes Received:
    1,040
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    375
    #56
    Ok! Everyone! Back On Topic! :mad:

    NO KICKING, BITING, PULLING HAIR, OR PERSONAL ATTACKS. :mad:

    READ BEFORE YOU REFERENCE; THINK BEFORE YOU POST.
     
    Will.Spencer, Dec 4, 2007 IP
  17. astup1didiot

    astup1didiot Notable Member

    Messages:
    5,926
    Likes Received:
    270
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    280
    #57
    Wait Wait WAIT... If I can't bite then I'm off this thread.... :rolleyes:

    Alright, we'll start this on the CORRECT topic, which was Hilter lost the war because he was a drug addict, which is really hard to say. Wasn't his physician the one feeding him all the drugs?


    *** off topic ***

    Personall attacks on Will were uncalled for, due to a stressful day at work I let the idiot American come out of me, which I apologize to Will, BUT my stance on the current subject of the time remains.
     
    astup1didiot, Dec 4, 2007 IP
  18. northpointaiki

    northpointaiki Guest

    Messages:
    6,876
    Likes Received:
    187
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #58
    Will, I have no idea why you hold this opinion.
     
    northpointaiki, Dec 4, 2007 IP
  19. TechEvangelist

    TechEvangelist Guest

    Messages:
    919
    Likes Received:
    140
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    133
    #59
    Boy, this one is getting off-track!

    The original point of the thread seems to be lost. Hitler was a full blown speed freak at the end of the war, but not by intent. The German doctors were experimenting with amphetamines because at the time they thought they were a super-vitamin. They did appear to work--for a while.

    Will is right about the US contributions to WWII. It may be debatable as to whose Army was the most effective. Death tolls are not an indicator of involvement; they are an indication of losers.

    The fact is that if the US had not supported Russia and others with the Lend-Lease program, and if they had not entered a war that Germany was winning on both fronts, most of Europe might be goose-stepping and saluting the swastika today.
     
    TechEvangelist, Dec 4, 2007 IP
  20. Will.Spencer

    Will.Spencer NetBuilder

    Messages:
    14,789
    Likes Received:
    1,040
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    375
    #60
    It all comes down to Post #41.

    I believe that, if the U.S. had not entered the war, the German Eastern front would have been able to fight the Soviets to a standstill.

    Neither side would have won the war and the Soviets would have entered into a cold war -- much as they did with us.

    Instead, we just replaced the Germans with ourselves as the Russians opponents on that front.

    Without American intervention, Stalin's brave soldiers would have fallen to starvation, cold, disease, and a steady onslaught of the professional German Army. Without American intervention, Hitler would have been able to resupply his Eastern Armies, which would have prevented them from dying from starvation, cold, disease, and the relentless onslaught of the desperate Red Army.

    The Soviets fought the war; the Americans won the war.
     
    Will.Spencer, Dec 4, 2007 IP