WW2 politics, and leading up to the War and beyond...

[Gadianton]

Because I was talking about the Germans had a lot to deal with after invading Poland and then the Soviet Union. At the time they only had around 6 camps, and they by wars end had over 1000. If you want to add Poles, Slovak Jews, Gypsies, Romanian Jews, Russian Jews, Ukrainian Jews, Boskovic's, Communists, Ukrainian freedom fighters, and the others as a whole..., fine, it just shows how scattered they really were

I guess I'd posted enough on this thread that I had to go back and suffer through the relevant part of the podcast. We have a few missing words here, at least I missed them, Cooper actually says:

that when they went into the east in 1941 they launched a war where they were completely unprepared to deal with

Cooper is talking specifically about the 1941 invasion of the Soviet Union. When I gave my initial summary, I was wrong about the context. He wasn't talking about the war in general that culminated in extermination camps. You told me I was lying and misrepresenting the context, but then you turned around and claimed the exact same thing: it was more humane to gas Jews then let them starve. I've being going along assuming you know what your guy is talking about. So he's not on the hook for some of the things I've pointed out, but you are, as you've been defending something even more ambitiously pro-Nazi than Cooper was actually claiming.

Interestingly, now that I have the right context, he's telling an even a worse lie.

that when they went into the east in 1941 they launched a war where they were completely unprepared to deal with the millions and millions of prisoners of war, of local political prisoners and so forth that they were going to have to handle. They went in with no plan for that, and they just threw these people into camps and millions of people ended up dead there

Operation Barbarossa[g] was the invasion of the Soviet Union by Nazi Germany and several of its European Axis allies starting on Sunday, 22 June 1941,

The Hunger Plan (German: der Hungerplan, der Backe-Plan) was a partially implemented plan developed by Nazi bureaucrats during World War II to seize food from the Soviet Union and give it to German soldiers and civilians...The Hunger Plan was first formulated by senior German officials during a Staatssekretäre meeting on 2 May 1941 to prepare for the Wehrmacht (German armed forces) invasion

So they did have a plan to deal with the millions and millions of POWs and civilians, and that was to starve them to death and take their food for Germany! So in this case, starving people to death -- it's even called the "hunger plan" -- was a feature of putting them in those camps, it was the entire point!

So Cooper is lying his ass off when he said, "they had no plan" -- they had a plan, and it was exactly to starve them.

I know I brought up the hunger plan a couple of posts ago, but that was under the misunderstanding that Cooper's statements regarded the entire war, and so it wasn't a pinpoint. But now it fits like a glove. Cooper is talking about Operation Barbarossa specifically, and the "hunger plan" was developed precisely for that invasion.

[Markk]

They really weren't prepared for a mechanized war with the US. They weren't prepared to fight a two front war. Logistically they failed big time. They failed in underestimating Russian resistance, and in my opinion maybe the biggest thing they were not prepared for was the US entering the war on the second front, and the lend lease act.

Let's see ... Hitler attacked the Soviet Union in June 1941.

The Japanese attacked Pearl Harbour on December 7, 1941. Shortly after that, Germany declared war on the USA. Although Hitler did not know the precise details of the Japanese plans, he knew that Japan (with whom he had a pact) would eventually attack the USA, and when he got the news of the attack he was delighted. However, on December 6 the Soviets had already begun a counterattack that stopped the German advance on Moscow.

US troops did not engage German soldiers in combat until November 1942, when US solders formed part (and only a part) of the successful Allied invasion of North Africa.

By November 1942, the Soviets had already successfully pushed back against another German attack launched in June 1942, which led ultimately to the disastrous crushing of German forces at Stalingrad in February 1943. Stalin complained bitterly to the British and Americans that their action in North Africa was far too small-scale to help him against the great mass of German troops his army was fighting, and eventually defeating.

America made a great contribution to defeating Hitler, and many brave Americans died. Their legacy deserves respect. It is sad when people like Markk write about all this in the ignorant childish way they do.

I'm curious, if the US would have stayed neutral for WW2, and did not offer and help with time, treasures, and talent...what would have been the outcome of the war In your opinion? There is a lot to think about so by all means take you time.

What would have happened in the Pacific?

What would have happened to Europe?

We know that Britain was being choked, and in no way could have staged a landing in France.

What would have happened top Britain with the US merchant Marines, who proportionally lost more men that any other US branch of service.

Who would have weakened Germany in the air campaign bombing? Do you think Britain could have do so without US aviation fuel, bombs, parts, and food?

France, Belgium, Holland were already defeated.

Spain was neutral but Franco leaned toward Hitler and Mussolini big time in their ideology.

Who would have drove the Germans out of Italy and North Africa?

In regard to The Soviet Union....given that the US supplied Trucks, tanks, weapons, ammunitions, aircraft, food, raw materials, etc. I have read estimates that the US supplied, from 41 on, about 1/3 of their power....meaning that they would have been 1/3 less effective without the lend lease act.

Then think about what would have happened if Russia were to defeat Germany without US intervention.....which would mean Stalin would have basically been the leader of Europe.

Japan would have been unchecked, and even though they were beaten by Russia in a brief border wars in 1939, without the US commanding their attention, the Russians would not have been able to move eastern Russian troops and Siberia west like they did....who by the way were some of their best fighters at Moscow, Stalingrad, and Kursk.

Also how would Britain, Australia, and New Zealand faired alone in the Pacific without the US?

China was Occupied and no help. The Philippines were done. Japan would have pushed south and may have eventually invaded Australia or at the least isolated them as Japan took the oil from Indonesia and the rest of Southwest Asia.

We all know how ruthless and evil Hitler was, but what is seldom discussed is how horrible Stalin was. If you haven't studied that, I suggest you do so before you comment. My point, if Russia would have somehow defeated Germany, without the US, and the multiple fronts, how do you think Europe and Britain would be looking today?

What would have happened if the US would not have entered the war, in your opinion?

[Markk]

Gad: I guess I'd posted enough on this thread that I had to go back and suffer through the relevant part of the podcast. We have a few missing words here, at least I missed them, Cooper actually says:

Gad, it was two paragraphs? It was two minutes of video? You suffered through it?

Gad: Cooper is talking specifically about the 1941 invasion of the Soviet Union. When I gave my initial summary, I was wrong about the context. He wasn't talking about the war in general that culminated in extermination camps. You told me I was lying and misrepresenting the context, but then you turned around and claimed the exact same thing: it was more humane to gas Jews then let them starve. I've being going along assuming you know what your guy is talking about. So he's not on the hook for some of the things I've pointed out, but you are, as you've been defending something even more ambitiously pro-Nazi than Cooper was actually claiming.

Gad, I was quoting the Memo, which was titled "

Memo

Re.: Solution of the Jewish Question

Copper was speaking generally, and of POW's Citizens and Jews alike...."people." The memo was specifically addressing Jews, and I cut and pasted it directly.

LOL, let me get this straight....you did not read and understand the two paragraphs, at first, and concede you are wrong, and then acuss me of being pro Nazi because I quote word for word a Memo, that Marcus pointed me two, from a SS major addressing folks in charge of camps being set up with to deal with Jews, and I am some how pro Nazi?

Let me give you my view on this. You didn't watch the Podcast, then you finally read the transcript, you saw that you were mistaken and instead of just saying you got sloppy, and move on, you feel you have to blame me for your miss que.

Gad: So they did have a plan to deal with the millions and millions of POWs and civilians, and that was to starve them to death and take their food for Germany! So in this case, starving people to death -- it's even called the "hunger plan" -- was a feature of putting them in those camps, it was the entire point!

The memo is shows there was not a specific plan, focus. Even the Hunger plan was only partially implicated as your link showed, the first sentence reads: The Hunger Plan (German: der Hungerplan, der Backe-Plan) was a partially implemented plan developed by Nazi bureaucrats during World War II to seize food from the Soviet Union and give it to German soldiers and civilians. I guess you did not read the first sentence.

The memo stated that they were going to sterilize women, and have others work making things like shoes....so again like I have been saying all along, and what Cooper obviously was implying, the Germans did not has an all exclusive plan....which most all historians believe.

Are you saying the hunger plan was the only plan and directive, and general order for Barbarossa?

So Cooper is lying his ass off when he said, "they had no plan" -- they had a plan, and it was exactly to starve them.

No, not at all. It was one of many plans and directives, that evolved and changed during the war. heck, even some of the Russian soldier an Soviet block POWs turned and fought for Germany. They were known as the Russian Liberation Army.

I know I brought up the hunger plan a couple of posts ago, but that was under the misunderstanding that Cooper's statements regarded the entire war, and so it wasn't a pinpoint. But now it fits like a glove. Cooper is talking about Operation Barbarossa specifically, and the "hunger plan" was developed precisely for that invasion.

And was only partial implicated and it was nothing new. Germany was starving Jews in the Ghettos in 39, along with beating them and shooting them. They weren't allowed to purchase certain foods in the Ghettos, and most foods came into the ghettos in the black market.

[canpakes]

The memo is shows there was not a specific plan, focus. Even the Hunger plan was only partially implicated as your link showed, the first sentence reads: The Hunger Plan (German: der Hungerplan, der Backe-Plan) was a partially implemented plan developed by Nazi bureaucrats during World War II to seize food from the Soviet Union and give it to German soldiers and civilians.

Not to point out something terribly obvious, but the existence of what could be a plan of excruciatingly complex detail (as example) is not negated by it later being partially - or not even - implemented.

In fact, you can’t ‘partially implement a plan’ unless ‘a plan’ exists in the first place.

I guess you did not read the first sentence.

I’m going with the idea that both of you read it, but only one of you was able to understand the plain meaning of its words, and that person was not you.