Originally Posted by
Aerith's Knight
Hitler got elected because France hold the Ruhrgebied after the First world war. People were starving because of payments they had to give to France and England. Hitler had a good economics, because he fueled the machine of war. He opened factories for Tanks and weapons, indoctrinated the people and took back the Ruhrgebied. If France and England had retaliated immediatly, there would have been no economic upliving. He was a leader that united the people by giving them someone to hate, he was no leader, he was a manipulator and a dictator. He even tried to overthrow the goverment before, but was arrested and it failed. These are only the individual actions.. no context here.
There was no decent bone in that man's body... [stuff]
So you you believe that Nazi Germany should have been blamed for acting on something they had no control over, and not the French or the British who had decided everything without consultation? They rejected most of Wilson's 14 Points, which should surely have led to a more stable Europe, and kept trying to drive the nail in, when there were already several in place. There was no need to take away Germany's major industrial centers with a debt attached on, especially with the other provisions that were established as terms for losing the first World War. Thanks for ignoring what the rest of Europe did.
Tell that to me again when you learn what could've been if he had succeeded as an artist.
In regards to a permanent war economy, hello, 1984! i didntz c u thar
Reply With Quote