Jump to content
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!) ×
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!)
In the Name of God بسم الله
Darth Vader

What if Germany had won World War 2?

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

 

:salam:

 

As the title suggests, what if Germany had won WWII? Would it have been better for Muslims and the rest of the world in general? I think yes. Middle East would have been left alone, Israel would not have formed, British colonies would have gained freedom and fair divisions. Religious manipulations and forming of new religions would have ceased. There would have been no ISIS. May be India would not have been divided since some Indians helped NSDAP in the war. Also Russia and the rest of the Europe would have been a lot more powerful. With scientists like Vener von Braun and others there full potentials would have been unlocked and not just in the field of weapons development. There would been less arms races. No cold war. EU would have formed many decades earlier. There would have been no rabid canines terrorizing the world and blocking / manipulating our futures. Best of all, capitalism and imperialism would have died. Can you imagine? What do you think?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Propaganda_of_the_Deed said:

wE'd AlL bE sPeAkInG gErMaN bY NoW

Well they are not like British to take such measures. Look at Pakistan. We are taught English in schools and medium of education is English while English knowing/speaking countries are oceans away. Besides, non-Germans can never speak their language properly and are always given away by that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wish we could all have an interesting yet factual debate on this.

Saudi Arabia. Can you imagine? All the sects created and empowered by the English in Saudi and in India. Since Germany was fond of reversing English tricks to divide people geographically and otherwise, they would have certainly taken care of this very hot potato on the hands of the Muslim ummah, which is the source of Wahhabism and the seed from which terrorism sprouts. Muslim leaders would have been different and not foreign puppets. No Gaddafi, no Saddam, no mustard gas. Shah Faisal, Bhutto and Gaddafi in the 70s made a plan to unite all the Muslim countries and were all assassinated except Gaddafi. If you think about it, our immediate world would have been exceptionally different. There are more incredible benefits had Allies lost WW2, which I will relate if the discussion progresses.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Darth Vader said:

what if Germany had won WWII?

That is a disturbing thing to think about. Very disturbing.

2 hours ago, Darth Vader said:

Would it have been better for Muslims and the rest of the world in general?

Hitler saw Islam as a valuable weapon.

https://en.qantara.de/content/interview-with-historian-david-motadel-hitlers-Muslim-stop-gaps

Quote

Did the Nazis really see Islam as something inherently positive or were the Muslims only a means to an end?

Motadel: Overall, I think that Muslims were means to an end. Nazi policies towards Islam were informed by pragmatism. Some leading Nazis, particularly Adolf Hitler and Heinrich Himmler, repeatedly expressed their respect for Islam. Whenever denouncing the Catholic Church, Hitler routinely contrasted it with Islam. While he denounced Catholicism as a weak, effeminate religion, he praised Islam as a strong, aggressive, martial religion. Overall, however, it was strategic considerations, not ideology, that led to Nazi Germany's campaign for Islamic mobilisation.

Quote

Wasn't Nazi racism a major obstacle to collaborating with Muslims?

Motadel: Hitler had already postulated the racial inferiority of non-European peoples in "Mein Kampf". Once in power, however, German officials showed themselves to be more pragmatic: non-Jewish Turks, Iranians and Arabs had already been explicitly exempted from any official racial discrimination in the 1930s, following diplomatic interventions from the governments in Tehran, Ankara and Cairo. And during the war the Germans showed similar pragmatism. Muslims everywhere, it was clear to every German officer, were to be treated as allies.

The realities on the ground were by no means straightforward. In the first months of the Nazi invasion of Russia, SS squads executed thousands of Muslims on the assumption that their circumcision showed that they were Jewish. Eventually, Reinhard Heydrich, chief Nazi security officer, sent out a directive cautioning the taskforce executing squads to be more careful. On the southern fringes of the Soviet Union, however, German killing squads still had difficulties distinguishing Muslims from Jews. Moreover, in North Africa, the Balkans and on the Eastern Front, German soldiers were confronted with diverse Muslim populations, including Muslim Roma and Jewish converts to Islam.

Quote

 

A widespread assumption exists that Muslims supported the Nazi regime because they shared an anti-Semitic perspective. This is precisely why the Nazis tried to get Muslims on the regime's side. What can you tell us about this assumption?

Motadel: On the German side, pragmatic strategic interests were the most important driving force behind this policy. In its propaganda, however, especially in the Arab world, anti-Semitic themes played an important role. Anti-Semitic propaganda was often connected to attacks against the Zionist migration to Palestine which had emerged as a main topic in Arab political discourses.

On the Muslim side one cannot generalise. Some of the Muslim allies of the Nazi regime – most importantly the famous Mufti of Jerusalem – shared the Nazis' Jew-hatred. In the war zones, in the Balkans, in North Africa and in the Eastern territories, the picture is more complicated. In many of these regions, Muslims and Jews had lived together for centuries. And in some cases, Muslims would now help their Jewish neighbours, for example hiding them from the Germans.

 

So as you can see Hitler saw Muslims as an ally in his hatred of Jews, he successfully used propaganda to further manipulate Muslim Anti-Semitism (sadly, it doesn't take much to manipulate Muslims). As you can see he saw Muslims as a means to an end.

However, what was Hitler's overall opinion of Muslims and Islam?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_views_of_Adolf_Hitler#Hitler_on_Islam

Quote

 

Hitler's views on Islam are a matter of controversy. On the one hand, Hitler privately demeaned ethnic groups he associated with Islam, notably Arabs, as racially inferior. On the other hand, he also made private and public statements expressing admiration for what he perceived to be the militaristic nature of Islam and the political sharpness of the Prophet Muhammad.

Among eastern religions, Hitler described religious leaders such as "Confucius, Buddha, and Muhammad" as providers of "spiritual sustenance". In this context, Hitler's connection to Mohammed Amin al-Husseini, who served as the Mufti of Jerusalem until 1937 – which included his asylum in 1941, with the honorary rank of an SS Major-General, and recognition as an "honorary Aryan," – has been interpreted by some as a sign of respect, while others characterize it as a relationship born out of political expediency. Starting in 1933, al-Husseini, who had launched a campaign to free various parts of the Arab region from British control and expel Jews from both Egypt and Palestine, became impressed by the Jewish boycott policies which the Nazis were enforcing in Germany, and hoped that he could use the anti-semitic views which many in the Arab region shared with Hitler's regime in order to forge a strategic military alliance that would help him eliminate the Jews from Palestine. Despite al-Husseini's attempts to reach out to Germany, Hitler refused to form such an alliance with al-Husseini, fearing that it would weaken relations with Britain.

During the unsuccessful 1936–39 Arab revolt in Palestine, Husseini and his allies took the opportunity to strengthen relations with Germany and enforced the spread of Nazi customs and propaganda throughout their strongholds in Palestine as a gesture of respect. In Egypt, the Muslim Brotherhood would follow al-Husseini's lead. Hitler's influence soon spread throughout the region, but it was not until 1937 that the Nazi government agreed to grant al-Husseini and the Muslim Brotherhood's request for financial and military assistance.

According to Speer, Hitler wished that the Ottoman Empire had conquered Vienna in 1683: "The Mohammedan religion would have been much more compatible to us than Christianity. Why did it have to be Christianity with its meekness and flabbiness?" Similarly, Hitler was transcribed as saying: "Had Charles Martel not been victorious at Poitiers — already, you see, the world had fallen into the hands of the Jews, so gutless a thing was Christianity ! — then we should in all probability have been converted to Mohammedanism, that cult which glorifies heroism and which opens the seventh Heaven to the bold warrior alone. Then the Germanic races would have conquered the world. Christianity alone prevented them from doing so."

Notwithstanding Hitler's apparent admiration for Islam and Muhammad, and his willingness to work with Arab political leaders, he saw individual Muslims as racial and social inferiors. Nazi-era Minister of Armaments and War Production Albert Speeracknowledged that in private, Hitler regarded Arabs as an inferior race and that the relationship he had with various Muslim figures was more political than personal. During a meeting with a delegation of distinguished Arab figures, Hitler learned of how Islam motivated the Umayyad Caliphate during the Islamic conquest of Gaul and was now convinced that "the world would be Mohammedan today" if the Arab regime had successfully taken France during the Battle of Tours, while also suggesting to Speer that "ultimately not Arabs, but Islamized Germans could have stood at the head of this Mohammedan Empire."Hitler said that the Germans would have become heirs to "a religion that believed in spreading the faith by the sword and in subjugating all nations to that faith. Such a creed was perfectly suited to the German temperament."

As noted, Hitler was profoundly racist against the ethnic groups that practiced Islam. Regarding Hitler's wish that the Arabs had conquered Europe, Speer notes that Hitler believed that their hegemony over Germans could not last, because of their racial inferiority, but that Islamized Germans would come to rule the world in their place. Hitler was also quoted in the early war years stating, "We shall continue to make disturbances in the Far East and in Arabia. Let us think as men and let us see in these peoples at best lacquered half-apes who are anxious to experience the lash." Nevertheless, Hitler simultaneously made positive references about Muslim culture and Muslims as potential collaborators, such as: "The peoples of Islam will always be closer to us than, for example, France".

 

So based on this we can safely assume that while Islam would've become the world's dominant religion, it would've only been German Muslims in the world. Hitler liked the religion and its practices, but hated non Germans. What does that mean? It means that all of us that are not German, blonde haired & blue eyed would've either been killed or enslaved. So it wouldn't have been an advantage for Muslims by any stretch.

3 hours ago, Darth Vader said:

Middle East would have been left alone, Israel would not have formed, British colonies would have gained freedom and fair divisions.

Nope, not at all. Middle East would not have been left alone. Once Hitler was done conquering Europe he had plans to march into the Middle East, and then into Asia. Israel would not have been formed, but what difference would that matter since Palestinians would've been dead or enslaved by him anyway. Don't forget Hitler wanted to conquer the world, not just Europe.

3 hours ago, Darth Vader said:

Religious manipulations and forming of new religions would have ceased.

All we would've had were Nazis who follow Islam. Safe to say that Hitler would've also manipulated the religion to suit his wishes, so doubtful that the Islam of the Nazis would be anything close to actual Islam anyway.

3 hours ago, Darth Vader said:

There would have been no ISIS.

No ISIS, but no anything else either including Shi'a.

3 hours ago, Darth Vader said:

What do you think?

The defeat of Nazism was one of the greatest accomplishments of human history. Whatever condition the world is in right now is nothing compared to horror that would've occurred had Hitler not been defeated. To be honest, neither you nor I would've been alive right now most probably. If somehow we remained alive we would've probably been enslaved and treated like property. Not a pretty picture by any stretch. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Akbar673 said:

The defeat of Nazism was one of the greatest accomplishments of human history. Whatever condition the world is in right now is nothing compared to horror that would've occurred had Hitler not been defeated.

l completely agree with this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, Akbar673 said:

That is a disturbing thing to think about. Very disturbing.

Hitler saw Islam as a valuable weapon.

https://en.qantara.de/content/interview-with-historian-david-motadel-hitlers-Muslim-stop-gaps

So as you can see Hitler saw Muslims as an ally in his hatred of Jews, he successfully used propaganda to further manipulate Muslim Anti-Semitism (sadly, it doesn't take much to manipulate Muslims). As you can see he saw Muslims as a means to an end.

However, what was Hitler's overall opinion of Muslims and Islam?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_views_of_Adolf_Hitler#Hitler_on_Islam

So based on this we can safely assume that while Islam would've become the world's dominant religion, it would've only been German Muslims in the world. Hitler liked the religion and its practices, but hated non Germans. What does that mean? It means that all of us that are not German, blonde haired & blue eyed would've either been killed or enslaved. So it wouldn't have been an advantage for Muslims by any stretch.

Nope, not at all. Middle East would not have been left alone. Once Hitler was done conquering Europe he had plans to march into the Middle East, and then into Asia. Israel would not have been formed, but what difference would that matter since Palestinians would've been dead or enslaved by him anyway. Don't forget Hitler wanted to conquer the world, not just Europe.

All we would've had were Nazis who follow Islam. Safe to say that Hitler would've also manipulated the religion to suit his wishes, so doubtful that the Islam of the Nazis would be anything close to actual Islam anyway.

No ISIS, but no anything else either including Shi'a.

The defeat of Nazism was one of the greatest accomplishments of human history. Whatever condition the world is in right now is nothing compared to horror that would've occurred had Hitler not been defeated. To be honest, neither you nor I would've been alive right now most probably. If somehow we remained alive we would've probably been enslaved and treated like property. Not a pretty picture by any stretch. 

Unfortunately for your argument that is all either controversial, baseless or outright scare mongering that has nothing to do with facts. You need solid evidence to overcome controversies and can not use the latter to reach "safe conclusions".

  1. Hilter did not want to conquer the whole world. Read history brother.
  2. His army never touched Muslims, as you have quoted. Rather he was helped by Muslims.
  3. His alleged persecution of Jews is also controversial according to some famous individuals and evidence.

So those pictures are in your imagination only.

Germans winning means the tommies and yanks and zionists and capitalism losing. Everything that ails all of us and the rest of mankind today. The pro-capitalism medical science, the processed food industry, all its u-turns, all the disease promotion so everyone buys drugs (legal ones), economic terrorism, sanctions, bombing of cities and hospitals, empowering Saudi, Israel and other genocidal entities. The silencing of all creative thought. Monumental scams, hoaxes, manipulations. All that animosity would have gone down the drain with Allied defeat.

One could argue that there was no way Germany could have won, especially with their bad decisions like attacking Russia, Goring's carelessness with Luftwaffe and its demise, the Elektroboot being too late, misallocation of resources to things like Bismark and Tirpitz (should have just built better and more U-boats imo), not making use of diplomacy which could have solved a few big problems. They could not win let alone "conquer the world".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Darth Vader said:
  • Hilter did not want to conquer the whole world. Read history brother.
  • His army never touched Muslims, as you have quoted. Rather he was helped by Muslims.
  • His alleged persecution of Jews is also controversial according to some famous individuals and evidence.

I've previously posted this:

On 12/29/2016 at 4:07 PM, Haji 2003 said:

He [Rommel] was fighting in an army whose aims were underpinned by a racist ideology. They wanted various natural resources on the basis that their race had a better claim to it than others.

I don't think they deserve any sympathy from us.

I've posted previously the Haji 2003 © theory that it was their pursuit of Shia oil that was the Nazis ultimate downfall. As I understand it, the sidetrack towards the Baku oilfields delayed Operation Barbarossa and subsequently the loss of the eastern front.

If they had been successful in Azerbaijan, I think the oil fields further south would have been a target in due course.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Darth Vader said:

As the title suggests, what if Germany had won WWII?

I don't think it is too difficult to speculate.

The Soviet Union was a victor in the war and I think there are various similarities with the Nazi regime.

  1. Subservience to a secular ideology
  2. The deification of individuals (whether Hitler by the Nazis or Marx/Lenin by the Soviets)
  3. The promotion of Caucasians above other races (what's happening in Xinjiang province today is not far from what happened in places like Kazakhstan)
  4. The anti-Semitism
  5. The willingness to strike alliances with developing countries (including Muslim ones) as a means of wresting power from colonial rulers

Yes, some Muslims did see the Soviets as preferable to the Americans. But it was only another face of the same coin. However, their system was economically, politically and ideologically flawed in the same way as the Nazi system was.

Edited by Haji 2003

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Darth Vader said:

Hilter did not want to conquer the whole world.

Please provide a valid source to support this claim.

1 hour ago, Darth Vader said:

His army never touched Muslims, as you have quoted. Rather he was helped by Muslims.

I already stated above that he was "using" Muslims to achieve his goal of eliminating Jews. Do you actually think that he wouldn't have come after Muslims next? Do you actually think he didn't consider the ethicities of Muslims as inferior to Germans? 

In quoting "Mien Kampf"...

he states the need for "Germans to expand". How long would it have been before the Nazis felt that they needed to expand into the Middle East or Asia?

Quote

The annual increase of population in Germany amounts to almost 900,000 souls. The difficulties of providing for this army of new citizens must grow from year to year and must finally lead to a catastrophe, unless ways and means are found which will forestall the danger of misery and hunger.

Further more he states that when Germany will outnumber and dominate the rest of the world...he didn't consider anyone other than the "Aryan" race to be the strongest. How long before he went after everybody else?

Quote

But if that policy be carried out the final results must be that such a nation will eventually terminate its own existence on this Earth; for though man may defy the eternal laws of procreation during a certain period, vengeance will follow sooner or later. A stronger race will oust that which has grown weak; for the vital urge, in its ultimate form, will burst asunder all the absurd chains of this so-called humane consideration for the individual and will replace it with the humanity of Nature, which wipes out what is weak in order to give place to the strong.

or how about when he speaks of acquiring more land to support the German people? Where exactly is that land going to come from?

Quote

It is certainly true that the productivity of the soil can be increased within certain limits; but only within defined limits and not indefinitely. By increasing the productive powers of the soil it will be possible to balance the effect of a surplus birth-rate in Germany for a certain period of time, without running any danger of hunger. But we have to face the fact that the general standard of living is rising more quickly than even the birth rate. The requirements of food and clothing are becoming greater from year to year and are out of proportion to those of our ancestors of, let us say, a hundred years ago. It would, therefore, be a mistaken view that every increase in the productive powers of the soil will supply the requisite conditions for an increase in the population.

Here, he's stating that if land and territory can not be acquired through negotiation then an invasion is valid. How long before he went after more territory in Muslim areas?

Quote

Of course people will not voluntarily make that accommodation. At this point the right of self-preservation comes into effect. And when attempts to settle the difficulty in an amicable way are rejected the clenched hand must take by force that which was refused to the open hand of friendship.

 

1 hour ago, Darth Vader said:

His alleged persecution of Jews is also controversial according to some famous individuals and evidence.

Please provide links to websites which support your claim.

1 hour ago, Darth Vader said:

Germans winning means the tommies and yanks and zionists and capitalism losing. Everything that ails all of us and the rest of mankind today. The pro-capitalism medical science, the processed food industry, all its u-turns, all the disease promotion so everyone buys drugs (legal ones), economic terrorism, sanctions, bombing of cities and hospitals, empowering Saudi, Israel and other genocidal entities. The silencing of all creative thought. Monumental scams, hoaxes, manipulations. All that animosity would have gone down the drain with Allied defeat.

So if I'm reading this correctly you are so fixated with the evils of the West that you are willing to concede to Hitler being the better option? Correct me if I'm wrong on that.

1 hour ago, Darth Vader said:

One could argue that there was no way Germany could have won, especially with their bad decisions like attacking Russia, Goring's carelessness with Luftwaffe and its demise, the Elektroboot being too late, misallocation of resources to things like Bismark and Tirpitz (should have just built better and more U-boats imo), not making use of diplomacy which could have solved a few big problems.

Yes, that is a valid argument. However, there is rampant evidence that world domination was Hitler's eventual goal.

I honestly can't believe that I'm having to respond to a post which defends Nazi Germany and their intentions. Unbelievable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Akbar673 said:

So if I'm reading this correctly you are so fixated with the evils of the West that you are willing to concede to Hitler being the better option? Correct me if I'm wrong on that.

Possibly. When you consider Darth Vader literally had guys like this on his imperial star destroyer, it all starts to make sense...

Tarkin_DS.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Propaganda_of_the_Deed said:

Only North Americans would find this humourous. Football ("soccerrrr") is already the world's most followed/played sport. It is everywhere (Subcontinent the anomaly).<----------------:book:

You forgot to also exclude Antarctica.:rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Kaya  You disagreed above with my endorsement of @Akbar673 but one thing you may not know is that for the core membership, National Socialism was occult under political cover. The same with the Stalin-Beria inner circle.

Not to condemn this is a negligent endorsement of satanism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Sumerian said:

Also what's with this fixation among Muslims with hating the West lol, as if any other "superpower" in history since the beginning of civilisation has done better. Whom do you prefer, the Mongols or the Romans or who else? 

Furthermore, what good have Muslims done to the world when they were a superpower? Should we really bring up the record of Ummayads and Abbassids and the Ottomans? 

The great world you seek will only arise when the Sahib Al-Zaman (عليه السلام) appears. 

It's easier to blame the "west", it is easier to talk about puppets, agents, etc etc etc than look closer to home. Leaders would rather throw stones at the white boogeyman than have the people scrutinise them for their own weaknesses.

You are right about Muslim caliphates too, they have only done what Western nations have done. Done lots of evil and done good too, killing innocents with one hand and building hospitals, schools and pretty buildings is what empires do best.

North, east, south or west, corruption and evil exist and having the word 'Islamic' in a place's name or a star and crescent does not exclude a society from being evil or corrupt.

For me as a white Muslim it actually gets very tiresome hearing that my side of the world or my parent's culture is this almost satanic evil destroying innocent Muslims. Yes, my side of the world does some evil things, yes some of those things are done to Muslims, but my word, where are all the great Muslim faces condemning Muslim governments, leaders, countries etc? Seeing how it's taken Qatar forever and a day to stop supporting China's use of detention camps for Muslims, I best not hold my breath.

 

Edited by aaaz1618

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, hasanhh said:

@Kaya  You disagreed above with my endorsement of @Akbar673 but one thing you may not know is that for the core membership, National Socialism was occult under political cover. The same with the Stalin-Beria inner circle.

Not to condemn this is a negligent endorsement of satanism.

If Germany winning WW2 would have meant that there would be no Saudi Arabia and Zionist hegemony in the Middle East... and that sounds like a true blessing from God! ... then I would wish for it to have occurred if the other conditions in the world would be the same. I.e. similar constitutions as now, freedom of religion, no widespread nazist ethnic cleansing etc.

Of course who knows how things would have been. Perhaps Hitler would have become a worse fitnah than Israel (even though that's unlikely honestly).

However, I am not complaining the least bit. The decree of God Almighty is best, even though we can't comprehend the bigger picture fully. What we are facing from Israel and the Colonial satans is not even close to what Imam Hussein (عليه السلام) faced from Yazid and Shimr. So it would be childish for us to complain.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, hasanhh said:

:dwarf:"Aaaahhhh. Do you know any history?"

These countries were formed after WW1.

Salam new America also formed after WWII by Nazis after defeating Germany in WW II majority of German scientists & intellectuals that was froming Nazi Germany migrated to America & rest of them that remained in Germany  worked beside American & Soviets but influence of Nazis was more on Americans than soviets that just by sacrificing infamous Nazis america gained trust of Israel but Zionist didn't stop & used new Nazism in America in their favor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Haji 2003 said:

I've posted previously the Haji 2003 © theory that it was their pursuit of Shia oil that was the Nazis ultimate downfall. As I understand it, the sidetrack towards the Baku oilfields delayed Operation Barbarossa and subsequently the loss of the eastern front.

If they had been successful in Azerbaijan, I think the oil fields further south would have been a target in due course.

Anyone in their stead in that situation would have thought of appropriating Baku's oil which was part of Soviet Union at that time and also had a lot of oil. Azerbaijan was not independent. Why let Soviets keep it? The other nearby option would have been Romania but less oil and different country.

By the way brother Haji, its funny, accusing someone who might have tried to steal another nation's oil during a desperate war while presenting this apprehension in defense of the most notorious well understood oil robber and hoarder of all times on the face of the planet, who has killed millions of Muslims for oil and well being of its petro currency. Perhaps the next thing to assume would be that they would have also taken CIA's place to oversee the Opium industry as well.

15 hours ago, Haji 2003 said:
  1. Subservience to a secular ideology. Better than getting crushed and herded by Crusaders, no? I wish there were secular governments who treated all as equals but there are none.
  2. The deification of individuals (whether Hitler by the Nazis or Marx/Lenin by the Soviets). Reverence of individuals, or, ok, lots of reverence and respect. But whats wrong with this? Better than worshiping Hillary or Trump and ending up bombing Muslims either way.
  3. The promotion of Caucasians above other races (what's happening in Xinjiang province today is not far from what happened in places like Kazakhstan). Does that justify what the master race is doing to gentiles with help from its henchmen?
  4. The anti-Semitism. Exactly. Saves all of us gentiles and puts Mr... semite in his proper seat.
  5. The willingness to strike alliances with developing countries (including Muslim ones) as a means of wresting power from colonial rulers

Yes, some Muslims did see the Soviets as preferable to the Americans. But it was only another face of the same coin. However, their system was economically, politically and ideologically flawed in the same way as the Nazi system was. Its not fair to compare it to communism.

It is a proven set of policies or a system as it got Germany out of all the economic troubles and sanctioned troubles of Versailles.

 

2 hours ago, hasanhh said:

These countries were formed after WW1.

So was much of non-Allied Europe, and Danzig, where WW2 began. Whats unfair is unfair. Some people keep serving others rise up.

Btw, do you people agree it is a result of WW2 that former British colonies got rid of the British and gained a kind of independence?

 

P.S.: Guys I appreciate all your inputs but I should remind all participants that this is only meant as an opportunity for a light and speculative debate on the subject. I hope nobody gets too serious.

Edited by Darth Vader

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Darth Vader said:

Btw, do you people agree it is a result of WW2 that former British colonies got rid of the British and gained a kind of independence?

No, not as l read your question.

The United Kingdom pushed these colonies into independence in the 50s and 60s because after two World Wars, the United Kingdom was financially bankrupt and heavily in debt to the US. One example acknowledging this is Churchill's complaint that he never intended to preside over the dissolution of the British Empire.

France was resistant to this. Witness lndochina and Algerian wars. Finally, they also followed the United Kingdom example.

I saw this week that Qatar gained its independence from the United Kingdom in 1970.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, hasanhh said:

No, not as l read your question.

The United Kingdom pushed these colonies into independence in the 50s and 60s because after two World Wars, the United Kingdom was financially bankrupt and heavily in debt to the US. One example acknowledging this is Churchill's complaint that he never intended to preside over the dissolution of the British Empire.

France was resistant to this. Witness lndochina and Algerian wars. Finally, they also followed the United Kingdom example.

I saw this week that Qatar gained its independence from the United Kingdom in 1970.

The Indian subcontinent gained independence in 1947 right after the war and even though the local feudals kept supplying a steady stream of manpower to help them and the obedient servants were also given lots of land as reward of their services. If it truly were revolts they feared then our independence struggle in 1857 would have sufficed. But the British defused that with obedience of their loyalists and also then further divided people on the basis of religion as well, forming subsects among Muslims e.g. Deoband and Ahamdiya, on the principle of divide and rule.

In my humble opinion they realized that they really did not need to sustain so many pets and servants when they could leave behind a faulty sham democracy which results in the empowerment of godless wealthy crooks each time which they and 'Merica could buy out and have their will carried out. The Germans and their u-boats however taught them that direct rule, supply lines across the globe and the biggest navy were too expensive and difficult to maintain to that other system. The simple solution is to monopolize on peoples' ignorance, as all successful authorities have done throughout history of mankind. Incredibly cheaper and incredibly effective. Even now they are all doing it. They buy out the mullah and receive a whole army of Jihadis who fight for them mindlessly.

Edited by Darth Vader

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, aaaz1618 said:

It's easier to blame the "west"

I actually love any statements starting with that. It gives me a boost of self confidence knowing that the solution is in my reach, and is in eliminating my own weaknesses. That perhaps the lion's share of sell out traitors with Muslim names can be somehow dealt with and that plugging the holes in your own ship will give it a chance to survive even though the enemy won't stop making new ones. Seriously. It is also a true statement and I always agree with that positive attitude towards the problem. Even though its only self delusion and actually nothing changes.

Edited by Darth Vader

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Sumerian said:

@Darth Vader Hitler was capitalist to a large extent, he accepted both private industry and property, and Germany had a regulated but still profit-driven market.

Maybe you define capitalism as something else?

 

Ok then. I will attempt to define it.

67822367_675727412907905_3483839452017590272_n.jpg.d0eee208d36eb26d81f94ebfe6b2c650.jpg

UNinvolved precisely because war is profit. If there is no war, none will buy your surplus weapons.

11251624_984142404992923_1745293467173219559_n.jpg.3ebe3bdfcf04c9c5f9fcecb324ddd40e.jpg

Simply because there are no profits in fixing it.

I can go on all day. Its all about money and nothing else matters anymore. And it is all because of late stage, near death capitalism. It does not work. Yet it is enforced. Because other options mean the kings of the world, the 1% will lose their hegemonies and power. The world would be a incomparably better place without it even if we put two communists and a chimpanzee on the throne. This globalized system's countless failure are vindication for all its alternatives. All that has been done to the Middle East for oil and service to Jews is vindication for even the thoroughly demonized Hitler. I am sorry but that is the writing on the wall and I am merely reading it out loud.

Edited by Darth Vader

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, notme said:

Most Muslims aren't Aryan enough for Hitler to have tolerated them beyond their usefulness to his plan. Most of us would be dead or fighting in an active war to this day.

One has to believe the cheapest propaganda about Nazis to reach that conclusion. But okay.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, notme said:

Or just read their own writings. But ok.

I love momineen, anyone who loves Ali (عليه السلام) really, especially practicing ones, and if they are also Seyyed hey even better, for whatever reason I will look to them more. But it doesn't necessarily mean that I hate others. As the saying goes, birds of a feather flock together. Aryans like Aryans? Ok. Pathans like Pathans. I don't mind.

But out of curiosity perhaps there are their writings in existence that suggest that "non-Aryans should not be tolerated and fought to the death"?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its scary when adults accept such cartoonish explanations of history. Bad guys vs good guys a la hollywood.

I am sorry but unless your currently a Jew living in Europe, it is really far fetched and exagerated to say that we as Muslims would most likely be dead now if Hitler had won WW2.

 

In fact one could argue that the Middle East would have been better of if Hitler won rather than the other side, as much of the hell and chaos that was to come to the Middle East can be tracked back to the "good guys" of the west.

The zionist entity of israhell who has caused nothing but chaos and suffering to the Muslims, whos existence is feeding and relying on the corruption of the leaders of the neighbouring Muslim nations, would surely not have been a problem had the "bad guys" won WW2 instead.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Soldiers and Saffron said:

Its scary when adults accept such cartoonish explanations of history. Bad guys vs good guys a la hollywood.

I am sorry but unless your currently a Jew living in Europe, it is really far fetched and exagerated to say that we as Muslims would most likely be dead now if Hitler had won WW2.

 

In fact one could argue that the Middle East would have been better of if Hitler won rather than the other side, as much of the hell and chaos that was to come to the Middle East can be tracked back to the "good guys" of the west.

The zionist entity of israhell who has caused nothing but chaos and suffering to the Muslims, whos existence is feeding and relying on the corruption of the leaders of the neighbouring Muslim nations, would surely not have been a problem had the "bad guys" won WW2 instead.

Yes, exactly. Thank you.

The fact of the matter remains that while the Germans can not be depicted as an extraordinary world leading power but the incredible crimes openly committed by their enemies even make the Nazi party look innocent today, for those who have focused fire on the SS and ignored the German nation and all its achievements. Its a very weak footing for the other side of the debate, its like having to defend Umar in a religious debate. People see the SS and Himmler but forget the bigger picture to include the vast majority, the OKW the Wehrmacht, the German people who elected NSDAP and gave them the mandate and despite Versailles and all the sanctions and all the cheap underhanded tricks to economically sabotage any nation they rise up while their enemy remained in its great depression for many years even while equipped with its so-called superior form of government and economy which actually requires wars, puppets like Saudi, and rivers of blood of innocent nations to power it. They call those occult and haughty and that is so laughable as we are all mere gentiles and our nations exist to be toppled and destroyed one after the other while their leaders like to congregate naked in some godforsaken forest in North America and literally present sacrifices to satan. I am just a little bit disappointed at the defense, though not surprised at the outcome.

Edited by Darth Vader

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...