If Germany had won the first world war.

[kvnchrist]

 

The two nations with their very different ideologically driven systems probably still become mortal enemies.

The simple truth is that the US and USSR fought together in WWII, and our supposed "mortal enemy" status was entirely fabricated after the war ended.

 

Also try watching the 1950's/60's Soviet's PSAs for civilian nuclear attack (ours were "Duck and Cover" etc) during this period and tell us they weren't produced by the same group of people. This supposed conflict was almost entirely a colluded effort, just as U.S. involvement in and support of WWI (and anti-German public sentiment) had to be fabricated literally from thin air, not only in our country but in most of the world. We have Britain to thank for that global catastrophe, but historians and everyone else noted how well the UK's propaganda campaign worked. In fact it's been used as a model for generating war from nothing ever since.

 

Here's another bottom line imo: the Pentagon's primary requirement is not to defend our country or our Constitution, it's to justify its own existence -- and this cannot be done without the perpetual existence of mortal enemies. It's been true from the "Red Menace" to flipping Islamic terrorists and Somalian war lords. Review the history and see how these boogeymen have appeared magically and out of thin air, just in time to accomodate Pentagon budgets for the last 70 years, and how every one of these claimed mortal threats to our existence disappeared just as instantly and magically -- when the Pentagon's money ran out. The Russian people learned the great lesson in 1992: it's all a scam to justify public teetsucking. Virtually all of it. The difference with the current fake war is that the Pentagon finally landed the Holy Grail of obscene spending: a perpetual war that is fundamentally unwinnable because the list of defined enemies changes on a daily and sometimes hourly basis. So welcome to bankruptcy and collapse, America, but don't fret. It's just natural selection and losing their federal government didn't kill anyone in Russia.

 

Dude. Politics makes strange bedfellows. The U.S. pretty much backed Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein at one time. This thing about Russia and the U.S. is along the same lines. History is replete with these situations of convenience. .Germany and Russia conspired together to take Poland. the two had a non-aggression pack before Hitler tossed it in the trash. If it hadn't have been for the Russian winter, I think we might all be speaking German, right now.

 

As far as the cold war is concerned, I think Americas main issue was she was affraid of an idea called communism and I think that was sad and a little pathetic. Hundreds of people got blackballed and lost their livelihood during the 50's. People talk, today of political witch hunts. They should have set in front of the House on Unamerican Activities, which was itself unAmerican. More like the Gestapo.

[Fkemman11]

Not much would have changed IMO. Mechanized warfare was introduced towards the end of WWI and would have been enough to convince generals of the leading nations of the time to seek expansion. WWII would have still happened- just with slightly different players. Germany would not have been content with the areas they would control in France and elsewhere at the end of WWI and would have tried to conquer the rest of western Europe. America would have still had to have become involved to stop this aggression. Jews would have still longed for their ancestral home and would have gotten it with backing from the US and others. The only things that would have changed would have been the timeline for events and some of the people involved.

 

Now if Germany and Russia had made some kind of pact and had been allied in WWII- like they did in Poland- then the rest of the world would have been doomed for the most part. German engineering with Russian manpower would have been too much for even the Allies to have overcome.

[TheMastersSon]

...

Now if Germany and Russia had made some kind of pact and had been allied in WWII- like they did in Poland- then the rest of the world would have been doomed for the most part. German engineering with Russian manpower would have been too much for even the Allies to have overcome.

IMO WWII taught us that no nation has the manpower to conquer the world. The Nazis got stretched to the breaking point without even making it to our side of the planet. Edited September 25, 2017 by TheMastersSon

[Skagens]

I thank you very much for the information of the Germany ruler. I was not aware of this. It makes me rethink my attitude on this. It's hard to believe that these European leaders were all related to each other, seeing how some were so eager to prove themselves to each other

 

I never thought about the rising of a French Hitler, I would supose that anyone, with the right mind could come up with a convincing argument of internal betrayl of country. It seems, all it takes is scarcity and those unwilling to keep things in perspective will convinces themselves of just about any diabolic conspiracy All we have to do is look at the Japanese interment camps of WWII to see that. . I would suggest though that Hitler was a highly apt charismatic political showman. Even at that, I don't think he could have rose to power and more than Donald Trump could have risen to power at any other time than they both did.

 

I would ask if you think that a European union of some sort would have come out in the 1920, since the German King was so overbearing and would that have become an economic powerhouse that would have rivaled America.

 

I would also like to hear about peoples thoughts about The Ottoman Empire. Would it have collapsed and if the Western powers could not have swooped in and organized the Middle East, would the West be even a shadow of what it is today without the cheep oil it extracted from the puppet states they created to serve their interests? Would there have ever been a need to them to look to terrorism as a way to have a voice in this world.?

 

 

Wilhelm II, Germany's ruler at the time, had a british mother and inherited her love of the British Royal Navy. He had a project to construct his own massive naval army to rival the british because he was apparently quite envious of them. Arranged marriages between royal houses was big back then which often resulted in children being of two worlds. I do think it's silly they all the world leaders basically played a worldwide pissing contest to show who was the biggest and strongest.

 

Had the war ended in favor of the germans, there's a good chance all of France would become oppressed and many of the french would seek for answers as to why. Had Germany imposed the same reparations as the french did, the country and the people would have suffered immensely. Part of the reason Hitler had such a large backing was because he was indeed a charismatic and strong willed person. For him, the jews were to blame. Had we seen a french Hitler, who knows which minority would have been targeted. One has to understand that when you push people to the brink and leave them with no options or opportunities, these people will seek any help and answers they can, leaving many of them becoming somewhat radicalized. I think comparing Trump to Hitler is a mistake. Hitler wanted to create and expand living room for the german people east, and also exterminate Judaism and Communism which was, to him, the german people's worst enemy. Trump is not looking to expand America nor do I believe he wants war for the sake of it.

 

It is plausible some form of union could have been formed in the 1920's. However, rule and leadership was not elected by vote back then, it was inherited, and I believe that to be one of the main causes to the world not seeing a lasting union. Otto von Bismarck was actually chancellor to Wilhelms father and he believed another war would be devastating and therefore, engaged in a policy of diplomatically maintaining cordial relations with other nations in Europe. Had Otto been in power rather than Wilhelm, who knows what might've happened. Tensions was still relatively high and Otto was no great fan of France either.

 

I believe the Ottoman Empire would have collapsed either way, with my opinions being that many of the problems coming internally rather than being foreign. Many of the empire's military reforms resulted in it's army engaging in multiple wars, with World War 1 being one of them. It's also my opinion that the west was not dependent on the Ottoman Empire. The west would most assuredly be doing well, but perhaps not in the same capacity.

[kvnchrist]

Not much would have changed IMO. Mechanized warfare was introduced towards the end of WWI and would have been enough to convince generals of the leading nations of the time to seek expansion. WWII would have still happened- just with slightly different players. Germany would not have been content with the areas they would control in France and elsewhere at the end of WWI and would have tried to conquer the rest of western Europe. America would have still had to have become involved to stop this aggression. Jews would have still longed for their ancestral home and would have gotten it with backing from the US and others. The only things that would have changed would have been the timeline for events and some of the people involved.

 

Now if Germany and Russia had made some kind of pact and had been allied in WWII- like they did in Poland- then the rest of the world would have been doomed for the most part. German engineering with Russian manpower would have been too much for even the Allies to have overcome.

Generals don't make decisions like that, politicians do and the politicians would have to convince the public for such a need for expansion. WWI completely sapped the public will for warefare in many nations. I don't think that Hitler could have done what he accomplished if it weren't for the war reparations and the worldwide depression.

All in all, this is getting a bit off topic, as we were talking about the Geo-political area of this what-if scenario.

[kvnchrist]

 

I thank you very much for the information of the Germany ruler. I was not aware of this. It makes me rethink my attitude on this. It's hard to believe that these European leaders were all related to each other, seeing how some were so eager to prove themselves to each other

 

I never thought about the rising of a French Hitler, I would supose that anyone, with the right mind could come up with a convincing argument of internal betrayl of country. It seems, all it takes is scarcity and those unwilling to keep things in perspective will convinces themselves of just about any diabolic conspiracy All we have to do is look at the Japanese interment camps of WWII to see that. . I would suggest though that Hitler was a highly apt charismatic political showman. Even at that, I don't think he could have rose to power and more than Donald Trump could have risen to power at any other time than they both did.

 

I would ask if you think that a European union of some sort would have come out in the 1920, since the German King was so overbearing and would that have become an economic powerhouse that would have rivaled America.

 

I would also like to hear about peoples thoughts about The Ottoman Empire. Would it have collapsed and if the Western powers could not have swooped in and organized the Middle East, would the West be even a shadow of what it is today without the cheep oil it extracted from the puppet states they created to serve their interests? Would there have ever been a need to them to look to terrorism as a way to have a voice in this world.?

 

 

Wilhelm II, Germany's ruler at the time, had a british mother and inherited her love of the British Royal Navy. He had a project to construct his own massive naval army to rival the british because he was apparently quite envious of them. Arranged marriages between royal houses was big back then which often resulted in children being of two worlds. I do think it's silly they all the world leaders basically played a worldwide pissing contest to show who was the biggest and strongest.

 

Had the war ended in favor of the germans, there's a good chance all of France would become oppressed and many of the french would seek for answers as to why. Had Germany imposed the same reparations as the french did, the country and the people would have suffered immensely. Part of the reason Hitler had such a large backing was because he was indeed a charismatic and strong willed person. For him, the jews were to blame. Had we seen a french Hitler, who knows which minority would have been targeted. One has to understand that when you push people to the brink and leave them with no options or opportunities, these people will seek any help and answers they can, leaving many of them becoming somewhat radicalized. I think comparing Trump to Hitler is a mistake. Hitler wanted to create and expand living room for the german people east, and also exterminate Judaism and Communism which was, to him, the german people's worst enemy. Trump is not looking to expand America nor do I believe he wants war for the sake of it.

 

It is plausible some form of union could have been formed in the 1920's. However, rule and leadership was not elected by vote back then, it was inherited, and I believe that to be one of the main causes to the world not seeing a lasting union. Otto von Bismarck was actually chancellor to Wilhelms father and he believed another war would be devastating and therefore, engaged in a policy of diplomatically maintaining cordial relations with other nations in Europe. Had Otto been in power rather than Wilhelm, who knows what might've happened. Tensions was still relatively high and Otto was no great fan of France either.

 

I believe the Ottoman Empire would have collapsed either way, with my opinions being that many of the problems coming internally rather than being foreign. Many of the empire's military reforms resulted in it's army engaging in multiple wars, with World War 1 being one of them. It's also my opinion that the west was not dependent on the Ottoman Empire. The west would most assuredly be doing well, but perhaps not in the same capacity.

 

Please re-read what I said about Trump and Hitler. What I said was that I don't think Hitler or Trump could have rose to power without the situation being right. Neither of them could have achieved the office they did if they had tried at any other time.

 

I still can't wrap my head around a French Hitler. I don't think, with the German penchant for militarism that they would let anyone even close to being Hitlerisk rise to power in France. Indeed, both the English or the French could have stopped Hitler if they would have reacted to Hitlers occupation of Rhineland. I read The Rise and fall of the Third Reich and it states that Hitler was on pins and needles and would have pulled German troops out if anyone reacted. Him withdrawing, I i'm pretty sure would have ended him before he even got started.

 

I will let the union go as I haven't really thought that out very much, but I would suggest that some form of economic and political influence over the conquered country's, including England. I don't know if it would reach the level that France and England put on Germany, but I am almost certain that there would be some face slapping going on.

 

What I was talking about the Ottoman empire is that the West could not have set up their little puppet regimes in the Ottomans still had control of that area. The oil would not have been so cheaply paid for and the petro dollars would have went to Constantinople instead of the Capital cites of the countries that were set up after WWI.

I understand that it was crumbling from inside out. My God the thing, I think outlasted any other empire except ancient Egypt.

[Skagens]

Please re-read what I said about Trump and Hitler. What I said was that I don't think Hitler or Trump could have rose to power without the situation being right. Neither of them could have achieved the office they did if they had tried at any other time.

 

 

 

I still can't wrap my head around a French Hitler. I don't think, with the German penchant for militarism that they would let anyone even close to being Hitlerisk rise to power in France. Indeed, both the English or the French could have stopped Hitler if they would have reacted to Hitlers occupation of Rhineland. I read The Rise and fall of the Third Reich and it states that Hitler was on pins and needles and would have pulled German troops out if anyone reacted. Him withdrawing, I i'm pretty sure would have ended him before he even got started.

 

I will let the union go as I haven't really thought that out very much, but I would suggest that some form of economic and political influence over the conquered country's, including England. I don't know if it would reach the level that France and England put on Germany, but I am almost certain that there would be some face slapping going on.

 

What I was talking about the Ottoman empire is that the West could not have set up their little puppet regimes in the Ottomans still had control of that area. The oil would not have been so cheaply paid for and the petro dollars would have went to Constantinople instead of the Capital cites of the countries that were set up after WWI.

I understand that it was crumbling from inside out. My God the thing, I think outlasted any other empire except ancient Egypt.

 

 

Apologies, whenever someone mentions Trump and Hitler in the same sentence it feels like they're being compared.

 

Now, France could have had some nationalistic parties and there might've been some people with the same mindset as Hitler, to find a group of people to point finger to and call the culprit. But as you say, Germany would have been highly militaristic at the time so the threat could have been contained. Some resistance movements would also have been formed but I think the germans would've contained them as well.

Had Hitler withdrawn troops, it would only be a question of time imo until he tried something again. He had to, his own position depended on him living up to his ideology of expansion, otherwise the people would quickly lose faith in him. And without the majority of the people behind him, he was nothing. It might also be as you say, his reign might've ended then and there, had he only withdrawn troops.

 

I would assume the west would have entered into some sort of bargain or agreement to have some access to the oil. Mechanized warfare was only starting to come into fruition with countries being more and more dependent on the oil. Get access to the oil either by partnership or through force. Yep, the Ottoman Empire had been around for quite some time. A little over 700 years and to think it's demise came at the hand of themselves, greed and corruption.

Edited September 26, 2017 by Skagens

[kvnchrist]

 

Please re-read what I said about Trump and Hitler. What I said was that I don't think Hitler or Trump could have rose to power without the situation being right. Neither of them could have achieved the office they did if they had tried at any other time.

 

 

 

I still can't wrap my head around a French Hitler. I don't think, with the German penchant for militarism that they would let anyone even close to being Hitlerisk rise to power in France. Indeed, both the English or the French could have stopped Hitler if they would have reacted to Hitlers occupation of Rhineland. I read The Rise and fall of the Third Reich and it states that Hitler was on pins and needles and would have pulled German troops out if anyone reacted. Him withdrawing, I i'm pretty sure would have ended him before he even got started.

 

I will let the union go as I haven't really thought that out very much, but I would suggest that some form of economic and political influence over the conquered country's, including England. I don't know if it would reach the level that France and England put on Germany, but I am almost certain that there would be some face slapping going on.

 

What I was talking about the Ottoman empire is that the West could not have set up their little puppet regimes in the Ottomans still had control of that area. The oil would not have been so cheaply paid for and the petro dollars would have went to Constantinople instead of the Capital cites of the countries that were set up after WWI.

I understand that it was crumbling from inside out. My God the thing, I think outlasted any other empire except ancient Egypt.

 

 

Apologies, whenever someone mentions Trump and Hitler in the same sentence it feels like they're being compared.

 

Now, France could have had some nationalistic parties and there might've been some people with the same mindset as Hitler, to find a group of people to point finger to and call the culprit. But as you say, Germany would have been highly militaristic at the time so the threat could have been contained. Some resistance movements would also have been formed but I think the germans would've contained them as well.

Had Hitler withdrawn troops, it would only be a question of time imo until he tried something again. He had to, his own position depended on him living up to his ideology of expansion, otherwise the people would quickly lose faith in him. And without the majority of the people behind him, he was nothing. It might also be as you say, his reign might've ended then and there, had he only withdrawn troops.

 

I would assume the west would have entered into some sort of bargain or agreement to have some access to the oil. Mechanized warfare was only starting to come into fruition with countries being more and more dependent on the oil. Get access to the oil either by partnership or through force. Yep, the Ottoman Empire had been around for quite some time. A little over 700 years and to think it's demise came at the hand of themselves, greed and corruption.

 

All I see when people directly compare anyone to Hitler, personally shows the hate withing themselves. Hate is a dead end street that leads to misery for all involved, including the hater. Hitler was more diabolical than evil and what made him twice as dangerous is he surrounded himself with slavish minions that competed for his favor. Himmler was the worst and He was in charge of the Gestapo.

 

As far as the Ottomans. My take on that would be that the west would be slowed down by their inability to get oil under their own terms and would have allowed much of what is known as the third world countries to advance industrially. That might have had a cooling effect on colonialism, which to me is a nice way of invading another country and effecting their society. I don't think their would be as much turmoil in the world if the West hadn't thought themselves so benevolent that they could positivly effect another culture by supplanting it with their own. Industrialization and technology enabled a great many wrongs in this world.

 

I would have liked to see the native Americans greet the pilgrims on Plymouth rock with Gatling guns and see home far the white man would have conquered the contenient.

[Skagens]

All I see when people directly compare anyone to Hitler, personally shows the hate withing themselves. Hate is a dead end street that leads to misery for all involved, including the hater. Hitler was more diabolical than evil and what made him twice as dangerous is he surrounded himself with slavish minions that competed for his favor. Himmler was the worst and He was in charge of the Gestapo.

 

 

As far as the Ottomans. My take on that would be that the west would be slowed down by their inability to get oil under their own terms and would have allowed much of what is known as the third world countries to advance industrially. That might have had a cooling effect on colonialism, which to me is a nice way of invading another country and effecting their society. I don't think their would be as much turmoil in the world if the West hadn't thought themselves so benevolent that they could positivly effect another culture by supplanting it with their own. Industrialization and technology enabled a great many wrongs in this world.

 

I would have liked to see the native Americans greet the pilgrims on Plymouth rock with Gatling guns and see home far the white man would have conquered the contenient.

 

Agreed. However, I don't think diabolical is the right word. Hitler was without a doubt a disgusting human being and what he did is unforgivable but he didn't go around being evil for the sake of it, no person does. He was capable of compassion and kindness, same as everyone else.

 

I believe you might be right here. Had the Ottoman Empire survived and not been so open to the western powers, it might've blossomed into on of the wealthiest and most powerful empires in the world. With the territory held, they would have had access to incredible amounts of oil and natural resources. And with industrialization and mechanized warfare closing in, their army might've been the biggest and most well supplied army in the world. What isn't to say an industrially advanced third world country would invade and act like the west has? People are still people and there a rotten ones in every government, in every country and every civilization. There always has and always will be.

 

America and Russia has a tendency to meddle in affairs of state of other countries. America having replaced several functioning governments with ones to suit their own needs only to have the same people turn on them, creating a cycle of instability and chaos for the country in question. This in turn displace a large number of inhabitants with nowhere to go, thus creating a large number of refugees.

This might be going a bit off topic but one cannot help but feel a sense of uncertainty and worry about how the world is developing today.