Personally speaking i don't think Japan would have attacked either America or British colonies if they had not been preoccupied else where. Lets face it most of the the recent major military victories came about by attacking the opposition before declaring a war

Originally Posted by LeEnfield

Lets face it most of the the recent major military victories came about by attacking the opposition before declaring a war

Just recent ones?

Originally Posted by Doppleganger

There would have been another world war after WW1, Hitler or no Hitler. Hitler was a sign of the times, not a cause of it.

I'm not so sure. Hitler was insane enough to start war with almost entire world. If no Hitler, there maybe could be some local-scale war in Europe, but most likely no WW2.

Originally Posted by Doppleganger

If Hitler hadn't been around there was still Josef Stalin to contend with.

Right, Stalin was more pragmatic. If there was no Hitler and Germany with expansion politics, Stalin alone would not launch attack on Western world. Even Winter War was carried out in moment, when there were no significant threats to Finland become wide supported by western democracies since those were in war with Hitler and they did not need another enemy. If there was no war in West, although in form of `phony war`, Stalin most likely wouldn't be decided to attack Finland. He need a appropriate moment do it. And such moment could not occure if there was no Hitler.

Originally Posted by Doppleganger

Hitler, in a sense, was born in the wrong time. Had he been born in 300BC, 400AD or 1200AD, we'd be reading about the 'great conquerer' Adolf Hitler in our history books, instead of the inhuman monster he is known as today. He did nothing worse than what his predecessors did - the main difference was the scale.

Agree.

Originally Posted by perseus

Perhaps the European war, what about the Pacific theatre? It has been said that either would have happened without the other.

I think war in Pacific could happen, but without European Allies and theatre of war the Pacific war could be just large-scale local war, not World War. Something like Folklend War, just in bigger scale.

Originally Posted by Doppleganger

There would have been another world war after WW1, Hitler or no Hitler. Hitler was a sign of the times, not a cause of it.


If Hitler hadn't been around there was still Josef Stalin to contend with.

I watched this movie called Europa Europa and about half way through the movie, the nazis invaded Russia, in a scene where the nazis were pursuing a large group of Russians, the Jews were the only ones that kept running from the nazis towards Russian troops, everybody else actually preferred to face Hitler as opposed to Stalin. I thought that was an intriguing part of the movie, I wonder if that was truly the sentiment of many people that were in these border regions?

Originally Posted by Ski8799

I watched this movie called Europa Europa and about half way through the movie, the nazis invaded Russia, in a scene where the nazis were pursuing a large group of Russians, the Jews were the only ones that kept running from the nazis towards Russian troops, everybody else actually preferred to face Hitler as opposed to Stalin. I thought that was an intriguing part of the movie, I wonder if that was truly the sentiment of many people that were in these border regions?

Plenty of Ukranians thought he was ok (they hated Stalin) for a while until the SS started to cut loose behind the front lines.

The Vichy French were quite helpful to Hitler in collecting Jews to send to the Death camps.

Originally Posted by errol

Plenty of Ukranians thought he was ok (they hated Stalin) for a while until the SS started to cut loose behind the front lines.

The Vichy French were quite helpful to Hitler in collecting Jews to send to the Death camps.

Yeah, hard to tell which country got screwed harder in WWII, Poland or Ukraine.

Originally Posted by Damien435

Yeah, hard to tell which country got screwed harder in WWII, Poland or Ukraine.

At the time The Ukraine was not a country. It was a province of the Soviet Union. And before that it was the western most part of the Russian Empire. For hundreds of years people living in this area referred to themselves as Russian. That is except for a tiny group in western Ukraine who viewed themselves as Ukrainians. In successive years the group did get a lot bigger. This group welcomed the Nazi's until the Einsatsgruppen began their whole-sale murder. Even then a tiny group tolerated the Nazi's and hoped for some sort of Federation with the German's. It didn't happen.

Originally Posted by Doppleganger

There would have been another world war after WW1, Hitler or no Hitler. Hitler was a sign of the times, not a cause of it.


If Hitler hadn't been around there was still Josef Stalin to contend with.


Hitler, in a sense, was born in the wrong time. Had he been born in 300BC, 400AD or 1200AD, we'd be reading about the 'great conquerer' Adolf Hitler in our history books, instead of the inhuman monster he is known as today. He did nothing worse than what his predecessors did - the main difference was the scale.

I'm not so sure a World War would have taken place without Hitler. Hitler may have been a sign of the times in Germany, but the rest of Europe didn't have that kind of fanatic and extremist walking around. You say that the world had Joseph Stalin to deal with. But this isn't true. Stalin had enough problems in the Soviet Union to keep him busy for decades.
As for Hitler being born in the wrong time; whatever time you want to insert him he would be judged the same. World leaders in the later Greek and the Roman world would be thought of in terms of shame for the whole-sale slaughter of innocents. That also holds true for the later Medieval world. The only thing that changes with time is the technology. Human beings were just as sophisticated in these earlier times. To think that there morality was different doesn't make too much sense.

Originally Posted by Ski8799

I watched this movie called Europa Europa and about half way through the movie, the nazis invaded Russia, in a scene where the nazis were pursuing a large group of Russians, the Jews were the only ones that kept running from the nazis towards Russian troops, everybody else actually preferred to face Hitler as opposed to Stalin. I thought that was an intriguing part of the movie, I wonder if that was truly the sentiment of many people that were in these border regions?

In Lithuania the Germans really only targeted Jews, but the Russians targeted EVERYONE. Their standard operating procedure was to overwrite the indigenous culture with their own communist garbage, and kill anyone who so much as uttered a word of dissent. When they got a resistance member, they'd drag the body through the streets by tank and imprison or kill anyone who cried. So yes, at least in that country the Russians were hated far, far more than the Germans. The resistance managed to hold on till the mid-50s, but the British agents who were sent to help ended up flipping to the Russians.

My grandparents were faced with the choice of either fleeing to Germany (lucky grandma was blonde with blue eyes) then America, or becoming second-class slaves in the Soviet Union while Russians settled in their country. They tried three times to cross to the west, but the Americans turned them back every time. Fortunately there was a black soldier who finally let them through. It's funny, I would not have been born if World War II didn't go the way it did, and that particular soldier hadn't been there.

Originally Posted by Papashah41

I'm not so sure a World War would have taken place without Hitler. You say that the world had Joseph Stalin to deal with. But this isn't true. Stalin had enough problems in the Soviet Union to keep him busy for decades.

What problems did Stalin have internally that would keep him busy for decades? If he indeed had these problems, it did not stop him installing puppet Communist regimes in half of Europe after WW2. If it wasn't for Nazi Germany, the whole of Europe would have turned communist in no more than 10 years. Stalin was preparing for a major war of conquest and the Red Army was undergoing a massive reorganization and rearmament when Hitler struck in June 1941.

Originally Posted by Papashah41

As for Hitler being born in the wrong time; whatever time you want to insert him he would be judged the same. World leaders in the later Greek and the Roman world would be thought of in terms of shame for the whole-sale slaughter of innocents. That also holds true for the later Medieval world. The only thing that changes with time is the technology. Human beings were just as sophisticated in these earlier times. To think that there morality was different doesn't make too much sense.

Morality was not different but what was deemed acceptable in war certainly was. Genghis Khan put millions of innocent people to the sword, including razing entire cities. The figure is as high as 60 million people, which is far more than Hitler ever killed. Yet is Genghis Khan demonized as an inhuman monster?

Hardly.