I've always wondered what kind of world we would be living in right now if Germany's luftwaffe had conquered Britain, and if in Operation Barbarrosa the German army conquered Stalingrad...
This topic is locked from further discussion.
I've always wondered what kind of world we would be living in right now if Germany's luftwaffe had conquered Britain, and if in Operation Barbarrosa the German army conquered Stalingrad...
We'd eat airforces for breakfast? :?We'd speak German, eat Luftwaffles for breakfast, do the jig, and drive BMWs
wis3boi
then we would live in a wonderful world. where blacks or jews didnt exist and everyone was treated fairly (communism)theSteeeeelslol. nazi's weren't communists, dumbass. In fact they actively pursecuted communists.
In less you were joking, then my bad...
lol. nazi's weren't communists, dumbass. In fact they actively pursecuted communists.
In less you were joking, then my bad...
funtimez12345
Or he meant socialism, in which case you're the moron, since Hitler was very much a socialist. Albeit in a twisted sort of way.
[QUOTE="funtimez12345"]
lol. nazi's weren't communists, dumbass. In fact they actively pursecuted communists.
In less you were joking, then my bad...
airshocker
Or he meant socialism, in which case you're the moron, since Hitler was very much a socialist. Albeit in a twisted sort of way.
looks like you're the moron since he clearly said in his post COMMUNISM and the nazis imprisoned and killed many communists and the fear of a communist takeover was a big part of the reason why Hitler was able to take power.looks like you're the moron since he clearly said in his post COMMUNISM and the nazis imprisoned and killed many communists and the fear of a communist takeover was a big part of the reason why Hitler was able to take power.
funtimez12345
Didn't you know that socialism and communism are two of the most incorrectly used terms in the entire world?
The person you quoted said "Where everyone is treated fairly." Just because he incorrectly used the term communism doesn't mean anything. It makes you look stupid for not realizing he meant socialism.
They were worse than Communist. They were fascist like the UK has sadly become without Nazi influence. "Fascism ( /ˈfæʃɪzəm/) is a radical authoritarian nationalist political ideology.[1][2] Fascists seek rejuvenation of their nation based on commitment to an organic national community where its individuals are united together as one people in national identity by suprapersonal connections of ancestry, culture, and blood through a totalitarian single-party state that seeks the mass mobilization of a nation through discipline, indoctrination, physical education, and eugenics"[QUOTE="theSteeeeels"]then we would live in a wonderful world. where blacks or jews didnt exist and everyone was treated fairly (communism)Pirate700
...erm
They were worse than Communist. They were fascist like the UK has sadly become without Nazi influence. the people under the higher ups were taken care of that includes working class (so not like the UK)[QUOTE="theSteeeeels"]then we would live in a wonderful world. where blacks or jews didnt exist and everyone was treated fairly (communism)Pirate700
[QUOTE="Pirate700"]They were worse than Communist. They were fascist like the UK has sadly become without Nazi influence. the people under the higher ups were taken care of that includes working class (so not like the UK)The German citizens (well the white, non Jewish ones) were taken care of. That doesn't make Nazi Germany any worse.[QUOTE="theSteeeeels"]then we would live in a wonderful world. where blacks or jews didnt exist and everyone was treated fairly (communism)theSteeeeels
[QUOTE="funtimez12345"]
looks like you're the moron since he clearly said in his post COMMUNISM and the nazis imprisoned and killed many communists and the fear of a communist takeover was a big part of the reason why Hitler was able to take power.
airshocker
Didn't you know that socialism and communism are two of the most incorrectly used terms in the entire world?
The person you quoted said "Where everyone is treated fairly." Just because he incorrectly used the term communism doesn't mean anything. It makes you look stupid for not realizing he meant socialism.
"where everyone is treated fairly" could apply to either one. In the past that obviously that hasn't been true about communism, or socialism for that matter (they are equal failures of economic systems) but the idea behind both it is that everyone is treated fairly. In fact that would apply more so to communism since a "classless state" is what communism is described to be.One of us is looking stupid here and it's not me...
the people under the higher ups were taken care of that includes working class (so not like the UK)The German citizens (well the white, non Jewish ones) were taken care of. That doesn't make Nazi Germany any worse. who said its worse? democracy just lets corporations/banks take over... its controlled by money..... people start businesses, make money, become billionaire tycoons, and with the money they control the politics... after a while a handful of people will always have 99% of the money..... its stupid you need it controlled.[QUOTE="theSteeeeels"][QUOTE="Pirate700"]They were worse than Communist. They were fascist like the UK has sadly become without Nazi influence.
Pirate700
I don't see how they could have beaten the US, even if they had conquered europe. if they had backed the US to a wall, they would have resorted to nuclear war and vaporized them.
but hypothetically, if they had won, they probably would have exterminated everyone that weren't like them, like they were doing during the war.
so at least overpopulation wouldnt be an issue..
There is no way any one nation could take over the world, it is just too hard. Ghengis Khan and Alexander the Great could not do it. Greed is a vicious cycle. Once Hitler dies, the place would fall apart. Not even Rome could take everything, they got thinned out, and eventually could not hold itself.
where everyone is treated fairly" could apply to either one. In the past that obviously that hasn't been true about communism, or socialism for that matter (they are equal failures of economic systems) but the idea behind both it is that everyone is treated fairly. In fact that would apply more so to communism since a "classless state" is what communism is described to be.
One of us is looking stupid here and it's not me...
funtimez12345
Obviously. So why didn't you realize he was talking about socialism? Instead you lambasted him for using the incorrect term when you full-well knew what he was talking about.
That seems quite stupid to me.
[QUOTE="funtimez12345"]
where everyone is treated fairly" could apply to either one. In the past that obviously that hasn't been true about communism, or socialism for that matter (they are equal failures of economic systems) but the idea behind both it is that everyone is treated fairly. In fact that would apply more so to communism since a "classless state" is what communism is described to be.
One of us is looking stupid here and it's not me...
airshocker
Obviously. So why didn't you realize he was talking about socialism? Instead you lambasted him for using the incorrect term when you full-well knew what he was talking about.
That seems quite stupid to me.
Because he SAID communism.If that statement can be applied to either ideology, and he typed in communism, than it's reasonable to assume he had no idea what he's talking about rather than he made a mistake. Besides that there were other reasons to call him a dumbass, like when he said it would be better because there would be no Jews or blacks.
Because he SAID communism.
If that statement can be applied to either ideology, and he typed in communism, than it's reasonable to assume he had no idea what he's talking about rather than he made a mistake. Besides that there were other reasons to call him a dumbass, like when he said it would be better because there would be no Jews or blacks.
funtimez12345
So you're incapable of adapting when someone makes a mistake? That's pathetic. :lol:
[QUOTE="funtimez12345"]
Because he SAID communism.
If that statement can be applied to either ideology, and he typed in communism, than it's reasonable to assume he had no idea what he's talking about rather than he made a mistake. Besides that there were other reasons to call him a dumbass, like when he said it would be better because there would be no Jews or blacks.
airshocker
So you're incapable of adapting when someone makes a mistake? That's pathetic. :lol:
How is that pathetic? I was just correcting his mistake. Calm down, please.I doubt the Germans would have been able to hold onto everything they occupied during the war. Their goal was basically to reorganize the European balance of power under an association of fascist states with a German superstate at the top of the hierarchy. So if they had knocked the Britons and Soviets out of the war, they probably would have accepted peace terms from Britain recognizing Germany's control over Poland and the rest of Eastern Europe and then left them alone. They would have directly annexed most of Eastern Europe, and broken up the Soviet Union between its constituent republics; The Baltic States, Ukraine, etc, and reduced Russia to the borders of the old medieval Muscovite kingdom. They would have given the Vichy government control of all of France and its colonies, and would have headed an alliance with them, as well as with fascist Italy, Hungary, and Romania. They certainly would have formalized an alliance with Spain as well, and possibly Portugal too. With their collapse, the British would probably lose their mandate over Palestine, Egypt and Iraq and those rulers would probably align with the fascists as well, as certainly would the Syrians (of which Lebanon was a part at that time), being under French administration. Hard to say what would happen to India, but without British protection it would be awfully exposed to the Japanese. Italy would retain control of Libya and Abyssinia (Ethiopia), and would likely control most of the Balkans as well. Greece would likely be an independent fascist-aligned state. The Turkish Kemalists would likely go fascist as well, attempting to regain territory in the Caucasus that they had coveted since the Ottoman days as the Soviet Union retreated from the region. They would split up access to Caucasian resources with the Germans. fidosimWASHINGTON—Unable to rest their eyes on a colorful photograph or boldface heading that could be easily skimmed and forgotten about, Americans collectively recoiled Monday when confronted with a solid block of uninterrupted text.
WASHINGTON-Unable to rest their eyes on a colorful photograph or boldface heading that could be easily skimmed and forgotten about, Americans collectively recoiled Monday when confronted with a solid block of uninterrupted text.[QUOTE="fidosim"]I doubt the Germans would have been able to hold onto everything they occupied during the war. Their goal was basically to reorganize the European balance of power under an association of fascist states with a German superstate at the top of the hierarchy. So if they had knocked the Britons and Soviets out of the war, they probably would have accepted peace terms from Britain recognizing Germany's control over Poland and the rest of Eastern Europe and then left them alone. They would have directly annexed most of Eastern Europe, and broken up the Soviet Union between its constituent republics; The Baltic States, Ukraine, etc, and reduced Russia to the borders of the old medieval Muscovite kingdom. They would have given the Vichy government control of all of France and its colonies, and would have headed an alliance with them, as well as with fascist Italy, Hungary, and Romania. They certainly would have formalized an alliance with Spain as well, and possibly Portugal too. With their collapse, the British would probably lose their mandate over Palestine, Egypt and Iraq and those rulers would probably align with the fascists as well, as certainly would the Syrians (of which Lebanon was a part at that time), being under French administration. Hard to say what would happen to India, but without British protection it would be awfully exposed to the Japanese. Italy would retain control of Libya and Abyssinia (Ethiopia), and would likely control most of the Balkans as well. Greece would likely be an independent fascist-aligned state. The Turkish Kemalists would likely go fascist as well, attempting to regain territory in the Caucasus that they had coveted since the Ottoman days as the Soviet Union retreated from the region. They would split up access to Caucasian resources with the Germans. funtimez12345
WASHINGTON—Unable to rest their eyes on a colorful photograph or boldface heading that could be easily skimmed and forgotten about, Americans collectively recoiled Monday when confronted with a solid block of uninterrupted text.[QUOTE="fidosim"]I doubt the Germans would have been able to hold onto everything they occupied during the war. Their goal was basically to reorganize the European balance of power under an association of fascist states with a German superstate at the top of the hierarchy. So if they had knocked the Britons and Soviets out of the war, they probably would have accepted peace terms from Britain recognizing Germany's control over Poland and the rest of Eastern Europe and then left them alone. They would have directly annexed most of Eastern Europe, and broken up the Soviet Union between its constituent republics; The Baltic States, Ukraine, etc, and reduced Russia to the borders of the old medieval Muscovite kingdom. They would have given the Vichy government control of all of France and its colonies, and would have headed an alliance with them, as well as with fascist Italy, Hungary, and Romania. They certainly would have formalized an alliance with Spain as well, and possibly Portugal too. With their collapse, the British would probably lose their mandate over Palestine, Egypt and Iraq and those rulers would probably align with the fascists as well, as certainly would the Syrians (of which Lebanon was a part at that time), being under French administration. Hard to say what would happen to India, but without British protection it would be awfully exposed to the Japanese. Italy would retain control of Libya and Abyssinia (Ethiopia), and would likely control most of the Balkans as well. Greece would likely be an independent fascist-aligned state. The Turkish Kemalists would likely go fascist as well, attempting to regain territory in the Caucasus that they had coveted since the Ottoman days as the Soviet Union retreated from the region. They would split up access to Caucasian resources with the Germans. funtimez12345
Roflmao at germany stopping with just europe...This, obviously.
https://www.youtube.com/embed/ailAbCJf2dw
Gaming-Planet
[QUOTE="funtimez12345"]WASHINGTON—Unable to rest their eyes on a colorful photograph or boldface heading that could be easily skimmed and forgotten about, Americans collectively recoiled Monday when confronted with a solid block of uninterrupted text.[QUOTE="fidosim"]I doubt the Germans would have been able to hold onto everything they occupied during the war. Their goal was basically to reorganize the European balance of power under an association of fascist states with a German superstate at the top of the hierarchy. So if they had knocked the Britons and Soviets out of the war, they probably would have accepted peace terms from Britain recognizing Germany's control over Poland and the rest of Eastern Europe and then left them alone. They would have directly annexed most of Eastern Europe, and broken up the Soviet Union between its constituent republics; The Baltic States, Ukraine, etc, and reduced Russia to the borders of the old medieval Muscovite kingdom. They would have given the Vichy government control of all of France and its colonies, and would have headed an alliance with them, as well as with fascist Italy, Hungary, and Romania. They certainly would have formalized an alliance with Spain as well, and possibly Portugal too. With their collapse, the British would probably lose their mandate over Palestine, Egypt and Iraq and those rulers would probably align with the fascists as well, as certainly would the Syrians (of which Lebanon was a part at that time), being under French administration. Hard to say what would happen to India, but without British protection it would be awfully exposed to the Japanese. Italy would retain control of Libya and Abyssinia (Ethiopia), and would likely control most of the Balkans as well. Greece would likely be an independent fascist-aligned state. The Turkish Kemalists would likely go fascist as well, attempting to regain territory in the Caucasus that they had coveted since the Ottoman days as the Soviet Union retreated from the region. They would split up access to Caucasian resources with the Germans. Hubadubalubahu
Ah, yes... police hour, gestapo, soldiers on every street, fresh yet stinky soap of human fat, lampshaders from human skin with tattoos on it (just to name a few) , everyone sprecht sie deutsch
And lots of Aryans...
Can you imagine a better world? :roll:
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment