if it were not for the jews there would be no ww2

In history we studied that Germany had good relationships with the rest of the world but its balance was toppled once Wilhelm the 2nd came into power as he was narrow-minded, stupid and crazy. He alienated the English by entering an arms race with major constructions of battleships, it had been previously agreed between Otto Von Bismarck and the English that Germany would rule on the continent but not on the sea. Once Bismarck was out of power, Germany made mistakes putting her into a situation where she was the "aggressor". Under Wilhelm Germany started a policy of imperialism which disturbed many of the European leaders, ultimately led to WW1 as Wilhelm kept pushing for war. This is proven to be true, politics in Germany became dominated by military plans, the whole WW1 decisions were based on the fact that with the Schlieffen plan they could theoretically win the war easily, without taking into account that england might intervene.

I conclude that Wilhelm the 2nd was thus one of the worse German leaders ever!!! since it lead to WW1 and thus complications leading to WW2.

Just wanted to make my stance on early 20th century German relations with the Allies.

 

In history we studied that Germany had good relationships with the rest of the world but its balance was toppled once Wilhelm the 2nd came into power as he was narrow-minded, stupid and crazy. He alienated the English by entering an arms race with major constructions of battleships, it had been previously agreed between Otto Von Bismarck and the English that Germany would rule on the continent but not on the sea. Once Bismarck was out of power, Germany made mistakes putting her into a situation where she was the "aggressor". Under Wilhelm Germany started a policy of imperialism which disturbed many of the European leaders, ultimately led to WW1 as Wilhelm kept pushing for war. This is proven to be true, politics in Germany became dominated by military plans, the whole WW1 decisions were based on the fact that with the Schlieffen plan they could theoretically win the war easily, without taking into account that england might intervene.

I conclude that Wilhelm the 2nd was thus one of the worse German leaders ever!!! since it lead to WW1 and thus complications leading to WW2.

Just wanted to make my stance on early 20th century German relations with the Allies.

A good but general summation of the situation

 

In history we studied that Germany had good relationships with the rest of the world but its balance was toppled once Wilhelm the 2nd came into power as he was narrow-minded, stupid and crazy. He alienated the English by entering an arms race with major constructions of battleships, it had been previously agreed between Otto Von Bismarck and the English that Germany would rule on the continent but not on the sea. Once Bismarck was out of power, Germany made mistakes putting her into a situation where she was the "aggressor". Under Wilhelm Germany started a policy of imperialism which disturbed many of the European leaders, ultimately led to WW1 as Wilhelm kept pushing for war. This is proven to be true, politics in Germany became dominated by military plans, the whole WW1 decisions were based on the fact that with the Schlieffen plan they could theoretically win the war easily, without taking into account that england might intervene.

I conclude that Wilhelm the 2nd was thus one of the worse German leaders ever!!! since it lead to WW1 and thus complications leading to WW2.

Just wanted to make my stance on early 20th century German relations with the Allies.

Isn't it amazing what just one man can do if he happens to be in the right place at the wrong time?

 

Hitler had very good instincts when it came to motivating perhaps the more basic elements of German society. Selecting a minority and blaming all of Germany's misfortune on them, was calculated to create an US versus THEM mentality. Governments have frequently used the threat of an enemy, external or internal, to gain support and create excuses for harsh laws and more Federal power. I'm sure you can think of lots of other examples.

The Jews were a convenient tool. Once he got started on them, he couldn't stop (not that he wanted to), the Nazis were making too much money by persecuting the Jews. Evicting them from their homes, forced sale of properties and businesses, even making them pay damages after Kristalnacht! Hitler needed these funds because of the huge amount of spending on military hardware.

What's curious is how the German population largely went along with the whole sick venture. There are a number of books available that expose the participation of "ordinary Germans" in the Holocaust. One I read recently was about Reserve Police Battalion 101. The book details the horrific crimes of this so called police unit in Poland in 1941 - 1942, committed by individuals who weren't "psychopaths". I think a psychopath would have hard time keeping up with these guys.

I think it was after reading that particular book I kind of realized something about people, just about anybody can justify any deed in their own mind, no matter how vile.

Police Battalion 101 was ordered to kill all of the Jews, men, women and children, of a Polish town called Jozefow. This particular atrocity is somewhat unique in that the commanding officer told his men that if any of them weren't up to it he could find other duties for them and that they would not be punished. Only about one dozen of the men asked to be exempted from the mass murder.

An example of mans ability to justify even the most horrific of deeds was given by one of the perpertraitors when they were tried in the 60's. One of the men from Battalion 101 only shot children, afterward he justified these murders by saying that since the mother was also being killed the children would have nothing to live for.

 

It was not difficult to spot this thread with its incendiary title of "if it were not for the jews there would be no WW2". Not even a question mark, so I decided to scan back to the original posting by Montgomery in March 2006.

if it were not for the jews there would be no ww2

some people say if it was not for the jews there might not have been a second world war the only thing i find unusal is why did hitler hate the jews i think because they were rich and strange.


I thought to myself, funny, I've never been described as rich before, strange perhaps, but as I read on to the most recent item posted above by Stig O'Tracey I realised that despite a rocky start, forum members had treated the subject with due gravity and consideration.

I shall not be commenting further on this particular topic but will be keeping an interested eye on subsequent postings.

Regards

Ron

ps
I wondered why I had not seen this thread before so I went back to see when I had first posted on this site. It was in June 2006 so therefore I was not around to join in the discussion. Today, some 1,001 posts later, I make a point of reading virtually every posting in order to see whether it is a subject on which I feel I can contribute.
This is a good, honest, forum which suits me to a T and I shall continue to make comment for as long as I am able.

 

Antisemetism was a central plank of the NSDAP value system , the scapegoat hatred centred mentality provided an easy target and focus for Germany's ill and misfortune.

The Jewish population of Germany in Hitler's time was less than 1% , they were well integrated and formed a productive "minority", they were as "Germnan" as any other "German".
Hitler's "25 point plan" made it clear that they would be removed from German society - party propaganda identified the Jews as being "bolsheviks" and from early times they were targeted and identified as being central to Germany's defeat and all that followed.

Now that is the NSDAP line , for what it is worth - not wishing to be blunt but it is a "crock of sh1t".

If you really want to follow this up there are any amount of well written histories of the rise of "the party" and their antisemetic message which clearly outlines the racalist doggma which was presented in anything from the crude message of "Der Sturmer" to books aimed at youngsters such as " Trust no Fox" all are quite disgusting and untruthful.

Ian Kershaws "Hubris" ,
Hitler, 1889-1936: Hubris: Amazon.co.uk: Ian Kershaw: Books

"The Hitler Myth"

The Hitler Myth: Image and Reality in the Third Reich: Amazon.co.uk: Ian Kershaw: Books

Hitler, the Germans and The Final Solution
Hitler, The Germans, and the Final Solution: Amazon.co.uk: Ian Kershaw: Books

This I have to read yet - it presents some of Kershaws earlier work on the Nazis and the Rise of Hitler - his evolving policy towards Germany's Jewish population will no doubt be well documented.


Professor Richard Evans

The Coming of the Third Reich: Amazon.co.uk: Richard J Evans: Books

Amazon.co.uk: Richard Evans: Books

The Third Reich at War: How the Nazis Led Germany…Amazon.co.uk: Richard J Evans: Books

The above should go a large way to explaining the ignorance which formed the basis of party propaganda and policy which evolved from it.

As far as the initial question goes there is no truth in it whatsoever.
In some ways it is a good thing that the question be asked as it allows an indelible example of racist propaganda to be seen for what it is.
Histories verdict on the Nazis has been accurate and they remain as a warning for we who have come after them.

Christopher Brownings "The Origins of The Final Solution" is to be recommended .

The Origins of the Final Solution: The Evolution of Nazi Jewish Policy September 1939-March 1942: Chris Browning: Amazon.co.uk: Books

The end goal and how it came about the drift from race hate propaganda and state laws to enforce victimisation and the eventual act of genocide.
Why did it happen , simply because he could do it - he had created a society which had no actual law and which held no checks or balances on the abuse of power , the Nazis came at a price - this was part of it - "T4" and the concentration camps were the thin end of the wedge.

 

That Adam does explain a lot , hopefully he now has a greater understanding of what was.
Don't get me wrong - I have no problem with questions like this being asked - they allow a good bit of the mindset of the time s to be explained and thisd can only be appreciated within the context of that time.
Having said that it was propaganda then , and time has not changed that.
Radical solutions from a radical party given to a people who had seen their world collapse and the old established order swept away - answers were sought and reasons had to be found it gave the extreme right and left a foothold they would never otherwise have had.
The street violence of the times reflected the internal problems facing Germany , a situation which Hitler was bron to take advantage of- the wrong man at the "right time".

 

I accidentally came across this post after reading a post by another member which I thought showed considerable bad taste to say the least. I decided to look at other posts by that member as I was curious to see if there were any common threads. That's when I discovered this thread. I thought the title was pretty inflammatory and I was curious to see what kind of replies it received.

By the time I got to the end of it I was a bit worked up and wanted to post. I had written more than 1/2 of my post when I noticed how old the thread was. I decided to post my comments anyway. Perhaps I shouldn't have, let sleeping dogs lie and all. I also didn't realize that the person who started the thread was only 12.

Recently I've had a relative, who is mentally ill, become involved with a hate group. Although this person is quite intelligent and well read, he was still sucked in by this groups claptrap. It's disgusting to see the filth and lies perpetuated by these types. I think partly because of this experience I'm perhaps a little sensitive to statements that could be taken as promoting racist ideas or hate.

 

Good for you Stig