Was Hitler really the bad guy? It seems to me as though he wanted peace but was denied. Also, Churchill supported eugenics and biological warfare, so the systematic killing of an entire race of people with poison gas. Ring any bells? Roosevelt had everyone by the balls and kept Europe in war. Hitler always said he wanted peace and said his declarations of peace where ignored, and that the SA was necessary for the Nazis to rise to power.
After WW1 you have a broken Germany with a crashed economy and the iron ball of the treaty of Versailles. Germany was denied its rise of power by the elites that already took the seats. These Elites are...Jews? So he or his colleagues without him knowing initiated a program of mass killing?
How right am I?
>>1225126
If he wanted peace maybe he shouldn't have declared all those wars
>>1225126
Nah, he was good guy, it's just poles being butthurt:
>kill 2 billions of germans living in poland a day so they become minority in German Colony of Poland in few years
waaaaaah they killed 2 polish soldiers bad hitler, bad
>destroy warsaw - blame it on germans
>build concentration camps for jews and germans - blame it on germans
literally the worst scum in the world.
>>1225126
>he wanted peace
Invading a bunch of countries is a weird way to show that.
Of course he'd want peace on his own terms having annexed Austria&Czechoslovakia and having conquered Poland, Belgium, the Netherlands and France. But he only wanted this peace so he could fight the USSR without a second front to worry about.
Yes he was a bad guy.
But the world we live in now is pretty fake, and it has Stasi-tier surveillance coupled with a corrupt democracy that is owned by rich and powerful people's interest.
I certainly prefer to live in this society though, as I am for the most part left alone to my own devices which assuredly wouldn't be the case in Nazi-Germany.
>>1225139
17% of poland's population died as a result of ww2
>>1225126
I certainly think that Hitler was bad. I do think that Churchill had some ideas that were similary bad, but as a response to Hitler he changed his mind in a way to oppose Hitler.
What kind of policies Churchill would have had without Hitler? Ask yourself that.
>>1225158
If you can't see that was a sarcastic comment you have no hope.
>>1225162
Not him, and I did notice the sarcasm, but at this point, I think Poe's Law applies. There are /pol/acks that literally believe this
>>1225160
Without Hitler, Churchill would never have come to be PM.
Pre-war, he was viewed as the parliamentary equivalent of a homeless man shouting THE END IS NEAR by a train station.
>>1225126
>seems to me as though he wanted peace but was denied.
Then your an idiot. You don't build up a massive army and war economy with no intention of using it.
>Also, Churchill supported eugenics and biological warfare, so the systematic killing of an entire race of people with poison gas. Ring any bells?
The difference is he didn't actually act on this ideas.
>Roosevelt had everyone by the balls and kept Europe in war.
Literally what?
>Hitler always said he wanted peace and said his declarations of peace where ignored, and that the SA was necessary for the Nazis to rise to power.
He lied. Of course he'd portray himself as some sort of peaceful, persecuted upstart to garner simpathy. It's basic propaganda.
I'm not even going to answer the rest. This is what everyone feared /his/ would degenerate into.
>>1225133
First post best post
Does anyone have the infographic where they comedically make Hitler a good guy? Where everything he ever said about Jews was actually positive but mistranslated or taken out of context? Like it wasn't "The Jewish Problem", it was "Jewish Problems", and he intended to help them.That was pretty funny.
>>1225305
Just go on a /pol/ holocaust thread. You are sure to find stupider shit than that on there too.
>>1225311
No no, this was obviously satirical. It was great because it became more obvious only later on, so at first it really does seem like a dumb /pol/ infograph.
