Re: ww3

On Thu, 16 Jan 2025 7:56:40 +0000, Thomas Heger wrote:

Am Dienstag000014, 14.01.2025 um 09:53 schrieb Bertietaylor:

On Fri, 10 Jan 2025 7:15:51 +0000, Thomas Heger wrote:
>

Am Donnerstag000009, 09.01.2025 um 11:01 schrieb Bertietaylor:
>

NATO already has ships in the Black Sea.
>

>
Possibly yes, but there is no war between Russia and NATO till now.
>
Important is, what would happen in the case of a conflict.

>
Russia would get it's ass kicked even more than it's getting its ass
kicked now.

>
Germany has tried to do this several times and lost every single war
with Russia- mostly very miserably.

>
>
Bullshit, in 1ww Germany beat Russia and forced
to  a separate peace.

>
True but a century earlier they thrashed the French.

>
Napoleon was a shithead from Corsica and has invaded Prussia.
>
The French forced Prussia to participate in the war against Russia, what
the Prussians disliked.
>
The scumbag named 'Napoleon' later left the war unharmed, but the
Prussians didn't and died there in large numbers.
>
 From Prussian perspective this war had the sole aim to decimate
Prussians.
>
As a revenge the Prussians helped the British to destroy Napoleon in
Waterloo.

>
Russians and Germans were feudal and imperial whereas France was modern
and egalitarian.
>
Napoleon ranks with Alexander, Caesar and Hitler as among the four top
European leaders, for egalitarianism and modernity.

>
All of them did essentially the same thing:
>
they have sent their armies into territories, which were not theirs and
forced the inhabitants of the occupied regions to fight in their army.
>
In case of Napoleon this was a disaster for the Prussians, which died in
large numbers in the Russian winter.

Napoleon invaded Russia as the Czar broke the earlier treaty after
losing a big battle. The idea was to contain Russia, not let it expand
by sea, stop its association with the UK.

>
That stupid corsian piece of shit didn't do that, however, but left the
Prussians there to die together with the French soldiers.

He lost. Russia won and the Cossacks romped in Paris. However those
serfs got ideas from France and over time they grew strong enough to
overthrow the Czar.

>
Hitler did almost the same thing.

Big mistake. That is why there are those who say that Hitler was
actually anti-German or anti-Arya. The greatest conman ever.

>
Hitlers occupation involved more serious crimes however, which were much
more devastating for the German soldiers.

Indeed. Either a very big fool or the greatest traitor. Stalin never
thought he would be so stupid as to have war on two fronts. Hitler
should have finished UK before attacking USSR.

>
E.g. Hitler refused to occupy Leningrad.

He did say he would have dinner there but looks like Soviet resistance
was great.

>
This was extremely stupid, because Leningrad has a harbor and having a
harbor there would allow the Wehrmacht to use ships (instead of walking
through the Russian winter).

This assumes he could have walked in.

>
To prevent German success, the Nazis had to surround Leningrad and
starved 1 million Russians to death, which was a very serious crime,
too.

So you hold Hitler and Nazis to be anti German. Well they certainly
ruined Germany while claiming to love Germans.

>
But it was also extremely stupid, because with occupation of Leningrad
the Baltic Sea would have been entirely under German control.
>
That in turn would allow Navi-ships to move quite safely back and forth
and that in  turn would have saved millions of lifes.

Yes, but the Soviets stopped them. Once their troops returned from the
Chinese front the tide turned.

>
>
Also the Stalingrad campaign was extremely stupid and extremely deadly.
>
It made not sense of any kind to invade that region in the first place.

They wanted the oil in that region, and the rich lands of Ukraine.

>
But especially the city Stalingrad was of no particular interest and the
campaigned served no obvious purpose (despite wiping out an entire
army).
>
So: Hitler was a piece of shit, too, but for very similar reasons as
Napoleon.

Look at their plus points. They were scientific, modern, egalitarian,
supported research, cared for the common man, introduced many reforms,
improved quality of life, weakened the grip of the feudal lords and
religious bigots, broke down barriers... We all must die and who knows
that better than dictators. Their point is that mass killings will lead
to positive change in due course. Genghis Khan is credited with the
Renaissance in Europe, dragged them out of the Dark Aged.

>
>
>
>
>
>
....
>
>
TH