Why did Hitler declare war on the U.S.?

[rightwinger]

Here's A Question

Britain And France Were Bound By Treaty To Ensure The Sovereignty Of Poland
Germany Invaded Poland, Britain And France Declared War On Germany
USSR Co-Invaded Poland With Germany
Britain And France Didn't Declare War On USSR

FDR, Churchill, DeGaulle, and Truman sold Poland out to Stalin.

Patton was right.

Patton was a moron

You're just pissed that he was right about the Russians.

History shows he was an excellent general.

Excellent tactical general. Strategically, he was a moron
Engaging Russia would have needlessly killed 100,000 Americans
Ask the Germans how it turned out

You progressives are so stupid. you can't ask them because they are all dead.

Yes
Millions of Germans died invading the USSR
How many Americans would Patton kill doing the same?

 

[Cellblock2429]

FDR, Churchill, DeGaulle, and Truman sold Poland out to Stalin.

Patton was right.

Patton was a moron

You're just pissed that he was right about the Russians.

History shows he was an excellent general.

Excellent tactical general. Strategically, he was a moron
Engaging Russia would have needlessly killed 100,000 Americans
Ask the Germans how it turned out

You progressives are so stupid. you can't ask them because they are all dead.

Yes
Millions of Germans died invading the USSR
How many Americans would Patton kill doing the same?

/——/ The Russians were already in Europe and that is where Patton would have fought them.

 

[miketx]

FDR, Churchill, DeGaulle, and Truman sold Poland out to Stalin.

Patton was right.

Patton was a moron

You're just pissed that he was right about the Russians.

History shows he was an excellent general.

Excellent tactical general. Strategically, he was a moron
Engaging Russia would have needlessly killed 100,000 Americans
Ask the Germans how it turned out

You progressives are so stupid. you can't ask them because they are all dead.

Yes
Millions of Germans died invading the USSR
How many Americans would Patton kill doing the same?

7.

 

[harmonica]

1. Victory Disease/etc:
..he just defeated not 1 but 2 armies and a major country--a country with a huge military and better tanks...and he did this very ''quickly'' [ blitzkrieg ] !
..he took over Czechoslovakia, Denmark, Norway, etc rather quickly/etc
..he's rolling over the Russians---
..he's on a huge roll---victory after victory

2. he's not alone in thinking he can '''handle'' the US--the Japanese think the same thing--even though the US has about TEN times the warmaking potential of Japan

---- so, it's not only that he ''might'' be crazy, he's doing what a lot of ''humans do--a lot of governments have done...

 

[Syriusly]

Hitler is often described as a "mad man" whose declaration of war against the U.S. was the worst strategic blunder of WW2. But I am wondering if there may have been a rational basis for his decision.

In December 1941 the German army was at the gates of Moscow, poised for what it seemed to be an imminent defeat of the USSR. In that event, Germany would have established an impregnable Fortress Europe for years to come. In contrast Germany's ally Japan was about to be squashed by the far greater industrial resources of the U.S., possibly creating a new world empire even more threatening to Germany than that of the British.

By quickly declaring war against the U.S. could Hitler have decided that drawing off U.S. resources to fight an unwinnable war in Europe would extend the war with Japan (possibly to a stalemate) and eventually lead to a comprehensive peace treaty?

There is almost no documentation of Hitler's thinking on this matter, but being a monster does not necessarily make one a moron. Any thoughts on this theory?

Roosevelt started arming the UK, USSR, France and China, cut off fuel to Japan and moved the Pacific fleet from San Diego to Pearl Harbor.

The jackass party of slavery also instituted the first peacetime draft in US history.

That stuff certainly didn't go unnoticed by Hitler.

You think FDR was wrong to draft people?

Conscription is a particularly abhorrent form of slavery.

But of course Democrats have never been morally outraged by the institution of slavery.

Funny how you want to frame conscription as an issue that only Democrats have supported.

Considering how the first draft law was implimented by Republicans.

 

[Syriusly]

Hitler is often described as a "mad man" whose declaration of war against the U.S. was the worst strategic blunder of WW2. But I am wondering if there may have been a rational basis for his decision.

In December 1941 the German army was at the gates of Moscow, poised for what it seemed to be an imminent defeat of the USSR. In that event, Germany would have established an impregnable Fortress Europe for years to come. In contrast Germany's ally Japan was about to be squashed by the far greater industrial resources of the U.S., possibly creating a new world empire even more threatening to Germany than that of the British.

By quickly declaring war against the U.S. could Hitler have decided that drawing off U.S. resources to fight an unwinnable war in Europe would extend the war with Japan (possibly to a stalemate) and eventually lead to a comprehensive peace treaty?

There is almost no documentation of Hitler's thinking on this matter, but being a monster does not necessarily make one a moron. Any thoughts on this theory?

Roosevelt started arming the UK, USSR, France and China, cut off fuel to Japan and moved the Pacific fleet from San Diego to Pearl Harbor.

The jackass party of slavery also instituted the first peacetime draft in US history.

That stuff certainly didn't go unnoticed by Hitler.

You think FDR was wrong to draft people?

He also behaved badly during the bonus army march, according to historians.

FDR and the bonus army march? I think you are confused.

Arguably Hoover- and MacArthur and Patton all acted inappropriately during the bonus army march- but FDR was nowhere near the White House then.

 

[harmonica]

Hitler is often described as a "mad man" whose declaration of war against the U.S. was the worst strategic blunder of WW2. But I am wondering if there may have been a rational basis for his decision.

In December 1941 the German army was at the gates of Moscow, poised for what it seemed to be an imminent defeat of the USSR. In that event, Germany would have established an impregnable Fortress Europe for years to come. In contrast Germany's ally Japan was about to be squashed by the far greater industrial resources of the U.S., possibly creating a new world empire even more threatening to Germany than that of the British.

By quickly declaring war against the U.S. could Hitler have decided that drawing off U.S. resources to fight an unwinnable war in Europe would extend the war with Japan (possibly to a stalemate) and eventually lead to a comprehensive peace treaty?

There is almost no documentation of Hitler's thinking on this matter, but being a monster does not necessarily make one a moron. Any thoughts on this theory?

see post # 84

 

[ABikerSailor]

You know, History Channel has done quite a few shows on this. Much of Hitler's judgement in the middle and end parts of WWII were impaired because he was high most of the time on opiates and amphetamines.

He even kept a doctor on call at all times so he could get his drugs.

 

[Muhammed]

Hitler is often described as a "mad man" whose declaration of war against the U.S. was the worst strategic blunder of WW2. But I am wondering if there may have been a rational basis for his decision.

In December 1941 the German army was at the gates of Moscow, poised for what it seemed to be an imminent defeat of the USSR. In that event, Germany would have established an impregnable Fortress Europe for years to come. In contrast Germany's ally Japan was about to be squashed by the far greater industrial resources of the U.S., possibly creating a new world empire even more threatening to Germany than that of the British.

By quickly declaring war against the U.S. could Hitler have decided that drawing off U.S. resources to fight an unwinnable war in Europe would extend the war with Japan (possibly to a stalemate) and eventually lead to a comprehensive peace treaty?

There is almost no documentation of Hitler's thinking on this matter, but being a monster does not necessarily make one a moron. Any thoughts on this theory?

Roosevelt started arming the UK, USSR, France and China, cut off fuel to Japan and moved the Pacific fleet from San Diego to Pearl Harbor.

The jackass party of slavery also instituted the first peacetime draft in US history.

That stuff certainly didn't go unnoticed by Hitler.

You think FDR was wrong to draft people?

Conscription is a particularly abhorrent form of slavery.

But of course Democrats have never been morally outraged by the institution of slavery.

Funny how you want to frame conscription as an issue that only Democrats have supported.

Considering how the first draft law was implimented by Republicans.

And of course you are lying.

Wealthy Democrats are constantly getting the US into wars that have nothing to do with our vital national security interests and using slaves to fight those wars.

It's one of the reasons the Democratic party is known as the party of slavery.

Nixon ended slavery, however, since then, every once in a while a Democrat will introduce a slavery bill in congress to sort of feel the waters.

 

[22lcidw]

Because Germany, Italy and ja6pan were members of the axis and a declaration of war against om0ne member of the axis was a declaration against all three per their agreement. I don't think Hitler was in any way happy about Japan picking the fight with America at that time but I'm sure we were in his sights for the future, just not right then. He'd intended to bump off Great Britian first then take on America once he had a chance to prepare.

Hitler broke all his other agreements....why not this one?

Hitler had no chance of attacking America

He couldn’t cross 30 miles of English Channel, how could he cross 3000 miles of Atlantic Ocean?

Lend lease help to save England but was the final nail in the coffin for them as a world empire.

 

[Syriusly]

Patton was a moron

You're just pissed that he was right about the Russians.

History shows he was an excellent general.

Excellent tactical general. Strategically, he was a moron
Engaging Russia would have needlessly killed 100,000 Americans
Ask the Germans how it turned out

You progressives are so stupid. you can't ask them because they are all dead.

Yes
Millions of Germans died invading the USSR
How many Americans would Patton kill doing the same?

/——/ The Russians were already in Europe and that is where Patton would have fought them.

Russia is in Europe......and Asia.

I do not understand this fantasy that some have of a 'good war' where Patton defeats the Soviets.

There are several problems with that fantasy.
First of which is that the American people believed at the time that the Soviets were our allies- convincing them to go to war with the Soviets without any cause for action would have been simply impossible.
Secondly- the Americans were already war weary and still had a war going on in the Pacific- there would have been no enthusiasm for the American sons who had been overseas fighting and risking their lives for 3 or 4 years spending a few more years risking their lives.
Thirdly- the Soviets were no almost defeated Germany. Their tanks were superior to any allied tanks of the time, and they had more of them. The Soviets had tons of very good artillery and infantry as experienced or more than the Americans. The advantage the Americans would have would be in the air- and that still would have been tough. I think given the air power Americans would have probably prevailed but at huge cost that would dwarf our losses to the Nazi's and Japanese.

 

[Syriusly]

Hitler is often described as a "mad man" whose declaration of war against the U.S. was the worst strategic blunder of WW2. But I am wondering if there may have been a rational basis for his decision.

In December 1941 the German army was at the gates of Moscow, poised for what it seemed to be an imminent defeat of the USSR. In that event, Germany would have established an impregnable Fortress Europe for years to come. In contrast Germany's ally Japan was about to be squashed by the far greater industrial resources of the U.S., possibly creating a new world empire even more threatening to Germany than that of the British.

By quickly declaring war against the U.S. could Hitler have decided that drawing off U.S. resources to fight an unwinnable war in Europe would extend the war with Japan (possibly to a stalemate) and eventually lead to a comprehensive peace treaty?

There is almost no documentation of Hitler's thinking on this matter, but being a monster does not necessarily make one a moron. Any thoughts on this theory?

Roosevelt started arming the UK, USSR, France and China, cut off fuel to Japan and moved the Pacific fleet from San Diego to Pearl Harbor.

The jackass party of slavery also instituted the first peacetime draft in US history.

That stuff certainly didn't go unnoticed by Hitler.

You think FDR was wrong to draft people?

Conscription is a particularly abhorrent form of slavery.

But of course Democrats have never been morally outraged by the institution of slavery.

Funny how you want to frame conscription as an issue that only Democrats have supported.

Considering how the first draft law was implimented by Republicans.

And of course you are lying.

Wealthy Democrats are constantly getting the US into wars that have nothing to do with our vital national security interests and using slaves to fight those wars.

It's one of the reasons the Democratic party is known as the party of slavery.

Nixon ended slavery, however, since then, every once in a while a Democrat will introduce a slavery bill in congress to sort of feel the waters.

Oh you are such a predictable partisan liar.

The Republican controlled Congress passed the first conscription law in 1863, signed into law by our best Republican President ever- Abraham Lincoln.

The 1917 Conscription Act was introduced by a Republican and had more Republicans than Democrats in the House voting in favor
TO PASS H. R. 3545, AUTHORIZING THE PRESIDENT TO INCREASE ... -- House Vote #14 -- Apr 28, 1917

Then in 1948 Republicans introduced a new draft bill- which Republicans voted overwhelmingly for.


But of course to you- it is all the Democrats fault..........lol.....talk about partisan blinders.

 

[Syriusly]

Hitler is often described as a "mad man" whose declaration of war against the U.S. was the worst strategic blunder of WW2. But I am wondering if there may have been a rational basis for his decision.

In December 1941 the German army was at the gates of Moscow, poised for what it seemed to be an imminent defeat of the USSR. In that event, Germany would have established an impregnable Fortress Europe for years to come. In contrast Germany's ally Japan was about to be squashed by the far greater industrial resources of the U.S., possibly creating a new world empire even more threatening to Germany than that of the British.

By quickly declaring war against the U.S. could Hitler have decided that drawing off U.S. resources to fight an unwinnable war in Europe would extend the war with Japan (possibly to a stalemate) and eventually lead to a comprehensive peace treaty?

There is almost no documentation of Hitler's thinking on this matter, but being a monster does not necessarily make one a moron. Any thoughts on this theory?

Roosevelt started arming the UK, USSR, France and China, cut off fuel to Japan and moved the Pacific fleet from San Diego to Pearl Harbor.

The jackass party of slavery also instituted the first peacetime draft in US history.

That stuff certainly didn't go unnoticed by Hitler.

You think FDR was wrong to draft people?

Conscription is a particularly abhorrent form of slavery.

But of course Democrats have never been morally outraged by the institution of slavery.

Funny how you want to frame conscription as an issue that only Democrats have supported.

Considering how the first draft law was implimented by Republicans.

Wealthy Democrats are constantly getting the US into wars that have nothing to do with our vital national security interests and using slaves to fight those wars.

It's one of the reasons the Democratic party is known as the party of slavery..

Since the vast majority of voters who are descended from actual American slaves are Democrats, I find it amusing that you claim that the Democratic Party is the party of slavery.

Do you think that African Americans are all stupid? Or Do you think that African Americans are all ignorant?

Either way- your response shows one of the prime reasons that African Americans shun the Republican Party as if it were a leper.

 

[jwoodie]

The 1917 Conscription Act was introduced by a Republican and had more Republicans than Democrats in the House voting in favor

Did you forget that this was passed (94%) at the request of Democrat Woodrow Wilson, who got us into WW1 and then ensured the Great Depression and WW2 because he wouldn't renegotiate Britain's and France's war loans?

 

[Syriusly]

The 1917 Conscription Act was introduced by a Republican and had more Republicans than Democrats in the House voting in favor

Did you forget that this was passed (94%) at the request of Democrat Woodrow Wilson, who got us into WW1 and then ensured the Great Depression and WW2 because he wouldn't renegotiate Britain's and France's war loans?

Nope- didn't forget that Woodrow Wilson was the President when Republicans introduced the Conscription law.

Anymore than I forgot how Hoover exacerbated the Great Depression and helped leave us woefully unprepared for WW2, and had American vets shot in Washington DC.

 

[Picaro]

Hitler didn’t have a whole lot of respect for the war making capabilities of America.

He considered us nothing more than “a country of mongrels filled with n*****s and Jews”.

He also counted on the large German Bund groups and sympathizers like Joe Kennedy and Lindberg, and the GOP and anti-Roosevelt Democrats to keep the U.S. out of the war despite FDR's efforts; it was FDR who turned out to be right, not the isolationist tards.

/—-/ Many Americans were still reeling from the bloodbath of WWI and didn’t want to get involved in another European mess.

True, but that doesn't change the fact that it has always been a futile fantasy. Even Jefferson had to face that reality of geo-politics in 1803.

I suppose you are a fan of Woodrow Wilson?

The isolationist? No. Why do you assume that? Doesn't matter who is in office, wars will start regardless, as in the case of both European wars. Wilson also screwed up when he got caught trying to reach peace agreements with the Kaiser in secret, which if course made the other Allies sue for peace way too early, before occupying Germany, which led to the problems later and the rise of Hitler. The U.S. advocated lower indemnities for Germany at Versailles, and also propped up the German economy and financed it's indemnities until the 1933, when Hitler thanked us by repudiating them and then later declaring war on us.

Even more absurd was the sniveling about Jews wanting to kill off Germany, when in fact the German-Jewish bankers in the U.S. were pro-Germany when WW I broke out, and were despised as a result, yet Hitler blamed them for Germany's losing WW I; just a factoid few know about, since it's almost never brought up in most histories or anti-semitic propaganda for some reason. Why were they pro-German? See what the Russians were up to for a hundred years or so before the war, and why half the world's Jewish population ended up in the U.S.

 

[Picaro]

The 1917 Conscription Act was introduced by a Republican and had more Republicans than Democrats in the House voting in favor

Did you forget that this was passed (94%) at the request of Democrat Woodrow Wilson, who got us into WW1 and then ensured the Great Depression and WW2 because he wouldn't renegotiate Britain's and France's war loans?

Right wing propaganda has to go back some19 years to find a Democratic President to blame for the Wall Street scams of the 1920's, I see; 24 years in the case of WW II now, apparently. Sorry, but WW II belongs to the same country that started WW I, Germany, lock, stock, and barrel. Republican Presidents spent their time propping up Germany; their reward for this foreign policy was repudiation and WW II. Can't blame Wilson for all of it.

 

[Polishprince]

Hitler is often described as a "mad man" whose declaration of war against the U.S. was the worst strategic blunder of WW2. But I am wondering if there may have been a rational basis for his decision.

In December 1941 the German army was at the gates of Moscow, poised for what it seemed to be an imminent defeat of the USSR. In that event, Germany would have established an impregnable Fortress Europe for years to come. In contrast Germany's ally Japan was about to be squashed by the far greater industrial resources of the U.S., possibly creating a new world empire even more threatening to Germany than that of the British.

By quickly declaring war against the U.S. could Hitler have decided that drawing off U.S. resources to fight an unwinnable war in Europe would extend the war with Japan (possibly to a stalemate) and eventually lead to a comprehensive peace treaty?

There is almost no documentation of Hitler's thinking on this matter, but being a monster does not necessarily make one a moron. Any thoughts on this theory?

Germany was at the gates of Moscow, that is true. But the capture of the Russian capital wouldn't necessarily mean victory you know. It was in the more recent past at the time , but a famous cheese-eating Surrender Monkey captured and burned Moscow and still lost the war with his Grand Armee.

Hitler was pissed at conservative Americans who opposed his Holocaust and Socialized Medicine policies. The idea of Freedom is America just made his sick to his stomach and made him want to fight back. Very similar to fellows that came along later like Laden, Saddam Hussein, al-Baghdadi and Soleimani.

 

[jwoodie]

Germany was at the gates of Moscow, that is true. But the capture of the Russian capital wouldn't necessarily mean victory you know. It was in the more recent past at the time , but a famous cheese-eating Surrender Monkey captured and burned Moscow and still lost the war with his Grand Armee.

The difference is that Moscow was the rail hub for European Russia. In the era of mechanized warfare this was critical to its subsequent counteroffensives. If Hitler hadn't postponed Barbarossa for six weeks (to bail out Mussolini's Greek fiasco) who knows what might have happened on the Eastern Front.