/mlpol/ - My Little Politics

He was thinking he'd use them as fodder to take down the axis powers so that afterwards he could rebuild the british empire. He didn't count on the US and Soviets agreeing to never allow western europe to have their empires back.

>>281484
>The English
Allow me to rock the boat just for fun.
And the video's author is a legit and reputed NatSoc.

>>281497
So is that why Operation Unthinkable was a thing?

>>281516
Pretty much, Churchill was banking on continued US support to pull it off, though and possibly assumed it'd return to its isolationist ways once it was all over and done with, leaving the UK as the last man standing in a decimated europe to pick up the reigns. There must always be a global hegemon, that's just how it works. The second world war was in truth a war over who that would be going forward, as it stands, the jews were playing most of the horses in that race against each other to see who would come out on top.

>>281484
In a perfect world, how would WW2 go?
If Hitler decided from day one to actually line up and shoot jews, meaning he didn't have to waste resources and manpower on keeping them in internment camps with labour and rabbit-breeding and swimming and theatres.
If Hitler had somehow convinced America, the UK, or both to take his side against communism.

>>281528
In a perfect world?
That's hard to imagine. It would be glorious though. You wouldn't have people asking stupid 'in a perfect world' questions based on their own heavily biased
impressions of what is ideal that's is heavily skewed by insufficient investigation, as an excuse to tell (you) what THEIRS are.
Oh, but yeah, Hitler should have just dropped a nuke on the jews, day one. My multi-dimensional Marvel(tm) time stone tells me it would tots go best that way.

>>281529
Oh great, you again.
How many years has it been since I put you in a state of perpetual butthurt?

Another thread about to be ruined by Nigel's off-topic autism and that one burger's pathological obsession to point it out.

>>281497
>to rebuild the Bristish Empire
It seems like a historical narrative so bafflingly retarded that its almost hard to believe. Churchhill risked losing everything just so he could lose to a agricultural tribe ruled bankers and merchants rather than a industrial nation that Germany produced and closer in relationship. God fuck this eternal anglo british cunt.

>>281532
Believe it, his desire to raise the empire from the dead was as well recorded as his opinions on niggers.

Churchill was a bitch nigga.

>>281530
What's the story on this guy?

>>281484
Fascism doesn't mean "frens with Hitler".
At its core, it is the very broad concept of "we're stronger together". More specifically, it is an ideology that sets the protection of [b]the group as its ultimate goal, and seeks to achieve said goal through members of said group working closely together against anyone who'd deter them in it, be it foreign enemy, infiltrator or traitor.
Notice how it doesn't restrict you in how you define the group. It could be a nation, a race, citizenry, employees of some company, members of some club or people sharing the same eye colour. Anything, basically.
Hitler defined his groups as the German nation and the Aryan/Germanic race. (Yes, definitions of race change over time, it is just as much of a social concept as it is genetic.)
Churchill though, he subscribed to things such as "being British", so that probably would've been the group he was thinking of in this context. Notice how this is radically different, and not based on national identity. (I mean, just ask the Irish. Or the Scots. Or the Welsh.) Another possibility is that he meant the Anglo-Saxon. This one would be based on nationality, yet still be a natural enemy to the Pan-Germanic cultural efforts of Germany at the time.

Also worth to note that any group can and do have its own goals regardless of fascism. Fascism itself is not the goal, it is just one of the tools for keeping the group going so that they can achieve the actual goals they might have. It just so happens that the goals of the UK during that time period also opposed the goals of Hitler and Germany.
So there you have it, an eventual conflict was unavoidable. They opposed each other on every possible level. They defined their groups in a different way, their definitions of the groups and the groups themselves were at odds, and their political and material interests also supported identifying each other as enemies.

>>281539
3 years ago, this site was raided by trolls trying the old "pretend to be a group of Glimmer fans. Abuse and shame anyone who goes against the group. Agitate and lie and harass and insist this will only end when anyone you don't like is banned, or you're promoted to an all-new Janitor role, someone who can delete posts and ban users without oversight"
All sorts of dirty leftist tricks were used. I have archive.is copies of old threads to prove it.
One faggot, two tops, is mad that I saved this site from raiders and never backed down.
So now and then, he will blurt out "fuck you nigel" completely unprompted in an attempt to derail threads. If you're lucky, he will also lie about what happened that day. Or accuse me of lying while providing no evidence to back up his lies.
He only does this in threads he hasn't already tried and failed to derail.
He wants the ignorant and new to take his side in his neverending war on me. It rarely works out for him.
Just ignore him and he'll eventually get lonely and fuck off back to his "official mlpol" jew-loving communist-filled circlejerking hugbox of a discord server.

>>281543
And if you believe that,....

>>281544
Perhaps I should rephrase, for clarity

>>281545
Remember that time whatshisname begged to be a janitor?

>>281547
Your point is shot down. Back to topic

>>281530
This is an anonymous imageboard. Personalized drama where anonymous posters are perceived or accused as being specific individuals involved in drama from years past, or responsible for grievances real or imaged, has no place on the /mlpol/ board in general, and it most certainly has no place in this thread. If you really must argue about this, create a thread on that subject on /sp/, or take it to discord or where-ever else. Any further posts on the personalized drama are thread derailment in violation of site policy and will be deleted, as may many of the derailing posts already existing.

>>281533
Churchill was such a faggot. I wish he'd joined Hitler, it would have changed history and likely resulted in a better outcome for Germany and the UK.

>>281561
wasn't his entire reason for starting the war specifically to crush germany so hard that they would never be able to recover like they did before?

>>281562
Let's not neglect alcoholism and allies and contacts among the jews

>>281564
That too, but he was also on a personal mission of vengeance. Him being ordered to was just the cherry on top.

>>281562
I hear after the war, they intentionally tried to destroy Germany's manufacturing and agricultural ability and planned on splitting Germany up into multiple parts while giving the part with all the mines away.

>>281571
>they intentionally tried to destroy Germany's manufacturing and agricultural ability and planned on splitting Germany up into multiple parts while giving the part with all the mines away.
The occupation of post war Germany was worse than any of the country's that Germany possessed during the war.

>>281562
Yes, that and they were afraid of what germany would do to them in retaliation for the treaty of versailles. The rest of europe has historically been against german unification and ascendancy and you can trace a fair few of the wars over the last several centuries or so back to this reasoning. Germans don't view the world in the same way the rest of us do, like their engineering, they're prone to building complex and orderly societies with more than a little martial aspect to them. A unified germany is something the rest of europe fears like nothing else, so when Hitler announced his intentions, a war to break them up again was inevitable, especially in a time of decline for the old world powers who were scrambling for whatever foreign influence they could get, britain especially.

>>281575
>A unified germany is something the rest of europe fears like nothing else, so when Hitler announced his intentions, a war to break them up again was inevitable, especially in a time of decline for the old world powers who were scrambling for whatever foreign influence they could get, britain especially.
Isn't the greatest irony of all having to do with the fact had England NOT gotten involved, they wouldn't have lost everything, bankrupted the country continent, have nearly every single power relinquish control of majority of their colonies, and result in every single country having to take out loans from and be indebted to the U.S? Not to mention the fact that Socialism would NEVER have been a problem in the first place and would have remained nothing more than a footnote in history.

>>281580
England wasn't the only factor, the French were also shaking in their boots at the thought of a resurgent Germany and would have started the war themselves eventually. Socialism still would have been a problem as well, even if France didn't start the war, Stalin was always going to try to take over Europe to spread his influence, but it would have been at a time of his choosing. A few more years of build-up, and Stalin's legions and armoured divisions would have rolled right the fuck across eastern and central Europe, possibly even south to China. The biggest mistake the old world powers ever made was not rearming Germany and marching on the Soviets, excepting the mistake of marching on Hitler at all, of course. Now we're stuck with the self perpetuating memetic virus we know as Active Measures.

Thanks, Churchill. You fuck.

>>281581
>Socialism still would have been a problem as well
Why? The only reason Lenin succeeded with the October Revolution was because, despite the public favoring the Czars, Russia was far too tired from fighting a world war. If Germany still bankrolled his fare for a one-way ticket to Russia, and the war had remained just between just Russia and France against Germany (As it was until England re-established their claim over Belgium, despite having no power or claim over it for almost a century, as an excuse to get involved in the war), history would have turned out far differently.
>The biggest mistake the old world powers ever made was not rearming Germany and marching on the Soviets, excepting the mistake of marching on Hitler at all, of course.
That was the plan; UNTIL FDR, Truman, and Eisenhower wanted to honor their agreements with the Soviets made during the war (Which, IIRC, even Churchill found downright appalling). There's a reason why Patton's assassination was overlooked and silenced, and why MacArthur was fired from leading the Korean War (Which could have fixed EVERYTHING).
>Now we're stuck with the self perpetuating memetic virus we know as Active Measures.
>Thanks, Churchill. You fuck.
I think he realizes just how much he fucked up when the Socialist were elected into the parliament literally just as the war ended, and then had to return to power just six years later to fix a mess that was a result of the war.

>>281582
>Why?
Under the assumption that Stalin eventually takes power, the man was never content with just Russia under his thumb, he didn't even particularly care about socialism, using it only as an excuse to rule unimpeded. He wanted to see how far his armies could reach. It's true that if England remained out of the war, the French wouldn't have lasted long due to civil strife and a demoralised military, at which point Germany could have focused all its resources against the Soviets, but it's up in the air whether they could have held even with that. German tanks were notoriously overdesigned and difficult to repair in the field, which was a major disadvantage against Soviet armour which could be repaired and manufactured far more quickly and easily.

>I think he realizes just how much he fucked up when the Socialist were elected into the parliament
I'm not sure it's an outcome he could have foreseen, he probably banked heavily on the US taking his side against socialism, but looking back it's obvious the US was only in it to end the war fast, not fix Europe's problems. They ended up having to do it anyway because they realised only after the fact how dangerous the socialists really were, only by then, it was too late to use the nuclear advantage. Jesus christ the 20th was a shitshow.

>>281583
>Under the assumption that Stalin eventually takes power
Would Lenin still, eventually, have gained some high political office had Russia remained as a Constitutional Monarchy with the Czars and parliament still in power?

>>281585
I'm not particularly well read on Lenin, so I can't exactly assess what he would have done under different circumstances. Just on cursory knowledge, he doesn't seem the type to subvert a system from within, more a straight up commie who lived by the literal word of the manifesto. While useful, he could have seen long term subversion as a waste of time and a betrayal of the proles, keeping to the word of the manifesto that violent revolution was the only way. That said, he was definitely aware of the broader range of subversion tactics given his warnings about Stalin and the purges he himself carried out, I just don't think he would have had the patience to use them himself.

>>281586
Excuse me, I didn't mean Lenin, I meant Stalin. Lenin probably would have been imprisoned, executed, or exiled (Again) for attempting to cause a revolution (Assuming that WWI didn't turn into a world war). Would Stalin still have gotten into power had it remained a Constitutional Monarchy?

>>281587
Oh, absolutely, the man was a sociopathic, power hungry maniac, I always got the impression from historical accounts that he didn't give a single solitary fuck what system he was working with, so long as he was at the top of it. And he had the intelligence and drive to do it. Odds are he would have gotten close to the Czars, organised his own rebellion, declared himself the new supreme ruler and done the same thing he did as top commie.

Maybe I'm wrong but I was always under the impression Churchill made that quote some time before Italy invaded Ethiopia. People generally forget Nazi Germany and Italy weren't as close "allies" as they seemed. For example Italy was one of the players against Germany annexing Austria.

But as far as I know the western powers didn't start hating Italy (and in the context of Churchill's quote fascism) until they invaded Ethiopia. Which is quite hypocritical because they had tons of their own colonies. Yet, at the time your average normie in the west was against actively colonizing places so the move by Italy alienated the western powers.

>>281582
>>281583
Something to consider is that the red-army only became an actual threat because Weimar Rep. made a treaty in which Germany conducted military research and re-build it's own army in-secret deep inside soviet territory, in exchange they modernized soviet industry, reds got access to all the juicy German tech, they even asked for help in creating a general staff for the Red Army, hell they even discussed a possible invasion of Poland if it declared war along with France.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Rapallo_(1922)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Germany–Soviet_Union_relations,_1918–1941

Remember lads, the best way for the west to deal with the large, much more populated countries of the east is to keep them off your tech, creativity really is the only true white religion.

>>281590
>Which is quite hypocritical because they had tons of their own colonies.
Much of the disdain towards Italy's invasion of Ethiopia was that it showed how much of a "paper tiger" the League was. It was an incident that they were absolutely powerless towards preventing, and Hitler only drove it in further when he remilitarized the Rhineland months later as a realization to Italy calling the League's bluff.

>>281609
Do you know of any good books discussing this material? I'm hesitant from using Wikis as a source to believe because of their biased nature.

>>281609
Part of what you state is true, however there is a MUCH more sinister backstory to Russian technological advancements. I suggest doing what you want because a pirate is free for the following books:
-Wall Street and the Bolshevik Revolution: The Remarkable True Story of the American Capitalists Who Financed the Russian Communists
-Prolonging the Agony: How The Anglo-American Establishment Deliberately Extended WWI by Three-and-a-Half Years
-How Britain Initiated both World Wars
-GERMANY’S WAR: The Origins, Aftermath & Atrocities of World War II
-National Suicide: Military Aid to the Soviet Union
All of these describe, with citations and direct sources that blatantly show how, when, why, where, and with what currencies amerimutts funded what eventually became the USSR starting in 1909. In addition, certain amerimutt politicians secretly delivered >100,000 metric tonnes of material and "temporarily expatriated" tens of thousands of engineers, scientists, and researchers including large numbers of enslaved Germans, Italians, and Japanese POW's after World War (((Won))) so that Russia could secretly construct, improve, and maintain their technological base, all on the shekel petrodollar and the backs of a few hundred million humans. Great Depression ring a bell? Guess (((who))) caused that worldwide catastrophe by funding certain golem powers.

Also have a pony!

>>281590
What the other Anon said is objective truth. Italy's military, political, social, and financial leaders realized that the League of Nations was already a toothless, senile, incompetent, old, disgusting windbag of a rabid dog that couldn't do anything save shit on the carpet and whine. Loudly. In the long term, Ethiopia wouldn't be necessarily or strategically important. Why is this? Ethiopia had a number of specific, easily accessible resources that Italy (and by extension Germany) were banned from acquiring by a certain inbred tribe. After all, Italy lost in World War One, which makes them the """villains""", right? Not at all. Politically speaking the invasion of Ethiopia was a marginally bad choice in the short run since propaganda could (and was) used against Italy, yet for long term planning to rebuild their Post-WW1 shattered economy into a powerhouse backed up by a solid, technologically equivalent military with a massive trading fleet and access to world wide markets, that invasion was vital. Economically speaking, Italy was a hair's breadth from collapsing due to the artificially caused Great Worldwide Depression.

Yes, invading Ethiopia was possibly NOT the best move that could be made. Keep in mind that doing so allowed Italy to prove that the League of Niggers was a war crime against humanity and equal trade, yet also showed that there was a serious power vacuum in the world that strong, mentally healthy nations had to fill before judeo-communism could spread and subvert every region throughout Europe, Asia, Africa, etc. This is a painful example of Catch-22: absolutely FUCKED if you don't, and potentially more fucked if you do, mostly due to simps and golem traitors.

>>281609
Shit, just remembered a couple more books:
-What the World Rejected: Hitler's Peace Offers 1933-1940
-Hidden History: The Secret Origins of the First World War
-Against Our Better Judgment: The Hidden History of How the U.S. Was Used to Create Israel
The last one is ironically more revealing than Wall Street and the Bolshevik Revolution as it sets the truth straight on how and why every single 1947 to current day "police action", war, brushfire conflict, border conflict, "terrorist designate organization", etc. etc. etc. continue delivering more petroshekels to judeo-communists and their simp/woke golems world wide, all sourced directly from the pockets of braindead nothink sheep.

>>281613
>>281617
>Actually, many rich capitalists funded the communists in russia

I've actually only heard of this when David Duke mentioned it in some livestream a few years ago, it certainly goes against the narrative that EVERY country in the world financed the white army to crush the reds, this was certainly part of it aswell, thanks anon.

>>281610
Wikipedia's shit of a source i know, but it dosen't strike me as biased, that particular segment i mean, and the fact that the shenanigans ended as soon as Hitler got to power makes sense with pic related.

If Churchill wasn't a faggot and joined Hitler, do you think he could have won?
Would the UK be able to help Germany in any significant way when so many other nations were against the nazis?

>>281669
>No blockade, no oil shortages
>Vastly improved logistics
>The US is out of the war
>Half of the Luffwaffe isn't lost on the western front
>No need to build over a thousand u-boats
>No allied bombing campaing
>UK could actually bomb baku unlike Germany, 80% of Soviet oil production is under bombing range

Of course nigel! What are you thinkin'?

>>281609
You do realize the Weimar presence in the USSR was small? I wouldn't say any Soviet knowledge gained from that was decisive factor in WWII. Give me some examples of this "tech" you speak of? The German armaments industry of the 1930s wasn't exactly producing anything insane. Hell the first panzer model pretty much copied a british chassis.

>>281610
Some of these folks are hitting you up with some politically related works. I'm not as well read on that so I don't have any good recommendations there. However, if you want to know about the actually conduct of the fighting on the Ostfront in a good overview I strongly recommend "When Titans Clashed: How the Red Army Stopped Hitler." by David Glanz and Johnathan House. Glanz is an expert on the Ostfront, served in Vietnam, and was the chief editor for the US Journal of Slavic Military Studies.

>>281797
Right, maybe just saying "tech" was a rather limited statement as it wasn't the only thing that the red army got from Germany, as they also trained soviet personnel in both tank and aviation schools and i already mentioned the general staff, you can say the numbers involved were rather smul, but you have to understand that this was ultimately what set the foundation for what would become the wehrmacht.

When it comes to tech, again, the experimentation conducted, the shared and stolen German blueprints by the red army, all this became the foundation of what would become the werhmacht it was literally the only thing they got to work with, so either the Soviets greatly benefited or the Germans were able to get up to speed with so fucking little.

Either way it's a good reply to whom were directed at, as it means either the red army wouldn't become an actual threat or Germany would have been vastly stronger as there wouldn't be a treaty forcing them to work in such limited operation and give the soviets their shit.

Even if part of it is just copied or reversed enginered from other western powers, so that you may assume the soviets could have pulled off on their own, remember that they still couldn't get to speed with things like radios on their own and still got to rely on flags when coordinating with tanks.

Sorry if this is a rather convoluted yet lazy-ass reply (and it is) but i'll try to give you a better one next time

>>281700
Do you think Germany, USA, Japan, and England working together at that time could have conquered the world and killed Communism?

>>281849
That's me

>>281484
>What did he mean by this?
It was British Imperial policy to keep Europe disunited, and Germany was seen as a particular threat to this - the same reason Britain entered the First World War. And to say it was British policy then is the same thing as saying that something is American policy now: that is to say that it is Jewish policy. What he meant by that is that the statement was his personal opinion, and allying with the communists was orders from above, the British Empire at the time being the main puppet of the Jewish regime - the interests of the Empire and of the International Banking Elite were the one and the same. Certainly there was blame on Churchill's part for not resigning and refusing to take part, but he was a loyalist, and he would simply have been replaced with some other stooge if he did so. There's also evidence to suggest he himself was a crypto-jew.

>>281669
Pretty sure. I always think of Sir Oswald Mosley as the man who could've saved not only Europe, but maybe the entire world. Also, wasn't it Great Britain who invited the USA into WWII? No sources on that, but I might have misunderstood The Greatest Story Never Told. If so, I think (((they))) would have driven the USA and Great Britain so far apart, that they would easily fight against each other.

>>281969
FDR always supported Churchill so before the US was offically at war they were heavily helping the UK in the atlantic. But the american public was still very isolationist. However Germany was the one that declared war on the USA. They did it to honor their alliance with japan. In retrospect I wonder what would of happened if Germany had not done that. I inow FDR wanted war with Germany but would he of been able to provoke it if the US public had been fixated on Japan? I think so but we'll never know.

>>281969
>>282196
I think this gives some context

https://youtu.be/EnfvGMAPCko