Have you heard of this?

---

No...I said by murdering his oppostion AND more of his own people...etc, etc.They called them gulags in Russia...in Germany they were concentration camps.

Originally Posted By: OldFolks>>>"Most of Hitler's success as a public leader was due to his minister of propaganda, Goebbels."No not really. I read your whole post, but didn't quote it all...save space. Anyway, we'll have to agree to disagree on this one. Hitler was a wonderful orator, but he'd have gotten nowhere without Goebbels and others to do his dirty-work for him. Respectively, it's not that difficult, mind you, to rally a people who have absolutely nothing left to lose.

Originally Posted By: OldFolksFor whatever reason, that no one knows, he lacked the ability or the will to rein in Himmler. Himmler was one of the ones doing a lot of the dirty-work. Goebbels sold the idea of concentration camps as the "final solution" to the public...Himmler made it happen. He was head of the SS. The SS ran all the concentration camps. Regular army wasn't involved.

He may not have belived in it, but he allowed himmler to go off on his quests. That still si supporting it, but Id never heard the side of all the relic shit being himmlers ideas and nto hitlers, then again, I did nto do a great deal of research into it, just what I remember from school through HS history. and uhh maybe a movie or two raiders of the lost arc is always going to be one of my favorites even if its nto exatly accurate.and Hell Boy, I love tha movie! it was funny and still had soem action and they are making part 2 that I may or may not ever see.

My contention is that Hitler would have gotten where he was going, Goebbels or not. Not because Goebbels had nothing to offer, quite the contrary, but rather because in the absence of Goebbels he would have found another adept propaganda minister.One of the things that made Hitler such an effective political leader was his delegation of administration for the inaction of his ideas. He knew what he wanted and then sought out great (what would today be called) political handlers to carry out his vision. To your point, would he have gotten as far without the likes of Goebbels and Spear or the aristocracy of Goering. I don't think so. But lacking them, I think history shows, Hitler would have found other talented people to manage his push forward.It makes one wonder, for all his political savvy in macro-managing his political career, why did he then turn to micro-manage the war.

Originally Posted By: thorNo...I said by murdering his oppostion AND more of his own people...etc, etc.They called them gulags in Russia...in Germany they were concentration camps. I wouldn't categorize the Jewish popupation as his own people.

Originally Posted By: sdp Originally Posted By: thorNo...I said by murdering his oppostion AND more of his own people...etc, etc.They called them gulags in Russia...in Germany they were concentration camps. I wouldn't categorize the Jewish popupation as his own people. OK...citizens of the country he ran? And most folks don't realize that the 6 million Jews we hear so much about were only a portion of the 13.5 million total killed in those camps (Czechs, Poles, etc). Of course, this pales next the numbers Stalin was responsible for putting away.

I followed ya on that one, I considered them "his people: as they were citizens of his country, even if they were not HIS people. That atleast is how I was looking at it and considered them his people because of that.

There are many indications that Hitler did not like Himmler as reported by many people who were invited to visit the Berghoff. Himmler often served as butt of Hitlers jokes.Hitler was not religious though at the time to admit such a thing would have been political suicide. He just avoided the topic of religion in public. He only allowed the Catholic church to continue in Germany as "a crutch for simple minds." But his hatred for the church was by all accounts on par with that of the Jew. He saw them both as blights on the perfect German.Hitler's inner circle reported him saying that he had finally began the process of removing Germany from their servile role of Christan religion only to have Himmler invent a new one.To Hitler and most of the Nazi elite the single most important thing was to show a unified front. Which is probably the reason Goering's drug addiction was tolerated, even at the cost of the German air force. The same I would imagine applied to Himmler. To rein him in could have shown a schism at the top of the party, which was completely unacceptable. Not only that there is some speculation about who the SS would have followed Himmler or Hitler. While retrospect says Hitler, at the time it wasn't clear. There was much that neither man liked about the other and by the close of the thirties their relationship was distant and strained....According to the shit I've read.

But Scotty, where di you read this shit?Im not going to argue against what you said, but i would be interested in learning more and reading it for myself. I read alot anyways, and since I got out of school and wasnt reading what I was told and taking tests I somehow became interested in history, especially political shit like hitler.

-Rise and fall of the Third Reich
-The Willing Executioners
-Inside the Third Reich
and a bunch of others.

Those are the only three I can think of at the moment. For a little while I got big into reading shit printed by the Nazi party leading up to the war. I used to be able to read German but I haven't done it for about 10-15 years other than the occasional simple little phrase, usually architectural. Don't even know that I could do that now.

The three are a start, and may even satisfy my need for the hitler shit. Sometimes I go ovrboard and read everything availible, sometimes a few books secure me in knowledge that I dont give a shit as much as i though.
I figure a reccomendation for a book is better than randomly selecting one at the library or book store, Ill star with teh first one of them I can find

I would say read the first and the third. HOWEVER, keep in mind when reading Inside the Third Reich that it was written by Spear, Hitlers architect and architect of the German war machine. I highly recommend it, but you must keep in mind who is writing it and what his agenda is after getting out Spandau prison, twenty years later. I think it's a good book as long as you remember that.

If I can find it, Ill read it with that in mind, everyone who writes based on personal experience has an agenda, his is no different, but a godo thing to know why he wrote it and try to balance that with facts from other sources.

If your a World War II junkie like myself here are some interesting sites I have bookmarked. As with anything to do with Nazism one must always keep in mind who is writing it and how they may portray it with an agenda and skew the facts. (That's not so much at you Chance as it is to whoever might stumble across this post.) The Jewish Virtual Library - The Holocaust Third Riech in Ruins The History Place - The Nazi Party is Formed It's amazing when you start wondering what were these fucks thinking and scary when you think how easy everything went form prejudice to deportation to wholesale industrialized murder.

Im not a buff per say... but Im interested, I sat through the war on pbs, 3 times so far, and have it on dvd. Julz grandpa was at d day, but he refuses to talk about it, showed us his uniform and some stuff he brought back and pictures, but he wont go itno details..."we were there, we did what we wree told to do, the war was won" thats about as detailed as he gets on it. We took him the dvds, he refused to watch it.
I thougth he would maybe enjoy it, especially since before he retired he was a teacher. I guess some shits just to much to relive nad talk about for some people.

A while back I got into JFK (around the anniversary maybe 2 or 3 years ago) so I read all that shit and have several books, its just what ever peaks my interest and then we see if it takes hold and I continue to care or if that desire fades away after a few months or years. Atleast I learn something and am intertained for a while even if it doesnt stick and become a passion.

My Grandpa was the same way. He refused to talk about it, other than a nice piece of tail he snagged over there.

I get mania's like that as well. I'm like Mr. Toad, from the Wind in the Willows. I never read the book just saw the cartoon. I want to learn all I can about whatever has peaked my interest then couldn't care less later on. I get completely into something then drop it like a hot rock and move on to something else totally unrelated.