News:

Welcome to our site!

Main Menu

Epstein's associates ...

Started by Baruch, July 08, 2019, 03:04:39 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

Cavebear

Quote from: josephpalazzo on August 15, 2019, 12:24:42 PM
 


If you follow my posts on this, I said, let Stalin and Hitler fight it out, with no help from the Allies. They would have exhausted themselves by the sheer volume of bloody battles. Whoever would have come out a winner - most likely Stalin but in a very much more weak position - the Allies would not have had to accept Stalin getting half of Europe. So, in my estimation, less bloodshed for the Allies as they would have confronted a weaker German army. The only drawback I see  is that the war would have taken more time - perhaps a year or two more for Stalin, on his own, to turn the tide and defeat Hitler.

You keep thinking Hitler and Stalin wanted to fight each other.  They didn't.  Hitler was an idiot.  Stalin could barely hold the Soviet Union together.  All Hitler had to do was leave him alone and invade England.
Atheist born, atheist bred.  And when I die, atheist dead!

Unbeliever

Quote from: Baruch on August 14, 2019, 08:20:03 AM
"Guards Were Sleeping During Epstein's Alleged Suicide, Then Falsified Records To Cover It Up" ... typical government operation ;-(


Yeah, like the soldiers guarding the tomb of Jesus were said to have fallen asleep...
God Not Found
"There is a sucker born-again every minute." - C. Spellman

Cavebear

Quote from: Unbeliever on August 15, 2019, 01:14:36 PM
Yeah, like the soldiers guarding the tomb of Jesus were said to have fallen asleep...

They wanted him dead.  Not some conspiracy, prisoners and guards just like people like him dead.  Deliberate indifference and permitted opportunity....
Atheist born, atheist bred.  And when I die, atheist dead!

Unbeliever

Quote from: josephpalazzo on August 15, 2019, 12:24:42 PM
 


If you follow my posts on this, I said, let Stalin and Hitler fight it out, with no help from the Allies. They would have exhausted themselves by the sheer volume of bloody battles. Whoever would have come out a winner - most likely Stalin but in a very much more weak position - the Allies would not have had to accept Stalin getting half of Europe. So, in my estimation, less bloodshed for the Allies as they would have confronted a weaker German army. The only drawback I see  is that the war would have taken more time - perhaps a year or two more for Stalin, on his own, to turn the tide and defeat Hitler.

Or America could've nuked Moscow and Berlin. That would've put a stop to the whole mess. We didn't mind nuking Japan, after all, to "shorten the war." Would've been a hell of a casualty count, though.
God Not Found
"There is a sucker born-again every minute." - C. Spellman

josephpalazzo

Quote from: Cavebear on August 15, 2019, 12:45:33 PM
You keep thinking Hitler and Stalin wanted to fight each other.  They didn't.  Hitler was an idiot.  Stalin could barely hold the Soviet Union together.  All Hitler had to do was leave him alone and invade England.

And so why did Hitler decide to invade Russia in 1941???

The belief in the Ally countries is that invading Russia was an afterthought. Not if you read Hitler's biography, his speeches, and what he was selling to his own party. The real crusade was against communism, and Russia was symbolic of all evil to Hitler. As for England, he admired the Brits because in blood, they were close to Germans. But more importantly, invading England would have left the British empire to other countries, not Germany. He saw no use in invading England. But the Brit propaganda said otherwise. Wouldn't they believe since they were constantly being bombarded? But the record shows that Hitler tried multiple times to seek peace with England. When that failed, after a constant bombardment that failed to get a peace agreement, he then turned to Russia, the golden prize he had promised his troops.

From Hitler on England, read https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07WMX6FJW/ref=sr_1_15?keywords=Hitler&qid=1565890207&s=digital-text&sr=1-15


Here is the intro:

Quote"Hitler's foreign and war policy is one of the most important fields of contemporary history research. So there is no shortage of work on the subject. But it will be a fresh look and no sources used - such as the Goebbels diaries - always to find new points of view, to discover new aspects and gain new insights. The essay presented here seeks to show the hitherto neglected origins of the England picture, which led the programmer Hitler to see an alliance with Great Britain as the centerpiece of National Socialist foreign policy. On such a basis the development can be illuminated, which led the Chancellor Hitler from the courts in England over the contempt of England up to the war with England."

Cavebear

Quote from: josephpalazzo on August 15, 2019, 01:34:06 PM
And so why did Hitler decide to invade Russia in 1941???

The belief in the Ally countries is that invading Russia was an afterthought. Not if you read Hitler's biography, his speeches, and what he was selling to his own party. The real crusade was against communism, and Russia was symbolic of all evil to Hitler. As for England, he admired the Brits because in blood, they were close to Germans. But more importantly, invading England would have left the British empire to other countries, not Germany. He saw no use in invading England. But the Brit propaganda said otherwise. Wouldn't they believe since they were constantly being bombarded? But the record shows that Hitler tried multiple times to seek peace with England. When that failed, after a constant bombardment that failed to get a peace agreement, he then turned to Russia, the golden prize he had promised his troops.

From Hitler on England, read https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07WMX6FJW/ref=sr_1_15?keywords=Hitler&qid=1565890207&s=digital-text&sr=1-15


Here is the intro:

Like I said, Hitler was an bad general and insisted on proving it.  Most Dictators are.
Atheist born, atheist bred.  And when I die, atheist dead!

josephpalazzo

Quote from: Unbeliever on August 15, 2019, 01:21:30 PM
Or America could've nuked Moscow and Berlin. That would've put a stop to the whole mess. We didn't mind nuking Japan, after all, to "shorten the war." Would've been a hell of a casualty count, though.

Here's an interesting tidbit about the nuke. Einstein was alerted by a colleague that Germany had embarked on a program to develop a nuclear bomb. This prompted Einstein to write the famous letter directly to Roosevelt, enough to convince the president to start the Manhattan Project, which in effect produced the first nuke. But the irony of this is that indeed, Germany had started this project but it was in the hands of none other than Heisenberg, of the famous Uncertainty Principle in QM. But after the war, Heisenberg said on record that he deliberately push the research into blind-alleys - he never intended that Hitler would get such a bomb. So all that scare stuff that the US was racing against the clock to build the bomb before Germany was based on some misguided ill-informed dude who made a wrong evaluation of Germany's program.  Consider what history would have been without this blunder!!

Cavebear

Quote from: josephpalazzo on August 15, 2019, 01:57:20 PM
Here's an interesting tidbit about the nuke. Einstein was alerted by a colleague that Germany had embarked on a program to develop a nuclear bomb. This prompted Einstein to write the famous letter directly to Roosevelt, enough to convince the president to start the Manhattan Project, which in effect produced the first nuke. But the irony of this is that indeed, Germany had started this project but it was in the hands of none other than Heisenberg, of the famous Uncertainty Principle in QM. But after the war, Heisenberg said on record that he deliberately push the research into blind-alleys - he never intended that Hitler would get such a bomb. So all that scare stuff that the US was racing against the clock to build the bomb before Germany was based on some misguided ill-informed dude who made a wrong evaluation of Germany's program.  Consider what history would have been without this blunder!!

That is an interesting idea that would be helped by some evidence.  Otherwise, it is just a conspiracy theory.
Atheist born, atheist bred.  And when I die, atheist dead!

josephpalazzo

Quote from: Cavebear on August 15, 2019, 02:05:18 PM
That is an interesting idea that would be helped by some evidence.  Otherwise, it is just a conspiracy theory.

It's time for you to get informed on the subject.


QuoteAfter the war, Heisenberg wrote in Nature that there were simple practical reasons why Germany never embarked on a full-scale bomb programme. Under wartime conditions, it would have been impossible to build the huge industrial infrastructure of the US’s Manhattan Project. But he also wrote that the physicists themselves ‘had consciously striven to keep control of the project’ and avoided work on a bomb, preferring to work on reactors and cyclotrons.[/size]Read more: https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg13518370-300-heisenbergs-principles-kept-bomb-from-nazis/#ixzz5wh7tYdii

Unbeliever

Yeah, I've read that as well, but some people are skeptical about Heisenberg's claim. I don't know what the consensus is, but I think he was probably stalling the bomb project as much as he could.
God Not Found
"There is a sucker born-again every minute." - C. Spellman

Cavebear

Quote from: josephpalazzo on August 15, 2019, 02:10:19 PM
It's time for you to get informed on the subject.

Individual sabatoge is always a possibility for any failure.  But there  more practical matters.  The Germans didn't have the same access to fissionable materiel, and their facilities were being bombed.  Not just research labs, but railroads.
Atheist born, atheist bred.  And when I die, atheist dead!

josephpalazzo

Quote from: Unbeliever on August 15, 2019, 02:16:04 PM
Yeah, I've read that as well, but some people are skeptical about Heisenberg's claim. I don't know what the consensus is, but I think he was probably stalling the bomb project as much as he could.

The fact is that when he was interned in England after the war was over, he described exactly how to build the nuclear bomb, and those in attendance, mostly German physicists, were getting this as new information. IOW, he had never told anyone what he really knew.

josephpalazzo

Quote from: Cavebear on August 15, 2019, 02:17:43 PM
Individual sabatoge is always a possibility for any failure.  But there  more practical matters.  The Germans didn't have the same access to fissionable materiel, and their facilities were being bombed.  Not just research labs, but railroads.

Me thinks you didn't read the article. Try again.

Cavebear

Quote from: josephpalazzo on August 15, 2019, 02:20:37 PM
The fact is that when he was interned in England after the war was over, he described exactly how to build the nuclear bomb, and those in attendance, mostly German physicists, were getting this as new information. IOW, he had never told anyone what he really knew.

I think your claim is "plausible".  But I'm saying I would like to see some evidence.  Give a source or link.
Atheist born, atheist bred.  And when I die, atheist dead!