Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Savant" data-source="post: 165552" data-attributes="member: 546108">Lets think about some of this.. Toward the end of the war he could have stopped an invasion if his troops weren&#039;t terrified to wake him so he could send the tanks-a-rolln&#039;.. ok.. so his TROOPS dropped the ball, justifiably terrified of him or not, how can it be Hitler&#039;s fault no one woke him and told him there was an invasion on?As far as not going with tech and staying cheap.. Makes sense to a degree.. I mean, think about it.. your millitary needs supplies.. lots of them.. and needs them &#039;now&#039;.. you want to waste time and money by making &#039;good&#039; stuff and not being able to get it in the hands of the troops in a timely manner?&nbsp; In war, sometimes cheap and fast is better than slower-produced but superior and expensinve (limiting amount to be made).. depends on the circumstances.. I don&#039;t know enough about the specifics of WWII and Germany&#039;s resources and such.. but I&#039;d immagine staying cheap was a good idea..And, pissing away money on &#039;foolish&#039; research only goes to substantiate his psychosis.. Didn&#039;t I read somewhere that they are pretty sure Hitler ended up dying of Syphilus (suicied but from the demented state of syphilus)? Doesn&#039;t Syphilus cause instanity? Hmm.. lets see.. most expansionistic leader of all time who had all his followers cowering in fear and would do anything he said.. had the ENTIRE world in chaos for years.. Na.. nothing to any of that.. Killing his staff, wasting tons of money, switching bombing to civys instead of millitary.. Cruel and psycho things to do.. doesn&#039;t make him&nbsp; a fool, makes him NUTS..Again, it looks like the American &#039;ethnocentric&#039; view of what it takes to be a good leader (liked and loved by yoru people, always looking to tech over raw force, etc etc)..But, again, this is off topic.. We are talking about the impending war with Saddam, not Hitler.. and Saddam is not even 1/10 the leader Hitler was..</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Savant, post: 165552, member: 546108"] Lets think about some of this.. Toward the end of the war he could have stopped an invasion if his troops weren't terrified to wake him so he could send the tanks-a-rolln'.. ok.. so his TROOPS dropped the ball, justifiably terrified of him or not, how can it be Hitler's fault no one woke him and told him there was an invasion on? As far as not going with tech and staying cheap.. Makes sense to a degree.. I mean, think about it.. your millitary needs supplies.. lots of them.. and needs them 'now'.. you want to waste time and money by making 'good' stuff and not being able to get it in the hands of the troops in a timely manner? In war, sometimes cheap and fast is better than slower-produced but superior and expensinve (limiting amount to be made).. depends on the circumstances.. I don't know enough about the specifics of WWII and Germany's resources and such.. but I'd immagine staying cheap was a good idea.. And, pissing away money on 'foolish' research only goes to substantiate his psychosis.. Didn't I read somewhere that they are pretty sure Hitler ended up dying of Syphilus (suicied but from the demented state of syphilus)? Doesn't Syphilus cause instanity? Hmm.. lets see.. most expansionistic leader of all time who had all his followers cowering in fear and would do anything he said.. had the ENTIRE world in chaos for years.. Na.. nothing to any of that.. Killing his staff, wasting tons of money, switching bombing to civys instead of millitary.. Cruel and psycho things to do.. doesn't make him a fool, makes him NUTS.. Again, it looks like the American 'ethnocentric' view of what it takes to be a good leader (liked and loved by yoru people, always looking to tech over raw force, etc etc).. But, again, this is off topic.. We are talking about the impending war with Saddam, not Hitler.. and Saddam is not even 1/10 the leader Hitler was.. [/QUOTE]

Verification