WW2 as viewed in two hundred years

I'll lay any bet that in two hundred years, Hitler will be known by most people asa terrific general and a brilliant decision taker who conquered almost all of Europe with one single country.

Reason? Take a look at today's views on Napoleon and Genghis Khan and the contemporary views.

In 1900 people were still calling Napoleon the most evil dictator who ever lived. Do we do that now?

 

you make a good point, but don't we think of Napoleon as a great strategist because he played more of a direct role in the combat and decisions during combat.
Hitler told his generals what he wanted and the generals were the great strategists...plus hitler was not responsible for the change in tactics..IE blitkrieg.
I think he'll be known more through evil and how he convinced a whole nation to follow him.

 

Perhaps Napoleon lost his 'evil' image mainly due to the fact that a worse dictator arrived. First the Kaiser, who of course ate babies for breakfast if we believe British propaganda, and then Hitler.

So, what are the chances that in the next 200 years we have a dictator in a major country in this world who does things that make Hitler look harmless?

 

You do make a good point, but i think Hitler will be remembered in the same way as some of the Roman Emporers. Maybe like Nero. Although of course he is mostly known by people for letting Rome burn, i understand he was also very cruel. What you say about Napolean is a good point though. How many people know about Hitlers actions as a soldier. We all know about his military blunders, but not his actions in WW1.

 

Was it perhaps the Europeans who got trounced by him that were calling Napoleon an 'evil dictator'... People living in the past, who viewed the passing of the monarchies which was bound to occur anyway as inherently evil?
I think, barring the triumph of revisionists bent on 'proving' Hitler blameless for the Holocaust, that he will always be viewed as an evil figure, because his 'reign' brought no progressive social reform.
Although, if you want to stretch perception sufficiently, he could be viewed as one of the prime movers behind the creation of "modern society"...

 

Yes... he could also be viewed as the man who, in the last century, has done most for the unification of Europe. After all he got closer to achieving it than even Napoleon.



[ 08 October 2001: Message edited by: Andreas Seidel ]

 

What about other conceptions of the war. Will people really see Stalin for the evil he was intead of trying to ignore it because of the embarresment it causes us. Will people realise that our guys commited wrongs to. I am sure there are many more.

 

Bonaparte, was a good soldier, not a great statesman.

Nero, on the other hand, was a sack of $hit-period.

Nope, I dont think Hitler will be a revered person of history. They best things that come to mind about him is the fact that he was a brave soldier in wk1, nobody can deny that. If he wasnt a brave Landser from the List Regiment, then why was he awarded the Wound badge in Black, The Iron Cross 2nd and 1st classes? The man had guts, but as we well know that he was a meglomaniac.

I will argue with anyone anytime, that uncle joe was much worse than Hitler was. I dont think even saddam insane, the iyatolla komonkey and sin sladin, could be as evil as was uncle joe.

Just my humble opinion

 

But should not people know the other side of Hitler. Sure he was evil, there is no getting away from that. But how many know he was an enviromentalist and anti blood sports. Not that this changes what he did.

In the same way people should know of the bad things the so called good guys did. I think it is time we got away from the propaganda and knew the truth.

Chirs, sorry if i am missing the obvious, but do you think Stalin was worse than Hitler or the other way round. As for me, i think Stalin was far worse.

 

Hello Bish, glad to see you back from the exercises..Hope they went well for you, and I certainly hope that you guys will not be called on to use your talents.

I knew he was an enviromentalist, but didnt realize he was against blood sports--cept for hunting which he detested. He was also a vegetarian.

Oh I certainly agree with you that I believe that uncle joe was much more evil than uncle adolf. Uncle joe, from what I understand, killed appx 30 million of its own people. I wholhardedly concur with what you said

 

Good, not just me then. I happened to put this veiw, and the fact that i believe communisim was worse than Nazisim on the On War Forum, and had a couple of people jump down my throat.

I think it is people like those here who can change the way people view WW2.Of course we should not be telling people that the Germans were all good guys who never did anything wrong. but we can get people to look at things with more of an open mind, and think with their heads not their hearts. i think what most people understand about the war is still coloured by Allied propaganda. For example, if you ask most people in Britain what the best fighter of the war was, they will most likely say the Spitfire, but they have no idea why. Some may say it does not matter, but i think it does. If we think every thing we did was good and just, than we will do the same again.

 

Bish, believe me, there are many many people who think as we do, and we have several here on these forums as well. But, "we" arent alone in our thinking. In fact, im very glad to see someone who thinks as I do and very glad that its mentioned publicly.

This is part of the reason why im involved with so many German vets. BUt being an American, I have a duty to our and Allied vets too.

[ 03. June 2003, 02:27 PM: Message edited by: C.Evans ]