Was an alliance between Germany and Russia completely out of the question?

At the begining conference in 1939 Ribbentrop started his speach with remembering of mutual battles of germans and russians and brotherhood of our two nations, but Molotov interrupted him with words " It can't be brotherhood between us, if u'd like to we can talk about business. "

Both sides uderstood from the beginig that war is just a auestion of time.

 

No, I do not believe an alliance between Germany and Russia could of been feasible. When Hitler was first starting his career as a public figure he was gaining support through his political faction, which was not unlike the Communists after World War I. It is not that Hitler had a problem with Communism, they're ideologies were actually pretty similar, but in the struggle for power turned the two against each other. They were two dogs after the same bone. Both the reds and the nazi's were trying to rally support and revolutionize the impoverished Germany. Men with power do not like to share it and that was the case with the reds and nazi's. Germany and Russia signed a Non-Aggression Pact which gave Stalin a sense of security and respect for Hitler. Hitler, was not as peaceful as many would of though him to be on the other side of the pact. After the defeat of his Luftwaffe at the Battle of Britain he desperately needed raw goods so it was only natural for Hitler to break ties with Russia to gain its precious oil wells. Another reason for invading Russia was to provide a "lebensraum," or a living space for the expanding empire of Germany. He described this "lebensraum" in his book published in 1920 called "Mein Kampf." Hitler began to explain in his book that the expansion of Germany should look east for more land. For this reason he invaded Poland in 1939. The only reason he did not push further east was because of France and Britain coming to Poland's aid, which delayed his expansionary ideas.

Maybe I was late in posting or maybe it has already been said.

 

Stgg44 u said " For this reason he invaded Poland in 1939 " but Poland was allied country to Germany and Polands attacked Czechoslovakia together with Germany, and Poland was possible allied for Germany in the war against USSR, so what was the reason for attacking it?

 

Now THAT is interesting. I do recall, though, that eugenics as policy, especially forced sterilization, was not popularly supported in the US. Was that the case? I know Virginia passed a law to sterilize "the mentally degenerate", but it was only practiced once before it was repealed.

 

No they were not. The results were similar but the ideas coudn't be more different. Just for an example nazis stressed race and took nationalism to extremes while the communists theories ignored race and planned for the dissolution of national states. Both failed in practice, often with horrendous side effects and leaving a terrible legacy (but not necessarily, see Spain as an example and what's going to happen in China is anybody's guess), that doesn't make them the same thing. You could actually make a case that fascism was the opposite of communism and would never have had a chance without the initial support from the industrialist, that were scared of the communists, of the would be dictators.

 

good old winston..britain and empire first above all others..i refer you to deviladvecoats first post on this thread of which me and winnie agree totally.

 

OK, I submit to the argument, I worded that poorly. Pseudo-science shouldn't have been included in the post. I was only pointing out a personal opinion of this policy as applied to humans, during this period of time. And of course a great many people embrased the concept. It seemed such an "easy cure" to the weakening of a society. And it was "science" afterall, how could that be immoral? Science is (supposedly) amorale, and indifferent to humanity. It being applied to the human race was false (pseudo) science was what I was trying to express.

And you are right DA, the practice was very widespread, and much longer lasting than people recall, as revealed by this article from 2000.

PHILADELPHIA (Reuters)—U.S. doctors who once believed that sterilization could help rid society of mental illness and crime launched a 20th century eugenics movement that in some ways paralleled the policies of Nazi Germany, researchers said on Monday.

A Yale study tracing a once-popular movement aimed at improving society through selective breeding, indicates that state-authorized sterilizations were carried out longer and on a larger scale in the United States than previously believed, beginning with the first state eugenics law in Indiana in 1907.

Despite modern assumptions that American interest in eugenics waned during the 1920s, researchers said sterilization laws had authorized the neutering of more than 40,000 people classed as insane or feebleminded in 30 states by 1944.

Another 22,000 underwent sterilization from the mid-1940s to 1963, despite weakening public support and revelations of Nazi atrocities, according to the study, funded by the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum and the Merck Co. Foundation.

Forced sterilization was legal in 18 U.S. states, and most states with eugenics laws allowed people to be sterilized without their consent by leaving the decision to a third party.

(final paragraph)… It is better for all the world, if instead of waiting to execute degenerate offspring for crime, or to let them starve for their imbecility, society can prevent those who are manifestly unfit from continuing their kind, Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes wrote in the majority opinion of a landmark eugenics case in 1926.

See:

David Morgan, Yale Study: U.S. Eugenics Paralleled Nazi Germany

 

I think it could not have worked out with their different ambitions and the fact that one country was fascist and the other being communist.

 

The only difference between the browns and reds are that the browns stressed national unity and the reds stressed international unity. Look Hitler was a socialist... he created Volkswagen and wanted everyone in Germany to have one. He wanted only his race and for all of his Aryans to be equal. Communism and socialism are similar. Ill give you that Hitler had nationalism in mind but the core principles are the same.

 

Not true at all. After the Anschluss of Nazi Germany and Austria in March 1938, Adolf Hitler annexed Czechoslovakia. Poland was neutral. And actually Poland was not really a contributing factor for much because the Soviets and Germans invaded Poland and split it up. So for the duration of the war Poland was out of the picture.

 

Jesus!! do you actually read and believe what you write???

I know, I know, it's the color right?

If so, then why did he imprison (KZ Dachau), shoot and terrorize them?
Because he created VW? so "all" Germans got one for free? or just the pure Germans? or all the equal Aryans?

Who is his race? and who are all his Aryans?
He didn't even consider all Germans to be pure Aryans (equal?) so his nationalism only included the pure German Aryans, and the other German nationals were what? - non nationals? but he stressed nationalism?

Because they have red in their flags?
Communism means - everything belongs to the state, no private property, all the people are equal.
Socialism means - to reduce the gap between rich and poor, private and state controlled companies, but people are not equal.
Can you forward a single communist country that is ruled by a democratic government?
Can you forward a single communist country that bases its political principels on a racial dogma?
Like; only slavic communists are pure, but French communists are 2nd grade?

You really need to do a lot of reading, before you forward such opinions.

Kruska

 

Thank you for a good analysis Kruska.

 

may I suggest a book? Liberal Fascism by Jonah Goldberg.

 

"True, it is a fixed idea with the French that the Rhine is their property, but to this arrogant demand the only reply worthy of the German nation is Arndt's: "Give back Alsace and Lorraine". For I am of the opinion, perhaps in contrast to many whose standpoint I share in other respects, that the reconquest of the German-speaking left bank of the Rhine is a matter of national honour, and that the Germanisation of a disloyal Holland and of Belgium is a political necessity for us. Shall we let the German nationality be completely suppressed in these countries, while the Slavs are rising ever more powerfully in the East?"

- Friedrich Engels

 

Deal. And another book I would suggest is Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand.

 

And what does this have to do with the title of the thread???
Kruska

 

Do you know who Friedrich Engels is?

 

Friedrich Engels was a Marxist writer.