• ℹ️ Heads up...

    This is a popular topic that is fast moving Guest - before posting, please ensure that you check out the first post in the topic for a quick reminder of guidelines, and importantly a summary of the known facts and information so far. Thanks.

Would the world be a safer place if Hitler had won the war?

Dave said:
I don't see how this is over-sensitive, no one is suggesting the situation would have been preferable nor saying Nazi policy was a great idea. It's just a debate based on conjecture of a revisionalist history. Academics look into these conjectures all the time, its not possible to bring up factual evidence but loads of realms of research is like that.

Not all academia is quantitative, this is the problem when those who are used to using scientific method enter into the realms of theoretical sociology. I'm not too comfortable in this topic area as I'm a scientist so I'm not going to get involved in the debate but I can see its a little bit of a wild card but not completely ridiculous.

Play nice :D
Click to expand...

I fail to see how research is indeed research at all if there is no product? Even if it has no conclusion surely research must be based upon some observable variable? Something that can be recorded?

Constructing a future by assuming that none of the many of hundreds of thousands if not millions of variables would change is most likely going to result in a completely inaccurate and wrong prediction.

:)
 
Diogo/Blaze That depends on when and how they Germans won, surely? If they had won around the same time as the war actually ended, would they have enough troops and food to defend and defeat a rebellion? Or even repel Russia if it decided to seize the chance at a weakened opponent.

Thinking a *little* more on it, I actually think the world wouldn't quite be as safe as hoped! We could be living in chaos if Russia were take it's chances, or if a Scandinavian country were to get a bit uppity at the news!
 
TheMan said:
BigDave said:
Whilst this is a discussion board for people to discuss things, certain topics are best talked about off a forum and I think this is one of them. Simply saying "its freedom of speech" doesn't mean anything either. Your more than welcome to say it, just keep topics that are highly sensitive off the forums. Especially a forum that is set up for people who like themeparks and not to talk about Nazis/Hitler.
Click to expand...

No offense (genuinely) meant here Dave, but the Nazi's affect our daily lives.

If you don't think it belongs on a forum, you'd all better ditch Tapatalk - because without Moonlandings, you don't have mobile phones, and without the Nazi's rocket tech, you don't have moon landings.

Simples.

Really, it is that simple.

Whether that sits well with anyone is their own issue. If not. Don't have a mobile phone.
Click to expand...

Thats fine and Im not saying they didn't, Im just saying that discussing this subject on an open forum is bout to cause issues, that could be avoided by discussing this else where.
 
Meat Pie said:
I have no crusade Blaze. Just a commitment to rationalism.
Click to expand...

Relax, it's a discussion forum that consists mostly of "what if". You don't need no proof for than sonny!
 
But the resultant prediction isn't what matters, its the exploration of the various social constructs involved that has the value.

Quantitative research has observable recordable variables, qualitative research is harder to pin down but is still important. Some scientist would disagree which is why many scientists hate Psychology and sociology. But other people would say those nay Sayers are closed-minded.

Either way the majority view is quantitative speculation isn't the equivalent of smoking weed in the student union so its hardly something I'm going to poo poo people for... Though I may ban myself from using the term "poo poo" again.
 
Well ignoring the fact that the first mobile phone call was made in 1946.

I dont think we can attribute a lot of post war inventions to the Nazi regime. We can agree that conflict does seem to bring technological advances as one side seeks to gain advantage over another. It is irrelevant what the sides are called.

What was clear in the 1930's was that the world was in a difficult place economically with lots of unrest. It was was ripe for conflict with different groups waiting to step into any power vacuum that formed when the people became unhappy with the regular poiliticians of the day.

It could be argued easily that without an extreme political group taking control in Germany then the second world war may not have developed the way it did and been much less of a conflict that it was. It then could be said that without the second world war being brought to such a conclusion the world could actually be worse today, as a smaller war could have left lots of little areas of unresolved conflict rather than the 2 superpowers in a stalemate.

I'm not saying the Nazi regime was a good thing, just that it possibly needed an extreme regime to lead to the sustained period of relative peace we have had. It could have been any number of groups we could now be having this discussion about.

Badgy
 
Blaze said:
Dar said:
Diogo, you're post makes a bit of sense but I think that, like the British Empire and the like, any such "German Empire" wouldn't last very long and would just crumble under it's own weight leading a situation not unlike the real present day, except the allies would be the ones feeling guilty and licking wounds instead of Germany.
Click to expand...
While I agree in principle, the Nazi Reich was in its early days, and after defeating Europe, and presumably America.
Click to expand...

In all honesty, I doubt that if the Nazis had defeated the Allies in Europe that they'd have been able to succesfully invade the US. I mean, conquering a few countries of a similar size on your own continent is one thing, but taking over a country much bigger that's half way around the world, I couldn't see it working in all honesty!

Not to mention that if they did send a huge enough invasion force across the atlantic to actually beat the US, the lack of soldiers back in Europe would make it pretty easy for a major uprising to happen in West Europe, and then you've got to consider the USSR would probably also take the opportunity of invading Germany themselves, what with half of Hitler's army the other side of the Atlantic. :p

Now Africa, I could see that being invaded by the Nazis succesfully, but not the US. Not while the danger of a democratic uprising and the USSR was still existant.

:)
 
Oh of course they couldn't take America straight away, but after consolidating and stabilising Europe, they could conceivably pursue their plans to take America. With Europe being a similar size to the States, an interesting chapter in history could have been written.
 
DiogoJ42 said:
A fair point Dar, no empire lasts forever. but it is not unreasonable to assume it would last at least a hundred years. The bigger an empire grows, the less opposition it faces...
... Then again, the thinner it stretches it's occupying forces. This could be a whole new question in itself: how long would a German empire have lasted?
Click to expand...

Hitler wasn't daft dude, he knew this, which is why he knew he needed state of the art tech far beyond the allies to win. To go farther, faster, and with more devastating effects.

How close they came to this accurately is debatable - but from my research, they were terrifyingly close. Given the technology that surfaced in Russia/USA afterwards, once the scientists were split (essentially taking different parts of it) - it became harder to continue their work as before, without their familiar labs and fellow brains.

However, had they remained together and focused (though again arguably, Hitler himself, had lost focus on tech and was spreading thin from my recollection), and succeeded in their attempted developments - I'm not convinced the war effort would have continued on ground and thus being to thinly spread may well not have been an issue at all.

What he achieved was scary enough, had he have further succeeded in his goal it would have been game over I believe.
 
Dave said:
But the resultant prediction isn't what matters, its the exploration of the various social constructs involved that has the value.

Quantitative research has observable recordable variables, qualitative research is harder to pin down but is still important. Some scientist would disagree which is why many scientists hate Psychology and sociology. But other people would say those nay Sayers are closed-minded.

Either way the majority view is quantitative speculation isn't the equivalent of smoking weed in the student union so its hardly something I'm going to poo poo people for... Though I may ban myself from using the term "poo poo" again.
Click to expand...

I have very specific views on how to deal with anti-social behaviour and that is backed up by figures of success when the methodology that I support is implemented. That is exploration that results in conclusion which can provide an accurate prediction?

But if exploration cannot result in a verifiable conclusion, then you cannot produce accurate prediction, and I do therefore question the value of this type of research?

I most certainly do not refute Pyschology or Sociology which are not pure conjecture because the evidence of experience can be used to justify the outcome of a solution?

It just comes across illogical to me that someone should go on to invent a conclusion when the variables cannot be covered. Surely always ending with an unevidenced prediction is not reliable and therefore disreputable?
 
Blaze said:
Oh of course they couldn't take America straight away, but after consolidating and stabilising Europe, they could conceivably pursue their plans to take America. With Europe being a similar size to the States, an interesting chapter in history could have been written.
Click to expand...

But then you've got to consider that the longer the Nazis waited to attack America, the more time they'd be giving the US to prepare for the invasion. ;)
 
Maybe, MP, because it's fun.

Seriously, this is by far and away the funniest, most enjoyable thing this website has seen since the wiki was in its prime.
 
Well, if the Germans invented the atom bomb (and there is some evidence to suggest they were very close, even theories that they did), they planned to use it against the USA. This could have drasticly altered the course of the war, with both sides having the bomb.
Now that could have been a very different war.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top