Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Ohio43 on January 20, 2005, 09:05:30 AM
-
Greenclouds post inspired me to ask a hypothetical question that I have always wondered about. Being that Hitler was a racist (go figure)
If the war had gone Hitler's way and he succeded.. do you think he would have turned against Japan? Maybe there is even documentaion that he would have. Dunno, just a thought I had. What do you think?
-
I'd say definately. The germans viewed the Japanese as 'untermensch', the same way they saw other, non-aryan races. The funny part was, the Japanese felt the same way about them, and their mutual racism somehow made a temporary alliance possible. No doubt that the two would have butted heads the moment it became convenient.
-
No, Hitler would not have turned on the Japanese. First off, they are on other sides of the world. Next, by the time that Hitler had recuperated German's military, japan's military would be ready too.
2 extremely battle hardened forces going at it? It'd be a giant goat **** with no real ending. After one side wins, they would get taken over by mexico's 4 man army.
-
actuly im not sure if Hitler was racist.
Lets say that he were using racist statements to justify his action.
But under his regime has been killed many people who were potencial problems. Nobody realy cared about your race, when you said something agains Hitler. or any other pro-german oficier.
Hard to say what could happen to Japan, but Italy , Slovakia has been allies of hitler as well and they didnt care about their race.
However some time ago i saw movie about post war gemany in situation "How it could looks like if Hitler won the war" but i dont know name of that movie. Its quite old movie... like 15 yrs or so.
-
Originally posted by lada
actuly im not sure if Hitler was racist.
Lets say that he were using racist statements to justify his action.
But under his regime has been killed many people who were potencial problems. Nobody realy cared about your race, when you said something agains Hitler. or any other pro-german oficier.
Hard to say what could happen to Japan, but Italy , Slovakia has been allies of hitler as well and they didnt care about their race.
However some time ago i saw movie about post war gemany in situation "How it could looks like if Hitler won the war" but i dont know name of that movie.
You really need to stop posting crap like this.
Karaya
-
Originally posted by GScholz
Hitler and the Nazis were racist, no doubt about it. However they were not seeking to wipe out or conquer all other races, they believed in racial purity; it was only the Jews and Gypsies that they tried to exterminate. The Jews because they were seen as a threat, and the Gypsies because they were seen as lowlifes. As for other races they were accepted in German society as second-class citizens that could not hold public office or be military officers. There were actually Africans, Mongols, Arabs and other races fighting in the Wehrmacht. Nazi-Germany was Apartheid.
Amen brother Scholtz!
<>
Karaya
-
Originally posted by GScholz
Hitler and the Nazis were racist, no doubt about it. However they were not seeking to wipe out or conquer all other races, they believed in racial purity; it was only the Jews and Gypsies that they tried to exterminate. The Jews because they were seen as a threat, and the Gypsies because they were seen as lowlifes. As for other races they were accepted in German society as second-class citizens that could not hold public office or be military officers. There were actually Africans, Mongols, Arabs and other races fighting in the Wehrmacht. Nazi-Germany was Apartheid.
Yeah, and all that stuff about the destiny of the German "race" being the rule of the world doesn't count, does it? And the fact that the Slavs were to be enslaved, then eliminated over time due to attrition isn't germane to the discussion either, is it?
Get a grip. Read that madman's books and publications. It will scare you that he could manipulate himself into power in a civilized country like Germany.
-
Hitler had a tendency to make and break alliances at will. If Germany and Japan had prevailed in WW2, I think we would have had a Cold War in a different way, with Germany and Japan as the major powers instead of the US and Soviet Union. The major bone of contention, and area of conflict, would be in Asia.
-
Originally posted by GScholz
Nazi-Germany was Apartheid.
Yes, true. But you have to understand, that if there had been enough Germans or ethnic Germans to fight the war, alone. Then they would never have accepted forigners into their ranks.
Anyway, they wanted to create a feodal system, with Germans/white men in the power of everything.
And I really think he would have left the Japanese on their own.
-
Originally posted by GScholz
Why? His "crap" is historically accurate.
Hitler WAS racist, as were his minions. Lada said he might not have been. Come on.
Some of the Czechs "annexed" were part of the Austro-Hungarian empire. So they would blend in fine. Germany had supported Serbia in WWI. No surprise there, Except Josef Broz Tito. It was him alone with INTREPID that Operation Barbarossa was suspended for 6 months.
Karaya
-
Hitler wasnt racist? lol
There wasnt and probably isnt now a country in the world isnt racist.
-
Originally posted by rshubert
Hitler had a tendency to make and break alliances at will. If Germany and Japan had prevailed in WW2, I think we would have had a Cold War in a different way, with Germany and Japan as the major powers instead of the US and Soviet Union. The major bone of contention, and area of conflict, would be in Asia.
Hitler WOULD HAVE invaded Japan. You're off your rocker if you think he wouldn't have.
Karaya
-
Originally posted by GScholz
Exactly what was incorrect in my post?
I have read, studied and believe that the ltimate goal of the Nazis was the ELIMINATION of all other peoples, without exception. Their belief in the supremacy of the "aryan race" led to the conclusion that all "subhumans" needed to be destroyed (not subjugated, destroyed) in order to assure the peace of a National Socialist world. The Nazi ideal was a semi-pastoral existence, with everyone close to nature. With other peoples threatening their safety, they could not take this step backward, and therefore those other peoples must be destroyed.
-
Originally posted by Masherbrum
Hitler WOULD HAVE invaded Japan. You're off your rocker if you think he wouldn't have.
Karaya
Of course, we're just speculating here. It is possible that the "alternative Cold War" would have ended in armed conflict, but remember that we thought--for 50 years--that the real Cold War would end up the same way. Who's to say? It is interesting to speculate on "what if".
Maybe Harry Turtledove (an American author of alternate history fiction) has done this theme. Or perhaps one of the other authors in that genre.
Ok, let's assume Germany prevailed in Europe, and Japan was able to force the US to sue for peace. That leaves Japan in control of the resources of SE Asia, and part of China, with an active hot war against the Chinese.
Hitler has the resource base of Europe to work with, and possibly the oil fields of the Middle East.
What happens in India? Africa? the USA? South America? With these areas unconquered (at least for several years, Hitler has no way to actually invade the American continents), both the big Axis partners would have their hands full exerting control over their respective spheres of influence. The same thing happened after WW2, when the Western Allies regained control of most of Europe, and the Soviet Union exerted its influence over the so-called satellite nations.
-
Originally posted by lada
actuly im not sure if Hitler was racist.
I was about to google the hell out of that comment, then realized, that it would be such a complete and utter waste of my work time doing honorable things-like posting here- that I 'm just gonna let your comment marianate for a while.
Originally posted by lada
actuly im not sure if Hitler was racist.
-
Originally posted by rshubert
I have read, studied and believe that the ltimate goal of the Nazis was the ELIMINATION of all other peoples, without exception. Their belief in the supremacy of the "aryan race" led to the conclusion that all "subhumans" needed to be destroyed (not subjugated, destroyed) in order to assure the peace of a National Socialist world. The Nazi ideal was a semi-pastoral existence, with everyone close to nature. With other peoples threatening their safety, they could not take this step backward, and therefore those other peoples must be destroyed.
There's something wrong in your informations.
The elimination was considered only for the jews, the gitans(??).
The others untermenscht were to be used as workforce, in a no different manner than in the ancient times were the slaves.
[edit]
I forgot to add....
IMHO.
[/edit]
-
I think that we have proof that even a ridiculous hypothesis can spark a good old-fashioned, ping-pong, dung-throwing, O'Club cat fight.
-
Karaya, take a step away from the expresso machine... open fridge, take a beer, sit on the couch, drink it.
Feel beter? :D
-
Originally posted by lasersailor184
No, Hitler would not have turned on the Japanese. First off, they are on other sides of the world.
One could say the same about the U.S. and Japan.
-
Originally posted by Masherbrum
Some of the Czechs "annexed" were part of the Austro-Hungarian empire. So they would blend in fine. Germany had supported Serbia in WWI. No surprise there, Except Josef Broz Tito. It was him alone with INTREPID that Operation Barbarossa was suspended for 6 months.
Please, can you try to explain your thoughts in other words?
Germany supporting Serbia in WWI?! Tito suspending Barbarossa for 6 months? All operation in Yugoslavia and Greece took about one month and required 1/10 of the force planned for Barbarossa.
-
Some guys have an astonishing non-knowledge about WWII.
They catch every they know from "MoHAA", "WWII online" etc, etc
The other day someone where shouting "Churchill didnt hate communism!"
Sad............
-
Originally posted by GScholz
If you try to understand him right and leave your emotions at the door, you'll understand that he was trying to analyze whether Hitler was a "true" racist or simply using racism as a political tool. It is a valid question, and one that has seen much debate over the years.
OK, work with me, to what extent is a political tool NOT an indication of one's personal beliefs? Are we safe in assuming that he merely claimed to be racist to servbe a political end?
Perhaps you can explain to me what true racism is? By this argument, one could say that all politicians only talk about their religion, worldview, etc., only to pursue a political career.
regardless of wether or not his racist ideology was a tool or part of his actual worldview, I believe his actions speak for themselves.
In my mind, the guy was a racist. A sober, well dressed, non-swearing one, but a racist nonetheless.
6million jews and 20% of the Polish population can't be wrong. Those are pretty extreme measures to take just to push a political agenda w/o believing in racism.
-
In short, Hitler's foreign policy was massively influenced by the Geographer Karl Haushofer, who as well as being a proponent of the Geopolitical theory behind the concept of lebensraum, was also a keen orientalist and a huge supporter of Japan as well as being one of the architects of the alliance with Japan.
Invading Japan wasn't on Hitler's agenda. Dominating the east-european heartland and cementing Germany's destiny was.
-
Originally posted by Masherbrum
Hitler WAS racist, as were his minions. Lada said he might not have been. Come on.
Some of the Czechs "annexed" were part of the Austro-Hungarian empire. So they would blend in fine.
rofl man ..... better do not comment about this because now it must be clear to everybody with basic education , that you have no clue about history of central/eastern europe
-
Originally posted by lada
rofl man ..... better do not comment about this because now it must be clear to everybody with basic education , that you have no clue about history of central/eastern europe
Ok, lada, enlighten us. What is factually incorrect in the post? Wasn't that geographic area East of the sudetenland part of the Austro-Hungarian Empire?
-
Originally posted by GScholz
If you try to understand him right and leave your emotions at the door, you'll understand that he was trying to analyze whether Hitler was a "true" racist or simply using racism as a political tool. It is a valid question, and one that has seen much debate over the years.
yeeep .....
question is not if Bush has been abused by some Gay during his chilhood... question is why is he agains marriedge of gays./les.
maybe we could claim him "orthodox hardcore heterosexual" and then nobody would waste time to speak with him about this matter. Like you deny to speak about diference between Hitlers politic and his personal believes.
what a lovely example :D
-
very possible scenario of German/Japan war
http://www.rio.com.br/animation/iconstory.htm
-
Originally posted by rshubert
What is factually incorrect in the post? Wasn't that geographic area East of the sudetenland part of the Austro-Hungarian Empire?
Czech, Moravian, Slovakian were loong time hated by Austrians. Some of most famous proverbs are... " Czech= die simulanten bande" or "The one who survive working under austrian Master will not die in any war." and so on..
Even today they still didnt get used to it. And when we started to build our Nuclear powerplant, they were complaining a lot.
so your statement
Originally posted by rshubert
Some of the Czechs "annexed" were part of the Austro-Hungarian empire. So they would blend in fine.
Is totaly off and prove that you know nothing about Czech, Moravian, Slovakian relationships with Austria.
Originally posted by rshubert
Ok, lada, enlighten us.
What did you mean by us ???
You are the only one who didnt get my point and the only one, who speak about something w/o clue in this thread.
-
Originally posted by Momus--
In short, Hitler's foreign policy was massively influenced by the Geographer Karl Haushofer, who as well as being a proponent of the Geopolitical theory behind the concept of lebensraum, was also a keen orientalist and a huge supporter of Japan as well as being one of the architects of the alliance with Japan.
Invading Japan wasn't on Hitler's agenda. Dominating the east-european heartland and cementing Germany's destiny was.
I just saw a special about Haushofer on the History Channel recently. Good show. However, lets assume the Axis won. Germany would control Europe, much of Asia, and probably get its hands in the Americas. With 2 cultures dominating the globe, both being very militaristic, I wouldn't be suprised if a war broke out between the two. Could've been waged by my generation. Implausible? Maybe. Impossible? I wouldn't say so.
-
I got your point lada, but you are wrong even to question Hitler's racism.
I think the methodical extermination of a race pretty much defines racism.
Or do you doubt the reports of millions of Jews cooked, gassed, shot etc.?
-
Good point Indy.
A enemy will always be needed to keep a empire together, to make people forget about their "own" internal problems.
-
Originally posted by Lazerus
I think the methodical extermination of a race pretty much defines racism.
Or do you doubt the reports of millions of Jews cooked, gassed, shot etc.?
Well that is racism. But there are some reasons, why he acted like that.
In pre war era Hitler pointed on fact, that most of Berlin based lawyers are Jewish.
Later on when he came to another countries, most of ritch or famous people were executed or jailed.. jewish or non Jewish.... Im not sure who said this, but it were some of famous german Officiers ( i think he were director of some annihilation camp) "I will determine who is and who isnt Jewish."
So there are many reasons to ask if racism showed by Nazi were true belive in racism at high level or it were just political suite like terrorism.
So young german has been told, that other races are "baaad" so it should make easy to remove whoever. Only one thing you have to say is, that they are Jews or Gypsie or simply dirty race.
Or does somebody belive that officier in Osvetim asked someone if is he Jewish, christian orthodox or whatever ?
If somebody point on Hitler today and say... look he were silly racist is not quite well served information IMO.
-
If granma had hmmm if a frog had wings he wouldn't...
well you get the point
THE megaSTUD :D
-
Originally posted by GScholz
You didn't read anything I wrote did you Lazerus?
I read it all. I just don't think there can be any question of his racism.
Political tool? Sure it was. But I just don't believe that it wasn't sincere.
-
Originally posted by Masherbrum
Germany had supported Serbia in WWI. No surprise there, Except Josef Broz Tito. It was him alone with INTREPID that Operation Barbarossa was suspended for 6 months.
Karaya
Germany certainly did not support Serbia in WW1. German opposition to serbian aims is exacly what spread WW1 to all of europe.
Tito had no bearing on the delay of Barbarossa. It mostly the Italian's fault because their disasters against the Brits and Greeks necessitated German intervention in early 1941. Further some Yugoslav british leaning army officers revolted against a pro-German government so Yugoslavia was invaded too.
-
Thank you GRUN.
Sounds like I got it right, then.
-
Originally posted by GScholz
As for other races they were accepted in German society as second-class citizens that could not hold public office or be military officers.
There are few million slavs who would disagree with that comment, however they are unavaiable as they have been gassed or shot in massed execusions.
Come to poland, i'll take you to aushwitz myself.
Races were due for extermination, simply sick ****s didn't have enough time to finish the job, but slavs were being worked over pretty well too, i assure you.
As for german citizenship thingy, joke here says all you had to do is own a german shepard and not look as a jew in order to get it, however you'd have a visit from a resistance folks soon afterwards.
Hitler was a racist, no doubt about it.
-
Originally posted by indy007
I just saw a special about Haushofer on the History Channel recently. Good show. However, lets assume the Axis won. Germany would control Europe, much of Asia, and probably get its hands in the Americas. With 2 cultures dominating the globe, both being very militaristic, I wouldn't be suprised if a war broke out between the two. Could've been waged by my generation. Implausible? Maybe. Impossible? I wouldn't say so.
Well, nothing is impossible, but given the time germany would have required to consolidate its hold on Eurasia (generations possibly), it is unlikely to have happened in Hitler's lifetime, aside from all the other factors to the contrary.
-
Originally posted by lada
yeeep .....
question is not if Bush has been abused by some Gay during his chilhood... question is why is he agains marriedge of gays./les.
maybe we could claim him "orthodox hardcore heterosexual" and then nobody would waste time to speak with him about this matter. Like you deny to speak about diference between Hitlers politic and his personal believes.
what a lovely example :D
What the heck does either GB or the gay marriage issue have to do with this? There are political reasons that have nothing to do with personal beliefs on the right or wrong of being gay to oppose allowing legally recognized gay marriage.
-
Originally posted by rshubert
Read that madman's books and publications. It will scare you that he could manipulate himself into power in a civilized country like Germany.
civilized country? you mean what was left of germany after ww1?
Germany had lost everything, had nothing after ww1
Back to topic, lets asume germany had won ww2, this means
also Hitler would had the Atomic Bomb. A war with Japan would
not last long, i think he would bomb 2 citys to show the atomic power,
Japan then would surrender...umh somehow that sounds similar hmm
-
Originally posted by Gh0stFT
civilized country? you mean what was left of germany after ww1?
Germany had lost everything, had nothing after ww1
Possibly true, but you can do a lot of rebuilding in two decades. hell... Eighteen years after the Treaty of Versailles, Germany was involved in Spain.
-
The Krauts were nowhere near the A-bomb. Werner Heisenberg was sitting on the project. That is why the premise here is so absurd. SWOTL or not, war is over by the end of 1945.
-
Originally posted by GScholz
The Jews were hated in Germany by the average German. Why? Because the Jews (to a large extent) owned Germany. Most white Germans worked for Jewish businessmen, and the particular Jewish way of doing business (family business) to a large extent made the Jews the "upper class" in Germany.
I believe Hitler was a racist. However it is valid to question this since he (being a sociopath) simply could have used the hatred against the Jews as a political tool to rally support. Also, since the Jewish families owned much of Germany, the Nazi-state could confiscate their property and wealth.
Did Hitler personally hate the Jews, or were they just a means to a goal in a mad man's political game?
Good question. One that can never really be answered.
Judism is a religion, not a race. The only ones to ever classify it as a race was Nazi Germany....of course History has proven they where a bunch of Morons.
-
Originally posted by weaselsan
Judism is a religion, not a race. The only ones to ever classify it as a race was Nazi Germany....of course History has proven they where a bunch of Morons.
Yes, judism is a religon that anyone can convert to, but one can never become a "jew", thats a racial thing, really.
Either you born as one, or you are not.
I think the jews themself are quite proud of being jews.
I sugest you read about things weaselsan, before you utter anything.
-
Lets not forget something, Hitler was a deeply disturbed individual who suffered from many mental defects, and it is also theorized that he suffered from more than anyone Knew. Add to that the fact that his personal doctor was shooting him up with every upper and downer you could think of plus a mixture of human feces.
This is a man who no one will ever be able to accuratly perdict what actions he would have or have not taken. I mean he lost the eastern front against Russia because he was so doped up that he didnt know what was going on.
I wrote a 25 page paper on the man in Freshman Comp. for college and I dont think I even touched the surface of who he was and what made him the person he turned out to be.
-
darth tater thought that hitler was great...but only until the last moments of his life when he converted back to the good side. he was later served "loaded" with butter, bacon bits and sour cream.
(http://images.ibsys.com/2005/0118/4102534.jpg)
-
Hitler had a definite racial motivation (counting the Jews as a "race" in general usage) that he acted on to an illogical, counter productive (by an consideration), manic extent. It obviously wasn’t all talk where the Jews and gypsies were concerned and even where Slavic people were seen as being troublemakers in the occupied territories.
However, it was also a tool used to motivate some sectors of the population, just as the communist threat and Treaty of Versailles were used. No single issue for all of Germany, but the Nazi's were masters at using the right message(s) with the right audiences and pushing the most powerful buttons to sway action and opinion.
As for the Japanese, Hitler laid out in Mein Kampf his vision of Germany as a global power, and it was somewhat restrained. He saw each existing empire as having its own land, resources and sphere of influence. He *****ed about Germany lacking access to new colonial opportunities but noted that opportunities did exist in the East for the Third Reich to occupy and develop. The local, inferior Slavic populations would be used as unskilled farm labor, and educated just enough to go into town and get supplies for their German masters. So, I don't think he had any particular global ambitions beyond those, at least initially. Had Germany been gloriously successful, that might have changed :)
FWIW, you could also stand up to the Nazis and survive, but you had to have some mass. The individual didn’t dare, but organized groups were successful both before and during the war. The resistance to euthanasia program was one example. I believe the wives of partial Jews also marched in Berlin and were able to hold off planned action. Hitler knew the weaknesses of a dictatorship, and that you can’t be a successful dictator without the support of most of the population, and he worked to keep mass unrest down as best he could. That’s one reason why he waited so long to go on a full war production footing, since he witnessed first hand the domestic discontent that can breed from hardship at the end of WW1.
Charon
-
Originally posted by RTStuka
This is a man who no one will ever be able to accuratly perdict what actions he would have or have not taken. I mean he lost the eastern front against Russia because he was so doped up that he didnt know what was going on.
yet almost everyone from the German High Command obeyed him until the very last moments. wtf were they thinking??!?!?
-
Originally posted by GScholz
Um ... I've already said Hitler was a racist; please pay attention.
Yes said he might have been. Isn't that an honest question?
Although I have no problem imagining Hitler trying for world domination, that was never one of his actual goals during WWII. Hitler was even reluctant to attack Britain.
Nazi-Germany's military ambitions of WWII were the domination of continental Europe, western Russia and the Caucasus. In fact Germany only got involved in North-Africa because their ally Italy was getting their butts kicked by the British.
Hitler WAS going to attack Britain. Had he used his brain instead of listening to his minions, Hitler might have succeeded.
I just get the belief that after awhile HAD Hitler "succeeded". He would have expanded.
Karaya
-
Originally posted by Boroda
Please, can you try to explain your thoughts in other words?
Germany supporting Serbia in WWI?! Tito suspending Barbarossa for 6 months? All operation in Yugoslavia and Greece took about one month and required 1/10 of the force planned for Barbarossa.
Operation Barbarossa was stalled for 5-6 months. Because of INTREPID. Read "A Man called INTREPID". Tito, was the main factor. Actually, I've read this in other books as well. It's quite common knowledge. I shouldn't have to explain this.
Karaya
-
Originally posted by lada
rofl man ..... better do not comment about this because now it must be clear to everybody with basic education , that you have no clue about history of central/eastern europe
I think you have proved to ALOT of people within the last week how much of an idiot you can be.
You stand on the shoulders of other lada. You are weak, ask Pat for a vowel.
Karaya
-
Origanally posted by Lada
so your statement
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by rshubert
Some of the Czechs "annexed" were part of the Austro-Hungarian empire. So they would blend in fine.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hey genius, why are cramming words down Rshubert's throat? He NEVER POSTED THIS. Learn to ******* read before insulting others.
You got caught, and you got caught good.
Karaya
-
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
Germany certainly did not support Serbia in WW1. German opposition to serbian aims is exacly what spread WW1 to all of europe.
Tito had no bearing on the delay of Barbarossa. It mostly the Italian's fault because their disasters against the Brits and Greeks necessitated German intervention in early 1941. Further some Yugoslav british leaning army officers revolted against a pro-German government so Yugoslavia was invaded too.
Tito WAS MOST DEFINATELY involved in the delay of Barbarossa. The whole Balkans Crusade did exactly what the allies wanted the Germans to do. Stall the Germans in the Dead of winter, it did. Germany IGNORES the Balkans. The outcome of 5-6 months of "better weather" might have been enough to turn the tide.
Karaya
-
Originally posted by patrone
I think the jews themself are quite proud of being jews.
I sugest you read about things weaselsan, before you utter anything.
I think you should follow your OWN Advice. You had to edit this post I am partially quoting? That first sentence is a gem. :aok
Karaya
-
Originally posted by bunch
The Krauts were nowhere near the A-bomb. Werner Heisenberg was sitting on the project. That is why the premise here is so absurd. SWOTL or not, war is over by the end of 1945.
When the ships from Norway were sunk on the way to Germany with the Heavy Water, it set them back 4-5 years.
I agree with your statements sir.
Karaya
-
Originally posted by GScholz
That would be Bolsheviks and Communists. I may be splitting hairs, but that is political persecution not racism. The people of the Soviet Union (in particular the Ukrainians) were the single largest contributor of non-German volunteers to the Waffen-SS.
You're not getting it, people in poland, russia or more easter europian nations were being picked up on the streets at random and send to concentration camps - so called "lapankla", anyone even suspected of anything could be send to camps, basically at any good occasion, you'd be send to camp.
If you were a pole, looking like a jew, you'd get send to camp.
If you were a christian, looking like a jew, you'd get send to camp.
and so on and on and on.
Slavs were next on the list, only thing that saved them for extermination enmasse is the ending of the war. Had it lasted, it wouldn't have been pretty.
Still doesn't change the fact that 6 million civilians died during WWII in poland, and that's excluding Jews from the statistic.
As for people serving in Werhmacht, don't get too excited.
Polish man were sometimes forced into joining the service. Enlistment offer looked like this - join or we'll shoot your whole family.
Ukranias had a bit of a problem with Uncle Joe, one can hardly blame them for helping germans then.
It ain't always black and white.
-
Originally posted by GScholz
Karaya, please get an education. Practically everything you have posed in this thread has been factually incorrect.
Fd ski, I do get it. I'm just separating the random persecution of civilians from the definition of racism.
So William Stephenson is a liar? He was called "INTREPID", he answered ONLY to Churchill and Roosevelt.
I have an education, time for some of you to READ MORE. I realize some want to troll on this board, heck, we had a rarity in this forum. Someone so hellbent on being "right", this person misquoted another BBS member. It is THIS PERSON that needs the education. Save your "know it all rhetoric" for someone who is in the same boat as YOU GS. The person's name? patrone. But then again, you guys are already spooning each other's egos.
Fd ski is right, YOU really don't GET IT.
Karaya
-
Originally posted by Masherbrum
Operation Barbarossa was stalled for 5-6 months. Because of INTREPID. Read "A Man called INTREPID". Tito, was the main factor. Actually, I've read this in other books as well. It's quite common knowledge. I shouldn't have to explain this.
Karaya
Funny, I have this book on the shelf, time to finally read it after maybe 10 years after i'll run out of easy reading.
I am reading Gabriel Gorodetsky's "Myth of the Icebreaker" now. He has a whole chahter about Yugoslavia and European politics in 1941. He says that Barbarossa definetly was NOT delayed for such a long time. The whole operation in Balkans took one month, and only one division was actually sent there instead of going to Poland.
Prince Pavel was overthrown one month before Germans attacked Yugoslavia, and he was one of the Hitler's allies. I really need to read that book you mentioned.
-
Originally posted by Masherbrum
Tito WAS MOST DEFINATELY involved in the delay of Barbarossa. The whole Balkans Crusade did exactly what the allies wanted the Germans to do. Stall the Germans in the Dead of winter, it did. Germany IGNORES the Balkans. The outcome of 5-6 months of "better weather" might have been enough to turn the tide.
Karaya
The situation was much more complicated IMHO.
Biggest problem was that British Foreign Office sincerely believed that Soviet-German alliance will last for a long time, and it ws impossible to break it attracting USSR to the allied side.
-
Originally posted by Masherbrum
So William Stephenson is a liar? He was called "INTREPID", he answered ONLY to Churchill and Roosevelt.
I have an education, time for some of you to READ MORE. I realize some want to troll on this board, heck, we had a rarity in this forum. Someone so hellbent on being "right", this person misquoted another BBS member. It is THIS PERSON that needs the education. Save your "know it all rhetoric" for someone who is in the same boat as YOU GS. The person's name? Lada. But then again, you guys are already spooning each other's egos.
Fd ski is right, YOU really don't GET IT.
Karaya
-
Originally posted by Boroda
Funny, I have this book on the shelf, time to finally read it after maybe 10 years after i'll run out of easy reading.
I am reading Gabriel Gorodetsky's "Myth of the Icebreaker" now. He has a whole chahter about Yugoslavia and European politics in 1941. He says that Barbarossa definetly was NOT delayed for such a long time. The whole operation in Balkans took one month, and only one division was actually sent there instead of going to Poland.
Prince Pavel was overthrown one month before Germans attacked Yugoslavia, and he was one of the Hitler's allies. I really need to read that book you mentioned.
It's an amazing book. I had no idea of the involvment of the Allies "stalling" Operation Barbarossa until I read this book. I ENCOURAGE you to read it.
I haven't been trying to pick fights on this thread. But I refuse to accept some people saying that Hitler was NOT Racist. I'm sorry but I still won't.
Karaya
-
Originally posted by Masherbrum
Tito WAS MOST DEFINATELY involved in the delay of Barbarossa. The whole Balkans Crusade did exactly what the allies wanted the Germans to do. Stall the Germans in the Dead of winter, it did. Germany IGNORES the Balkans. The outcome of 5-6 months of "better weather" might have been enough to turn the tide.
Karaya
Tito and the parizans were a non factor in the April 1941 attack. The Tito resistance movement only started fighting later and was not involved in the series of events that got Germany to attack Yugoslavia in the first place, let alone Greece...
So you are MOST DEFINITELY wrong here...
-
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
Tito and the parizans were a non factor in the April 1941 attack. The Tito resistance movement only started fighting later and was not involved in the series of events that got Germany to attack Yugoslavia in the first place, let alone Greece...
So you are MOST DEFINITELY wrong here...
Okee-dokee. :aok
Karaya
-
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
Tito and the parizans were a non factor in the April 1941 attack. The Tito resistance movement only started fighting later and was not involved in the series of events that got Germany to attack Yugoslavia in the first place, let alone Greece...
So you are MOST DEFINITELY wrong here...
I wonder, GRUN, what make you think you are an expert in the history of "Yugoslavian" and Balkan? I bet you never saw a single James Bond movie...........
The death of Metaxa changed the scene a whole lot in balkan. And the delay that the Balkan meant to Barbarossa, would´nt have made any diffrence at all. They where stoped by a superior enemy, the Soviet. Many factors made the goal to reach Moscow a failure, not only the winter alone. Leningrad holding up a lot of manpower, etc, etc
(A jewish person, is a person that have a bloodline to the Person called "Israel", who had 12 sons.........)
-
Anyone there:
With enough heavy water,could the Germans have built the bomb?
-
Kataya, your are to funny to have on ignore. You are up there, right beside 412cobra and crumpp when it comes to "historical facts":lol
-
Originally posted by lada
Is totaly off and prove that you know nothing about Czech, Moravian, Slovakian relationships with Austria.
You are the only one who didnt get my point and the only one, who speak about something w/o clue in this thread.
Lada, you are a boor. Look it up, it is a person who has no manners. That describes your petulant responses to legitimate questions and requests for proof of your points.
Back to the point. Was not the area of Europe known now as the Czech Republic a part of the Austro-Hungarian Empire? As well as Moravia, Slovakia, etc.? Yes, yes--there was a revolution in the 1840s, but it was put down, wasn't it? Yes, again--many people didn't like the fact that they were ruled by the Dual Monarchy, but that doesn't change the facts.
-
(http://www.wendyknits.net/images/google.jpg)
-
Originally posted by Gh0stFT
civilized country? you mean what was left of germany after ww1?
Germany had lost everything, had nothing after ww1
Back to topic, lets asume germany had won ww2, this means
also Hitler would had the Atomic Bomb. A war with Japan would
not last long, i think he would bomb 2 citys to show the atomic power,
Japan then would surrender...umh somehow that sounds similar hmm
Admittedly Germany was in a bad way after the War, but things did improve significantly in the late 20's, right up to the time of the Great Depression, which affected EVERY Western nation. Germany had problems, but was on the whole a civilized nation. You can't blame all of Nazism on economic conditions and civil strife.
-
Originally posted by Angus
Anyone there:
With enough heavy water,could the Germans have built the bomb?
The gentleman in charge of the project, Werner Heisenberg, was reputedly sitting on the project (making it fail) out of a sense of patriotism.
-
The heavy water method is theoretically useable to build the bomb right?
And a stock of it did get sunk en route. Was that on a lake or Fjord, I cannot remember.
Anyway, the question of what if, relates a lot with the possibility of the bomb.
What if England would have made peace with Hitler in the Summer of 1940?
Or as Scholzie said:
"Hitler did not want war with Britain. He actually sued for peace with Britain after the battle of France, but Britain's resolve did not waver."
It has a point. Hitler considered Britain to be necessary for the stability of the colonies.
However, after the BoB, there was no dream of that no more....
Anyway, back to it.
If Britain had made a truce, I have no doubt that Hitler would have won the USSR. He could have used all his strenght there, also his trade with the USA would have been open.
(It actually was untill 1941, but the Brits blocked the possibility)
Comments?
-
Originally posted by Angus
The heavy water method is theoretically useable to build the bomb right?
And a stock of it did get sunk en route. Was that on a lake or Fjord, I cannot remember.
Anyway, the question of what if, relates a lot with the possibility of the bomb.
What if England would have made peace with Hitler in the Summer of 1940?
Or as Scholzie said:
"Hitler did not want war with Britain. He actually sued for peace with Britain after the battle of France, but Britain's resolve did not waver."
It has a point. Hitler considered Britain to be necessary for the stability of the colonies.
However, after the BoB, there was no dream of that no more....
Anyway, back to it.
If Britain had made a truce, I have no doubt that Hitler would have won the USSR. He could have used all his strenght there, also his trade with the USA would have been open.
(It actually was untill 1941, but the Brits blocked the possibility)
Comments?
The heavy water method (I am a former USN nuke plant operator) used unenriched (.7% U235) uranium as a fuel, generates little power, and provides a fast neutron flux to transmute U-234 to Plutonium (P) 239. The plutonium is then separated from the fuel rods, and chemically purified as a bomb fuel. It took about 100 TONS of Uranium ore to produce 1 KG of plutonium.
The USA decided not to use that method of production. We used an enriched uranium reactor (about 15% U-235) with a graphite moderator, producing plutonium in a "shell" of unenriched U-238. The advantage was that no production of heavy water was needed for a moderator.
Germany's dependance on the Heavy Water method put a bottleneck in their plans, but the question must be asked--did they have the physics and electronics to produce a plutonium bomb? A Plutonium bomb needs to use an implosion-explosion system, due to the fact that there is very small theoretical minimum critical mass. In other words, with a correct geometry, a very small amount of Plutonium will fission critically. The trick is to keep it in a geometry that won't support a sustained reaction. As opposed to U-235, which will not go critical unless the mass is greater than 5.2 KG.
Basically, a Plutonium bomb uses a convoluted geometric figure that is imploded into a sphere using explosives. Getting that to work took a year of experimentation in the US. Did this take place in Germany? I have never read that it did.
-
The gentleman in charge of the project, Werner Heisenberg, was reputedly sitting on the project (making it fail) out of a sense of patriotism.
That's what he says :)
There is also quite a bit of documentation, including bugged conversations of the German nuclear scientists when the atomic bombing was announced, that suggests he didn't have a clue. They seemed to actually be shocked. The general impression was that Heisenberg didn't think the bomb was practical, didn't really push for it, was barking up the wrong tree and was quite surprised that the Allies actually made it work. Given the constraints in Nazi Germany on pure science which requires creativity, an open environment, diverse, eccentric personalities, etc. (compared to an engineering heavy technology like rocket or jet engines) it is hardly surprising. In those cases the basic scientific principals were quite clear, the challenge was engineering a solution. Of course, those traits in the allied program certainly help make sure the Soviets got the bomb earlier than they would have otherwise.
Germany was a leader in physics before the Nazis's but you get the impression (I think it's documented as well) that Hitler though nuclear physics was a degenerate, Jewish science and the research effort reflected that.
[edit: not that the bomb didn't require some pretty sophisticated engineering as well. But the theoretical physics hurdles were perhaps the greatest challenge to overcome.]
Charon
-
Originally posted by bunch
The gentleman in charge of the project, Werner Heisenberg, was reputedly sitting on the project (making it fail) out of a sense of patriotism.
General Groves has an interview with Heisenberg and other German scientists in his book IIRC. They simply didn't believe that Americans could make a bomb and didn't even think of a method Americans used to start a chain-reaction.
Groves book on Amazon. (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0306801892/qid=1106415513/sr=1-4/ref=sr_1_4/102-8401701-5151324?v=glance&s=books) Very good read. I have a copy published in USSR in early-60s by Atomizdat.
-
Originally posted by rshubert
The heavy water method (I am a former USN nuke plant operator) used unenriched (.7% U235) uranium as a fuel, generates little power, and provides a fast neutron flux to transmute U-234 to Plutonium (P) 239. The plutonium is then separated from the fuel rods, and chemically purified as a bomb fuel. It took about 100 TONS of Uranium ore to produce 1 KG of plutonium.
The USA decided not to use that method of production. We used an enriched uranium reactor (about 15% U-235) with a graphite moderator, producing plutonium in a "shell" of unenriched U-238. The advantage was that no production of heavy water was needed for a moderator.
Germany's dependance on the Heavy Water method put a bottleneck in their plans, but the question must be asked--did they have the physics and electronics to produce a plutonium bomb? A Plutonium bomb needs to use an implosion-explosion system, due to the fact that there is very small theoretical minimum critical mass. In other words, with a correct geometry, a very small amount of Plutonium will fission critically. The trick is to keep it in a geometry that won't support a sustained reaction. As opposed to U-235, which will not go critical unless the mass is greater than 5.2 KG.
Basically, a Plutonium bomb uses a convoluted geometric figure that is imploded into a sphere using explosives. Getting that to work took a year of experimentation in the US. Did this take place in Germany? I have never read that it did.
Thanks for the well presented explanation; that was a good little read.
As to the original question, I think that Hitler would have taken on Japan had he thought he could win, and had it been practical to rule Asia.
I think that Germany would have beaten Japan had the Axis won WWII. I think that they would have had a heck of a time ruling Asia, however.
eskimo
-
Originally posted by Charon
That's what he says :)....
Lol...
Openheimer: Lol Heisenber, we got the bomb, you don't. All you research are blong to us!
Heisenberg: I could make one whenever I want, but I love my country, so I didn't.
Openheimer: Lol, all your Germany are belong to us. Pwned!
...Most of what I know on the topic, i think, comes from Brighter Than A Thousand Suns (which is a great read BTW) & some physics professors (some ex nuclear weapons reseachers) who may have been suffering a case of hero worship.
-
i dont think that hitler would have done so.
dont know why, but i was always under the impression that he had invisioned giving them control over the orient.
-
Still, Scholzie, they did not have a long plan enough to enter the red sea.
There had been very little to stop them knocking on Egypt's back door if they had wanted too.
-
Originally posted by Ohio43
Greenclouds post inspired me to ask a hypothetical question that I have always wondered about. Being that Hitler was a racist (go figure)
If the war had gone Hitler's way and he succeded.. do you think he would have turned against Japan? Maybe there is even documentaion that he would have. Dunno, just a thought I had. What do you think?
Yes Hitler would have turned on Japan.Hitler was out to conquer the entire world.
If He had gotten the atomic bomb first he would hav leveled everything in his path too. Includeing England, France, and anything in Eastern Europe that stood in his way
My Great grandfather was in Hitlers Navy, and he use to tell me stories about things he had to do, one of which was to map out the East coast of the U.S for future attacks.
Needless to say after WW2 my greatgrandfather moved to Australia before the next Hitler took over.
My greatgrandfather was alos given a choice, join the military or go to a concentration camp with the Jews
-
rshubert:
My understanding is that the German scientists never had a confident concensus of an implosion geometry, so shaped HE lenses, and the machining/tooling to produce them if they had even thought of them, would have been quite a long way down the road.
Even the less elegant gun-type mechanism they considered (and we used - after the naval gun designers finally realized that they didn't need to design it to naval gun barrel weight specs since it would only be used once... :rolleyes: ) was realistically beyond the industrial and financial capability committed to their effort.
-
It's scary but very telling to realise people are quoting FICTIONAL books as history reference.
What's next, James Bond quotes for the cold war? ROFL.
Amazon.com on the INTREPID:
He also was a key factor in the development of the OSS. These accomplishments alone would have made an interesting book. However, there is so much disinformation and outright falsehood, that his outstanding contributions are overshadowed. This book has been discredited by several prominent WWII historians, veterans of MI5/6 ; among others. Don't waste your time or money.
I did enjoy reading it, but take it with a grain of salt.
Sir William Stephenson was never named "Intrepid" until dubbed by the author Stevenson. He never worked for Churchill, it is doubtful he ever met Churchill. The dark figure with Churchill in the bombed House of Commons is Brenden Bracken the Minister of Information. The pictures of Madeliene and others are actually from an old 1946 movie,"School for Danger". I believe I was the first in North America to challenge the books authenticity. My article was published in the Vancouver Province on Aug.19. 1984. Quoting the historian, David Stafford's remark in 1988: The Intrepid book is a "farrago of nonsense"
Truly, a great source of knowledge. :lol
-
Originally posted by GScholz
The really interesting question is: Would the Japanese Empire attack the Third Reich?
As opposed to the Nazis, the Japanese did actually believe in a future where the Japanese Empire ruled "all five corners of the world".
this could mean that both of them used same propaganda, whitch has not been so close to real goals .
-
So, I guess that the Germans could not have built a Bomb before 1946 or so?
They had ballistic missiles before that, and one must bear in mind that their industries were being bombed for years, - what could they have done if they had been in a neutral status with the British and on the trade side with the USA.
And who would Niels Bohr have been doing his maths for?
Anyway, I'd put my money on this:
If Germans had cracked the Brits in 1940, they would have won over the USSR possibly in the autumn of 1941. Their line would have been drawn near the Urals with some resistance going on beyond there.
A conflict with Japan might then have happened when the Japanese would have collided with the UK colonies, - but by here something is missing into the equation.
the USA and Naval Power.
-
So, I guess that the Germans could not have built a Bomb before 1946 or so?
They had ballistic missiles before that, and one must bear in mind that their industries were being bombed for years, - what could they have done if they had been in a neutral status with the British and on the trade side with the USA.
And who would Niels Bohr have been doing his maths for?
They weren't putting any serious effort into it, and did not see it as a priority. I don't think neutrality would have changed that much. It also didn't matter that the industries were being bombed, etc., it was an afterthough seen as being part of a field dominated by Jews :) They weren't supposed to need one anyway. Just as there was degenerate art, there was degenerate science. Good old Nazi ideology at work once again, helping with it's own demise.
Charon
-
So the heavy water project was half-hearted?
The ballistic missile and cruise missiles were definately not, - the Germans were in that field the leaders in the world.
Their steel was good, their radar was good, their subs were good, their aircraft were good, their tactics were good, - but their ideology was bloody ape****.
But they must have had some plan for the heavy water. How realistic was it?
-
Here is one of the key things in the nukemaking....
"Bohr, although he had been christened in the Christian Church, had Jewish origins on his mother's side and so, when the Nazis occupied Denmark in 1940, his life became exceeding difficult. He had to escape in 1943 by being taken to Sweden by fishing boat. From there he was flown to England where he began to work on the project to make a nuclear fission bomb. After a few months he went with the British research team to Los Alamos in the United States where they continued work on the project. "
-
WOW....so we helped the Allies and Jews as well?
I thought we where Axis, just like Finland, during the war.........
-
one thing is for sure, some of our best physicists left
germany because of the growing Nazi regime, and helped
usa to build the A-Bomb. So i think now, if the Nazi's would
have won ww2, they would not have the bomb ready,
the best Brains left anyway no matter how you turn the past.
-
I've no idea how seriously the Riech took the atom bomb; but they did do work on a delivery method; which seems odd if they were that far off.
The He 177 V38 was to be the atomic bomber; so they had a rough idea of weight and dimensions; I'd imagine.
As far as I know; although there were planned intercontinental version of the V2 on the drawing board; I've never seen mention of a nuclear war head for them.
-
Well, the V2 could carry a ton?
Enough?
And there was nothing to stop them making something much bigger than the V2 basically, - the project worked nicely.
-
Ask this guy if Hitler was racist ;)
(http://en.wikipedia.org/upload/3/3d/JesseOwens_1936olym.jpg)
-
It maybe just semantics but I don't believe Hitler was rascist, he was more an ultra nationalist.
Tronsky
-
Originally posted by Angus
Well, the V2 could carry a ton?
Enough?
And there was nothing to stop them making something much bigger than the V2 basically, - the project worked nicely.
the Redstone was a bigger V2 :)
-
Originally posted by -tronski-
It maybe just semantics but I don't believe Hitler was rascist, he was more an ultra nationalist.
Tronsky
Hitler wasn't a rascist as we use the term today. But Yes Hitles was a rascist, he wanted an entire race of blonde haired blue eyed people that were super intelligent, he believed that everybodythat wasn't part of his "master Race" was inferior He blamed everything on the Jews because hitler himself was half Jew, and was picked on and tormented all of his childhood.
Heres the list of people that hitler hated, and wanted to destroy their race
1) Jews
2) Blacks
3) all non whites ( includeing Orentials)
4) Muslims
5) hindus
6) Cathloics
7) everybody that wasn't like he
wanted them to be
And hitler was walking a fine line between genius and insanity, If he had listened to his Generals and not thought he could do it all himself, we'd all be saying Hiel Hitler right now.
His sciencetists were working hard on the A bomb, even without Ophenhimer. The United States bombed his research facilities, and heavy water plants, useing England as a bombing platform. The Airplane designers were working ona bomber that could make it across to the US, and carry a atomic bomb if he ever got one.
All I can say is thank God he didn't listen to his Generals. Can you imagine what would have happened if Romel had been in Europe instead of Africa?
-
but they did do work on a delivery method; which seems odd if they were that far off.
The A4/V2 was never developed to launch a nuclear warhead. It was developed to toss, with very modest accuracy, a 2,000 lb warhead somewhere into a city like London. It had no significant military value and was a huge waste of resources and funding and was only really seen as a "vengence" terror weapon by the Nazis.
It was a significant achievement in rocketry, but then it was fairly useless in terms of WW2 and nobody else paid any attention to that technology. As it was, the first A-bombs weighed 10,000 lb. It took about 10 years before the rockets got enough throw weight and the a-bombs to get small enough for the two to start to become the ultimate weapons system. Then you had to take a few steps back in the weight department with the development of the H-bomb, which took a while to lighten up.
Charon
-
Originally posted by Ohio43
Greenclouds post inspired me to ask a hypothetical question that I have always wondered about. Being that Hitler was a racist (go figure)
If the war had gone Hitler's way and he succeded.. do you think he would have turned against Japan? Maybe there is even documentaion that he would have. Dunno, just a thought I had. What do you think?
'What if ?' theories for history research is the direct distraction from history research itself.
Just forget about your question.
Because Hitler would die of old age anyway before the anticipated confrontation with Japan. :D
-
It's amusing how many people can make such forceful assertions about Hitler without a shred of historical evidence to support their contentions, basing their argument instead on a -"Hitlar was a ebil maniac who wanted to invade everyone !!!!111111" rationale. :rolleyes:
-
Originally posted by Momus--
It's amusing how many people can make such forceful assertions about Hitler without a shred of historical evidence to support their contentions, basing their argument instead on a -"Hitlar was a ebil maniac who wanted to invade everyone !!!!111111" rationale. :rolleyes:
Well, he was a maniac and he wanted to invade everyone.
So far, so right.
Or you might have a deeper view on this matter? He was actully a pacifistic geniuese?
-
Originally posted by GScholz
No Patrone. Not a maniac, and did not want to invade everyone.
GS,, dont destroy a perfect laid trap.....to catch one, you need to be silent
-
:rofl
-
Originally posted by patrone
Well, he was a maniac and he wanted to invade everyone.
So far, so right.
He didn't want to fight Britain and that is fairly well documented. His ambitions regarding grabbing a large slice of Eastern Europe were very well documented in the pre-war period. Not so regarding East Asia and Japan, and if you have access to hitherto unpublished historical sources indicating to the contrary then please share them.
Merely stating that he was mad and wanted to invade everyone doesn't cut it. Hitler's territorial ambitions were based on a very rational reading of late 19th and early 20th century geo-political theory. Those theories made a fundamental distinction between continental and maritime power blocs and in fact reasoned that such power blocs could actually co-exist.
Or you might have a deeper view on this matter?
Well, deeper than yours, obviously.
-
Originally posted by Charon
The A4/V2 was never developed to launch a nuclear warhead. It was developed to toss, with very modest accuracy, a 2,000 lb warhead somewhere into a city like London. It had no significant military value and was a huge waste of resources and funding and was only really seen as a "vengence" terror weapon by the Nazis.
It was a significant achievement in rocketry, but then it was fairly useless in terms of WW2 and nobody else paid any attention to that technology. As it was, the first A-bombs weighed 10,000 lb. It took about 10 years before the rockets got enough throw weight and the a-bombs to get small enough for the two to start to become the ultimate weapons system. Then you had to take a few steps back in the weight department with the development of the H-bomb, which took a while to lighten up.
Charon
But that's my point; Charon.
As far as I know; there were never any plans for a nuke carrying rocket; while the He 177 V38 made it to prototype stage; which infers to me that they knew enough about their planned weapon to rule out the A series rockets and plump for airplane delivery instead.
How close would they have to be to full production to make that kind of descision?
-
Specific data on the prototype V38 seems to be pretty cloudy with the "rumor" that is was to be an A-bomber. And even so, you then have to determine if it was a fission bomb or a dirty bomb using conventional explosives to spread a cloud of harmful but otherwise non-fissionable radioactive material. I have seen sites on the Web where the 177 V38 was fully operational and ready to transport some of the atomic bombs the allies actually captured from Germany in 1944 and later used agianst Japan :)
The chief German scientist on the project denies that Germany was even remotely close to fielding a bomb, and he should know. The only real debate is if that was on purpose or by accident. In addition, no peer-reviewed smoking gun has surfaced since to indicated otherwise. More plausable than Area 51 stuff, but still more in the realm of fan fiction.
Charon