The Wehrmacht

The Wehrmacht

Ratings: 7.88/10 from 96 users.

The WehrmachtHitler's army thundered through Europe from 1939 to 1945 and brought needless death and destruction to the continent.

What was it like to serve in this army? To conduct one of the bloodiest wars in history? To occupy half of Europe and yet to suffer total defeat?

This five-part portrait provides long-awaited answers and sheds light on the Wehrmacht's complex bonds of loyalty, conscience and honor.

The thought-provoking story of an army's evolution from defense troops to military force to exterminating power.

More great documentaries

232 Comments / User Reviews

  1. The conspiracy true believers that only know 25% of real history and don't understand where alot of the infantile ideas they believe in came from are the ones that will become the new Brownshirts. They don't understand things that seem to complex and because they don't understand and don't want to learn at school they think that the people who do know history are somehow elitists. Most of the conspiracy tripe comes for that bastion of critical thinking the John Birch Society or the Minute men etc. and this has become mainstream were as a couple decades ago you would have been advised to see a shrink and you wouldnt have had friends. Scary but thats America today and in fact me generation the boomers are some of the biggest wingnuts destroying the country. Probably the best history written about WW2 came out about ten years ago. Professor did a fantastic job, readable and correct. You will learn, if you're teachable, of the origins of fascism in the 1860-1870's period and the inevitable slide in fascism. Good stuff (and not based on the conspiracy of Jesus, the illuminati and the planet Nabooboo...though once you're a true believer a type of sickness takes over where every fact you see is scornfully laughed at as part of the elitist attempt to, uh to, uh zzzzzz...uh oh yeah; is turned into a part of your ever widening paranoia).

  2. Great synopsis. Thundering across Europe as the last few stragglers sneaked out of Stalingrad in 1943?

  3. Yet again another KIKE driven piece of trash and lies to make the good hard working germans look bad and evil as always.

  4. The introduction made this clear that this not a documentary. It is a unvarnished hatchet job on the Wehrmacht and Germans.

    1. How so?

  5. One helluva conflict. Hitler was like a blind dog in a meat house. Let's go this way...wait a minute no let's go that no wait a Crimea no no Stalingrad...oops whatta mean we're surrounded by two Siberian Armies? Uh oh did we give 'em too much time to re-arm that's okay just stand and fight. Those western allies will be push overs don't sweat it.

  6. The German generals' acting was a bit funny though at some points. Tremendous documentary no less, really enjoyed it!

  7. This is a pretty good documentary. Unlike those that bring you lots of actual footage, this one takes the approach of sharing more what was in the Nazi leaders heads, and how many explained and justified various actions. As a WW2 documentary buff, I found this one to be along the lines of "Auschwitz" and "Stalin: behind closed doors" as opposed to say, "World at War" or "The Colour of war" where footage tells as much of the story, in a broader sense, than documentaries like this one, that try to get you into the thinking and often self-serving justiticiation of the men behind various battles and actions. Well done, and well narrated, this is a good production.

  8. It works!!!

  9. Oh ya He was a little fukin snot who was only brave while under Hitlers wing Nothing but a loud mouth peg legged idiot.Tell me would you love to pick his brain before murdering his children?

  10. I have read a lot of your comments and I think your all a bit F@#*ked in the head especially Sarcastic_Drew people dont want to know your personal views on the war they want to know pros and cons about this documentary. If you want express your views on the war find the right forum and do it there

    1. hahahah fighting right out of the gate with insults instead of intellect. you sir, are hilarious.

  11. ive watched about 70 documentaries on this site. this one is a prime example of why you should not let people express their opinions in an online forum.
    there's 2 minutes of my life i'll never get back. sheesh.

  12. Mr Mod, did you really have to edit my word "id**t" and let people like Enook say "***hole" even after you edited his comment... lmao wtff?????

  13. My great grandfather served in the wehrmacht, so did alot of my relatives - my grandfather was inducted to the - compulsory - hitler youth. He also married an Australian Aborigine (my grandmother) when he came to Australia. Don't open your mouths on things you haven't fully thought about.

  14. Scientifically speaking, Dr. Goebbels was a true social genius. I believe he, and he only, was the mechanism able to sway an entire people. Hitler was an id**t. Judging by his wartime strategies, he could not have been responsible for mass brainwash. Goebbels alone was the true weapon of mass destruction. Boy would I have loved to pick his brain before he passed.

    Its so sad that his genius couldn't have been used for the good of humanity. Just a small foreshadowing (imo), that humans are as doomed as dinosaurs.

  15. did anyone watch this or jst grammar police and slagging each other? thought it was a good series that highlights the dangers of mass phycological coercion, and manipulation of a nation by relatively few men. playing of diffrent levels of social fear.

    Would have been nice to see a bit more about the propaganda and staging of the mass rallies and brainwashing of the children - Hitler youth, schools and chapels had religious effigies removed and replaced with swastickers and images of the Furrher.
    Im badly dislexic so undoubtable thick as ****.

  16. So, perhaps a comment about...the documentary? I lived one year in Bavaria and spoke only German. That was back in the '60s, before the reunification. I've been living and teaching here in France ever since. Thank you (to the site) for sharing a video that attempts to show "the inside view" of Hitler's failure to listen to his generals. Like Napoleon, Hitler's deaf ego, more than tactical ignorance, led to his defeat and what the Normandy Invasion owed to Staline and the resistance of the Russian people would change the face of Europe even today. When we reflect on the technical aid Hitler disposed of such as scientists like Werner Von Braun...? To Enook : By the way, I'm US born and totally agree with your comment concerning what we might call...critically inhuman decisions of people become blind with power.

  17. The Wehrmact was a seperate entity from the SS. Many Wehrmact officers and soldiers were shot, tricked or refused to follow Hitler and his thugs. Modern history needs to seperate the Wehrmact from the SS and Nazi Germany. As well, robertallen1Collapse, you spelled Canadian wrong. This documentary is supposed to be about how good people and good instutions go bad. Many people should take this doc as a warning of our immedite future, not as a medium to discuss the U.S.A. But should instead take this opportunity to think about what is happening in the U.S.A and many other countries.

    1. You need to distinguish between typos and misspellings.

    2. A typographical error is a misspelling Subject: [topdocumentaryfilms] Re: The Wehrmacht

    3. Obviously, you have trouble telling the difference or perhaps appreciating the significant, so let me help you. If one writes, "He is hhere." That's typographical. If one writes, "He is heer," that's orthographical. If one writes, "He is hear." That's ignorant.

    4. your trying very hard to sound intelligent. Patronize someone else. Also look in the dictionary for misspelling

    5. "Your trying very hard to sound intelligent." Well, you are not succeeding and considering your irrelevant last sentence, you deserve to be patronized if not downright contemned.

      You're playing with the wrong person.

    6. You're , a little boy who has to be tough on the internet. Tell me tough guy what is "contemned".......I`m "playing with the wrong person", grow up Yanky. My first post was about how people are talking about U.S presidents and not about the Doc. You were the one who sent an e-mail to me trying to be a smart guy. If you can't take it don't dish it out. Subject: [topdocumentaryfilms] Re: The Wehrmacht

    7. What are you talking about or are you as ignorant about that as you are about the difference between an orthographic and a typographic mistake?

      If you don't know what contemned means and you're interested in finding out, you should know what to do about it.

    8. You again, you are truly pathetic, still not commenting on the content of the documentary. You`re the kind of ***hole that if someone said "That`s a nice tree" you would say "That`s not a tree, that`s an oak" Orthographic and typographic are both examples of misspelling. Here`s some advice, get a job, get a hobby, get a girlfriend, move out of your mother`s basement. You are so insecure and pathetic you need to argue about terminology to make yourself sound intelligent. Also yankee, English speaking countries do not accept yankee English as being correct, written or spoken. So whatever you`re trying to go on about keep it to yourself next time, no one is listening.Subject: [topdocumentaryfilms] Re: The Wehrmacht

    9. Robert is our orthographic nazi. Just for fun i typed "Robert Allen and Hitler" on google and....i found a rapport.
      Go to "Hitler attacks Pearl Harbor" bottom of the page.
      That sure make me laugh!

      According to him
      You can be stupid and are stupider if you can't spell.
      You can be smart but still stupid if you can't spell.
      He can be smart and not stupid if he makes constant typos.
      As for me he thinks i am stupid, no matter what.

    10. As I've tried to explain, typos are venial; errors in orthography, grammar or usage are not--and in most cases, it's easy to discern the difference. Apparently, this is beyond your comprehension which attests to the basis of the line above your initials

    11. No it's not above my comprehension, I edit 9 out of 10 of my comments, orthographically and typographically, as for grammatically ...i fail constantly, my mind will always be more French than English.
      I like to correct myself, this is how i learned to write English, and French for that matter. But you won't see me correct everyone around here (except you), i do take pleasure in showing you the mirror.
      You don't seem to own one.

    12. You can edit all you want, but I still find typos in yours just as a I find them later on in mine and everyone else's.

      Your pleasures are cheap.

    13. they were all fingers on the same hand. A iron fist and murdered millions. nThey are all scum and are ALL responcable. German must never be let to forget what they did.

    14. What about Russians? Are all of them responsible for what Stalin and the NKVD did?? Should every Russian never be let to forget what they did???


    15. i hate how people are so quick to want to correct other peoples spellings on here, especially when no one types seriously to comment. But I will break my own rule to point out that as you are mentioning someone else spelling something too have misspelled institutions.

      Good day sir

  18. After watching this over an hour I realised why Trent Park sounds so familiar. It's part of Middlesex University campus nowadays and I took my last courses in the summer there long ago! I have actually been in that building.

  19. "Reinactments" are 100% hokey and are a total turnoff. Actors in polyester off-the-rack uniforms, disturbing accents, and cookie-cutter props are simply insulting. Stop it.

  20. well, maybe we don't see things that differently, Robert. what did you think of truman?

    1. He was the president I was born under and the only one in my lifetime for whom I have any respect. That is not to say that I agreed with everything he did, but he was certainly someone to look up to.

    2. What did you think about Reagan? He did a pretty good job bringing this country back during his presidential terms. His economic policies pretty much kicked the economy back in gear with 16 to 17 million new jobs. I always hear the black folks talk about how Clinton was for them. But Reagan is the one that cut the black unemployment rate by more then half.
      Everyone was all dam excited from his tax reforms that we began to light a fire under our a$$ and work hard and save. It was a pretty good time to invest and start a business in the 80s. They say the average family income rose dam near 13% with inflation being at around 5%. Two years before his term the inflation rate was at its highest in 60 yrs.
      I don't think any President had a better foreign afairs policy in play. He had the respect of the world and pretty much kept their sh*t at bay. I remember Iran cutting loose the US hostages like 5 hr before Reagan came into power. (I could be wrong on the time of that.) he also strengthened our military and reformed it.
      To me, I think ol Reagan was one of the best pres. we've ever had considering the mess he had to fix from the get-go........I thought his acting needed a little work....but hey, no ones perfect:)

    3. iran cutting loose hostages because they were scared of ronnie reagan and his war on drugs.piss off,man you lost in a fairytale.

    4. HiLlArY!'s it going squirt? You back so soon? What would you call it then if Iran wasn't scared of a new Republican Pres. coming into power. Reagan said he was going to take action upon his arrival in the White House. Now I don't know about you, MiniMe, but that sounds like Iran was scared to me there, HiLlArY?

    5. I was not impressed.

    6. Reagan is the main reason the world economy went down the shitter. If you think he was a great president, then you have only heard the sound bites.

      He collaborated with terrorist groups to fund his and Bush seniors secret wars. He negotiated with the iranians to hold out until he won the election. He and his cronies were at best traitors to the american public. They and the thatcher government are the worst thing to happen to the world since the british royal family orchestrated the great world war 1914-45!

    7. Ok,..Janus,your right!.......Reagan didn't! Nada! except fueling for war. But I bet he's in heaven looking down at an uneducated mentality that thinks were're just a bunch of soft retards that need some kind of f***in' sitter:) Passions gone with the introduction of glass houses.

    8. It is the third or fourth time i read your acclamation for Truman and every time you say you don't agree with everything he did. Care to say what you don't agree with? As you have already written part of what you agree with.

    9. I mentioned one thing in a previous post and that's the main one: the founding of the OSS (Office of Strategic Services), the precursor to the CIA.

      Now, on the more positive side, he fired MacArthur, one of the most unpolitical moves ever made by a president and one of the most needed.

  21. thanks for sharing your insight into the many demerits of the kennedys, robert. the nixons, and johnsons, and clintons, and bushes were so much better, morally and cognitively, then those dumb, rich, populist irish guys. context is everything. look into that concept, when you get a minute away from whatever you do besides spouting on the internet.

    1. True and I also have no respect for the Nixons, Johnsons, clintons and Bushes--and the Kennedys were no better.

  22. Further research seems to indicate that it was rumor, probably based on the allegations of Samuel Bronfman, a Canadia distiller of spirits known for running them across the border and Danny Walsh, a gangster, made after the repeal of prohibition--sour grapes, so to speak. So in the absence of hard evidence, I guess old Joe is exonerated of one thing.

    I now wonder if he were better than his three awful sons.

    1. what's your beef with rfk? you seem to sling broad & perjorative categorizatons arround rather freely. i think jfk was, like obama, elevated early to the highest office. but would never, given whats come after, call him 'awful'. and all rfk did was go after organized crime, council caution & restraint during the cuban crises, come early to opposition to the dumb indochina war his brother started, and provide some spark to the progressive impulse, which now lies dead in the gutter, in terms of mainstream politics.

      but all that's off the subject - this doc shows that the inhumanity in the german people of mid-last century ran wide & deep. given the society which evolved after the war, its clear evidence that cultures can grow sour & evil, and yet be brought back to a decent respect for the rights of others. optimally, the process doesnt cost scores of millions of bystander life during the corrective process. but such was the case, in that instance.

      the us & israel are busy re-inforcing the notion that violence is the first resort of the powerful, unfortunately.

    2. My beef with RFK is with the McCarthy Commission--and that says everything about the man!!! The rest I couldn't care less about

  23. re: Joseph Kennedy - he was relieved of his duties as ambassador to england because he took the position that germany could not be stopped, that democracy was a losing proposition in europe. fdr took the position that having a defeatist running his key embassy, and perhaps working out ancient and, in context, largely irrelevant 'racial' (if you will) enmities, was not such a good thing. it ended old joe's political career, forever, and jfk doubtless as compensation for his father's missteps, took on a ridiculously belligerent tone towards the communists that landed us in the vietnam soup a few decades later. aint politics great?

    1. Thank you. You jogged my memory. Now, I recall where I read about this.

      Seeing that you're so conversant about the Kennedys, can you explain why Joseph Kennedy did not try to stop his sons from going after the mob the way? I never could figure that out.

    2. all i know about them, i read in books or saw on tv. maybe they wanted to stake out a new destiny, maybe it was all robert's idea, for robert's own reasons.

      do you have any evidence that joe was mobbed up, by the way, or are you just repeating what you heard? i'm not saying he wasnt, or that he wasnt a sharp operator, however, i've heard that about him, have seen no corroboration.

    3. How else could he have imported and distributed scotch during prohibition?

    4. do you have some evidence for that assertion? just saying something doesnt make it so. he certainly imported whiskey AFTER prohibition and made a killing. i dont know for a fact that he did before. do you? and if not, why do you state the rumour/supposition as a fact? its just kind of sloppy.

      there IS good evidence that Joe was an anti-semite and a boor. but give the man credit for knowing how to make a buck, though with the rough edge of his upbringing on the fringe of acceptibiliity.

  24. different words have different precisions of meaning. weather, for example, can signify a lot of different phenomenon.

    words like race & breed have taken on so much baggage, whatever use they ever had has been overtaken by misuse, beyond the purely technical, if even that is still not yet under dispute or misapplied in some half-baked social theory or chauvinism. in which case either a de-bunking or a new word is in order.

    'species' we have to live with. its fuzzy too, but has not had **** thrown all over it, like the others. but in biology, there must be, as elsewhere, an atom of meaning. the bush of life ensures that atoms don't exist, but too much complexity is beyond us, as a practical matter.

    when people start to argue over words, i check out. if you are one inclined to do that (i.e. have some strong proprietary sense of the meaning of a controversial/over-burdened word or concept), i'd work on changing my priorities from words onto the ideas behind the words, and words as guides to meaning. that's all they are good for.

    (wish i knew three languages)

  25. i apologize for my 'ranting' yesterday, especially az(cool cat comment!),epicurus(for taking the time to mediate!) & vlatko,who had absolutly nothing to do with this.robert,i'm tri-lingual & sometimes my fingers are faster than my oxford concise & thanks to my missing education i enjoy my miserable profession of publishing & translating for the hearing-impaired.
    true,i'm annoyed with myself when i find mistakes in my grammar ,but i reconcile myself with knowing, that my german is flawless due to it being the language i have mainly been working with for the last 20 years. so excuse my french for calling you a twat,i bet you hear that often enough!
    i hope the others accept my apology.

    1. I'm curious. Is German your first language?

    2. nope,my dad was stationed in germany where he married my mother & we were restationed to britain (due to his service in northern ireland) till i was six. my british education stopped when we moved back to germany.english was the language mainly used at home,but german was the language i mainly focused on .i believe my english grammar defects are so slight that i have nothing to be ashamed of,sir.i bet i will find similiar mistakes when i painstakingly search your comments.

    3. You wrote twit and twat, made me wonder if twut, twot, twet and twyt would eventually come out too. lol
      No sweat, stay around long enough and you'll get to see many more fights even if you don't get involved in them. Offers of truce are sometimes not accepted at will.
      Back to Parallele Universe and Do You Know What Time It Is? I am spending my morning in the rabbit hole.

  26. sometimes intellect is challenged by 'd*ck' ,& i don't mean richard .

  27. Excuse me, but most of the Mexicans (and you're the one who is concentrating on this particular nationality) in this country are products of cross-breeding with Spaniards and hence are part Caucasian, whether you like it or not, whether you acknowledge it or not.

    Illegal aliens are illegal aliens, no matter what their origin--and we owe them nothing except deportation.

    The ignorant, incoherent way you express yourself justifies my contempt for you and everything you think you stand for, including your Judeo-Christianity and your cheap, vapid form of compassion. I don't need to stoop to empty epithets to make my point because I am in general better than you've shown yourself to be.

    So lose it all you want. On second thought you can't lose what you never had, whatever it is.

    1. Mr Allen, sometimes your acid intellect gets the better of your tongue! Cross breeding? With a wonderful knowledge of words such as yours, could you find none better? You're better than that and we both know it! I will blame the painkillers, they can make people very narky :)

    2. But that's what it is. One nationality or people breeds with another.

    3. You men! No middle ground, no fuzzy in between. Must be why I like you. It's a hard word and a touchy subject, I was only suggesting that you find a gentler way to say it, one that won't get people's backs up. Hey ho, your words, your way. No matter :)

    4. Euphemism never accomplished anything.

    5. Funny, but when I fill out forms I find no cross breed box to tick for my children, should I draw one in myself?

    6. Evolution shows us to be crossbreeds of one sort or another. However, I wish the "ethnicity" checkboxes which I think is what you're mentioning were done away with, for they usually mix race (e.g., negro) with nationality or area of origin (i.e., Hispanic).

      Would you rather I use the term "cross" to describe someone of mixed parentage or lineage, e.g. a mulatto?

    7. You'll have explain, aren't people just people? I thought breeds were things that had been made to be different, breeds of dog for example. Are breed and race just different words for the same thing, am I being too emotional about this ? Nobody says mulatto now either, whatever the origin of it was it has become wrong. I think we must be coming at this from different ends, you from science and I as a mother. I can't completely disagree with you because I don't know, it just feels bad.

    8. I'm coming at it from science. I couldn't care less about emotion or political correctness.

      Homo sapiens is the only existent hominid, just as canis lupus familiaris (sometimes canis lupus domesticus) is the only existent dog. So I guess it's correct to say that people are people and dogs are dogs.

      Humans breed no differently from dogs. A mulatto is a cross between a caucasian and a negro just as a puggle is a cross between a pug and a beagle. Both are hybrids--and in terms of evolution, we are all hybrids or evolution wouldn't work.

      As for the difference between breed and race, Wikipedia has a fine, detailed article.

      It says a lot about you that you ask these questions whether than just asserting and I hope I have helped you somewhat--but you are being too emotional.

    9. you,sir, are a cross-breed between a twit & a twat !if you are so distant from being human ,which only can be explainable due to missing maternal care or you a plain simple emotional dispatched!this is not meant as an insult,just an objective observation of your commenting....................& their is a fine detailed article on wiki.....but your picture is missing!

    10. And your intelligence is missing.

    11. ouch!you must be enjoy such complentory company ,that simple 'hostility' makes you 'ad absurdum'..........but you will definatly come up with a senseless response,without answering the actual topic in your 'scientific' way........excursion,is the actual definition!

    12. You haven't refuted anything I've written. Maybe that's too difficult for someone who can hardly spell.

    13. i challenge your humanistic view & you answer by challenging my intelligence?????????????how dispicable can one be?i enjoyed this site as a discussion friendly,open for all insights & refreshing for flowing information..........but all i find are self-complentary,insulting,inner-circle-building little twats that exclude any other view(!;which was not yor intention,VLATKO???)??you have made this site,,by using two self-indulging,self-loving-individuels....a joke!

    14. @dmxi:

      I went over the posts and found no really adverse remarks from the people you accuse of them excluding any other view. Fact is you are the one that is resorting to ad hominem, do not ask Vlatko to intervene, am afraid you have to fight your own battles, but keep it civil.

    15. why do always back-up the same commenters?what is your agenda?
      this is not meant as an 'exploitation' of your-self !i know you have to defend....but you always do it in the same demeanour????hope you are true to someone.....................?

    16. Again, you can't spell and you can't argue with anything other than empty epithets. All this says a lot about your education and level of intelligence.

    17. dmxi, you are not making much sense right now.

      you are going overboard over very little being said to you, even though you were just as guilty of s*** slinging.

      come on guys..what is wrong lately? why cant people seem to disagree without resorting to name calling and freaking out?

    18. dmxi, nothing about this post was constructive. it was just attempts to insult and unfortunately it didnt make much sense.

      if you disagree with him tell him why he is wrong. explain it.

    19. I'll head over to wiki when my eyes are less tired, thanks for your efforts :)

    20. From wiki - breed. A breed is not an objective or biologically verifiable classification. They use dog breeding as an example, cannot find anything that states that people are breeds. Humans are a sub-species (?)that have acquired tiny differences caused by geographical separation and environmental influences. I'm thinking now of your bonobo/chimp question. They are basically the same and only the river between them keeps them from mating. Because of their separation they have developed slight differences. We are as I read, genetically divergent populations within a species. How much more divergent or genetically different would we have to be to become different species, would we then become different breeds? I cannot separate my emotions from this, it is an emotive subject. I think what I have read backs up my belief that people are the same in spite of superficial differences like skin colour or hair type (only examples I can come up with) . I think it does no good to distinguish between one race or another so harshly. There are probably greater differences in our behaviour from one place to the next than there are biologically. Even then we share the same basic values. Feel free to point out where I might be wrong.

    21. You seem to be trying to answer your own question, are breed and race different labels for the same thing and now you're diversifying, which is great. In this respect, I assume you have read both the article recommended by Epicurus and the one by me and apparently have received some enlightenment.

      As for the question I posed some time ago whether monkeys and bonobos can produce viable offspring, I have received conflicting answers and wish I could contact an expert in primates. However, this leads to your question about divergence, a complex one indeed and one I've asked myself, although perhaps not in your terms. Contrary to what the fundamentalists and other such willful ignoramuses would have us believe, life is complex and I wish there were a simple answer, but alas there isn't. However, Epicurus, Achems_Razor and Over_the_Edge might be able to do better that I can.

      You asked me to point out where you might be wrong. While you're going about your research in the right way, you must remember that as science is by nature objective, emotion, superstition and dogma have no place in it.

      Keep up the good work.

    22. On your last point, there being no room for for superstition and dogma. I can agree with that but everything that science discovers will affect us in some way out here in the real world. Whether it benefits us or not is another thing altogether. I did read both pieces and found they complimented each other very well :)

    23. Do you mean compliment and complement?

    24. Did she mean for for or for? You are so "pointilleux"...but hey! we all learn from you.

    25. Complement :)

    26. I think with your way of looking at this it could be argued that even very small groups of people could be classified as breeds, a small town or village for example. Surely our gene pool (right terminology? ) is too huge for that? As for skin colour, that to me is no more important than say, big noses or the ability to roll your R's :)

    27. A race just happens to be different and a breed is made to be different for a particular reason.
      Neither one of those things occure in humans, every single one just the result of evolution and adaption to the local environment.

    28. So therefore a mulatto is simply an adaption to the local environment.

    29. Well give it a couple of thousand years and let´s see what people look like then:)

    30. A couple of thousand years is nothing in terms of evolution. Why not say a million years or even 100,000?

    31. Yes you are right of cause.
      Would be intressting with a new color like maybe green thou.

    32. I predict that we will turn somewhat purpleish.

    33. OK, so people from different places basically are different breeds in that evolution and circumstance have given us different physical characteristics (races) whereas dogs are deliberately bred to enhance certain traits and that makes them breeds. ? .

    34. In my opinion thats right. Even thou i dont know at which level of different genes you would call an individual a diferent race.
      Because no two people really are the same but then again we are all just humans.

  28. WermachtiLeaks?

  29. ANYONE who uses this forum for debates is a LOSER...

    1. And just which forum are we to use?

    2. With a name like Bilbo Baggins! who's a loser?

    3. i disagree i think the term "loser" is subjectively defined, and im sure many of the people debating here would have much happier and fulfilling lives.

      what is your case? ;)

  30. Thanks Robert. I think we got pretty much the same view as most Americans do when it comes to immigration policies. I also respect your intelligent "tell it how it is" method you instill in all your posts. We need more like you ,Lary 9, Achems Razor, J.1952 and in my of course most definitely Waldo. When dumb a$$e$ like me come on here and want to learn, sometimes just from the comments alone, you guys are the ones I and probably most learn from. I know I don't have the best grammer on the world and a lot of my posts are rude and a little to pro American but they come from what I see to be true and are no less ignorant then the disrespectful little chatroom US bashing. I am gratefully for this free site and all the hard work that Vlatko puts in to give a man with very limited education like me a free education.

    1. I respect your honesty far more than your compliments.

    2. you would be right at home welding some gas chambers together saying i am proud to be a nazi. a job has to be done and my nation is just looking out for its own. hey i am not racist i have hispanish friends at work. im just racist about that jewish religion,the swine.

    3. Well, isn't that cute? You gave me a reply to my post. Thanks there little fella. That's what the comment threads are for! By the way, why did you reply to me? Did you want me to express my views in more detail? Anyway bud, I was wondering if you would do me a HUGE favor and go out of your way to kindly take your comment and lodge it sraight up your A$$!....ok bud?....thanks little guy,I appreciate it.

      Oh God! Ive been home for two weeks straight from an ankle problem and can't wait to go back to work....BUT! in the mean time I got my buddy tonkinbay2 to talk too, huh little fella?

  31. nice to see that U.S. immigration politics are discussed under the 'wehrmacht' topic !you should have waited for a SS documentary....more fitting!

  32. The US is made up of every race and culture on the face of the Earth. I have no racism toward anyone that was born on US soil. Your place in this country should be valued 1st. I live alongside native land and have good buddies that are Shoshone. Ive got a lot of Hispanic freinds as well. Ive welded side by side with them for years. Im also not going to lie and say I'm not a racists either. I'm as white trash as you can get and make ignorant remarks like ALL races do about others. But that doesn't mean I think I'm more American then the next. I here Americans all the time ad another nationality before American, like I'm Mexican-American...I'm Scottish American....I'm African American...ect..ect. Chances are the mother f**let's never even been there! What's wrong with proudly saying..."I'm American " with your head held high???? If your so dam ashamed of your country.....leave!

    Im with Robert on foreigners coming here not learning English. Im also resentful of a lot of middle eastern people coming here as if 9/11 didn't mean sh!t and get free government business loans that could've went to a disabled vet or our children's education system. I'm not racist toward the Arabian race. Just the Muslim religion or any organized religion that is destructive. There's. a big difference between God and the.....pulpit and pews!

    1. You've hit the nail on the head, especially hyphenated nationalities. Am I to call myself a Russian-Polish American or simply an American? As I clearly stated about two posts back, like you, I have no problem with those who've been here for some time making a living, learning English (it doesn't preclude their speaking another language) and not cadging off society. This apparently Mr. Lozada chooses to gloss over.

      Once again, we owe the descendants of the peoples affected nothing for the sins of some (or even a great number) of our ancestors (certainly not mine) despite how much we benefit and continue to benefit from their acts and those who try to pursue this line, especially in courts of law, are simply looking for something for nothing.

  33. Ten minutes of this Hollywood costumer was all I could bear. Perhaps it got better; but the German accents were just too much.

  34. Well, history repeats itself : people never seem to learn from history :

    The former victims of the nazis are now the new nazis : the zionazis : just switch on your tv to witness that fact

    Amazing how formerly persecuted people copy the behavior of their persecutors in relation to other peoples like the fact that abused individuals in their childhood or youth become abusers themselves when they grow up ,unless they get the proper therapy

  35. Oh wow a world war two documentary about the Nazi' refreshing, there are hardly any of those!

  36. @ robertallen1 & rtiom

    Quite the debate you two are having. Honestly I haven't read the full script of back and forth (how ignorant am I to comment after admitting that, right!).

    There's an excellent (best WWII doc I've ever encountered, personally) doc called "Third Reich: Rise and Fall" on TDF. It focuses purely on the evolution of the German culture during the rise of the National Socialist German Workers' Party. Hitler came to dominate this party after its conception, so Nazi should not be synonymous with Adolf Hitler.

    Hitler and his political team were able to use policy to influence, manipulate, and indoctrinate the German people. In fact, Hitler never won an election (it was a democratic state). He became Chancellor because he was vociferous and the minority of Germans that supported him were so belligerent that they gave the impression of being a majority.

    I won't go on because the documentary explains it flawlessly. The point is that rtiom, although trying to incite reactivity and anger through emotional rhetoric, is correct in his assessment of modern American history. The U.S. government and its people have willingly participated in brutal acts to preserve its wealth and power. Rtiom's suggestion that this is akin to the acts of the Third Reich are inaccurate, but the fact remains that we (I'm an American) have committed some heinous crimes in our history. His point that we annihilated the indigenous people of this continent while simultaneously "owning" Africans should be an indicator that our founding fathers didn't create a perfect Union, but created a document (The Constitution) that allows for our Union to become more equitable and fair over time.

    We must not pretend to be a perfect country. Within the pretentious thought of our country being infallible is a rigidity that would have prevented the Emancipation, prevented the Civil Rights Movement, prevented Women's Rights. The idea that our country has no progress to make currently prevents Gay Rights, encourages the prejudice against Muslims and Mexicans, and ultimately contributes to the false pretense of American Exceptionalism. One of Hitler's most successful tactics in controlling the German people was to convince them they were exceptional whilst other peoples were inferior. Let us not fall for that trap any longer.

    I find it laughable that any American can be prejudice against anybody since Americans are by definition foreigners; immigrants sometime after 1492 searching for a better life. Is this not what a Mexican family seeks in leaving a poor country torn apart by internal conflict, drug wars, and a corrupt government. My family came here during the potato famine, and if many modern Americans had it there way my family (and likely their own families) would never have been let into this country.

    1. You're right about the rise of Hitler in Germany (you certainly know more about it than rtiom professes to), the malfeasances committed by this country and its flagrant deficiencies (I wish you had also mentioned culture). And yes, except for two clauses which could easily be amended without affecting the spirit of the whole, I feel the same way about our Constitution as you.

      I gather from your mention of the potato famine that you're of Irish extract and I'm guessing that your forebearers came through Ellis Island about 1913. Indeed, most of them worked hard and became productive, self-sufficient and welcome members of society--and, of course, I have no problem with this. But I do have a problem with the Hispanics. I know a goodly number who like your forbearers have become, if not pillars, members of society and have been so for several generations--may hat's off to them. However, there's the other group that seems to make the news, the illegals who come into this country not only expecting handouts, but refusing to learn the language, demanding that everything be translated into Spanish for them--the bilingual ballot is a disgrace. I have known of instances of people having lived here illegally for 30 years and being still unable to speak basic English, yet demanding benefits to which they have no right and which unfortunately they received. They therefore become a drain on the rest of us--and the figures are staggering. When my grandparents came here legally from Russia and Poland at around the time I guess your ancestors did, the first thing they learned was the language which they never could speak like a college professor, but at least could get around in.

      I have nothing against legal immigration, only we should be particular about those we let in. Remember, peons are a dime a dozen and we can afford to be selective.

    2. Brian Rose is cool! i like him, he is open minded and that is a good thing! Adapt robertfallen! (sic)
      "Remember, peons are a dime a dozen and "We" can afford to be selective". We? even if you came on the Mayflower, that is an obnoxious statement
      I love your quote, but you don't see the irony of that in your diatribe against those "Hispanics".I Presume your family came from Polish and Russian royalty, the reason your ancestors traveled thousands of miles to come to this country, was because they couldn't make it in their part of the world. in their native countries they were peasants!
      The true aliens are the europeans, by all rights this country should be called the United States of Europe. from the first day the european set foot on this country there has been nothing but crimes against humanity, first they killed all those dumb natives called "Indians", stole their land in what became one of the largest acts of genocide in history. this land didn't belong to europeans , they stole it! then with the invention of "manifest destiny" the US had the God given right to take the whole of america from coast to coast. the dumbass mexicans made the mistake of welcoming "aliens" into their land."welcome white boys, we'll give you land, for free, just don't bring slaves into mexican territory" it was against the mexican constitution ( yup! those backward people didn't accept slavery!). The texuns didn't want anybody ( especially dark skinned people) telling them what to do, so they trumped up a war against mexico, revolted for independence and set themselves up as the "victims".Americans , like jews are always victims. who broke the law?
      Robert , you are a smart boy, no doubt about that, you have actually read "mein Kampf" 3 x's.? what for? learn something about authentic american history. Read Howard Zinn! The indians, the blacks and mexicans got screwed!!
      the most fertile and mineral rich part of the country , belonged to mexico. oil, gold, silver, copper and beautiful land. look at a map and see how much of it was STOLEN.the mexicans have a true saying, "we didn't cross the border, the border crossed us"
      I've worked with polish newcomers, can't speak english yet, but the first words they learn is, nigger and spic!
      You may be very well read , but you are ignorant!
      you can't have your cake and eat it. did you think that there is no repercussion to all the crimes the europeans committed? it's payback time.before 2050, the true Aborigines will be coming back to their native land and they will outnumber the other races.
      Bone up on Spanish, the spics are a powerful economic force.
      The funny thing is, I admire the Poles, the Irish,the Russians
      The Scots. they have great historical roots. try to understand other people, leave people alone! YOU are NOT superior!
      I also am an American!

    3. Let's get a few things straight. Neither I nor any one living is responsible for the mistreatment of the people you mention. I am responsible only for my own actions, no one else's. This means I owe the Hispanics, blacks and Indians or any other affected people absolutely nothing.

      You know nothing about why my ancestors came to this country (and, by the way, some of them went right back voluntarily), so I take umbrage at your wild guess as to their backgrounds.

      I am particularly insulted by your statement that I should bone up on Spanish when these illegal moochers should be learning English, as did my grandparents when they came to this country. By the same token, if I'm going to reside in a non-English-speaking country, the first thing I'm going to learn is the language and I'm not going to emigrate for the puspose of receiving handouts either--and I'm not going to insist on bilingual ballots or bilingual this or that--and this makes me superior.

      Your statement that I've read "Mein Kempf" three times is false; I've read it only once--and that was enough. Where you got the impression that I read it this many times is beyond me.

      And yes, we can and should be selective about whom we let in. Peons are a dime a dozen.

      Quite frankly, how dare you tell me what to do. I hate everything that you seem to stand for and find you to be a despiccable example of an American.

    4. But Charles Lozada is right about one thing. We flat-out stole the Southwest from Mexico. Karma seems to have circled around and bit us in the a$$.

    5. Fine, some of our ancestors did, so what? The Mexicans or Spaniards probably stole it from the Indians and on and on.

      How much did the forebearers of the present day Canadians, the French and British steal from the Indians in that neck of the woods?

      How much did the settlers in Australia, New Guinea and New Zealand steal from the aborigines?

      How many Armenians were slaughtered by Turks?

      How many Africans were sold into slavery by their own chiefs?

      And speaking of blacks and Indians, how many were killed off by internecine wars?

      There's no denying that these things happend and are still happening; but this does not militate against my point, that I and members of the present generation owe nothing to those affected by the transgressions of the past generation.

    6. RobertAllen, I merely pointed out that the man was correct historically, I made no judgement one way or another. My comment about karma reflects my amusement at some states' (particularly Arizona) reaction to this immigration. Largely because of their narrow view.

      As for illegal immigration, it is my opinion the US should allow unrestricted immigration from (and to) Mexico. Now when I say unrestricted I don't mean unvetted.

    7. And I feel just the opposite. The more of them we keep out, the better.

    8. Then we obviously disagree. No problem with that.

    9. If you qualify for a passport you should be allowed to go where you please. Ours allow the bearer to pass freely without let or hindrance.

    10. not to disagree with your point but to clarify: the Mexicans were the Indians and the Spaniards were the conquerors. The Mexica (x pronounced like sh) were an indian tribe if I am not mistaken.

    11. Good point. Most "Mexicans" are of American Indian heritage.

    12. You owe them nothing? Let me tell you what you owe them. There is no white or black American that will work in the hot sun, with poisonous fertilizers , breaking their backs for 12 straight hours for peon's wages. You benefit because these Peons are donkeys, if those migrants did not serve this country well, they wouldn't be here and you wouldn't be eating vegetables and fruits for such low prices.
      yes sir, Mr Allen, they serve a purpose.
      get on your knees and thank the mighty lord you are privileged.these people work for measly wages because they are desperate and needy.
      Obviously you are not! Great to judge people, isn't it?

    13. They serve a purpose, but I still owe them nothing and this country would be better without the illegals.

    14. That's funny Robert!!! That's exactly what the native Americans said when the white man came to their land in boats from Merry Olde England.

    15. What are you talking about?

    16. As if you were an exemplary American! hey, i hate everything YOU stand for!
      Staying with the theme of "THE WEHRMACHT" this applies: you say,
      "Peons are a dime a dozen!" so were the Russians; who i admire VERY much; during world war 2, they were forced to go the battlefront, they didn't volunteer, if they retreated, the officers would shoot them.this is NOT to discredit their valor! brave mothers they are! Let me ask you something: when the Russians invaded Afghanistan did they learn "their" language? OOPS!
      Polish/Ukrainians are fine too, I've been dating one for 21 years.

      BTW, i like the word you used, umbrage. I am impressed!I said you were very intelligent, well read, BUT ignorant. You're no better than anyone else! Your ancestors were lucky when they came to this country. in case you don't know the US has quotas on certain nationalities and races.In the 50's I bet you would not have been welcomed here.
      As far as being selective, we should screen people who are bigots. we have plenty of them here already.
      Your turn! SAY, white power!

    17. I have no idea what an exemplary American is and I don't think you do either.

      If I benefit from my ancestors' having come here, so what? They at least learned English at a time when it was more difficult to do so. They at least were legal! They at least did not expect handouts!

      Once again, I hate everything you stand for.

    18. legal is an angle of perspective,like it has been stated ,you enjoy illegal vegetables,illegal fruit,illegal clean sanitation....etc.

    19. What are illegal vegetables, illegal fruit, illegal clean sanitation, etc.?

    20. products &/or services that were laboured through exploitation of unregistered,tax evasive individuells !

    21. That's not my problem. I don't care how they were produced, just as long as I can get them on the open market.

    22. ....which makes illegal aliens a necessity for your cheap food supply.what do you care if they comunicate in spanish due to not having the time nor money to learn otherwise ?

    23. Let's not call them illegal aliens. How about we call them people.

    24. No, let's call them what they are, illegals who have no business being in this country in the first place.

    25. Unlike we the Europeans who have every right to be here.

    26. Hey, these illegals are of European heritage as well. So don't confuse the issue.

    27. Well RobertAllen these illegals are not of European heritage. Far from it. They are of American Indian heritage.

      It is not confusing the issue, rather, it is confronting the issue.

      Aside: I hate the word issue. It is so oblique. Why don't we use the word "problem".

    28. Problem is so miserable, can't you say sausage instead. Much funnier.

    29. OK I say sausage. Wehrmacht sausage.

    30. Wrong. They are a combination of Spaniard and Indian.

      And fine, these illegals (and notice I stress illegals) are a problem, and a serious one at that, which their government should be handling, not us.

    31. A combination of Spanish and Indian you say. And I'm a combination of English and American Indian. And I just happen to be born on this side of an arbitrary line drawn on a map. Are you saying that makes me different than if I had been born on the other side of that line?

    32. That arbitrary line means something.

    33. There you go again! They are desperate, needy human beings making the best of it in a land that exploits them and supposedly doesn't want them here but they let them come in because of the advantage of cheap labor.
      Their business: besides smuggling drugs is performing tasks that the majority of Americans won't do, at triple the wage.
      Notice, i said smuggling drugs!! If you must complain about something, complain about a real problem! Not people who work in sweaty kitchens, in slaughterhouses for your Big Macs, in the fields picking fruits and vegetables for Your healthy diet and cutting your grass. Yup! they are taking jobs away from Americans.
      Once you have attained your dream of evicting the downtrodden, perhaps you can pick up the slack. The sun produces plenty of vitamins.

    34. Once again you miss the point. I have nothing against those who are here legally (or who endeavor to come here legally), earning a living, paying their taxes, etc. Being citizens, they are entitled to the benefits of citizens.

      I also have noting against those who are brought in legally on a temporary basis to perform jobs which, as you say, most Americans would shun (although I think with this economy, that might change). However, their earnings are a matter between employer and employee.

      My gripe is with the illegals and are namby pamby handling. They might work, but because they are illegal, they pay no taxes and yet demand the benefits, thereby becoming a drain on society--and to add insult to injury, expect us to speak their native tongue. We owe them nothing except deportation. We should not have to make up for the deficiencies of their native countries.

      Let's get something else straight. I have nothing against the downtrodden as long as they come through the front door. I know a number who have raised themselves by their own bootstraps out of the mire of abject poverty--but the point is that they acted aboveboard--and I admire them for having done so and consider them just as good as I am--and they learned the language which is basic, whether you think so or not.

      If in your eyes, this amounts to bigotry, sobeit. I'm proud to be a bigot despite what you believe to be my humble roots and once again, I despise everything you stand for.

    35. If there be a judgement day, we'll see who failed in what they stood for. I stand for what is termed in this country as Judeo-Christian principles. I believe in not judging people and not failing to walk a mile in their shoes. Their country failed them, (NAFTA didn't exacly help) these people deserve a shot at life, just as your ancestors were given in years past.
      You are just a bitter blowhard, being a bigot is nothing to be proud of, especially since you espouse intellectualism. As I said before, you are a smart bugger, but blind in many ways. God help you!
      I understand the biased ravings of an illiterate, ignorant redneck, but you are educated. Such a shame, what a waste! No compassion!!
      I hope someday You will have some of these people as your neighbors.It won't be long, the census projections, claim the Hispanics will outnumber the white man WAY before 2050.
      Finally, "they" do not expect you to speak their language. Big business sees an opportunity to make big money from Hispanics,"They" do buy stuff here, They are a great voice in the economy. The Hispanics did not force or lobby Big business to have the contents and warning labels in Spanish. BOTTOM LINE: Big business doesn't care about YOU! Nor do the people who exploit them.
      Best wishes!
      This conversation is over!

    36. If these people deserve a shot at life, it should not be at the expense of the American taxpayers, but rather at the expense of the country from which they came.

      What private industry does is its business, but what the government does (e.g., printing ballots in Spanish) is the taxpayers'--and yes, I have had firsthand experience with these low-lifes expecting me to speak Spanish rather than their learning English. As I said before, if I were to reside in their country, the first thing I would learn would be the language--and I expect them to do the same if they reside here--of course, this is rarely a problem with those here legally. Whether they will outnumber the white man (an absurd statement as they are part Caucasian) has nothing to do with anything.

      Your Judeo-Christian principles be damned, along with your god and your misplaced compassion.

    37. You can't let it go, you have to have the last word, huh?
      Native Mexicans ( the brown ones you have a hard on for) are Indigenous people, they are not all mestizos, not crossbred with the pure, superior white race. They are NOT part Caucasian, you fool! I overestimated your brilliance because you write elegantly and convincingly. Do your research, dummkopf.
      What do you say about illegal Polish and Irish aliens in this country?
      God knows what other Europeans are here illegally! A lot of illegal homeless Poles living by the Passaic River in NJ, that's a fact jack! The Irish? they go about unquestioned since they are white, speak English and they meld with the white Americans
      Kiss my big black butt you heathen! You are a jack off! Hey, if I am black, what are you going to say now? My ancestors were here before yours and we picked cotton for Mr. Charlie. I speak English, I beat the system anyway I can, because of people like you. Thank god you weren't here then, you'd be crackin' a whip! Damn my god? you mean Allah? (PBUH).Watch it bub! Now I'm losin' it!
      If you are an atheist, you give Atheism a bad name. Atheists are well read, educated and broadminded.You live in a hate filled, paranoid, delusional, ego driven small world where you think you matter.
      You have displayed your arrogance and ignorance to all the people reading these posts. I bet you think you have fooled all of the people, huh? no way jose. BTW: I love your Anglicized name.

      You've been Punked! I am a White Mexican! Betcha I'm lighter than you! Pure Spanish ( Caucasian NOT mixed with Moor) Remember the Conquistadors? That's my ancestry. late 1400's!
      Write if you want, I will not lower myself to answer. So PLEASE waste your time. I have one more chapter to go on the Wehrmacht series, then I will meet with my Chechnyan friends and toast to you with fine Vodka.

    38. Using your logic shouldn't we all be speaking in Native American tongues?

    39. No more than the French should be speaking Latin.

    40. and regarding to immigrant's issue,a
      simple equation goes like that:
      improvement=common good

    41. You left off the one thing that negates your equation, the adjective illegal.

    42. If they want to communicate among themselves in Spanish, that's fine. But when they want to communicate outside their community, English is the language--and I resent the idea that they expect us to speak Spanish to them.

    43. there is a difference between the spanish speaking ''supplying-populace''.... & the spanish speaking ''defying-pop-art-assimilation''?
      or not??if you are resented from all.........what would you do???

    44. I have no idea what you mean. How about trying to express it clearly?

    45. i made it short & clear.....what don't you understand?

    46. Well, an exemplary American would be a good, decent, honest person, who is grateful for escaping injustices, prejudices and lack of freedoms in his native country and appreciates opportunities not available elsewhere, ergo showing compassion in a land that gave him/her a shot at a good life in a Great country that prides itself as the model of democracy and opportunity to ALL. Dig it? ALL!

      These illegals you despise, you admit they do work, right? So do they expect handouts? No question about it, some people, even some legals abuse "the system".What I DO often hear is: "Man, those Hispanics are hard workers". If anything, they expect to be paid a decent wage for the hard work they do from which everyone here benefits, they perform jobs that you would scoff at. It appears you are above "dirty work".
      You say that English was more difficult at the time of your ancestors. What sort of English was spoken at the time? Ye Olde Kinde? or are you saying, it's easier now, because of the acceptance of slang and profane language?
      You have really hurt my feelings for saying you hate everything I stand for. Let me get my Kleenex box and wipe my tears.
      wink! wink! I'm not really hurt by your vitriol, I consider the source from whence it originates. I'm not offended by you and your pseudo intellectual hubris.
      You are a jewel! And you sir, are the epitome of what i detest. A bigot who forgot his humble roots.

  37. have you,gentlemen,ever considered to track down the financiers of both atrocial wars?did you ever track down the benefitors of these dilemma's ?do you even know who financially stood behind every contradicting party? do you comprehend that nazi germany couldn't have enjoyed expansion without u.s. patented synthetic petroleum?do you know that the russian revolution was paid & induced by the same folk(trotzky,look it up),that gave life to the 'fed'?
    it's up to everyone ,to find the truth....but at least try???????

    1. An apologist and a screwy one at that.

    2. Sorry, that last post was not intended for you, but for rtiom.

  38. I wasn't meaning to be degrading to Italy or Italians, just saying their heart wasn't in either of the WW's, and were thus not up for a proper fight. I wish we (Australia) had even 1/10th of their history and culture.

    1. it was a common joke under german soldiers that only italian tanks were issued with a reverse gear for quick retreat!

  39. I had a major operation a few years ago, by a quality surgeon, that saved my life. I didn't have any insurance at all, but that wasn't an issue. My only cost was to pay for a TV while I was admitted. As I understand it, under the US system that wouldn't be case.
    Basically, anyone who gets hurt here, citizen or visitor, 'should' be given good, professional care at little to no cost.
    It is going downhill though, more and more the pharmaceutical companies are getting their way. Its probably only a matter of time until we're more or less the same as the US here, regretfully.

    1. Thanks for the info.

  40. And why then, be an ally with Japan, as in WWI they were on our side?

    1. Clarification needed. Which post are you resopnding to?

    2. I was just adding a thought that popped into my head, if Hitlers goal was to get revenge on those that had contributed to it's bad result from WWI, why become an ally to someone that was a part of that defeat, namely Japan.

    3. For that matter, why become an ally of Italy which "fought" on the side of the Allies in WWI?

    4. Hahaha, I'm glad you said "fought". Depends on your definition of fight lol . In my humble opinion, the best kind of 'enemy' to have was Italy. Kind of like a couple of Italians I've known, lots of gestures when they talked, not much substance.

    5. Ah, but that opera and those paintings, murals, architecture and sculpture.

      By the way, please correct me if I'm wrong, but in addition to Germany/Austria, Bulgaria was the only country on the losing side in both world wars.

    6. Off the top of my head I think yes. Romania was allied to the Russians in WWI I think. I can't think of any.

    7. Hungary. Although it was the Austria-Hungarian empire in WWI.

      (Its getting late here, the 'ole cogs in the head are slowing down)

    8. That's why I didn't include it.

    9. Allying with Japan was mostly strategic, and made even more sense considering that all three Italy, Germany, and Japan left the league of nations. They each had they separate ambitions. Japan wanted east Asia and the pacific, Germany wanted East and Western Europe, and Italy wanted North Africa and something else. They had common interests therefor worked together.

    10. So I forgot, the Germans needed someone to distract the West and Russia, and Japan was right there when you needed them.

  41. Payback, with a large dose of interest included.

    1. In other words, when it came to usurious rates of interest, the Germans far outstripped the Jews.

      Again, I emphasize that despite the runaway inflation due to the unrealistic and draconian Versailles Treaty, from 1925 to 1929, American dollars kept the Germany economy booming and the Nazi party far in the background.

  42. I didn't get past reading that post about the Nazi's only wanting to regain ground and get some payback. I was kind of shocked that someone professing to having read up on the subject would say that.

    1. Well, you must admit that they wanted payback--and certainly a bit more.

  43. Watched the first 3 parts and must say I like it. However the documentary fails to explain why at some point Germany hated the jews. The same tactik was used in the past years to show those bad kamikaze islamist in Palestine who blow themselves up killing civilian jews, forgetting the reason behind these extrem gestures. Once you understand the context of the events you realize that most germans soldiers were gentlemans compared to russians, english, hispanic races and obviously no one is so keen to prepare such a documentary of the sistemic murders by the US army.

    1. Just like the U.S is using the Mexicans as scapegoats for their economic problems so are where the Germans using the Jews. And now the U.S is using the Muslims as scapegoats as well.

    2. In the United States Mexicans are not a scape-goat, their impact is real.There are tens of millions here illegaly.They are taking scarce American jobs and lowering our wages.They have set labor back at least 20 years so far after people like myself have fought for better wages and working conditions.I am one of the peolpe who are out fo work and have loast everything because these illegal crimminals have takenover my trade,with the help of our government I might add.I want to school,paid taxes and was a good citizen and lost eveything from these so called scape goats.I have a 6 year old daughter who is being forced to learn Spanish in school.Just the other day she asked me why when in America we speak english...

    3. I agree for the most part, but have a request. Could you please provide more information about your daughter's being forced to learn Spanish in school. Is this an official dictum or something else?

  44. Well if you read as much as you claim you have, then you would know that Hitlers objective was to take back all of the German territory it had lost in WW1, as well as exercise revenge on the countries that contributed to it's horrible state after the War. Not only was Germany not given assistance after the war they were made to pay huge fines. Also Tzar Nickolas-es wife, who happened to be the queen of Russia was of German royal descent. Germany had a long time treaty with Russia until it was broken by Russian interests during WW1. So the Germans pretty much had a reason for a revenge. Okay, so now lets talk about sub-human and stuff. I'm fairly certain all nations have fought for many different beliefs and religions, no matter how outrageous they may have been. Weather you believe in God, the bible, and that the world was created in 7 days. Or maybe you believe that there were many Gods that rule all aspects of life. Or how about not even believing in anything but science and atheism. Well, Hitler believed in a superior race that came from space. It so happens that he has very good reason to believe this as well because as you might know since you read so much that ancient texts dating thousands of years talk about ancient civilizations that left behind mysteries we are baffled about today, have been described as white people. Lastly if you don't like a quote by one Russia's and the worlds greatest Authors maybe you would appreciate the wisdom of Plato who has a quote with the same ideology.

    1. First of all, Hitler's goal was to take back far more than just what Germany had lost in WWI--or haven't you read Mein Kempf as I have!

      True, Germany was saddled with ridiculous raparations by the Versailles Treaty, resulting in runaway inflation, but 1925 to the great depression of 1929 were boom times for Germany, due largely to American investments--and notice how quiet Hitler and his party were during this time--not a peep.

      Let's just say that Hitler believed that Aryans were a superior race and omit all the rest of your claptrap in this regard.

      So spare me your apologia and be equally sparing of your meaningless quotes, your meanderings and everything else about your pathetic little self who refuses to reveal either his nationality or his qualifications--I assume through sheer embarassment.

    2. You my friend can assume whatever it is you like, but Germany's economy collapsed in 1930 after a slow and brutal economic meltdown during the 1920's. If you have any of the false ideas of some economic boom it's no wonder you still believe the U.S is gonna make it. But the cold reality is that Germany's economy collapsed because they were barred from exporting their goods. Here's the funny thing about that. Germany was always exporting better quality goods for very cheap. And here's another funny thing about that. Hitler did exactly what Lincoln did to revive the economy. He created his own government currency, which was independent from the international banks, wow. I bet your really getting angry now mister robertallen. Seems to me that you should double check those books you've read because if you read a lot, you might forget some very important information contained in those volumes. I really don't think that my background is of any relevance, simply because I'm not a biased individual as you seem to be. As for my qualifications, I don't think that common knowledge like this requires any. But if I seem unqualified to you I'm terribly sorry please don't hire me. Oh and unlike you I haven't read all of Mein Kampf but I'm pretty sure world domination wasn't on the agenda. Like I said if you can give me one solid piece of that evidence I will agree. Last but not least, calling me pathetic is fine because you are nobody to be offended by.

    3. No, I'm not getting angry, only disgusted--and yes, you do seem unqualified to me and a number of other people who've responded to you. As you've failed to state your qualifications and where you are writing from, you are not worth communicating with.

    4. I'm the one disgusted in a yuppy like you. It's none of your business where I'm from and the fact of the matter is, you already proved your less qualified than me by lying about how much you've read. Who in their right mind would say that the German economy was booming in the 1920-1930's. You lose buddy, get another book.

    5. You really are a jerk!

      If you're ashamed to admit where you're from, I can understand it. However, your ill-founded statements make one wonder about your qualifications and so far mine considerably outdistance yours.

      Now, you have displayed your inability to comprehend what you read. I wrote that from 1925 until the market crashed in 1929, the German economy boomed due to the influx of American dollars and that this kept Hitler and his minions in the shadows.

      You're the loser and you're the jerk--and I don't mind being a yuppy if indeed I am one.

    6. @ rtiom

      In relation to your statement, "Well if you read as much as you claim you have, then you would know that Hitlers objective was to take back all of the German territory it had lost in WW1..."

      I suggest that you read some more on what Hitler said about Lebensraum. (Living Space).

      Clearly, the Nazi's had more planned then only regaining ground they lost in WWI.

    7. Hi, Docoman.

      I mentioned this in one of my previous posts. If all Hitler wanted to do was take back the land that Germany lost as a result of the Versailles Treaty, why did he invade Russia, Belgium, France and Poland? Also in Mein Kempf which rtiom admits not having read, Hitler outlines his ambitions.

      But I'm curious. As I indicated in previous posts, all the intelligent, well-informed posters on this site seem to be Canadians, are you as well and if not, would you mind disclosing which part of the world you inhabit?

    8. G'day Robert.

      I'm from Australia.

    9. For a country founded by convicts, you've done rather well.

      Your wildlife is exciting and, as I understand, much of it is found nowhere else on earth.

      Another poster from your neck of the woods informed me that there is little fast-food culture in your country. Would you care to comment on this?

    10. Unfortunately, to get away from the fast-food establishments, you have to get away from the towns and cities. I think we have most of the same here as you guys do.
      I don't care for that food most of the time myself. IF we had some brains here, we'd be eating and exporting Kangaroo meat, but that's one more lesson we failed to learn from our indigenous peoples as we took over their country.

    11. I also understand that your system of health care is superior to ours--again I seek a comment.

    12. Yes, sure but my point is that there was no evidence of world domination. Unlike what most people blurt out given the chance. I think that's overdoing it a bit.

    13. @ rtiom
      I agree that much of the propaganda of the day is still widely believed. However, saying, "...Hitlers objective was to take back all of the German territory it had lost in WW1, as well as exercise revenge on the countries that contributed to it's horrible state after the War" is a huge understatement and incorrect in many respects. Hitler wanted much more then that, he said so multiple times.
      Most moral, intelligent people would agree that the Jews were used as scapegoats, and what was done to them can only be described as evil, not to mention many of the conquered peoples, for example the Poles.

      As you say, between the Axis powers, they wanted to control large parts of the world. Asia, Pacific, most of Europe, most of Africa and the Mediterranean. The Nazi's were also very interested in South America. If they had realized this aim, they would've controlled/dominated the majority of the world. Or, in other words, achieved world domination.

      If the Axis had won WWII, I wonder what would've happened next. From what I understand, the Nazi and Shinto ideologies both thought they were racially superior, destined to rule. I suspect they would've ended up fighting each other. As you said, Japan was handy for the Nazis, to distract some of their opposition for awhile. I don't think the Nazis had any intention of actually sharing control with the Japanese eventually, but even they realized they weren't strong enough at that time to do it all by themselves.

      Without doing some more research, I couldn't comment with any confidence on Germany's economic conditions in 1925-29.

      I think that dmxi's comment is very relevant. If you want to find out more on who was behind the scenes, the real puppet masters, follow the money, see who profited. I wonder how many from the USA are aware that their last President, George W, had a grandfather that was deeply involved in financing the Nazis. A traitor to his country, his fellow Americans and allies, yet his son, and grandson end up becoming President?!? Looks to me like the Bush family worked out awhile back that war is good business, as long as you're not the one being killed.
      In my opinion, many of the real criminals from WWII not only got away with it but made a huge profit as well. Although that's nothing new in our history from what I can tell.

    14. Right on as usual--and speaking of the Bush Family, I've often wondered about Joseph Kennedy's relationship to the Nazis.

    15. @ robertallen1

      You say, "I've often wondered about Joseph Kennedy's relationship to the Nazis."

      That seems a bit cynical. Joe Kennedy, his beloved eldest son, was killed in Europe fighting Nazis. Have you some evidence of a connection or are you simply casting aspersions without foundation?

    16. I had heard that he had had some kind of relationship with the Nazis, but now that I think of it, I cannot remember where. That's why I didn't state it directly. However, I wouldn't be surprised if he had, considering his relationship with so many underworld characters. I guess being a bootlegger has its perks.

      And yes, I'm a cynic although not a conspiracist.

    17. i emphasize everyone to do a little research on the protagonists involved by financing certain individualls & (their) groups/parties, so they can make their own conclusions ! recheck the sources found to evade biased &/or deliberate misinformation . you'll find links between the known enemies which sketches a different picture of historical events !you can start with henry ford (& ig farben),prescott bush (i believe?),hess & his flight to england...& then follow the money chain.
      the state of europe was long planned (round about 1880 ) & the number 6 million was making the rounds well before 1945-1947 .
      you can check the information found via newspaper archives.

  45. Well Soros of course history tells us many a country and race have piled atrocities on their fellow man.All are unforgivable.The germans take a lot of beating in the game of inhumanity . Upwards of 50 million dead.As the doco said it would have been half that number if the "Gutless Generals had stepped up 10 moths before the end of the war.So perhaps you should go back to your roots and rethink, Good luck to growing that small moustache maybe you can take rtiom with you, or are you one and the same.Sorry Soros _SS_have a nice day...

    1. Nobody who fights too the end is a coward. Isn't that what your Hollywood movies teach you. Don't they teach you to stand up for your country no matter what because it's your home. BTW, you foolish brainwashed sheep. That mustache wasn't only worn by Hitler, it was fashionable back in the day. Just like it is fashionable now for girls too wear skimpy little skirts and low cut tops to attract men from an early age just to become single, jaded, young women. And who gave you the right to label me? Or call anyone here a Nazi? Oh I get it, if I don't agree with a fool like you it makes me a Nazi? Well in that case I'm Genghis Khan. Do you know who that is or is he okay in your books? Oh did I forget to mention that the United States murdered around 100 million Native Americans. Did I forget to mention that they dropped two Atomic bombs on civilians. Did I forget to mention that the United States assisted in the deaths of over 2 million Vietnamese, and besides killing a bunch of people themselves during World Wars they are still killing thousands in the East. Now let's see how many they lost and you tell me who is the bloody Nazi.

    2. And which country are you from or are you too ashamed to say?

    3. Grow up son!! of course the Yanks were wrong and Pol Pot 2_3 million and on and on it goes,,but the Krauts were way out of order and you can't defend their action.Their Generals mostly were gutless in the fact of not standing up to a "Madman". "The Bomb" was wrong but with the Japanese honor, no surrender coupled with their lack of empathy, (they now have some thank god) was there another way to bring an end to the war??.Rtiom if you haven't traveled do so it will do you the world of good.There is a lot of crap in the world,but on a personal level (which is the only place to start) you can live a good life and make your life better. Have a good day..

  46. britain ruled the world with less manpower & i believe they latently still do !

    1. they actually played a major (arms) role in the destruction of yugoslavia in the 90s/00s that the UN ignored

  47. ''accidently double posted & this is it's removal!''-by oxymoron

  48. the borderlines of modern day europe were sketched up in the 1880's,i believe to have read somewhere (have to look up the article again!) & ww1 didn't bring the satisfying results,which made ww2 a necessity !politics had to change more & more to decentralize nations souvereignty & make way for more monopolistic government (EU,NATO,....),et voila (that's french for ta-daah!) & that's where we are today......moving steadily but surely towards a global hegemony!

  49. The most important thing here is to learn a lesson from the past.
    Given the situation after WW1 with wide spread unemployment, hunger and poverty in an industrial nation it is quite understandable that people were less than happy. And hitler of cause was the right person to use this situation for his own goals. Finding scapegoats for misstakes that have been made by different political leaders was basically all he had to do.

    Something that could happen just as easy today in any country.

  50. It never ceases to amaze me how naive, people can be on this, and many other subjects. Most people that criticize the Germans, themselves are like the brainwashed Hitler youth of that time. They make conclusions based on mixed information, hateful propaganda films depicting the biased atrocities of war.
    “It's not given to people to judge what's right or wrong. People have eternally been mistaken and will be mistaken, and in nothing more than in what they consider right and wrong.”(Leo Tolstoy, War and Peace)
    The complexities of war and political leadership of any one country, is a massive undertaking to dissect, especially by someone who can't spell. I do not hate the Germans in the slightest, or look down on them from any angle. I think they provided very important lessons on what to do, and what not to do. And it seems that no matter how many self proclaimed reasonable, rational, intelligent people exist in this world everything is repeating.
    I also agree with SOROS that if Germany would have won nothing would really change. Unlike someones outrageous remark "If they would have won, we'd all be speaking German", get a grip fool.

    1. First of all, your quote from Tolstoi proves nothing.

      Secondly, it is impossible to predict what would have happened if the Germans had won, although with someone like Hitler calling the shots, I don't see how they could have. However, given its manpower and size, I don't see how Germany could have ruled the world. They would have needed to aryanize the Japanese, Chinese and Afrikanners.

      As for looking down at the Germans, it's been about 67 years since the war ended and Europe has basically been at peace with itself ever since.

    2. Let's take a look at what you have replied with. Firstly, please elaborate on what you mean by, "your quote from Tolstoi proves nothing". Do you have any idea why I used that quote in the first place? Secondly you said, "although with someone like Hitler calling the shots, I don't see how they could have. However, given its manpower and size, I don't see how Germany could have ruled the world." I don't know why you used "however", but in any case this whole "rule the world business", shows that you've been watching too many Hollywood movies. I hesitantly feel like arguing with individuals who have very little actual knowledge except for Google on hand because it's like debating with a domestic cat. Nevertheless, if you can't see how Germany could have won the war, I have no idea what all the panic was about back then. Too bad they couldn't consult with you. Lastly for now, Europe is at not at peace with itself because if it was there would be now news to watch. Or money to be made. I would love to hear back from you.

    3. Fine, you're hearing back from me.

      I have no idea why you even bothered with the quote, nor do I much care for when it comes to weltanchauung, quotes mean nothing.

      Second, I have read at least four biographies of Hitler (enumerated upon request), biographies of Goebbels, Goering, Hess, Schact Himmler, Ribbentrop (sorry, von Ribbentrop, von Pappen, Spier and I don't know how many books on the war itself, especially in Europe, so spare me the crap about having very little knowledge.

      Third, if you can conjecture about what might have happened had Germany won the war, so can I. However, I took it one step further by stating that considering Hitler's makeup, it's doubtful that they could have and even if they had, they had neither the manpower nor the size to rule the world. This conjecture is based on what I have read about the war, not upon the movies. So I think you should take back your insult.

      As for modern day Europe, give me an example of one European country waging total war on another European country since 1945. As a matter of fact, this is the longest that Europe has been at peace in modern times.

      Now, calm down.

    4. I am calm, and I appreciate your response. Like I previously stated the internet is available to us all. So listing the names of high ranking Nazis doesn't tell me about how much you know. The reason I "bothered" with the quote, is in response to the many opinions here, that come from residents of a country that is royally screwing with other countries just to make a buck. Yet, they sit around cursing everything that was done wrong by one side as if that doesn't happen anymore. Secondly, nobody can rule the world alone, that's why throughout history alliances and partnerships are created to win wars. Money, technology, and trade also play a huge role. So yeah Hitler could have essentially been, and actually has been the largest superpower in the world. As a matter of fact no empire actually had the manpower to rule the territory it did, but they still ruled. In addition, quotes exist for a very good reason. What mine proves is that all wise and intelligent people agree that judging others without judging yourself is wrong. And now as for what you have read. Name me one quote directly from credible uncensored text that implies the intent of world domination by the Nazis and I'll leave this be. Lastly, Europe is not at all out war with each other, yet now the conflicts are with the east. And guess who the oppressors are? The United States and there European allies. Or should I say their European cronies. Aside from that, there are many conflicts in eastern Europe and Asia. Oh Hitlers makeup wasn't that much different from Stalin's and he ruled Russia till he died.

    5. First of all, I didn't just list the names of high-ranking Nazis, but mentioned that I'd read entire books about them. (Oh, I left out Martin Bormann--"The Secretary" is excellent).

      Second, like most quotes, yours proves nothing of any substance--and because Tolstoy said it does not make it valid.

      Are you positing that the Naxis were not out for world domination, especially considering Hitler's view of what he considered subhuman non-Aryans? How much of Mein Kempf have you read? I've read all 700 boring, ranting pages. Do you really think that Hitler would have stopped if he had overrun all of Europe and then England?

      But you're right about one thing: Hitler and Stalin were cut from the same cloth.

      Now, how much do you know?

    6. i hate russians i hate germans
      more then anything else.
      from the historical point of view of course.
      i'm polish:)

    7. I could tell that from your last name.

  51. A very informative Documentary.. The Werhmact was thought of as the German Army and not as idiological like the SS this tells us many of the Generals were just as bad and arrogant as Hitler's SS.Oh! how stupid an iresponsable were the German people letting a madman rule them.Let us not forget and may they never forget,,.Two world wars in 20years.The new generations German's cannot be held resposible but can't escape the fact that many of their forebears can only be described the scum of the earth, it makes
    the US forigein policy look like Disneyland...

    1. Your comments could well apply to the British in India and elsewhere. How stupid and irresponsible the British people. They had a democracy and yet still killed native people all over the world, invented the concentration camp, exterminated the American Indian... blah blah blah. Get an education.

  52. just imagine if russia would have fallen under the swastika banner & how world politics would exist today.......chilling!

    1. Hi dmxi, I think things would not be too different. Maybe some big events would have happened under different flags. Now it's just People vs Govt, everywhere. I'm chilled now. Best of luck.

    2. you know that we(rep. of eire) were a platform for providing 'das reich' with necessities for launching attacks ?one thing is for sure:we would have only changed our surpressors & i would have never come to existence.....makes one wonder !

    3. Actually, had the Germans won and Nazi ideology triumphed, the Americanization of the world would have gone ahead anyway. Coca Cola, jazz, modern advertising and business culture already had a foot hold in Europe; all of it would have advanced. Eventually, Hitler, like Stalin and Mao and all the other dictators would have died and the world would have fallen to Wall Street. I dont think things would look much different today...