What Would Happened to Nazi Moscow?

[aktarian]

Originally Posted by b12ox

I am sure Himmler would rather not face additional problems at this stage of the war. What he said does not matter much. When Leningrad held on Hitler said"fine, we will starve them, even better, one problem less" Then later in 1942 he came up with another directive to break the siege and prepare for an assult. With the Russian army closing in, it had to be scrapped eventually.

I'm not sure what your point is here......

My point was that Germans didn't intend to raze Warsaw to begin with and only decided to do it after Uprising, when opportunity presented itself.

[aktarian]

Originally Posted by Snake Featherston

Shoot the defeatist traitors (i.e. people who are trying desperately to convince the Fuhrer that this is nonsense of a very preposterous sort) who don't see the light of the Fuhrer's divinely inspired will for the German people (even when they're right and Hitler's full of nonsense).

And when next set of people tell him same thing and that thing starts to happen?

Originally Posted by Snake Featherston

When did Mexico split off from the North American continent?

When Americans start waging war on Natives.

Originally Posted by Snake Featherston

Sure, if we're looking at it from the POV of "rational" conquerors intending to exploit and enslave and ignoring moral qualms here. But if we're talking the Nazis, they ain't gonna care about puny quibbles of a few defeatists who want to use the methods of the salvation army, to quote Hitler.

Or when it comes to practical matters. Something you keep ignoring and reverting to moral aspect.

Originally Posted by Snake Featherston

Warsaw.

Weird. All the books I've read say Warsaw was still standing at the end of WW2 and people lived there. Obviously I've been reading books full of false information.

[mekilldyou]

Anyway, how the Germans get to conquer these lands? If it's after several years of war there's a good chance that Stalin has moved most of the European Russians to the east and destroyed anything that the Germans could use. Moscow, Leningrad and other big cities have probably been razed to the ground much like Stalingrad was.

[aktarian]

Originally Posted by Snake Featherston

We're talking about Hitler. You see him noticing or caring about this difference?

And once again you bring up moral dimension when I'm talking about practical dimension. I'm starting to wonder if you do this deliberatly to change the subject.

Originally Posted by Snake Featherston

And when Hitler strangles the "defeatists/destructionists" with piano wire because they're not accepting his genius by virtue of pointing out the kind of realities you're rightly noting?

Then their replacements tell him same thing due to same circumstances. Something that often happened during fighting.

Originally Posted by Snake Featherston

I'm saying that Hitler wouldn't care and would order things done and use it to either sack or shoot the people who chose to buck him on this.

And you keep saying that once Hitler said something will be done he stuck to it until it was done, even if it ment killing people who couldn't do it. Because we all know Hitler never, ever, changed his mind.

[Snake Featherston]

Originally Posted by aktarian

And when next set of people tell him same thing and that thing starts to happen?

He keeps up the Darth Vader retirement policy until he finds someone who values their neck over their ability to appreciate their lying eyes.

Originally Posted by aktarian

When Americans start waging war on Natives.

Originally Posted by aktarian

Or when it comes to practical matters. Something you keep ignoring and reverting to moral aspect.

And when I cite the Nazis IOTL refusing practical concerns for their pet murder machine you brush it aside and refuse to acknowledge it, so I call bullshit.

[aktarian]

Originally Posted by Hamelus

"Changing it"... The original plans called for the entire city to be razed with only a few selected landmarks kept standing. If you call that "changing it", then sure.

Two sentences say largely destroyed (or soemthing to that effect) and one destroyed. 66% says I'm right, 33% you are.

Originally Posted by Hamelus

What part of "slavic peoples were to be exterminated, and the survivors enslaved" didn't you understand?

The part where you first exterinate the people and enslave the survivors latter.

Originally Posted by Hamelus

Poland was to be destroyed, and its lands settled by Germans. The remaining poles would be expelled, exterminated, or enslaved.

As for the former european part of the USSR, the Hunger Plan aswell extermination through labor would have been implemented on a vast scale.

Bolded the parts that disprove your point. You can't have all of them. If you exterminate an ethnic group you can't ensalve for simple reason that it's gone (that's what exterination means, killing everybody). Now, if you could explain how you can both kill somebody and then enslave him I'll listen.

It may be you mean the scene at the end of "Shaun of the dead" where people keep zombies (reanimated corpses) as pets. It may not.

[Snake Featherston]

Originally Posted by aktarian

And once again you bring up moral dimension when I'm talking about practical dimension. I'm starting to wonder if you do this deliberatly to change the subject.

Evidently when I point out all the times IOTL that Hitler did disregard pragmatism for the sake of murdering more Slavs it's both irrelevant to you and makes no impression, so again, bullshit. I point out real-life examples of the Nazis doing the exact opposite, and you ignore them to derail the conversation by looking for a moral application of what is simply noting that Herr Hitler was not a practical man.

Originally Posted by aktarian

Then their replacements tell him same thing due to same circumstances. Something that often happened during fighting.

And he proceeds to either shoot them or unleash a new Night of the Long Knives. People tried to tell Stalin about the giant USSR-wide Terror Famine, too. Same principle, same results.

Originally Posted by aktarian

And you keep saying that once Hitler said something will be done he stuck to it until it was done, even if it ment killing people who couldn't do it. Because we all know Hitler never, ever, changed his mind.

To judge by his using trains and resources vitally needed for the real war against the Allies so he could still kill Jews.......

[aktarian]

Originally Posted by Amakan

And where is mexico city located?

Central America. Or Mezzoamerica, as that area is sometimes called regarding pre 1492 civilisations.

[Snake Featherston]

Originally Posted by aktarian

Bolded the parts that disprove your point. You can't have all of them. If you exterminate an ethnic group you can't ensalve for simple reason that it's gone (that's what exterination means, killing everybody). Now, if you could explain how you can both kill somebody and then enslave him I'll listen.

It may be you mean the scene at the end of "Shaun of the dead" where people keep zombies (reanimated corpses) as pets. It may not.

You do realize that people were pointing this out to Hitler at the time and he simply didn't care, right? I mean we're talking the guy who did things like having 3 million POWs from the USSR starve to death in the first six months of the war when he really needed slaves and who chose to send Jews up in smoke when he needed to devote every last mark and railroad car to the USSR, UK, and USA.

[Snake Featherston]

Originally Posted by aktarian

Central America. Or Mezzoamerica, as that area is sometimes called regarding pre 1492 civilisations.

On the contrary, it's part of North America. The continent does not end at the Rio Grande.

[aktarian]

Originally Posted by Snake Featherston

He keeps up the Darth Vader retirement policy until he finds someone who values their neck over their ability to appreciate their lying eyes.

Or somebody he trusts tells him it's not feasible.

Originally Posted by Snake Featherston

Indeed.

Originally Posted by Snake Featherston

And when I cite the Nazis IOTL refusing practical concerns for their pet murder machine you brush it aside and refuse to acknowledge it, so I call bullshit.

And as I keep pointing out that industrialised murder of dispersed and relatively small ethnic group would be different in practical matter than killing several million people you again bring up moral dimension. Call it bullshit all you want, you seem to like using it.

[Snake Featherston]

Originally Posted by aktarian

Or somebody he trusts tells him it's not feasible.

Which will never happen any more than any totalitarian dictator accepts their pet project fails.

Originally Posted by aktarian

Indeed.

I was simply noting that a huge city was demolished and razed to the ground by invaders. You're the one that legalistically read it to mean USA only.

Originally Posted by aktarian

And as I keep pointing out that industrialised murder of dispersed and relatively small ethnic group would be different in practical matter than killing several million people you again bring up moral dimension. Call it bullshit all you want, you seem to like using it.

And as you seem incapable of listening to my telling you that IOTL Hitler repeatedly refused to listen to people telling him to shelve the murder of 6 million people when Nazi Germany was in catastrophe, and have yet to provide proof that a victorious Hitler will listen more, I will keep using it. I keep asking for proof and all you do is repeat the same inane statement that has no relation to the real Hitler and the real Nazi Germany.

[b12ox]

Originally Posted by BlondieBC

By the end of the war, he was a old, sick man with a drug addiction problem. Yes, he might order Moscow raised immediately, but that does not fit his M.O. He will have at least two different people design the plans, he will review them and make changes. He will assign the task to be split among different commands. By the time this gets seriously started in the late 1940's, Hilter is dead or suffering dementia. Either means someone else runs the country. Even if he is healthier than I expect, his constant tinkering along with using resources on higher priority projects (Germania, maybe Ukraine) means it goes slowly. And in this case, when the next guy takes over, he will be more practical. I also expect Hitler to be less involved in a day to day basis in running the government as his health declines.

Hitler was in early 50's. He would retire to his studio to start drawing like a madman. The Fuerer draws, Speer builds, Himmler sweeps. Grand ouverture to the 1000 years Reich. He becomes a semi god so every drawing a mastepiece.

[Snake Featherston]

Originally Posted by b12ox

Hitler was in early 50's. He would retire to his studio to start drawing like a madman. The Fuerer draws, Speer builds, Himmler sweeps. Grand ouverture to the 1000 years Reich. He becomes a semi god so every drawing a mastepiece.

It's *demi*god and no, that's not what he'd do, he'd tenaciously hold onto power until his literal last breath and probably turn very, very paranoid by the end of it.

[b12ox]

Originally Posted by Snake Featherston

It's *demi*god and no, that's not what he'd do, he'd tenaciously hold onto power until his literal last breath and probably turn very, very paranoid by the end of it.

He appointed himself Commander of the Werhmacht. When time comes to build so who do you think would be the top architect?

[Snake Featherston]

Originally Posted by b12ox

He appointed himself Commander of the Werhmacht. When time comes to build so who do you think would be the top architect?

Speer, using Hitler's designs which were just as unworkable as his extermination policies in the east, and anyone stupid enough to say so would be shot and/or hanged by the neck.

[b12ox]

Originally Posted by Snake Featherston

Speer, using Hitler's designs which were just as unworkable as his extermination policies in the east, and anyone stupid enough to say so would be shot and/or hanged by the neck.

He didn't shot his generals, just sent them home. He wasn't a total wacko.

[Snake Featherston]

Originally Posted by b12ox

He didn't shot his generals, just sent them home. He wasn't a total wacko.

No, he both shot some and had others strangled to death with piano wire. You do realize we're talking about Hitler, right?

[b12ox]

Originally Posted by Snake Featherston

No, he both shot some and had others strangled to death with piano wire. You do realize we're talking about Hitler, right?

well if he did it to all the Werhmacht would have had to be led by Vlasov.

[Snake Featherston]

Originally Posted by b12ox

well if he did it to all the Werhmacht would have had to be led by Vlasov.

He did something simpler: starved the Wehrmacht and fed the SS.