![We shouldn't have bothered [931x1109 - 316KB]](https://pic8.co/sh/KGkUJ3.jpg){kind=link}
Because the real Hitler wasn't as evil as we have been told. Overly confident due to cocaine and too easily provoked perhaps, but not evil.
I disagree in large part.
You're forgetting that it took the ENTIRE (capable) WORLD to defeat Hitler. He may have over-extended, sure. But also, eh maybe not? That's (((history's))) version of events. I'm quite dubious of that.
cocaine
I 100% disagree.
Hitler also;
- was a meth addict
- sucked off bulls to drink their semen for (((reasons)))
- was gay
- was a trannyfaggot
- had a micropenis
- had a child who had a child whose name is Angela Merkel
- was a nigger-loving faggot
But that's if you accept jew lies and tales of history.
These always make me laugh at the insecurity of the ones who write those stories. If it wasn't for the grift of the holocaust shekels I'm sure they would have just tried to erase his name all together from history by now.
He may have over-extended, sure. But also, eh maybe not?
He attacked Russia first AND officially declared war on the USA.
If instead they had crushed the UK (which was war mongering), made the GEU (Germanic European Union) peaceful and prosperous, the US and Soviets would likely have backed off.
cocaine
I 100% disagree.
I think that one is fairly solid. If it helps you sleep Hitler was tricked by a quack doctor into thinking the cocaine was a vitamin injection.
If it helps you sleep Hitler was tricked by a quack doctor into thinking the cocaine was a vitamin injection.
Exact same thing is claimed of meth. And bull semen.
So no. I don't believe (((that information))). Not even slightly.
Legit curious, as I'm not on the same train as you guys but I find your theories interesting. What about all the photos of emaciated prisoners in stripes? I don't get it. Is it just a numbers thing, and a they-weren't-actually-gassed thing?
Those are not photos from WW2.
Those are people with typhoid fever. They originals have been found.
It's an all around thing. The jews have tried "muh 6 million" dozens of times.
There weren't that many jews during the 30s and 40s. If 6 million had happened in just two of those dozens of examples above: there would be no jews at all.
German Soldiers and Jews both starved towards the end of the war. Allies had bomber the supply lines. So who will you feed the most? Your soldiers or the prisoners that had every chance to leave before the war? There were no mass death camps or gassing. Watch “Cole in Auswitch” if you can find it.
They were hungry. So were the German people. There was no medicine. Typhus was rampant in ALL the camps and bases of ALL the military, so were lice (fumigation showers, anyone?).
Wouldn’t he have been kinder if he did?
Yes
Actually gassing the Jews would have been a kindness to the world. Butchering Anglo soldiers may have been better in the long run, but I would not necessarily call it "being good".
He didn't need to "butcher" the British Army. He could have forced their surrender.
I said that, retard. Don’t try to contradict someone you agree with.
If faced with two options one of them is the more moral of the two. If you are presented with only two options then one of them is the "good" choice morally no matter how unpleasant either of them is.
(post is archived)