Did Hitler gain power by banning guns?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Guns Guns Guns
  • Start date Start date
Everybody DANCE! said:
And I would disagree with that. I disagree with the occupation as well, and because of that, were there no occupation, there would be no need to disarm the people.
Click to expand...


That's a somewhat unique stance.

Are you saying the Allies were wrong to invade Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy and occupy them in WWII?

We didn't invade Japan per se, we demanded and got an unconditional surrender and then occupied the country.

Was that the wrong thing to do?
 
\\(\()/)// said:
That's a somewhat unique stance.

Are you saying the Allies were wrong to invade Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy and occupy them in WWII?

We didn't invade Japan per se, we demanded and got an unconditional surrender and then occupied the country.

Was that the wrong thing to do?
Click to expand...
The invasion was justified, it WAS war after all. The occupation I do not defend. It can be rationalized, naturally, and I won't argue too fine a point on it, as it's too late to affect anything. But I don't agree with it. Well, most of it. I do like the rebuilding of European infrastructure after the war.
 
Everybody DANCE! said:
The invasion was justified, it WAS war after all. The occupation I do not defend. It can be rationalized, naturally, and I won't argue too fine a point on it, as it's too late to affect anything. But I don't agree with it. Well, most of it. I do like the rebuilding of European infrastructure after the war.
Click to expand...

You are aware that the only reason Stalin didn't grab more of Europe and perhaps even Japan was the presence of the Western Allies armies of occupation?
 
\\(\()/)// said:
You are aware that the only reason Stalin didn't grab more of Europe and perhaps even Japan was the presence of the Western Allies armies of occupation?
Click to expand...
I wouldn't say the only reason, especially with Japan. Realism and idealism may not mix well, and as I said, I won't argue too fine a point on it.
 
Damocles said:
We had the nook, he did not.
Click to expand...


At the time of the unconditional surrender of Germany on May 8, 1945, the Manhattan Project was still months away from producing a working weapon.



We then expended all but one of our total available supply of nuclear devices on Japan, and Stalin knew it.


During the war, information had been pouring in from a number of volunteer spies involved with the Manhattan Project (known in Soviet cables under the code-name of Enormoz), and the Soviet nuclear physicist Igor Kurchatov was carefully watching the Allied weapons development. It came as no surprise to Stalin when Truman had informed him at the Potsdam conference that he had a "powerful new weapon." Truman was shocked at Stalin's lack of interest.


The Soviet spies in the U.S. project were all volunteers and none were Russians. One of the most valuable, Klaus Fuchs, was a German émigré theoretical physicist who had been a part in the early British nuclear efforts and had been part of the UK mission to Los Alamos during the war. Fuchs had been intimately involved in the development of the implosion weapon, and passed on detailed cross-sections of the "Trinity" device to his Soviet contacts. Other Los Alamos spies—none of whom knew each other—included Theodore Hall and David Greenglass.




http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_nuclear_weapons#From_Los_Alamos_to_Hiroshima
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top