Which war would you change the result?

[Abriekman]

First of all, I don’t know why you count Balkan Turks as another ethnic group, but let me say that it’s far from reality. They are “my” people, regional differences don’t matter. So yes I care about them and not only about them, but many other Balkanites as well. My people has a history in the region so of course I also care about territory, but it doesn’t come first. You just didn’t get it and kept implying like you know what I tried to say better than me. It’s getting ridiculous, just saying.

Caring about regions of other countries, that were for long time only occupied by your nation is not normal. Balkan Turks are other ethnic group, because they are genetically 3/4 Bulgarians, Greeks , while you from Anatolia have nothing common even genetically with this region, so it is not your territory. It shouldn't even be disputed, because Southeast European people live there.

[Kivan]

Caring about regions of other countries, that were for long time only occupied by your nation is not normal. Balkan Turks are other ethnic group, because they are genetically 3/4 Bulgarians, Greeks , while you from Anatolia have nothing common even genetically with this region, so it is not your territory. It shouldn't even be disputed, because Southeast European people live there.

Balkan and Anatolian Turks share the same Turkic heritage, language and culture (depending on place) and are not perceived as two different ethnic groups (same applies to Tatars, Azeris and others). Also, a small portion of modern Turkey is in Balkans and many Western Turks have partial Balkan Turkish ancestry, so yeah, it's their concern.

And they are not 3/4 "Bulgarian" or "Greeks", they are native Thracian with additional Turkic input.

[itilvolga]

Caring about regions of other countries, that were for long time only occupied by your nation is not normal. Balkan Turks are other ethnic group, because they are genetically 3/4 Bulgarians, Greeks , while you from Anatolia have nothing common even genetically with this region, so it is not your territory. It shouldn't even be disputed, because Southeast European people live there.

That's the definition of ethnic group: "A group of people who share a similar culture (beliefs, values, and behaviors), language, religion, ancestry, or other characteristic that is often handed down from one generation to the next." So how come Balkan Turks are another ethnic group? Most of today's SE European people aren't autochthonous in the region either. Turks have lived in the region for centuries, and are still there. Like it or not.

[reboun]

while you from Anatolia have nothing common even genetically with this region

All human beings are at least 99.9% similar genetically but that is another story. Being Turkish is much more than genetics. We share a common culture and common values, which are far more important than what someone's GEDmatch results would say.

[Charlemagne7]

LMAO at slavs saying WWII.

[Token]

Had Germany won WW1 and we would have no modern cuck Europe and Hitler would have never existed, a win-win situation.

[Centurion]

WW2 of course. Hitler should have won the war and the whole world would be a better place today. These books have changed my vision about that man and about WW2.



Interestingly, these two authors are not German or French but Belgian Walloon.

Wouldnt even have needed a lot of change. If Hitler had approved of jet turbines earlier, focused more on submarines instead of the Bismarck and would have put Rommel in command of the fighting forces instead of just wasting him in Africa it would have been a lot different.

The responsible of the defeat are more:

_Franco. If he had supported Hitler to occupy Gibraltar the Allies would have lost a decisive strategic advantage. Franco owed his power to Hitler as he could have never won the War of Spain without his support. What a way to show his gratitude. Not surprising though, if we consider the fact that Franco, like the Spaniard monarchy, is under the cut of the Opus Dei, a "Catholic" branch of globalism and free-masonry.

_Mussolini. Hitler was a military genius way ahead of his time and one of the greatest conqueror of History. But Mussolini was terrible and Italy has been ridiculous and pathetic all along the WW2. His vain attempt to invade Albania forced Hitler to divert a significant number of his forces to save his ally's ass. And delay the Barbarossa operation of 6 weeks. These 6 crucial weeks were a strategic loss that could never be compensated later. It also gave an opportunity to the British to land in the South East of Europe, this will be a strategic advantage for the Allies later.

_General Von Paulus. That feeble bureaucratic man with no real capacity of decision and assertiveness is the main responsible of the defeat of Stalingrad. He clearly didn't have the shoulders for this.

_Saboteurs and traitors. They were in considerable numbers and infiltrate numerously even in the highest ranks of the hierarchy and structure of the Reich. As they never was in Germany the equivalent of the Great Purges of USSR.

The sabotage of the weapon manufacturing was such that the the army Hitler could sent for the Barbarossa operation was considerably weaker than what was initially planned. Later during the war the manufacturing capacity would have been improved greatly to become as productive than what was initially planned, and even more. But it was too late. Léon Degrelle explains this very well in Hitler pour 1000 ans.

The book Hitler contre Judas develop over dozens of pages about all the traitors infiltrated in the Reich. One of the most notable is the admiral Canaris, a jew who was in contact with Churchill all along the war, always giving him crucial information in order to ruin the advantages of the German armies.

Another notable effect of theses treason is the landing of Normandy. The books explains thoroughly and in details how the alert process have been sabotaged at the D-Day, with the personal implications of many officers and generals including Rommel. Hitler had the intuition that the landing of the Allies's army would have been in Normandy and was prepared for this. He was completely awake when it started, as he was always awake all along the night, only sleeping a few hours during the morning. If the alert process had not been sabotaged, Hitler could have reacted immediately and the landing of Normandy could never have been achieved.

Also, the Hitler's generals and high officers were often arrogant bureaucrats, old-fashioned in their thinking and jealous of Hitler. They were still stuck in WW1 at best and couldn't understand how the art of war needed to be reformed for WW2. If Hitler had listened to them instead of his own judgement, the widespread extension of conquest of the 3rd Reich would have never happened. They could not suffer to be directed by a "little corporal" and often disobeyed his orders or were sluggish and without strong-will, weakening the effort of war. Also, many of them were bourgeois who disliked Hitler's socialism, mornarchists who were still hoping the return of the kaiser, pederast who knew that they could not practice their vices as freely if Hitler won, globalists who actually had more sympathy for the Allies and so on. They all betrayed Hitler and collaborated with the Allies during the war.

Even Hitler's personal doctor was an infiltrate, the Jewish Dr Morell, who poisoned him without him knowing with Glucose 4 injections, thus weakening his health.

Those are just examples among many others, the detrimental role played by Japan could also be discussed. And so many other things. Without all these sabotages, treason and failures from his so-called allies and collaborators, Hitler would certainly had won the war.

[reboun]

It is very shocking, in a negative way, that there are people who believe the World would be a better place if Nazis had won.

[Abriekman]

Balkan and Anatolian Turks share the same Turkic heritage, language and culture (depending on place) and are not perceived as two different ethnic groups (same applies to Tatars, Azeris and others). Also, a small portion of modern Turkey is in Balkans and many Western Turks have partial Balkan Turkish ancestry, so yeah, it's their concern.

And they are not 3/4 "Bulgarian" or "Greeks", they are native Thracian with additional Turkic input.

It does not mean anything, they are minority in Balkans and genetically Balkan, they are not the same as Anatolian Turks. And yes they are actually about 3/4 Bulgarian, Greek ( makes them 1/4 Slavic).

Eurogenes K13

Target: Turk_Deliorman
Distance: 2.1877% / 2.18765556 | R2P
80.8 Bulgaria_Northcentral
19.2 Turkmen_Uzbekistan

Target: Turk_Makedonya
Distance: 1.1713% / 1.17131329 | R3P
57.7 Greek_Thessaly
33.5 Greek_Istanbul
8.8 Chuvash


You seem to not read previous comments, as you do not know what we are talking about. I am not proving Balkan Turks and Anatolian Turks have different cultures lol

[Altaylı]

It is very shocking, in a negative way, that there are people who believe the World would be a better place if Nazis had won.

Welcome to TA many members wannabe german slave here