Not sure what the deal is with tennis balls, raquet balls hurt a whole lot more!

  • the_crotch@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    5 months ago

    Everyone in Hitler’s orbit was just as hateful as he was. But in many cases, they were smarter and less insane. Killing Hitler could have easily made WW2 a lot worse for everyone. What if you assassinated Hitler only to cause the Nazis to win?

    • rottingleaf@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      Yep, but they weren’t going to win globally, though locally we’d likely have some of the following, depending on the point in time where the assassination happens:

      1. German version of Hirohito, only it wasn’t a monarchy, so likely the new dear leader would be a figurehead in a western puppet government, kinda similar to how it really happened, but without apologies, without reparations, without big trials and with formal and aesthetic preservation of the German Empire, and of course they’d be known for nice cartoons, cool language and really weird engineering (OK, this part happened irl, so nvm) ;

      2. German version of Atatürk, with his NSDAP 2.0 rebranded (same as with Kemalists being slightly rebranded Young Turks), which is totally not NSDAP, and lots of stupid people would praise them for fixing the mistakes of previous incompetent and criminal leaders (including Holocaust, which was committed by a totally different party and totally different state, but still didn’t happen, and if it happened, then they deserved it, and we’ll do it again), ah, and of course the German Empire keeping Silesia, East Prussia, northern Schleswig and maybe even Austria, and continuing analogies, I’d expect Sudetes and Danzig and whatever too ;

      3. Something similar to the “Fatherland” movie, not in the sense of Nazis winning, but in the sense of society and, again, crimes against humanity ;

      4. Some peace without WWII starting or around early 1942, highly improbable seeing how eager they were to do it all, but - then maybe a very slow Mexican duel of a Cold War.

    • FuglyDuck@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      Ww2 would have ended very differently if, instead of invading Siberia/russia, they had instead elected to invade the Middle East.

      The impetus, ostensibly, was to seize oil fields. The reality was that Hitler absolutely despised Stalin, so he broke the non aggression treaty. It was largely inevitable- Stalin hated him just as much as Hitler.

      But, the problem was in terms of production of war material- specifically, fuel, oil, and rubber. They could have steam rolled most of the states in the Middle East with relative ease- they were largely armed with pre-WW1 castoffs.

      (Now, keeping it would have been expensive, but that’s a different matter.)