BOOK REVIEW
Hoffman tells people not what they want to hear, but what the undeniable facts of history shout from the housetops
By Dr. Patrick Flanagan
Michael Hoffman has written a new book entitled Adolf Hitler: Enemy of the German People. By writing it he freely admits he is tilting his lance at the fortress of the pro-Hitlerite establishment of which there is a cheerleading sect in the movement of historical revisionism that thinks the official and received historiographical narrative written by the Allied victors needs a tuning up. And they have a done a good job in resurrecting and rehabilitating Hitler’s historical baggage so that he is beginning to look like the Lord of Lords and King of Kings.
When Hoffman first began to publish some of the more sinister suppressed details of Hitler’s political life (starting in 2015 with his Revisionist History® newsletter No. 80 on the political assassination of Gregor Strasser), he understood some people were not going to like him for this. He wasn’t wrong. In the aftermath, when the hate mail began to subside, much to his dismay he found out he was going to lose out big time on major contributions. The age-old adage that the truth hurts came home to roost on Hoffman’s Revisionist History website in a way that caused him to lose about 20% of his income. Ouch!
On his website is this quote, “Revisionist history consists in the art of discerning fraud and the courage to publicly strip illusion, even when the whole world is clamoring violently for it.” A self-fulfilling prophecy, what? But Hoffman tells people not what they want to hear but what the undeniable facts of history shout from the housetops. And it costs him. Needless to say, by publishing this book he will again have to suit up for battle, in effect to put on the armor of God and draping himself in the mettle of his deceased foxhole friend Canadian attorney Doug Christie who when fighting battles against the world was wont to quote from Ephesians 6:12, “For our wrestling is not against flesh and blood; but against principalities and powers, against the rulers of the world of this darkness, against the spirits of wickedness in the high places.” May God rest his soul — a great warrior for truth and goodness. Hoffman knew him well.
Well, the title of his book should have come with a monitum: Hitlerphile historical revisionists beware: the book you are about to read may cause mental and physical upset.
So who is John Galt? Oops! Sorry Ayn, wrong book. So who is Dietrich Eckart? Here is a name that is going to become better known. Until I read Hoffman’s newsletter No. 97 (June/July 2018) that name did not mean much to me. In 2011 I read Mein Kampf for the first time, and I could not remember this name. So after beginning to read Hoffman’s book, I looked him up in the Encyclopedia Britannica (1990 ed.) and could not find him either by his name alone or under Hitler’s.
But in the present book under review Herr Eckart figures prominently in young Adolf’s psychical, political and philosophical formation even going so far as to say that there was indeed a mystical/magical influence conferred by Eckart to Adolf, which in later years inculcated a megalomaniacal ubermensch type of mindset that is subtly intuited in Hitler later in life, if the historian is perceptive enough, and objective enough, to detect it. And those who do study these little known facts, like Hoffman, came to conclude that Hitler was about the worst thing that could happen to the German nation. This is borne out today in what remains of what was once an advanced leader of Christian civilization now in ruins both materially and formally.
In Mein Kampf at the end of volume II, Hitler mentions Eckart as somebody he really looked up to—sort of a mentor. (The translator of my copy footnoted that Eckart was a drinker and seemed to die from alcoholic disease in 1923.) Eckart and some others were the spiritual founders of the National Socialist party. The party took its roots from the Thule Society composed of intellectual elites from German society holding up the Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion as a sort of secret Jewish production that exposed the Jewish nation’s plans for world hegemony. Later some experts showed that the author was actually not a Jew but a high ranking White Russian expatriate formerly in the service of Czar Nicholas II. Hitler became enamored of this document; thus, his public animus toward Jewish people.
For some reason Hitler and the Thule Society never picked up on Johannes Eisenmenger’s Entdecktes Judenthum ("Judaism Discovered") a scholarly magnum opus from 1700 that explained Judaic psychology on the basis of the Babylonian Talmud, which glorifies the Jewish people as humans and everyone else as humanoid simulacra without rational souls. In other words—beasts of burden not subject to legal rights.
Some of the Thule Society’s belief system is a derivative from Western secret societies which, if not directly involved with Satanic worship, are leaning toward it. Following his exploits in World War I, Hitler linked up with these folks and became politically energized. Anyone who didn’t like it had to go.
This brings us to Hoffman’s account of Gregor Strasser. He was raised in a conservative Catholic family and went on to become a pharmacist as his vocation. But he had a keen interest in economics, modern finances and a hatred for speculative business practices that put filthy Mammon ahead of agriculture, the industrial arts and just plain hard work which in his estimation suborned the virtues of European culture. With his natural penchant for oratory and inborn leadership qualities, he became a very successful figure in German politics during the Weimar administration. His anti-usury platform was especially quite appealing to Hitler’s followers and consequently Hitler incorporated Strasser and Gottfried Feder's advocacy of making Germany free of usurious banking practices that controlled the economy. This platform made him the popular frontrunner of the election in which he was elected Chancellor. And that is where the honeymoon ended.
Hitler and Strasser had a falling out after he Adolf got into office. By then, Hitler needed mmoney to create his quasi-Great Society. Eschewing the Jewish banking consortium, he was befriended by the non-Jewish banking cartel in Germany who bankrolled Hitler’s plans for German expansion into Poland. Of course, this would mean a huge war; and, as we know, the bankers absolutely love wars because they loan out money at compound interest and get ever more filthy rich, along with their depositors in the armaments industry who make the war machines, guns and ammunition. Meanwhile the brown bag schleppers go into debt. Thereafter, Strasser became a political threat — a witness to Hitler’s treachery — hence, without even so much as a show trial, Hitler had him shot, along with dozens of other political rivals during the Night of the Long Knives in 1934. The way it happened was that Strasser was actually having lunch at his house with his wife and two kids when the SS came and arrested him. They took him to a local jail and shot him right there. To add insult to injury, they cremated his body (against Catholic canonical law) and told his wife she could pick up his ashes for a fee.
In Mein Kampf Hitler brings up the term lebensraum (living space) multiple times ostensibly meaning that Germany needed to expand its borders to hold its ever expanding population. (This was a bad joke because a massive chunk of Germany’s reproductive DNA content was sacrificed on the bloody fields of Europe not even 10 years before he was writing this treacle.) He had got into his head the idea to take over Russia, which by then was Judeo-Bolshevist. He needed the lebensraum and he desperately needed Russia’s oil and raw materials.
Napoleon had tried and failed in Russia, but somehow Hitler, now a product of Eckart’s expansionist mind control where all you have to do is click your heels and get back to Kansas, Hitler is going to take over Soviet Russia. Not only is he going to take it over and crush Stalin’s war machine, but he is going to do it in only three months! This kind of nightmarish thinking should have got his general war staff to put him in the loony bin, but they too were infected with his delirium.
In June 1941 he launched Operation Barbarossa initially making great tactical inroads with his blietzkrieg method of war. Unfortunately, and right after the good news started rolling out of the Ministry of Truth of Dr. Goebbels, the macabre results of this onslaught tallied up to 180,000 German dead by the end of only three months, a number exceeding the total number of Americans killed in a one year of combat in the First World War, 1917-1918. Hello? And they had not got to Moscow yet with cold weather appearing.
When winter came the troops had no proper winter clothing, war industrial production having been unilaterally and prematurely diverted by Hitler’s orders to naval and air force purposes. At a public forum Hitler proudly declared that the Soviet campaign was already a done deal and he was basically just waiting for the final word from the Eastern front. It never came and actually the troops had to be supplied by stealing clothing from Norwegians (more ex-friends) and shipping them to the front because supply centers on the home front (under orders from Oberkommando Wehrmach) had not been informed of winter requirements. These delusional pie-in-the-sky predictions had to be gigantic epiphany for the big shot brass. But nobody saw the elephant in the room. People like General Keitel could unashamedly defend his Führer who, according to his way of not seeing things, seemed to know everything in advance before it even happened.
Back in the day Roman orators liked to bring up the question, “Cui bono?” ("For whose good?"), when a proposal was moved for the procurement of anything for the support of the empire. A few calamities that did happen to the Germans, and not for their good, were: the incineration of about 60% of the major population centers by the strategic carpet bombing campaign of the Allies (Hitler never visited these cratered areas); the compulsory sterilization of “inferior quality” girls to the tune of 300,000 by 1945; the euthanasia of the weak-minded and physically infirm (beginning in 1939 230,000 souls carried off before it was stopped by a public sermon given by the Catholic Bishop of Munster Count Clemens August von Galen August 3, 1941); and the horrible rape, pillage and plunder of the remnants of the German volk left undefended in the maelstrom of the lustful bloodthirsty savagery of the vengeance-seeking Red Army pouring in from the East at the end. That is a short list. Without going any further, there is much to admit that the actions of one man brought so much death and destruction that it is virtually impossible to regard him worthy of a friendly historical honorable mention.
I liked Adolf Hitler: Enemy of the German People. Without a doubt Hoffman does little more than bring up basic salient facts, supported by citations, which after 74 years a point can be logically, historiographically and syllogistically concluded that there was something in Hitler’s mind that would have told a wiser man that, for instance, taking on Soviet Russia was the mark of a mad man. As the Bard would have it, wisdom cries out in the streets and no man hears it. He could not expect to win in three months. The average house wife could have known that. History is replete with the carnage and carcasses of the invading armies of truly great military minds who thought they could do it. What made Corporal Hitler think he was better than Napoleon? In Mein Kampf he makes the remark that for Germany to expand its borders to the east, one million men by his estimates would be lost. Flatly he tossed it off as some type of noble sacrifice. What mother hearing that would not look at her fair-haired little boy and like to think of him killed on the field of battle as a sacrifice? In her eyes Mr. Hitler would not be invited over for dinner ever. Go to the devil, that one.
The book is an easy read, and the author has organized it in the order of real time except for the items on Eckart as they happen at the front and back ends of the book. But they eventually gibe with each other well explaining Eckart’s influence at the beginning and carrying on in to the type of l’enfant terrible that Hitler had morphed into. From the remote armchair perspective of a psychiatrist or clinical psychologist, (and I am a urologist whose subject matter is south of the beltline), Hitler does not meet the definition of a schizophrenic because he never evinced hallucinogogic behavior. Yet he was afflicted with classical delusions of grandeur which does put him in the category of schizoid personality. (Lots of folks think they are bigger and more important than what they are. They run for political office.) His main problem, from the philosophical perspective, is that he started out from the wrong major premise which was There is no God but it is good for the people to pray to me. So, Heil Hitler, ya’ll! And then, from my teeny perspective, he seemed to distill a type of Kantian subjectivism into something like this: the world is what you make it. Well, no, the world is what it is and we can’t change our sex, race and hair color no matter the diktats of the cryptocracy.
One thing the book lacks is an index. But perhaps he ran out of money. Further, much of the material in his book has been extracted in liberal quantities from four of his previous newsletters that have been carefully included in the new format giving the subject matter a bigger and more credible effect.
Until this book came along, David Irving’s magnum opus Hitler’s War pretty much had the last say on Hitler. But Irving never did really come out and state unequivocally, at least as far as I can remember, that Hitler was the reason the German people today are at the bottom of the national pecking order. Quite often when Hollywood wants to create a villain, he tends to be a former Nazi. The news coming out of the Zionist controlled mediocracy cannot say enough unjust things about the German people, especially when some German gets uppity and resists giving their money to the Israelis for reparations, especially since the people living there today were not even adults during the Reich years.
Lastly, it is hoped that those folks who read the history of the second war with a penchant toward the revisionist side will not get up in arms at this new material which Hoffman lays out for the reading public’s serious consideration. Hitler never started out this way, but as he grew up he ran into some very intellectual and influential people who steered him into a way of thinking that was not objectively reality oriented. And he tended to want to place the blame on the Jews when there was so much more culpability to be laid on the British and French whose geopolitical and imperialistic hopes to crush Germany were more to blame for Germany’s woeful position after the first war than the Big Jews. As it turned out World War I was fought to get Palestine for the Zionists and World War II was fought so the Zionists could conquer Palestine. Q.E.D.
Now let’s all of us wait and see if Mr. David Irving would like to add his two cents.
PATRICK FLANAGAN, M.D.
Dr. Flanagan is a veteran of the U.S. Marine Corps.
Dr. Flanagan is a veteran of the U.S. Marine Corps.
For further reading
Adolf Hitler: Enemy of the German People
Order from Amazon or here
___________
Posts
11 comments:
Flanagan's long and tedious diverging dissertation proves nothing other than he, along with Hoffman, blames Hitler for a war that was imposed on him by Judea's proxies, a war he knew Germany was not ready for and was neither prepared to fight and could not possibly have won.
Hitler had to choice but to unleash Barbarossa, since he intuited that Stalin was about to unleash a massive attack on July 6 on Germany, under the code name 'Operation Thunder'.
"The Nazi command succeeded in forestalling our troops literally two weeks before the war began. (General S.P. Ivanov, Chief of the General Staff Academy of the Armed Forces of the USSR, 1974.
In his new book 'The Day M' (Klett-Cotta, 1995), Victor Suvorov writes about the consequences of August 19: "It was a secret mobilization. The Soviet leadership readied the Red Army and the entire nation for the conquest of Germany and all of Western Europe. Stalin took the final decision to start the war on August 19, 1939".(Staatsbriefe, Wolfgang Strauss: Der Zweite Weltkrieg begann am 19 August 1939.
Hitler's purpose in attacking the Soviet Union derived from a concrete situation. In June 1941, the Soviets annexed Bessarabia and North Bukovina. They were thus threatening near the Romanian oil wells, from which Germany, to a great extent was supplied.
At the time, 6 German divisions, on the border between Poland and the Soviet Union, faced 170 Russian divisions. Hitler reacted. In July 1940, he gave instructions for the first time to the Overkommando der Wehrmacht, to explore the possibility of an attack on the Soviet Union. (Simultaneously, Stalin in Moscow gave the same instructions for an attack against Germany.
Cognitive dissonance: (arriving at a different conclusion from the very same set of facts) is motivated by personal sympathies or subjective dislikes and from a particular Weltanschauung alignment.
For me, Germany and Hitler were the non-guilty victims of an aggression orchestrated by a group of nations controlled by international Jewry.
Like the Talmudists, the Hitlerites won’t study that which contradicts their dogma. They mindlessly parrot the party line, “Stalin was about to invade Germany.”
Even if that disputed claim were true, it in no way vitiates the thesis of my book, but to understand that fact, the Hitler cultists would actually have to THINK. You’d be surprised what a tall order that is for many of them.
Adolf Hitler, in the words of his combat officer Kurt Meyer, was “the gambler at the map table.” He gambled that his ill-prepared, under-armed, poorly supplied military would conquer the vast space known as Russia in three months! When that suicidally lunatic notion did not materialize by September, 1941, he insisted Moscow would fall by December. There was never a snowball’s chance in you-know-where of that happening. It was such a fantastic misreading of what Hitler ignorantly derided as the “Asiatic hordes” of the Soviet Union, that one looks for an answer in the occult training he received, and the drugs he was ingesting, to fathom how any leader could be so grotesquely reckless and incompetent.
Even if the hypothesis that Stalin was going to imminently attempt to sustain a projection of an enormous military invasion force across the vast Soviet territory between Moscow and the German border, were indeed correct, a wise German leader would have done to Stalin’s forces what Stalin did to Hitler’s—allow the wobbly supply lines, the incredible distances, the non-existent roads, the Russian winter, and the insurmountable difficulties for quartermaster generals of supplying an army, to defeat the Reds, spearheaded by a German soldiery and Luftwaffe fighting close to their supplies and transport.
The argument that seeks to exculpate Hitler of his mass suicide “Operation Barbarossa” rests upon the claim that he was compelled by circumstances to wage an offensive war against a presumptive attack by the USSR, and that such a war was the only war he could have waged under the circumstances. This contention violates every principle of military strategy. The fact is, had he a Carl Von Clausewitz on his staff, he would have been informed that the German military, fighting a two-front war already (in western Europe and Britain, and in Africa), could not overcome the Soviet empire over the distances involved.
Though the Germans killed vast numbers of Russians in 1941, vast numbers were available for replacement, whereas the German “Ostheer” that invaded Russia and suffered 180,000 killed just in the first three months, and kept losing ever more in the months ahead, had very few replacements. By January 1942 that army would never be seen again. Only an ever-dwindling ghost of itself would be available.
In my book I quote the sources that show that Hitler’s generals who were in charge of supplying the Ostheer, stated to him by the end of 1941, that the army could no longer be adequately supplied, the war was lost, and all that was left was a holding action awaiting the potential development of the super weapons. This Masada-like catastrophe had occurred six months after Hitler ordered the invasion!
Stalin had amassed a huge army behind Germany's frontier line. The trains were arriving fully packed with war machines, equipment, and men. Had Hitler slept in his laurels and done nothing, not having taken the initiative to attack (the best defense), the Red Army would have overrun the Wehrmacht and advance deep into the German heartland. The material destruction and the killing of soldiers and civilians would have been enormous and the prospect of bringing the war action inside Germany was something Hitler would want to spare the Fatherland.
The Red Army had more of everything to inflict an early and devastating defeat on unprepared Germany and the war with Germany would have ended in 1941. The Soviet army would not have stopped there but would certainly have advanced into the Iberian Peninsula.
Germany, a small country compared with Russia, faced with the prospect of a Soviet invasion, did not have the luxury Stalin had when Barbarossa was launched: to retreat and run indefinitely into the emptiness and vastness of Russia's outback. Therefore, Germany's surrender would have occurred rather quickly and certainly only after huge human loses, taking into account the desperate and heroic resistance and defense the German people would, no doubt, have had to put up.
Faced with a certain Soviet invasion and with the prospect of, by inaction, bringing the war action into the German Fatherland and risking a quick defeat because of Germany's lack of preparedness, Hitler had no other option but to attack and bid for time (time = hope) and "gamble" his chances against all odds, because a second front was being forced on him.
If we are to put blame on Hitler it would be to have too soon put Judea into the spotlight as the Nº1 enemy of humankind and unleash all the power, the hatred and revenge of Judea on him and on Germany by extension. This sealed Germany's fate and defeat, until the present age. This war is still raging on, and we can bet that a man like Putin well knows who the enemy is, but the man is cunning enough not to identify it and disclose this publicly.
Hitler's defeat paved the way for the 'New World Order', for the 'One World Government' and for the 'One World Religion' projects.
The problem with your argument is the string of faulty suppositions you must mount to conceal Hitler's suicidal “march to Moscow." Defending a dogma makes for poor historical argument because facts must be dismissed to protect Hitler’s god-like status.
You wrote: “Had Hitler slept in his laurels and done nothing, not having taken the initiative to attack (the best defense), the Red Army would have overrun the Wehrmacht and advance deep into the German heartland. The Red Army would have overrun the Wehrmacht and advance deep into the German heartland. The material destruction and the killing of soldiers and civilians would have been enormous and the prospect of bringing the war action inside Germany was something Hitler would want to spare the Fatherland” (end quote).
These are the dreams the Hitler pleaders and panegyrists put forth to protect their god from criticism.
The notion that in order to defeat the allegedly imminent Russian invasion of Germany, Hitler was compelled to establish as his objective the grandiose conquest of the nation of Russia by the autumn of 1941, is a non-sequitur.
One can take the “initiative to attack” the supposed invasion force, without establishing as one’s goal, the conquest of Moscow by autumn, and when that hallucination was not realized, by December.
A Russian invasion of Germany in 1941 or early 1942 would have meant the crushing of the Russian invasion force for two primary reasons. 1. Like Hitler, Stalin had not the resources to sustain an army of millions across the distances involved. There is no evidence that such an overextended force could have maintained the vehicles, spare parts food, ammunition and personnel which would have been needed to conquer Germany.
2. You forget that the Red Army in 1941-42 was basically a mob of riflemen, except when constantly supported by heavy artillery and tank corps. The Red Army battered the Ostheer to death on the Eastern Front due to an abundance of supplies and manpower which the Germans lacked.
What do you know of the Red Army in this time period? It seems that you do not know that your supposed invincible Russian invasion force headed for the German border would be no match for the German army and air force fighting near their supply lines. On the ground, German army tactics embodied in the concept of the “Auftragstaktik” initiative, by which German officers exhibited justly renowned operational and tactical expertise in front-line combat, would have largely destroyed an overextended Red Army on German territory, in 1941 or early 1942.
Your concluding paragraph makes no sense. “Judea” benefited enormously from Hitler’s rule, first, by his suppression of the hugely popular (unprecedented in modern history), national German movement led by Gregor Strasser and Gottfried Feder to wipe out the Money Power through the abolition of ALL usury — including that of the non-Judaic German usury banks which Hitler traitorously embraced after 1934. Second, by the solicitude he gained for the Zionist masterplan of ruling Palestine. Without Hitler there would have been little sympathy for the dispossession of the Palestinians and the creation of the Israeli state. He is the real founder of so-called “Israel."
When Hitler’s invasion of Russia went from the blitzkrieg phase, which ended three months after he attacked Russia, to a war of attrition dependent on maintaining combat through access to distant raw materials and enormous stocks of fuel, food, spare parts, ammunition, transport and replacements for tanks and artillery, the Ostheer was doomed; a fact which was conveyed to Hitler by his quartermasters in 1941. And you’re telling me that Hitler’s decision to try to take Russia in three months, and then when that failed, in another three months, was a brilliant move on his part? It was another Masada, only in Nordic terms: Götterdämmerung.
All this and more is in my book, which perhaps you might trouble to read some time.
Dear Mr. Hoffman, I'm not trying to tell you that
"Hitler’s decision to try to take Russia in three months, and then when that failed, in another three months, was a brilliant move on his part",
and neither I'm saying that
"…in order to defeat the allegedly imminent Russian invasion of Germany, Hitler was compelled to establish as his objective the...conquest of the nation of Russia by the autumn of 1941", and I do not know if Hitler indulged in such grandiose wishful thinking.
What I did say was that Hitler, reluctantly, was compelled to attack against all odds and to open an unsustained second front, to prevent a Soviet invasion of Germany.
You suppose and speculate that a "Russian invasion force headed for the German border would be no match for the German army and air force fighting near their supply lines". Maybe yes, maybe not, but in the long run, I do think that the Red Army would have prevailed and German loses in German land would have been unbearable and that Hitler would rather have attacked than allow Stalin to bring war home.
You are right in stating that "When Hitler’s invasion of Russia went from the blitzkrieg phase...to a war of attrition...the Ostheer was doomed. But what could Hitler have done when reaching this point, bring the army back home? Easier said than done; once an attack is launched it's very hard to stop it and immediate greater loses may be the outcome and this was the fate of 'La Grande Armée' de Napoleon when in winter it retreated from the outskirts of Moscow.
I am neither trying to tell you "that Hitler’s decision to try to take Russia in three months, and then when that failed, in another three months, was a brilliant move on his part".
Please, Mr. Hoffman c'mon, aren't you exaggerating a bit when saying that Hitler "is the real founder of so-called Israel"? I totally agree that both Nazism and Zionism _although for different reasons_, both had the goal to relocate Jews to a national homeland, being Palestine, back then, a suitable destination. For what Hitler war concerned I bet that even Idaho would have been a good place, had the Jews chosen it.
You wrote:
"I’m not trying to tell you that 'Hitler’s decision to try to take Russia in three months, and then when that failed, in another three months, was a brilliant move on his part,' and neither I’m saying that '…in order to defeat the allegedly imminent Russian invasion of Germany, Hitler was compelled to establish as his objective the...conquest of the nation of Russia by the autumn of 1941,' and I do not know if Hitler indulged in such grandiose wishful thinking” (end quote).
Well, if you don’t know these FACTS OF THE DOCUMENTARY RECORD, how can you defend Hitler from the truth that he committed the Ostheer to mass suicide by invading Russia?
You wrote that had Hitler not sent the German army to conquer Moscow — quote — "I do think that the Red Army would have prevailed and German loses in German land would have been unbearable.”
Sir, as a result of Hitler’s delusional, reckless gamble on conquering Russia in a matter of months, the Red Army did prevail and the “German losses in German land” were indeed “unbearable" in 1945.
You wrote that had Hitler not sent the German army to conquer Moscow — quote — "I do think that the Red Army would have prevailed and German loses in German land would have been unbearable.”
To Baregil: In fact, Hitler split and diverted his own armed forces from the "Operation Typhoon" attempt to take Moscow to ANOTHER charnel house, Stalingrad, and to waste time and effort in the siege of Leningrad. Hitler's lunacy gave time for the Soviets to prepare their defenses and for "General Winter" to slow and halt the Axis forces.
"Sir, as a result of Hitler’s delusional, reckless gamble on conquering Russia in a matter of months, the Red Army did prevail and the “German losses in German land” were indeed “unbearable" in 1945."
To Baregil: In 1941, a German military that had not been attritted attempting to consolidate the vast territory of the European portion of the USSR would have been able to fight a defensive war from Poland, Austria and East Prussia, using its air power to "neutralize" any Soviet troop concentrations. The European USSR is 3,960,000 km². The Hitler Regime was unable to defeat Great Britain, whose territory is 209,331 km2. The Soviets suffered nearly four hundred thousand casualties in Karelia from December 1939 to mid-March 1940. The size of Karelia is half the area of present day Germany (minus East Prussia.) After the war with Finland, the Soviets were in no shape to take on a Wehrmacht and Waffen SS which were on or close to their own territory and supply centers.
Both B de G and Hoffman's assertions are correct, they appear to be in opposition only on account of differing perspectives.
Two pertinent facts; Germany was financed just sufficiently to engage in rearmament and a bit of muscle-flexing, but the Soviet Union was being built during the 1920 and 30s into a potential economic superpower, both thanks to the "money power". Read professor Anthony Sutton and Douglas Reed's books.
This is an excellent review and will envigorate it as a fantastic Christmas gift.
My quote: "In fact, Hitler split and diverted his own armed forces from the "Operation Typhoon" attempt to take Moscow to ANOTHER charnel house, Stalingrad,..."
Of course, the attempted occupation of Stalingrad did not begin until August 1942, in an attempt to sever the Volga River and cut northern Russia off from lend-lease supplies via the Caspian Sea, and foreshadowing a plan to capture energy-rich Azerbaijan. Again, Hitler, who by this time had arrogated to himself command of the German armed forces, was, with his occult influenced "magical thinking", and perhaps the drugs he was on, overconfident, and underestimated the strength of Soviet reserves. Hitler's (and Stalin's) unchallenged dictatorship should make us vigilant against any attempt by American politicians to arrogate unauthorized power to themselves, no matter how seemingly good the reason.
The losses in World War II are staggering beyond belief. Thank God nothing on this scale is happening today. I am not a war buff. But it is important to put paid to the delusions of the Hitler cultists. For this I thank Michael Hoffman. Pray for peace!
As a Moscow native who was never in the battle zone, I simply want to express my thanks to Mr. Hoffman, Mr. Gomcesval and Mr. Masters for the enlightening and truth-oriented back-and-forth! What a pleasure to read, seeking to reach answers through critical thinking, rather than the the ad hominem attacks this topic usually generates. I have been exposed to some of the thinking for Greg Hallett and his "Hitler was a British Agent" material, which I am quite undecided about, but there are aspects that make sense, and the outcomes that Hitler caused to occur were certainly disastrous for the German people, which is essentially the view of Hitler that Paul Rassinier seems to have adopted.
Certainly there are data points on both sides, i.e., first, the idea that Hitler was a very skilled actor and orator, perhaps Tavistock trained, whose entire purpose was to lead the German people down the path of destruction, as a planted Zionist agent.
Or, second, the idea that Hitler was simply egomaniacal and delusional about what could be accomplished with the resources available to him.
It does seem to me that Hitler had little choice but to take the battle to Stalin, but everything after that initial blitzkrieg was foolishness and ignoring the advice of his military men. I had not read before about the Nazis trying to cut off the Lend-Lease equipment shipping port; that would have been a sensible thing to do.
I think I shall get Mr. Hoffman's book as a Christmas present to myself and my girlfriend. Somehow I had the incorrect idea Mr. Hoffman had been "suicided", so I am very glad to hear those rumors have been greatly exaggerated.
Our woeful educational system feeds us useless propaganda, and directs us away from critical thinking and analysis. I am not an academician in these matters, simply endlessly fascinated. Most recently the Tambov Rebellion has caught my attention. I don't know if Mr. Hoffman has ever written on that topic, but if he had, I would certainly be interested to read his thoughts and analysis.
Idaho Kulak
(Yes, I truly am from Moscow, and, as the signs say, Idaho is too great to litter)
Post a Comment