For those who are interested: For this video I used the German transcript of this speech, which was printed in the book “Der verweigerte Friede - Deutschlands Parlamentär Rudolf Hess muss schweigen” by Alfred Seidl (Hess's lawyer). Universitas Verlag München, 2nd edition from 1985. Interesting book, by the way; I would recommend it. I'm pretty sure there is an English translation of the book. Please reply to this comment here if you notice any translation errors or general mistakes in the subtitles. Thank you. EDIT: Correction: 1:30 German: " Ich stelle fest, dass Sie sich zu Ehren unserer toten Kameraden erhoben haben." English: "I note that you have risen in honor of our dead comrades."
Thanks for uploading. The extraordinary thing about these old speeches is that they are spoken freely for 1-2 hours without a teleprompter and without filler sounds like hmm or mm or uh. When you see how weak many speeches are today, even though every word is read out, it's very noticeable how much the ability to speak has deteriorated.
turns out "strong" speeches with minimal filler sounds aren't what make a strong, competent leader. Strong speeches are how you seize absolute power, but also how you drive a civilization into the abyss. It would be nice if liberal leaders gave strong sweeping speeches that swell the people with emotion, but that isn't the limiting factor for genuinely good leadership.
Hitler was - unfortunately - extremely charismatic and held speeches that could manipulate and mobilise the masses. But besides this, he certainly used papers (as you can see even in this picture if you look closely), lies and every other technique, any dictator and autocratic potentate has ever and will ever use.
@@MagnusMaximusIII You are speaking as if liberal leadership ISN'T driving all of our countries into a deep abyss And that leadership from the past was in fact very efficient, and if it wasn't for the war, the nation would prosper
🤣🤣🤣 Are you serious? They already had pen and paper back then. That Hitler (check Alice Wiedel notes: communist-guy) doesn't speak freely, he has a manuscript. The only extraordinary thing here is your naivety.
In a globalized world, an attack on the trade partners of someone is an attack on that someone. If we lived in an endless world with an unlimited number of exchangeable trade partners this wouldn't be the case. While the U.S. joining WW1 was rather coincidental and happened out of fear that the Entente won't honour their U.S. debts if they lose WW1, the U.S. joining WW2 wasn't coincidental: the U.S. was lacking strategic materials like tin and rubber and letting Japan and Germany have their way would have led to the prospect facing two hostile superpowers controling two of the three major concentrations of industry on this planet.
@@fars8229 Utter bullshit revisionism. It was Japan who lacked OIL and attacked the Dutch Indies because of it, and it was Japan who attacked the US, regardless of this situation. Plus, in regard of rubber there were other producing countries in South-America and synthetic solutions if money, that the US had plenty. It's easily checkable in two clicks. Japan on the other hand didn't have any other way to have oil exept by conquest and it was one of the very factors which killed them.
@@kornofulgur The U.S. , who produced ~60% of the global crude oil, cut its oil supply to Japan in Juin 1940, which was, of course, a hostile act towards Japan. But Japan was threatening Western interests in China and East Asia since 1931. War is inevitable, so it doesn't really matter who does the first move, or what we do consider as first move from hindsight. Japan thought, East Asia is its backyard, the West disagreed... In the end it boils down, who is in the right, who has legit claims and who doesn't. What is right, and what is wrong, only depends on what we agree on, and we can only come to such agreements if we share the same basic views and values. As long as we don't, peace will never be, at best "peace for our time"...
Honestly, the funniest thing about the comments here is that, according to the statistics, only a fraction actually watched the speech in the video in its entirety. But everyone here writes as if they know exactly what's going on and have studied the subject matter in depth. Most of them see the title, click on the video and write a comment just to express their opinion and view on the topic, but without even having a clue what they are talking about. Especially the insults and accusations against the leadership of the German Reich government at the time appear very often, but without ever having studied the reasons and causes of those decisions, or at least having listened to them. But it is probably true: “No one has knowledge, but everyone has an opinion.”
i believe because it is in a foreign language people are less interested in reading for a considerable length of time and are less engaged. thats why AI voice reconstructions of hitler are so popular now and bring a whole new level of understanding to the individual that the vast majority of us didnt have access to in understanding german before
My issue here is not that many do not have the leisure to listen to the whole speech, or rather to read it. That is not the problem. My point is that people comment on something they are not even willing to understand. I know the speech is long and in a different language for many, but my point is that people give their opinion on a subject that they obviously don't understand and don't seem to want to understand. If people don't want to “read through” the whole speech, that's not a bad thing at all, but then at least they shouldn't blindly express their own opinion, especially if they have no idea whatsoever about the subject matter. Commenting without understanding and without the will to understand is the funny thing here, and mostly very ironic.
@@GermanSpeeches The writing is partly unclear (lack of contrast with the background). PS: Poland and Cheslovakia actually provoked the Nazi invasion, the "pan-Slavic movement" after WWI became a nightmare for the German-speaking minorities, some of whom had been living there for centuries. Added to this was the religious antagonism between Protestant Germans and Catholic Poles; there were even calls for genocide against Germans in Polish churches! Even Russia was attacked by Poland, and Russian phobia is still present today. However, Poland had a very difficult history; it was divided three times, i.e. de facto eliminated. The main reason for Hitler's invasion of Russia may have had quite personal reasons - in WW1 the Austrian Habsburg monarchy was defeated by the Russians in the east of his empire (today Western Ukraine!) and as a result lost the war and almost all of its huge territories outside the small Austrian heartland. Late revenge, so to speak, of the Austrian Hitler, who directed the war more from his Alpine fortress Obersalzberg than from Berlin! After the war, Linz in Austria was supposed to become the new capital of the Reich, the home of Hitler's youth - that says a lot! ;-)
@@carstenmanz302 To say Czechoslovakia provoked a full-scale invasion and a complete takeover of the entire country is a profound misrepresentation of historical facts at best, and an alarming alignment with pro-Nazi rhetoric at worst... Your inability to properly spell the country's name has me hoping for the former.
Unfortunately, it is absolutely necessary to publish Nazi content only with context: Hitler knew the war was lost by November 1941, before Pearl Harbor, before the Soviet winter counter-offensive. Or: Hitler pretends in this very speech that the invasion of the USSR was a reaction to Soviet meddling in the Balkans in spring 1941, however, Hitler had already ordered the attack on the USSR on Dec 18th 1940 (Weisung Nr. 21). More important: Words of politicians don't matter, only if they are coherent with their actions and omissions. E.g.: Treaties, pacts and other paperstuff do not create or set up the balance of power, they are mere reflections of it. The only inherent power, pacts and treaties do have, is, that they are a sort of tripwire or litmus test of loyalty, because keeping promises or reneging them is a sign of strength resp. weakness.
Statements regarding the Kremlin's intentions to dominate all of Europe could come from Biden and the current British Prime Minister justifying involvement in the Ukrainian war!
@@og5891 Das beantwortet nicht meine Frage. Aber offenbar versuchen Sie so zu antworten, dass es nicht justiziabel ist. Ich verabscheue Ihre Einstellung.
@@pommesschale5440 Ich weiß nicht um welche Dokumentation es hier geht. Ich habe viel über diesen Teil der Geschichte gelesen, Filme gesehen, in der Schule darüber gelernt. Ich erkenne die meisten Referenzen die in der Rede auftauchen wieder und kann sie Ereignissen zuordnen. Es passt zusammen. Also eigentlich nichts neues in dieser Rede. Was für mich neu und schockierend ist, ist wie wenig anders sich das alles anhört, wenn man es mit dem vergleicht was wir heute in unserer "kleinen Geschichte" sehen. Würde ich nicht wissen wer da spricht, welche Art von Geschichte da gemacht wird, dann würde es mir schwerfallen das ganze als bemerkenswert zu erkennen. Oder, schlimmer noch, es hört sich "gut" an. Durchdacht. Da ist natürlich ein starkes Element von Antisemitismus. Aber wenn man das Inhaltlich durch eine andere Zielgruppe ersetzt, "Terroristen" wäre ein Beispiel, dann fällt es wieder gar nicht auf. Das hört sich gar nicht an wie die Rede eines Wahnsinnigen. Das genau ist aber eine der Erwartungen die ich immer im Hinterkopf hatte, wenn Ich Hitler gelernt habe. Es würde sich ganz anders anhören, wären die USA heute ein Land, dass sich an internationales Recht genau so hält, wie es andere dafür kritisiert die es brechen. Es wäre so viel leichter den Vorwurf von Manipulation als rassistische Propaganda zu erkennen, gäbe es keine AIPAC. Man nimmt es den USA aber gar nicht übel, hätten sie völkerrechtswidrig deutsche Uboote versenkt, das waren ja Nazis. Und davon abgesehen hat sich an der Praxis, dass die USA sich nicht um internationales Recht ja schert ja nie etwas geändert und deswegen konnten sie trotzdem in Nürnberg Richter sein, und Russland für seine Verbrechen tadeln, kurz nach dem sie in großem Stil das gleiche getan haben. Wäre Hitler einfach nur ein Staatsmann gewesen, ein Feldherr, und hätte es keinen Holocaust gegeben, wir würden Geschichte wohl ganz anders bewerten, egal ob Hitler einen Krieg letztlich gewonnen oder verloren hätte. Er hätte dann immer noch Völkerrecht gebrochen und es wären trotzdem Millionen gestorben. Aber ein Völkerrechtsbruch ist ja nun wirklich kein Problem um das man sich heute Gedanken machen müsste. Selbst ein kleiner Genozid ist kein Verbrechen, wenn er im Rahmen eines Verteidigungskriegs gegen den richtigen Gegner - Terroristen - geführt wird. Das wirklich schlimme ist, dass ich mich wahrscheinlich wie ein Neo-Nazi anhöre, wenn ich das sage. Aber ich meine das nicht so. Ich verteidige Hitler's Rede hier nicht. Ich verharmlose den Holocaust nicht. Im Gegenteil. Es ist nur so, dass es mir immer schwerer fällt rationale Argumente vorzubringen, wenn die dann einfach und valide umgekehrt werden können und auf mich zurückfallen. Ich bin nämlich so geprägt, dass ich rationalen Argumenten kaum widersprechen kann, wenn ich sie nicht widerlegen kann. Wenn ich dann aber nicht mehr mit rationalen Argumenten arbeiten kann, dann bleibt mir wenig übrig als meinen Diskussionspartner zum Feind zu erklären und umzuhauen, weil Reden ja keinen Sinn mehr hat und einer muss ja gewinnen, wenn man auf der Ebene Konflikte austrägt. Das macht diese Aufzeichnung viel klarer als es irgendeine Dokumentation sein könnte. Die Aufnahme macht es möglich sich vorzustellen man höre das genau wie eine zeitgenössische Rede, vielleicht eine von Trump, Putin oder Biden. In so einer Rede kann man die Faktenlage ja auch nicht besser prüfen als damals. Ich habe zum Spaß versucht herauszufinden was es heute an Informationen zu diesem polnischen Botschafter und seiner Kommunikation mit und über Roosevelt zu lesen gibt, und alles was ich gefunden habe ist ein Eintrag der beschreit das es den Mann gab und das er Botschafter war. Vielleicht hat Hitler das einfach erfunden, was er da beschreibt. Damals gab es kein Wikipedia, heute gibt es das aber da steht leider nichts relevantes. Würde in einer Dokumentation zu dieser Rede etwas zu dem Botschafter stehen. Würde man sich in einer solchen Dokumentation mit den in dieser Rede präsentierten Argumenten auseinandersetzen und die ernsthaft bewerten? In den vielen Dokumentation die ich gelesen habe kam keine Bewertung der USA vor, die beschreibt inwieweit sie eher Teil einer möglichen Lösung war, die den Krieg hätte verhindern können, oder ob sie vielleicht stattdessen vielleicht sogar eine Teilverantwortlichkeit hatte. Soetwas ähnliches sehe ich heute im Ukraine-Krieg. Vielleicht gibt es mehr als eine Kriegspartei die aus WW2 hätte lernen müssen. Das würde Hitlers Schuld und die Schuld der Deutschen nicht schmälern. Es würde nur dieser Rede den Überraschungs-Effekt nehmen. Und es würde es auch denen schwerer machen so eine Rede als Beispiel zu verwenden warum man in all den Dokumentationen nichts gelesen hat, dass auf diese Überraschungen vorbereitet hätte. Dokumentation muss nicht unehrlich sein um weniger Informationen zu transportieren als ein Quelldokument liefert. Dokumentation kann eine Anreicherung sein, oder ein Filter in dem Aspekte ausgelassen werden die dem Autor nicht wichtig sind. Es kann auch eine Lüge sein in dem Falsches behauptet wird, richtiges geleugnet und wichtiges ausgelassen. Das kommt dann ganz auf die Dokumentation an. Der Author des ursprünglichen Kommentars hat mit dem Ehrlichkeits-Begriff nach meinem Geschmack zu viel Wertung eingebaut. Aber in der Sache kann ich nur zustimmen. Mir sind Quellen viel wertvoller als Reproduktionen oder Interpretationen.
I think one of the reason that Hitler declared war on the USA was his hope that Japan will declare war on Russia (relying on their treaty) thus Russia will have to fight two fronts, a situation which would relieve Germany from the Russian counter attack. However, Japan didn't. The piety of it all is that toward the end of the war, unprovoked by Japan, Russia declared war on Japan, and stole large chunks of its land . In my opinion Japan had a major roll in Germany's defeat.
Yes from what I study the non action of Japan attacking Russia on second front was the main couse of Germany losing the ww2. If he would conquer Stalingrad he would have conquer the Russia and was game over
Ohh how bad 😢, the USSR took the Sakhalin and Kuril islands from Japan, and freed the CHINESE Manchuria. Soo much land lost! I wonder why they would be so mean to innocent Japan, it didn't do anything wrong, right?
Russia did declare war on Japan exactly 3 monthes after defeating Germany becausr it was a part of the lend-lease deal with the USA. Another words Russia just had to do this to receive the US aid and have the second front opened meaning the landing in Normandie, or the D day.
@@ethanvanidour Yeah there was so much freedom these 12 years. There was no manipulation via media, you could say whatever you want against the authorities, the elections weren't influenced, there was peace and you could be whoever you are. It didn't matter with what race you were born with. I wish we had that freedom today like in the good old times.
@@ethanvanidourOur people wasn't free in this 12 years. Who told you such a bullshit? I'm shocked by that statement. The regime was everywhere. The Gestapo was feared. The SS was feared. In public you could not critisize anything without getting arrested. Millions of people had to suffer because this bastard want all germans to die heroic in the ruins of the destroyed cities. And don't let us forget the mountains of dead bodies in the camps, victims of a sick idea.
German but living in the US. Actually most Americans didn't want any war back then, and the Fuhrer declared war on the US, so it's not the fault of the US in this context.
@@paulpipek9108 still seeing many Americans and businesses in the US having some kind of German sounding names, so there must have been many German immigrants, especially in the previous 100-200 years. In fact lucky to be in the US and not in Nazi Germany back then.
Two fatal decisions by Hitler in 1941: first, invade the USSR, then declare war on the USA. By 1943 he had already lost both wars. 1945 was just the coup de grace.
Not just this 1.He trusted that the Great Britain will accept peace deals(He could have invaded them during battle of Dunkirk) but he was too eager that Britain will accept peace deals. 2 weeks after sending the peace deals no response so they hitler decided too invade England but no luck he didnt win air superiority.had he invaded earlier he could have a chance of taking england. . 2.He trusted Mussolini will follow his plans it was written in military intel that it will take 1942 for the Italian army to be fully trained and supplied. So he told Mussolini get your army ready,As the German attack the soviets , Italy will ready its army and after its army is ready Italy will take the Balkans as a show of dominance. But Mussolini wanted to prove that italy was strong too (Germany defeated france)(Japan took a large part of China and is about to expand in Asia). So Mussolini wanting to prove Italy is strong like its allies he decided to halt his army on Egypt and declare war on Greece. Hitle being enraged my this decision he told Mussolini to finish the war fast but Muffinman started losing So hitle decided to help italy he took the Balkans and then Greece,due to this decision his plan to attack soviets is delayed(He will soon regret this decision had the Germans attacked earlier they could have took Moscow and a large part of caucasian before winter hits)
@@betternowa From Hitler's perspective, it may have been a mistake to let the British evacuate Dunkirk and not (attempt to) invade Great Britain in May-June 1940, but we do not know what would have happened if such an attempted invasion had occurred at that time, coinciding with the invasion of France. On the contrary, the invasion of the USSR and the declaration of war on the USA are facts that occurred, so it is much easier to evaluate their results.
No matter how Hitler framed it, I have the impression that America was going to war with Germany when the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor. My mother was sitting in the movie theatre in December 1941… 20 years old. And the movie was halted and the presenter came out And said that the Americans had been bombed Pearl Harbor. My mother said everyone in the audience cheered. And I was puzzled. But she said, from that point in that moment they knew they would win the war. Because the Americans were finally coming into the battles. so it was interesting that even though it was the Japanese that bombed the Americans, Canadians knew that the Americans would come in on all fronts. And they also knew that that was the beginning of the end for Germany.
By the time Hitler declared war in USA, German armies had been stopped in the tracks before Moscow and the Red Army was beginning to force them back. It was the beginning of the end for Germany. This meant that Hitler should’ve focused all his attention on the eastern front and not have declared war on USA. Germany could not possibly defeat the combined forces of the Soviet Union, United States and British Empire. The very idea.was completely unrealistic.
Even if he didn't declare war on USA, german would be lose We talking about soviet, who owns 25% of land in this world at those times. While german already in crisis with oil If he focused so much to eastern front, the soviet would multiply their production and their army by hundred to thousandfold Its just predestined for german to lose the moment he attacking soviet
The USA would have joined the war anyways. They were already attacking German submarines and naval assets in the Atlantic before Germany declared war and they militarily occupied Greenland and Iceland. They would have found any excuse, similar to WWI, to join the war against Germany. Also, the “declaration of war” wasn’t really a declaration of war. It was an affirmation that Germany and the United States found themselves in a state of war. You can watch Von Ribbentrop’s speech where he clearly states this.
@@patrickcastell2061 Once Japan attacked the USA at Pearl Harbor and Philippines, it was obvious that Japan had no intention at all of attacking the Soviet Union. Yes, Hitler had hoped that Japan would help him fight SU, but he surely realized that was not going to happen after Pearl Harbor. And Hitler had no treaty obligation to Japan against USA because Japan was the aggressor.
@@Auqi The USA provides vital assistance to both Britain and Soviet Union. Ships to Britain and trucks and other military equipment to SU. And of course massive loans to both. If the USA had remained neutral and not provided such assistance and if Germany had not fought a war on two fronts but concentrated all its military strength against the SU, and if Germany had attacked SU in the spring instead of midsummer, and if Hitler had built more submarines instead of battleships, and if Japan had attacked SU instead of USA this bringing USA fully into the war against Germany, then it might have turned out differently. But thats a lot of big “ifs”. One thing is certain: Hitler underestimated the fighting strength of the SU. He couldn’t believe how many tanks they had!
this is the prime example of the power of words. And this is why education and information remains important and is a basic human need, because, even today, these words are capable of swaying the minds of many men, who are dazzled and drawn by his words, but forget or overlook the many subtle and dangerous things promoted alongside these impressive speeches. We shall remain cautious and not take everything without critically thinking about it prior. The devil is charismatic and beautiful, which is why we have to remain contious of our values and what we hold dear. Else we will be tricked into loosing everything precious to us. Just like we lost many of Europe's cities and people in this war. Or just like we lost our peoples economic security for the benefit of the fiew by promoting global trade and moving our industry to Asia, in turn destabilising Europe and America Always remember: Always keep an eye on those you hand the power of changing your life. It can and will go badly, if unchecked.
A really stupid thing to do. It made Roosevelt’s job much easier. Yes, the USA was already committed to helping Britain defeat Germany but Pearl Harbor meant that Roosevelt had to deal with Japan, not Germany. By declaring war in the USA, Hitler gave Roosevelt what he needed to enter the war against Germany openly and with full force and to attack German armies in North Africa. Hitler made a terrible mistake by attacking the Soviet Union in June, 1941, and followed it up with another serious blunder by declaring war against USA in December. He should’ve simply ignored the British declaration of war in September, 1939, and just consolidated his forces and focused on defeating the Soviet Union. He didn’t need to defeat France first, because there was no way that the British and the French would have lifted a finger to help Stalin if Hitler had simply marched against Russia directly and left Britain and France alone. The British and French hated and feared Communism much more than fascism, and the same is true for USA.
You don't understand the kind of person Hitler was. He was a monster, but not in the way such villains are displayed in Hollywood movies. American presidents don't mind it much if children are caged up and deported. That's not unique for Trump. They don't mind it if children die as a result of systematic bombardments. But killing innocents is one component that makes up a monster. Another is indifference. Indifference to something that is extremely valuable to others. Children usually are. If we see a child fall down, we help. We don't necessarily do that for a random stranger. We see the shortcomings of American presidents in contexts, even if they are at least partially responsible for atrocities, such as the corpses of children. We contrast these flaws with how well the economy did during their term, or we consider that immigration is a very complex and ambivalent topic, and so of course is self-defense. We don't see Hitler in context. And just like American presidents, Hitler was not just a monster. A great monster, but also a man with cultural and individual peculiarities. One of them was that he enjoyed to display himself as a self-made man and not a rich heir. Just like Trump, even though he is not quite self-made. And yet another part of him was that it was obviously important for him to explain himself and to fight openly. He also loved and protected dogs and he build the Autobahns. It would be a stretch to use terms like chivalry, but he would certainly have agreed. Did he make it easier for Roosevelt? I don't think this speech made a big difference. The USA has long been a party to the war, just like it is in Ukraine today. The one property nobody would ever assign to the USA is honesty or chivalry. Hitler enjoyed making this a point in this speech. And no, I did not describe Hitler as an honest knight, even though I came terrifyingly close. But I didn't and very deliberately so. As for Germany not having to defeat France: That success of this campaign was not a matter of genetics, material superiority or military genius. Had Hitler not done that when he did, he would not have been able to do it later on. Had he done it differently, there was a slight chance he could have pushed the UK out of the war early. That's all speculation, but not an unreasonable one. At the early stages of the war, France, the UK and others did not fight Germany for any moral or idealistic reasons. There was not yet a holocaust and human rights were not something anybody cared at all, not even in terms of public relations. This was all politics from the very start. Maybe they though Germany was not in a position to even put up a serious fight at all. They have been demilitarized and humiliated just a few years earlier. Don't forget that. France should have been unbeatable for Germany at that time and they probably could have become just that, had it not been defeated swiftly. Russia was probably also not seen as a great enough thread to have mattered for what the UK was willing to do at this point. It was an abstract thread, much more on an ideological level than in terms of geopolitics or military. Hitler suspected Russian would fight riding on donkeys. And I would be surprised if Churchill would have thought higher of Russians then. Nobody at that time knew or suspected that there would be a cold war with Russia coming up in which Germany was to be an important ally. There were not even nukes and the game of mutually ensured destruction. War was diplomacy. Increasingly ugly because of technology, but it was still like playing chess.
The only reason why operation Barbarossa went so well on the earlier stages is that Stalin was sure, that Hitler is focused on the west and won't attack him. This is why the attack were so unexpected and devastating for the Red army. However, if Hitler ignored the west and focused solely on the Soviet Union, there would be no guarantee, that he is be able to win. Soviets would definetely be prepared for the attack.
Wrong. France and Britain would not have felt at ease neighbouring a Germany who controles the industries and resources of all Central and Eastern Europe. (Balance of Power) Ideological reasonings are just pretexts, mere varnish and smoke screen. A Germany from the Rhine to the Ural would have gobbled up the rest of Europe sooner or later.
America was never going to side with Germany. They already been supplying Britain with aid since the war broke out, similar to what they are doing with Ukraine in 2022-24.
France already know that this Ukraine Russia war will weaken Europe completely. UK USA will benefit from this. This plan cold War plan was already started at the end of last stages of world War. US already deployed in army base in Germany at the end of second World War for launch its attack against Russia is any war situation happens. Many secret plannings were happened during second World War including how to beat Nazi Germany. Those plannings were still now nobody knows. All the things we study about second World War was based documents captured in Germany when allies entered Germany. What was the plannings done in UK, USA, France and Russia nobody still knows. If that documents had come to future, we may figure out what is happening now in the current world. Look after all the wars which happened after the second World War everything is linked to second world War and fall of Berlin Wall.
RUclips:die Zuversicht mit "Die größte Verschwörung der Geschichte" 1. //// RUclips:"DIE VERBORGENE GESCHICHTE" TEIL1 👋 Vielleicht interessiert es sie ja 👋
Leider ist die englische Übersetzung nur teilweise korrekt. Da ich nicht die gesamte Transkription korrigieren will, hier ein Beispiel: 1:30 „I note that you all stood up to honor our dead comrades.“ - NOT „that you have come up here“. Nicht mal die deutsche Übersetzung ist hier korrekt, da es das Wort „heroben“ im deutschen nicht gibt. Es muss natürlich „erhoben / stood up“ heißen. So ziehen sich leider unzählige Fehler durch die gesamte Übersetzung. 😢
Tatsächlich muss ich wiederum korrigieren: Das Wort "heroben" existiert natürlich im Deutschen (es leitet sich ab von "hier oben"="up here"), auch wenn Göring hier klar "erhoben" sagt und deine Übersetzung korrekt ist. Der deutsche Untertitel mit "heroben" ergibt inhaltlich keinen Sinn, und ist ein Fehler des Erstellers. Ich habe leider überwiegend nur die Audio angehört, weswegen ich den Rest des Untertitels nicht beurteilen kann.
That is correct. After the Reichstag fire, the Reichstag met in the Kroll Opera House. However, the word “Reichstag” here does not refer to the Reichstag building itself, but to the Reichstag as an organ of state. These are two different things. And the Reichstag building was not destroyed, but only damaged (it still exists today).
@ganjdalf2821 Hopefuly, otherwise Europe is done. America is no substitute, it's a degenerate Nation who want's to be both the beacon of the World and vassalize the World.
Interesting enough, had the Germans and Japanese really trusted each other. They would have coordinated the attack on Russia and attack from both sides. But there was a mistrust that existed, once Japan had attacked the U.S. Stalin decided to believe his spy in Tokyo that Japan had no plans on attacking Russia. Stalin was able to then move his Siberian reserves about 40 divisions in number to the Moscow front. That force pushed the Germans out as they advanced on the Moscow front.
Japan had no interest in the tundra and forests of siberia they desperately needed the oil and rubber of south east Asia and they knew this would need to be protected at all cost by a huge perimeter of island fortresses in the Pacific from the USA.
@@koperekhabsburdzki43Germany was considering an Alliance with China before, as they had a good relationship but decided for Japan for strategic reasons
I looked. I couldn't find those transferred divisions from Siberia at the Moscow front. All of the divisions that were involved in that offensive were new. Shortly after Germany invaded, there was a mass mobilization drive that created new divisions.
Even today with the modernity, you can see how similar Americans and Germans are. Both young and old people. They all have the same style. And check out The Ludolfs, they look like some Texan junkyard denizens lmao. We have Karens that look just like American ones. The food the stuff and everything has become so American here in Germany. But in America there are still bigger foods and bigger drinks and people as well but Germany is #3 country of the fattest people. I’m German.
Your statement reminds me of a friend of mine. He wants to immigrate to the US so much. I asked why. He said “I want to go where the poor people are fat”. Germany too huh?
@@vincentdipazio8143 What's wrong with fast food workers? They're a vital sector of the economy. The context of my comment is in regard to the little mustache man who presumed he often knew better than his generals. Thanks for playing.
It would be great if someone more talented than myself would record this in English like the other AI assisted speeches. Thanks in advance if it comes to pass!
He made some HUGE mistakes that costed him everything, allienating the Slavs, hating the Jews, but THESE levels of sovereignity towards the USA, Germany can ONLY dream about today. And since the 1945 till today, really. And with it, most of the EU. Except France. It's incredibly refreshing and quite extraordinary to see Germany having this kind of attitude towards the USA. This is how a FREE leader sounds like. With it's own interests. Too bad that Germany couldn't see broader European interests beyond it's own selfish interests. Poland, Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia, weren't communist countries at that time. Only the USSR. Yet they were targeted as enemies on nationalistic basis. Sad that Europe lost it's big chance in the world cause of such stupidities. Now, German leaders can't even answer ANYTHING to the USA president without ruining their own pants...
Very interesting to hear the other perspective. We will probably never know which corresponds to the truth. Are there any reports confirming whether the provocations and attacks by the Americans on the merchant ships were true? I also find it interesting that there were negotiations with Poland over the territories before the war. However, after the illegal attack on Poland under international law, I don’t understand why France and Great Britain declared war only on Germany and not on Russia. Russia also annexed parts of Poland. It’s also noteworthy that Germany wanted to make peace with Great Britain, but Great Britain wasn’t interested in peace.
They were full of lies. Germany provoked America multiple times, first, and not the other way around. And Hitler's peace treaties are bs. The world leaders learnt the hard way that appeasement doesn't work with leaders like Hitler. Appeasement is an extremely important concept to learn about when it comes to WW2, so please educate yourself. When Britain appeased Germany after it annexed Czechoslovakia, they had a peace treaty that Hitler won't take ke things any further even after doing something illegal, which he broke by invading Poland and starting WW2
@@rayeenrafsan4080 it's so funny how Hitler comes up with excuses to breaking a promise. "Oh yeah, we made a treaty, but.. uuuhh... they're ready to attack us... and lying to us and uuh... can't you see how they are harming the Germans?! And uuhh.. yeah that's it invade Poland!"
@rayeenrafsan4080 I've always been a relativist, thinking that we won't have enough facts to justify anything, so any viewpoint could be correct, and it's all up to subjective interpretations. But your comment made me think: is there any way to actually point out all of Hitler's actual lies, and compare them to other leader's speeches, find lies in them also? This would factually, and not just philosophically, like you probably saw me do under the other guy's comment, justify that nazis and neo-nazis are, well, lying and violent. To side or not to side with them would later be up to a person, sure. But this way they won't be dillusional about it. A person joining their side would, after knowing the factual truth, perfectly understand that they're siding with evil.
We all remember December 7, 1941 and December 8, 1941, but this is hardly talked about. Not many nations delcare war on us. It was Germany and Italy that delcared war, due to the The Tripartite Pact aka The Berlin Pact.
The man really believed what he was saying back then. Nevertheless, he must have realized then that the cards would be reshuffled when the USA entered the war.
Us English should have sided with the Germans in ww2. Hitler tried so many times to make peace with Great Britain. It's depressing that us English murdered our German brothers, knowing they were right. Look at the state of the world now. Here in England, our towns and cities are becoming unrecognisable, and our culture is disappearing
Da hast du recht, der Frieden wurde mehrmals angeboten und im Frankreich Feldzug britische Truppen verschont obwohl man hätte 300k Truppen vernichten können..... Glaubst du das war Zufall..... Ich denke nicht, wir wissen heute alle wie effizient die Wehrmacht war
Germany raped and pillaged poor Norway and treated neighboring Denmark like shit and you talk about siding with Germany? And both Norway and Denmark are supposedly Germanic? Please.
und was musste Sudetendeutschland alles ertragen? Denkst du es wird ewig weggeschaut? Sowas kommt von sowas...... Es wurde alles getan dafür das es kein Frieden gab nicht nur von Deutschland aus...... Russland zum Beispiel hat Polen auch angegriffen und Finnland aber dazu sagt ihr alle nix.....
The war against Germany by the USA started in July 1941 5 month before this event when President Roosevelt ordered the American Armed Forces to sink all German ships they encountered. Many German and Americans died in these encountered and at least one American destroyer ( the Ruben James ) was sunk in October 1941 with a loss of 120 American sailors loosing their lives. So the action by Roosevelt was in fact a declaration of war against Germany. So who were the aggressors?
@@fahrradmittelfranken8207 Do you still not know after over 80 years that Poland murdered 62,000 Germans from 1919 to Sept.1 1939 in the corridor? I suggest that you read the book by the son of the world famous violinist "Menuhin" ( a Jew) Gerard Menuhin " Wahrheit Sagen Teufel Jagen". In English "Tell the Truth and Shame the Devil". Germany had every right to protect its ethnic Germans just like Putin had the right to protect its ethnic Russians in the Ukraine.
@@fahrradmittelfranken8207 So einfach ist es nicht! Da gab es überall Vorgeschichten und Provokationen seitens Polen und England. Der Weltkrieg begann erst indem England und Frankreich sich in den Konflikt mit Polen einmischten. Sonst wäre die Geschichte nach wenigen Wochen erledigt gewesen aber England wollte einen Großen Krieg , genau wie die Selben heute wieder Krieg wollten. Alte Reden verraten sehr viel was uns die heutige Sieger Propaganda verschweigt
@@fahrradmittelfranken8207 No war......also this tragic world war never falls from the sky.....there is in every case a historic-development behind it. The Germans (and the russians today) was a threat for the anglistic dominance in the world. The "treaty of Versailles" was the cornerstone to keep the german nation down. Germany lost the war and is today not more as the 51-state of the USA. Now russia.....with it's enormous natural resources is the new target for the international "free" financial system.
„Ich verstehe nicht, warum die Leute sagen, ich hätte keinen Geschmack in der Mode. Diese braunen Hemden sind zeitlos, wie guter Wein... fragt mich aber nicht nach den Hosen.“
Ich würde an Ihrer Stelle versuchen, die Reden auch unter deutschem Titel mit deutscher Beschreibung einzustellen. Mit englischem Titel werden sie insbesondere Englisch Sprechenden vorgeschlagen, wie man an den Kommentaren sieht. Alles Gute!
Another sign of his over-confidence, and arrogance. Already facing the Soviets and the British, he adds the USA. Sure, Adolf, take on a nation with large amounts of resources when you're already on two fronts.
His Army was facing a strong and unexpected resistance from the "Untermenschen" and he declares war to the 1st military power of his time...That guy was completely deliusionnal !
Alot of things not mentioned in "The History" books that is mentioned in this speech, one of the most important being that around 62,000 germans that were living in poland got killed BEFORE the war started, and that this was one of the main catalysts of germany invading poland. Information on these germans getting killed in poland is hard to find. The search algorythm buries it hard. Some time ago I did find a website that claimed that the UK sent a telegram to a certain polish general essentially giving him the green light to kill ethnic germans and if germany declared war that the UK had polands back. Obviously, you cant link websites on youtube. But if ur smart enough, you can find this info and this website too.
No, the Nazis wanted to arrest and murder 61,000 Germans after taking over Poland (Sonderfahndungsbuch Polen). There were armed fights about Upper Silesia and displacements but no massacres against Germans in Poland 1919-39. AFTER the attack in September 1939, yes, about four to five thousand victims. Really, you want to make us believe that Poles massacred almost 10% of all ethnic Germans in Poland? This would have resulted in a mass immigration, Germans fleeing Poland into Germany, but htis never happened.
This is fake and has been disproven many times. But even if it was true it doesnt excuse a full on extermination and attack on the whole nation. Stop trying to justify horrendous human beings
Hitler was in desperation as his gamble versus the Soviet Union was failing, and he needed some kind of "success", a show of force. At least it hastened the ending of WW2 somewhat!
he interrupted an agenda of the elites to financially exploit Germany, so he had to go and so did Germany's economic power. After that, things continued exactly as before until today. And not just in Germany
@ there was no evidence that HITLER did not believe in victory in December 1941. Some of his generals BELIEVED that it was only a matter of time before Germany lost the war. However, a rational person could have no way of knowing what the outcome would be that early in the war.
@@abrakadabramo True, by November 1941 Hitler was convinced that the war was lost. "Operation Barbarossa" had already failed in the midth of July 1941 (Juli-Krisis). Goebbels' diary reflects quite well the sentiments and pre-sentiments of himself and other leading nazis. By declaring war on the U.S. he tried to look strong and hoped, maybe, maybe Japan in the Pacific and a stiff U-Boat campaign in the Atlantic (Operation Paukenschlag) may fend off the U.S. A desperate leap of faith.
He COULD defeat Britain. A naval invasion of Britain was seriously considered, but he decided against it. Attacking the USSR was not a matter of choice, it was either you strike first and get the element of surprise, or you get attacked first and lose any advantages.
Die Tonqualität ist bedauerlich sehr schlecht. Ich konnte den Führer nicht ganz verstehen…YT, bitte verbessern Sie die Ton Qualität der Führeransprachen!
Nich immer beklagen! Selber was tun. Ich habe mir ein einfaches Mischpult Programm geladen und selbst optimiert. Desweiteren geht es um die Aussagen, nicht um dein Höhrvergnügen.
Major factors that saved England during World War II: Hitler's decision to invade Russia instead of England, the English Channel, which prevented a land invasion by the German Wehrmacht, and the industrial capacity of the United States, which produced and contributed thousands of tanks, airplanes, ships, rifles, ammunition, men, etc.
@@BaptisteMoreau-yx7vs uhh absolutely not. I can promise you that Hitler would not have allowed Britain to be overrun by immigrants eating away at the very fabric of the United Kingdom. Besides, there was never going to be German rule. There were no plans for anything West of Germany before the UK and France declared war on Germany.
It is interesting to watch the whole speech. His comment that America wanted to take over the British Empire was prescient, as was his comment that it needed the war to rescue its economy. Hitler's major blunders were setting out exterminate Jews, attacking Russia, and trying to force with tyranny his rule on all Europe, on the notion that he was thus saving Europe. If he had restricted himself only to rescuing the German economy, his place in history would be very different. It is a surprise here to see his sense of humour on display.
"rescuing the economy" - ? - I heard once that the rationing imposed by the US government was totally a political move to get the people involved in the war effort. I don't know if that is true, but it was a shrewd propaganda tactic, like the camps for holding Japanese Americans. There are so many aspects to the war, I don't if any historian has covered them all.
There are inaccuracies in every label, similarly "Democrats" now undermine their namesake process. Obviously many people can claim a label with different intentions.
why does the most evil man in the world sound so darn reasonable? almost as if he was onto something or maybe even right? wait beeing right is not right right???
If the US didn't intervene, the war had prolonged for sure. But the Soviets would still have defeated the Nazi Regime and Japan sooner or later. In fact the US brought all to an end much sooner, also in the Pacific, to be fair. ( Other allies too, but I'm mainly talking about the part of the US here )
In my opinion no. The USA at that time had way more in common with Germany than the soviets, but that's just my opinion. That war should've never happened in the first place. Also look at the world today and tell me it's better.
Yea, this is how powerful the nazis' hatespeech was. It numbs your mind and convinces you that gruesome actions are warranted to avert some kind of non-existent catastrophe. Ever wondered how ordinary, good people suddenly became SS wardens in Auschwitz? It was this kind of manipulation of the mind. They thought they were fighting for a just cause. It's saddening to see how times have changed, but people really haven't.
100 years later, westerners will literally get systematically replaced, with their identity outlawed and the overwhelming majority will still disagree with your statement. Never bother with stupids, they said NO to Germany and commited racial and societal suicide in the process. Sad but still a laughable consequence of their action. France is done, England is done and the US is on its way. The same so-called 2 party system under so called democracy well known to be a problem in the 1940s is 100% just a rotten face letting any foreign interest and Monopoly to rule someone else's country. This will be a historical and may I add, well deserved unrecoverable miskate to Wikipedia's debunked Aryan race.
![Adolf Hitler speaks in Danzig about the Poland campaign, September 19, 1939 [English Subtitles]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/8FgBZoHJpVc/mqdefault.jpg)
For those who are interested: For this video I used the German transcript of this speech, which was printed in the book “Der verweigerte Friede - Deutschlands Parlamentär Rudolf Hess muss schweigen” by Alfred Seidl (Hess's lawyer). Universitas Verlag München, 2nd edition from 1985. Interesting book, by the way; I would recommend it. I'm pretty sure there is an English translation of the book.
Please reply to this comment here if you notice any translation errors or general mistakes in the subtitles. Thank you.
EDIT: Correction:
1:30 German: " Ich stelle fest, dass Sie sich zu Ehren unserer toten Kameraden erhoben haben." English: "I note that you have risen in honor of our dead comrades."
5Jahren 5
Where did you publish the diplomatic Note he sent to the administration of the british colony usa?
Thanks for uploading. The extraordinary thing about these old speeches is that they are spoken freely for 1-2 hours without a teleprompter and without filler sounds like hmm or mm or uh. When you see how weak many speeches are today, even though every word is read out, it's very noticeable how much the ability to speak has deteriorated.
turns out "strong" speeches with minimal filler sounds aren't what make a strong, competent leader. Strong speeches are how you seize absolute power, but also how you drive a civilization into the abyss. It would be nice if liberal leaders gave strong sweeping speeches that swell the people with emotion, but that isn't the limiting factor for genuinely good leadership.
Hitler was - unfortunately - extremely charismatic and held speeches that could manipulate and mobilise the masses. But besides this, he certainly used papers (as you can see even in this picture if you look closely), lies and every other technique, any dictator and autocratic potentate has ever and will ever use.
What a silly speech in the face of war against a superior power
@@MagnusMaximusIII
You are speaking as if liberal leadership ISN'T driving all of our countries into a deep abyss
And that leadership from the past was in fact very efficient, and if it wasn't for the war, the nation would prosper
🤣🤣🤣 Are you serious? They already had pen and paper back then. That Hitler (check Alice Wiedel notes: communist-guy) doesn't speak freely, he has a manuscript. The only extraordinary thing here is your naivety.
" No one will attack America unless it provokes the attack itself" sounds familiar to me
In a globalized world, an attack on the trade partners of someone is an attack on that someone. If we lived in an endless world with an unlimited number of exchangeable trade partners this wouldn't be the case.
While the U.S. joining WW1 was rather coincidental and happened out of fear that the Entente won't honour their U.S. debts if they lose WW1, the U.S. joining WW2 wasn't coincidental: the U.S. was lacking strategic materials like tin and rubber and letting Japan and Germany have their way would have led to the prospect facing two hostile superpowers controling two of the three major concentrations of industry on this planet.
@@fars8229 Utter bullshit revisionism. It was Japan who lacked OIL and attacked the Dutch Indies because of it, and it was Japan who attacked the US, regardless of this situation. Plus, in regard of rubber there were other producing countries in South-America and synthetic solutions if money, that the US had plenty.
It's easily checkable in two clicks.
Japan on the other hand didn't have any other way to have oil exept by conquest and it was one of the very factors which killed them.
9/11....
@@kornofulgur The U.S. , who produced ~60% of the global crude oil, cut its oil supply to Japan in Juin 1940, which was, of course, a hostile act towards Japan.
But Japan was threatening Western interests in China and East Asia since 1931.
War is inevitable, so it doesn't really matter who does the first move, or what we do consider as first move from hindsight.
Japan thought, East Asia is its backyard, the West disagreed... In the end it boils down, who is in the right, who has legit claims and who doesn't. What is right, and what is wrong, only depends on what we agree on, and we can only come to such agreements if we share the same basic views and values. As long as we don't, peace will never be, at best "peace for our time"...
911
Thanks for translations, appreciated.
Honestly, the funniest thing about the comments here is that, according to the statistics, only a fraction actually watched the speech in the video in its entirety. But everyone here writes as if they know exactly what's going on and have studied the subject matter in depth. Most of them see the title, click on the video and write a comment just to express their opinion and view on the topic, but without even having a clue what they are talking about. Especially the insults and accusations against the leadership of the German Reich government at the time appear very often, but without ever having studied the reasons and causes of those decisions, or at least having listened to them. But it is probably true: “No one has knowledge, but everyone has an opinion.”
i believe because it is in a foreign language people are less interested in reading for a considerable length of time and are less engaged. thats why AI voice reconstructions of hitler are so popular now and bring a whole new level of understanding to the individual that the vast majority of us didnt have access to in understanding german before
My issue here is not that many do not have the leisure to listen to the whole speech, or rather to read it. That is not the problem. My point is that people comment on something they are not even willing to understand. I know the speech is long and in a different language for many, but my point is that people give their opinion on a subject that they obviously don't understand and don't seem to want to understand. If people don't want to “read through” the whole speech, that's not a bad thing at all, but then at least they shouldn't blindly express their own opinion, especially if they have no idea whatsoever about the subject matter. Commenting without understanding and without the will to understand is the funny thing here, and mostly very ironic.
@@GermanSpeeches
The writing is partly unclear (lack of contrast with the background).
PS: Poland and Cheslovakia actually provoked the Nazi invasion, the "pan-Slavic movement" after WWI became a nightmare for the German-speaking minorities, some of whom had been living there for centuries. Added to this was the religious antagonism between Protestant Germans and Catholic Poles; there were even calls for genocide against Germans in Polish churches! Even Russia was attacked by Poland, and Russian phobia is still present today. However, Poland had a very difficult history; it was divided three times, i.e. de facto eliminated. The main reason for Hitler's invasion of Russia may have had quite personal reasons - in WW1 the Austrian Habsburg monarchy was defeated by the Russians in the east of his empire (today Western Ukraine!) and as a result lost the war and almost all of its huge territories outside the small Austrian heartland.
Late revenge, so to speak, of the Austrian Hitler, who directed the war more from his Alpine fortress Obersalzberg than from Berlin! After the war, Linz in Austria was supposed to become the new capital of the Reich, the home of Hitler's youth - that says a lot! ;-)
@@carstenmanz302 To say Czechoslovakia provoked a full-scale invasion and a complete takeover of the entire country is a profound misrepresentation of historical facts at best, and an alarming alignment with pro-Nazi rhetoric at worst... Your inability to properly spell the country's name has me hoping for the former.
Unfortunately, it is absolutely necessary to publish Nazi content only with context: Hitler knew the war was lost by November 1941, before Pearl Harbor, before the Soviet winter counter-offensive. Or: Hitler pretends in this very speech that the invasion of the USSR was a reaction to Soviet meddling in the Balkans in spring 1941, however, Hitler had already ordered the attack on the USSR on Dec 18th 1940 (Weisung Nr. 21). More important: Words of politicians don't matter, only if they are coherent with their actions and omissions. E.g.: Treaties, pacts and other paperstuff do not create or set up the balance of power, they are mere reflections of it. The only inherent power, pacts and treaties do have, is, that they are a sort of tripwire or litmus test of loyalty, because keeping promises or reneging them is a sign of strength resp. weakness.
This should have a billion views! Still just as relevant today.
Wieso? Hat Amerika schon wieder Japan angegriffen?
Statements regarding the Kremlin's intentions to dominate all of Europe could come from Biden and the current British Prime Minister justifying involvement in the Ukrainian war!
@@WeltraumkommandoDerBundeslade was? Japan hat die USA angegriffen?
Nuts!
So sieht's aus🙏🏻
Das Original ist immer das ehrlichste, gegenüber einer Dokumentation
Most "documentaries" dont even include the sub titles. Just some idiot talking over the man, telling you what to think
So, so, was ist denn Ihrer Meinung nach nicht ehrlich dargestellt in Dokumentationen?
@ was gezeigt wird ist das Original und keine Doku. darum sollte man dieses vorziehen gegenüber eine Doku
@@og5891 Das beantwortet nicht meine Frage. Aber offenbar versuchen Sie so zu antworten, dass es nicht justiziabel ist. Ich verabscheue Ihre Einstellung.
@@pommesschale5440 Ich weiß nicht um welche Dokumentation es hier geht. Ich habe viel über diesen Teil der Geschichte gelesen, Filme gesehen, in der Schule darüber gelernt.
Ich erkenne die meisten Referenzen die in der Rede auftauchen wieder und kann sie Ereignissen zuordnen. Es passt zusammen. Also eigentlich nichts neues in dieser Rede.
Was für mich neu und schockierend ist, ist wie wenig anders sich das alles anhört, wenn man es mit dem vergleicht was wir heute in unserer "kleinen Geschichte" sehen. Würde ich nicht wissen wer da spricht, welche Art von Geschichte da gemacht wird, dann würde es mir schwerfallen das ganze als bemerkenswert zu erkennen. Oder, schlimmer noch, es hört sich "gut" an. Durchdacht. Da ist natürlich ein starkes Element von Antisemitismus. Aber wenn man das Inhaltlich durch eine andere Zielgruppe ersetzt, "Terroristen" wäre ein Beispiel, dann fällt es wieder gar nicht auf.
Das hört sich gar nicht an wie die Rede eines Wahnsinnigen. Das genau ist aber eine der Erwartungen die ich immer im Hinterkopf hatte, wenn Ich Hitler gelernt habe.
Es würde sich ganz anders anhören, wären die USA heute ein Land, dass sich an internationales Recht genau so hält, wie es andere dafür kritisiert die es brechen. Es wäre so viel leichter den Vorwurf von Manipulation als rassistische Propaganda zu erkennen, gäbe es keine AIPAC. Man nimmt es den USA aber gar nicht übel, hätten sie völkerrechtswidrig deutsche Uboote versenkt, das waren ja Nazis. Und davon abgesehen hat sich an der Praxis, dass die USA sich nicht um internationales Recht ja schert ja nie etwas geändert und deswegen konnten sie trotzdem in Nürnberg Richter sein, und Russland für seine Verbrechen tadeln, kurz nach dem sie in großem Stil das gleiche getan haben.
Wäre Hitler einfach nur ein Staatsmann gewesen, ein Feldherr, und hätte es keinen Holocaust gegeben, wir würden Geschichte wohl ganz anders bewerten, egal ob Hitler einen Krieg letztlich gewonnen oder verloren hätte. Er hätte dann immer noch Völkerrecht gebrochen und es wären trotzdem Millionen gestorben. Aber ein Völkerrechtsbruch ist ja nun wirklich kein Problem um das man sich heute Gedanken machen müsste. Selbst ein kleiner Genozid ist kein Verbrechen, wenn er im Rahmen eines Verteidigungskriegs gegen den richtigen Gegner - Terroristen - geführt wird.
Das wirklich schlimme ist, dass ich mich wahrscheinlich wie ein Neo-Nazi anhöre, wenn ich das sage. Aber ich meine das nicht so. Ich verteidige Hitler's Rede hier nicht. Ich verharmlose den Holocaust nicht. Im Gegenteil. Es ist nur so, dass es mir immer schwerer fällt rationale Argumente vorzubringen, wenn die dann einfach und valide umgekehrt werden können und auf mich zurückfallen. Ich bin nämlich so geprägt, dass ich rationalen Argumenten kaum widersprechen kann, wenn ich sie nicht widerlegen kann.
Wenn ich dann aber nicht mehr mit rationalen Argumenten arbeiten kann, dann bleibt mir wenig übrig als meinen Diskussionspartner zum Feind zu erklären und umzuhauen, weil Reden ja keinen Sinn mehr hat und einer muss ja gewinnen, wenn man auf der Ebene Konflikte austrägt.
Das macht diese Aufzeichnung viel klarer als es irgendeine Dokumentation sein könnte. Die Aufnahme macht es möglich sich vorzustellen man höre das genau wie eine zeitgenössische Rede, vielleicht eine von Trump, Putin oder Biden. In so einer Rede kann man die Faktenlage ja auch nicht besser prüfen als damals.
Ich habe zum Spaß versucht herauszufinden was es heute an Informationen zu diesem polnischen Botschafter und seiner Kommunikation mit und über Roosevelt zu lesen gibt, und alles was ich gefunden habe ist ein Eintrag der beschreit das es den Mann gab und das er Botschafter war. Vielleicht hat Hitler das einfach erfunden, was er da beschreibt. Damals gab es kein Wikipedia, heute gibt es das aber da steht leider nichts relevantes.
Würde in einer Dokumentation zu dieser Rede etwas zu dem Botschafter stehen. Würde man sich in einer solchen Dokumentation mit den in dieser Rede präsentierten Argumenten auseinandersetzen und die ernsthaft bewerten?
In den vielen Dokumentation die ich gelesen habe kam keine Bewertung der USA vor, die beschreibt inwieweit sie eher Teil einer möglichen Lösung war, die den Krieg hätte verhindern können, oder ob sie vielleicht stattdessen vielleicht sogar eine Teilverantwortlichkeit hatte. Soetwas ähnliches sehe ich heute im Ukraine-Krieg.
Vielleicht gibt es mehr als eine Kriegspartei die aus WW2 hätte lernen müssen. Das würde Hitlers Schuld und die Schuld der Deutschen nicht schmälern. Es würde nur dieser Rede den Überraschungs-Effekt nehmen. Und es würde es auch denen schwerer machen so eine Rede als Beispiel zu verwenden warum man in all den Dokumentationen nichts gelesen hat, dass auf diese Überraschungen vorbereitet hätte.
Dokumentation muss nicht unehrlich sein um weniger Informationen zu transportieren als ein Quelldokument liefert. Dokumentation kann eine Anreicherung sein, oder ein Filter in dem Aspekte ausgelassen werden die dem Autor nicht wichtig sind. Es kann auch eine Lüge sein in dem Falsches behauptet wird, richtiges geleugnet und wichtiges ausgelassen. Das kommt dann ganz auf die Dokumentation an.
Der Author des ursprünglichen Kommentars hat mit dem Ehrlichkeits-Begriff nach meinem Geschmack zu viel Wertung eingebaut. Aber in der Sache kann ich nur zustimmen. Mir sind Quellen viel wertvoller als Reproduktionen oder Interpretationen.
I think one of the reason that Hitler declared war on the USA was his hope that Japan will declare war on Russia (relying on their treaty) thus Russia will have to fight two fronts, a situation which would relieve Germany from the Russian counter attack. However, Japan didn't. The piety of it all is that toward the end of the war, unprovoked by Japan, Russia declared war on Japan, and stole large chunks of its land . In my opinion Japan had a major roll in Germany's defeat.
Yes from what I study the non action of Japan attacking Russia on second front was the main couse of Germany losing the ww2. If he would conquer Stalingrad he would have conquer the Russia and was game over
Ohh how bad 😢, the USSR took the Sakhalin and Kuril islands from Japan, and freed the CHINESE Manchuria. Soo much land lost! I wonder why they would be so mean to innocent Japan, it didn't do anything wrong, right?
It was the other way around. The reason why the U.S. provoked Japan was to keep them out of fighting Russia in order to save Uncle Jew Stalin.
True if the Japanese don’t attack pearl harbour Germany takes all of Europe
The American people wanted no part of this war
Russia did declare war on Japan exactly 3 monthes after defeating Germany becausr it was a part of the lend-lease deal with the USA. Another words Russia just had to do this to receive the US aid and have the second front opened meaning the landing in Normandie, or the D day.
Thank you for posting this !
Who watched it completely and saw parallels to today?
Ja, erinnert an Putin!
Yes, Putin and his megalomaniacal ambitions.
Ja, erinnert an die Westmächte heute.
Well I know that the Democrat Party of the USA loves them some permawar.
That "extremely dangerous to our democracy" in the middle is funny
You seem to think our voting system is much different… they had 12 years of freedom from the oppression that we face today.
@@ethanvanidour Yeah there was so much freedom these 12 years. There was no manipulation via media, you could say whatever you want against the authorities, the elections weren't influenced, there was peace and you could be whoever you are. It didn't matter with what race you were born with. I wish we had that freedom today like in the good old times.
@@ethanvanidourOur people wasn't free in this 12 years. Who told you such a bullshit? I'm shocked by that statement. The regime was everywhere. The Gestapo was feared. The SS was feared. In public you could not critisize anything without getting arrested. Millions of people had to suffer because this bastard want all germans to die heroic in the ruins of the destroyed cities. And don't let us forget the mountains of dead bodies in the camps, victims of a sick idea.
@@HolyNarzThank you for saving me typing 💘
@@st20332 you're welcome
How many Germans watched this today?
I know of at least one;-).
German but living in the US. Actually most Americans didn't want any war back then, and the Fuhrer declared war on the US, so it's not the fault of the US in this context.
@@hvhans305 , Roosevelt wanted the war however.
Many
@@paulpipek9108 still seeing many Americans and businesses in the US having some kind of German sounding names, so there must have been many German immigrants, especially in the previous 100-200 years. In fact lucky to be in the US and not in Nazi Germany back then.
Two fatal decisions by Hitler in 1941: first, invade the USSR, then declare war on the USA. By 1943 he had already lost both wars. 1945 was just the coup de grace.
@@MonTube2006 ... and he does not ask you for permission.
US supplied the British and the RAF were bombing german cities. The USSR were preparing to attack the Reich but Germany pre empted them.
Not just this
1.He trusted that the Great Britain will accept peace deals(He could have invaded them during battle of Dunkirk)
but he was too eager that Britain will accept peace deals. 2 weeks after sending the peace deals no response so they hitler decided too invade England but no luck he didnt win air superiority.had he invaded earlier he could have a chance of taking england. .
2.He trusted Mussolini will follow his plans
it was written in military intel that it will take 1942 for the Italian army to be fully trained and supplied.
So he told Mussolini get your army ready,As the German attack the soviets , Italy will ready its army and after its army is ready Italy will take the Balkans as a show of dominance.
But Mussolini wanted to prove that italy was strong too (Germany defeated france)(Japan took a large part of China and is about to expand in Asia).
So Mussolini wanting to prove Italy is strong like its allies he decided to halt his army on Egypt and declare war on Greece.
Hitle being enraged my this decision he told Mussolini to finish the war fast but Muffinman started losing
So hitle decided to help italy he took the Balkans and then Greece,due to this decision his plan to attack soviets is delayed(He will soon regret this decision had the Germans attacked earlier they could have took Moscow and a large part of caucasian before winter hits)
@@betternowa From Hitler's perspective, it may have been a mistake to let the British evacuate Dunkirk and not (attempt to) invade Great Britain in May-June 1940, but we do not know what would have happened if such an attempted invasion had occurred at that time, coinciding with the invasion of France. On the contrary, the invasion of the USSR and the declaration of war on the USA are facts that occurred, so it is much easier to evaluate their results.
Imagine taking on a P2W player and zerg-rusher at the same time lol.
Vielen Dank.
No matter how Hitler framed it, I have the impression that America was going to war with Germany when the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor. My mother was sitting in the movie theatre in December 1941… 20 years old. And the movie was halted and the presenter came out And said that the Americans had been bombed Pearl Harbor. My mother said everyone in the audience cheered. And I was puzzled. But she said, from that point in that moment they knew they would win the war. Because the Americans were finally coming into the battles. so it was interesting that even though it was the Japanese that bombed the Americans, Canadians knew that the Americans would come in on all fronts. And they also knew that that was the beginning of the end for Germany.
Can you please tell me more stories from your mother - I’m Pakistani but fascinated by WW2 history
By the time Hitler declared war in USA, German armies had been stopped in the tracks before Moscow and the Red Army was beginning to force them back. It was the beginning of the end for Germany. This meant that Hitler should’ve focused all his attention on the eastern front and not have declared war on USA. Germany could not possibly defeat the combined forces of the Soviet Union, United States and British Empire. The very idea.was completely unrealistic.
He was hoping Japan would also invade Russia
Even if he didn't declare war on USA, german would be lose
We talking about soviet, who owns 25% of land in this world at those times. While german already in crisis with oil
If he focused so much to eastern front, the soviet would multiply their production and their army by hundred to thousandfold
Its just predestined for german to lose the moment he attacking soviet
The USA would have joined the war anyways. They were already attacking German submarines and naval assets in the Atlantic before Germany declared war and they militarily occupied Greenland and Iceland. They would have found any excuse, similar to WWI, to join the war against Germany. Also, the “declaration of war” wasn’t really a declaration of war. It was an affirmation that Germany and the United States found themselves in a state of war. You can watch Von Ribbentrop’s speech where he clearly states this.
@@patrickcastell2061 Once Japan attacked the USA at Pearl Harbor and Philippines, it was obvious that Japan had no intention at all of attacking the Soviet Union. Yes, Hitler had hoped that Japan would help him fight SU, but he surely realized that was not going to happen after Pearl Harbor. And Hitler had no treaty obligation to Japan against USA because Japan was the aggressor.
@@Auqi The USA provides vital assistance to both Britain and Soviet Union. Ships to Britain and trucks and other military equipment to SU. And of course massive loans to both. If the USA had remained neutral and not provided such assistance and if Germany had not fought a war on two fronts but concentrated all its military strength against the SU, and if Germany had attacked SU in the spring instead of midsummer, and if Hitler had built more submarines instead of battleships, and if Japan had attacked SU instead of USA this bringing USA fully into the war against Germany, then it might have turned out differently. But thats a lot of big “ifs”. One thing is certain: Hitler underestimated the fighting strength of the SU. He couldn’t believe how many tanks they had!
the declaration of war on the USA begins at 01:21:57 ... die Kriegserklärung im Wortlaut beginnt bei 01:21:57
this is the prime example of the power of words.
And this is why education and information remains important and is a basic human need, because, even today, these words are capable of swaying the minds of many men, who are dazzled and drawn by his words, but forget or overlook the many subtle and dangerous things promoted alongside these impressive speeches.
We shall remain cautious and not take everything without critically thinking about it prior. The devil is charismatic and beautiful, which is why we have to remain contious of our values and what we hold dear. Else we will be tricked into loosing everything precious to us. Just like we lost many of Europe's cities and people in this war. Or just like we lost our peoples economic security for the benefit of the fiew by promoting global trade and moving our industry to Asia, in turn destabilising Europe and America
Always remember: Always keep an eye on those you hand the power of changing your life. It can and will go badly, if unchecked.
Yes! I agree.
@@MrJolte Great words
Holy shit, he is making sense. WTF, I feel so lied to all my life.
Yea , me too
Es gibt noch viel zu revisionieren, viel zu lernen, meine Freunde! Nicht nachgeben, man will uns von der Wahrheit fernhalten.
You think Hitler isn’t lying to you here?
@@TobinTwinsHockey no , big part of this speech is True
@@TobinTwinsHockeyNo, of course not. Why do you believe that?
A really stupid thing to do. It made Roosevelt’s job much easier. Yes, the USA was already committed to helping Britain defeat Germany but Pearl Harbor meant that Roosevelt had to deal with Japan, not Germany. By declaring war in the USA, Hitler gave Roosevelt what he needed to enter the war against Germany openly and with full force and to attack German armies in North Africa. Hitler made a terrible mistake by attacking the Soviet Union in June, 1941, and followed it up with another serious blunder by declaring war against USA in December. He should’ve simply ignored the British declaration of war in September, 1939, and just consolidated his forces and focused on defeating the Soviet Union. He didn’t need to defeat France first, because there was no way that the British and the French would have lifted a finger to help Stalin if Hitler had simply marched against Russia directly and left Britain and France alone. The British and French hated and feared Communism much more than fascism, and the same is true for USA.
You don't understand the kind of person Hitler was. He was a monster, but not in the way such villains are displayed in Hollywood movies. American presidents don't mind it much if children are caged up and deported. That's not unique for Trump. They don't mind it if children die as a result of systematic bombardments. But killing innocents is one component that makes up a monster. Another is indifference. Indifference to something that is extremely valuable to others. Children usually are. If we see a child fall down, we help. We don't necessarily do that for a random stranger.
We see the shortcomings of American presidents in contexts, even if they are at least partially responsible for atrocities, such as the corpses of children. We contrast these flaws with how well the economy did during their term, or we consider that immigration is a very complex and ambivalent topic, and so of course is self-defense. We don't see Hitler in context.
And just like American presidents, Hitler was not just a monster. A great monster, but also a man with cultural and individual peculiarities. One of them was that he enjoyed to display himself as a self-made man and not a rich heir. Just like Trump, even though he is not quite self-made. And yet another part of him was that it was obviously important for him to explain himself and to fight openly. He also loved and protected dogs and he build the Autobahns. It would be a stretch to use terms like chivalry, but he would certainly have agreed.
Did he make it easier for Roosevelt? I don't think this speech made a big difference. The USA has long been a party to the war, just like it is in Ukraine today. The one property nobody would ever assign to the USA is honesty or chivalry. Hitler enjoyed making this a point in this speech.
And no, I did not describe Hitler as an honest knight, even though I came terrifyingly close. But I didn't and very deliberately so.
As for Germany not having to defeat France: That success of this campaign was not a matter of genetics, material superiority or military genius. Had Hitler not done that when he did, he would not have been able to do it later on. Had he done it differently, there was a slight chance he could have pushed the UK out of the war early. That's all speculation, but not an unreasonable one.
At the early stages of the war, France, the UK and others did not fight Germany for any moral or idealistic reasons. There was not yet a holocaust and human rights were not something anybody cared at all, not even in terms of public relations. This was all politics from the very start. Maybe they though Germany was not in a position to even put up a serious fight at all. They have been demilitarized and humiliated just a few years earlier. Don't forget that. France should have been unbeatable for Germany at that time and they probably could have become just that, had it not been defeated swiftly.
Russia was probably also not seen as a great enough thread to have mattered for what the UK was willing to do at this point. It was an abstract thread, much more on an ideological level than in terms of geopolitics or military. Hitler suspected Russian would fight riding on donkeys. And I would be surprised if Churchill would have thought higher of Russians then.
Nobody at that time knew or suspected that there would be a cold war with Russia coming up in which Germany was to be an important ally. There were not even nukes and the game of mutually ensured destruction. War was diplomacy. Increasingly ugly because of technology, but it was still like playing chess.
Should have advised Hitler.
The only reason why operation Barbarossa went so well on the earlier stages is that Stalin was sure, that Hitler is focused on the west and won't attack him. This is why the attack were so unexpected and devastating for the Red army. However, if Hitler ignored the west and focused solely on the Soviet Union, there would be no guarantee, that he is be able to win. Soviets would definetely be prepared for the attack.
Wrong. France and Britain would not have felt at ease neighbouring a Germany who controles the industries and resources of all Central and Eastern Europe. (Balance of Power) Ideological reasonings are just pretexts, mere varnish and smoke screen. A Germany from the Rhine to the Ural would have gobbled up the rest of Europe sooner or later.
Churchill supported communism... he was a blood thirsty warmonger.
America was never going to side with Germany. They already been supplying Britain with aid since the war broke out, similar to what they are doing with Ukraine in 2022-24.
Exactly right!
not much has changed, and the US still wants to destroy state after state
France already know that this Ukraine Russia war will weaken Europe completely. UK USA will benefit from this. This plan cold War plan was already started at the end of last stages of world War. US already deployed in army base in Germany at the end of second World War for launch its attack against Russia is any war situation happens. Many secret plannings were happened during second World War including how to beat Nazi Germany. Those plannings were still now nobody knows. All the things we study about second World War was based documents captured in Germany when allies entered Germany. What was the plannings done in UK, USA, France and Russia nobody still knows. If that documents had come to future, we may figure out what is happening now in the current world. Look after all the wars which happened after the second World War everything is linked to second world War and fall of Berlin Wall.
I hope they have the same viewpoint on Russia today. I'm not so sure with their new leader.
There was a good chance they wouldn't have picked a side at all, thanks to the America-First movement...until Japan pulled off a 3000 IQ move
Wir Lernen nie aus. Viele Dinge die uns nie Erzählt wurden. Es ist gut die wahre Geschichte zu kennen.
Die Geschichte des ww2 beginnt in der Schule erst ab 1939 und das ist Geschichtsverzehrung
@keinplan7686 stimmt nicht die fängt mit dem ersten Weltkrieg an und teilweise der Zeit davor
RUclips:die Zuversicht mit "Die größte Verschwörung der Geschichte" 1. //// RUclips:"DIE VERBORGENE GESCHICHTE" TEIL1 👋 Vielleicht interessiert es sie ja 👋
@@keinplan7686 Die Ukraine Story beginnt auch erst ab 22 - darüber könnte man auch reden!
@@keinplan7686 Das stimmt nicht ich hatte auch wie er an die macht gekommen ist
"We fought the wrong enemy"
🙏
real
follow your leader, dog
It s the info that is wrong...
Mulingan Paddy
Wie schaffst du es, dass die Reden nicht gelöscht werden?
Um 2017 rum hatte RUclips ja 99% der unkommentierten Reden Hitler's entfernt.
Leider ist die englische Übersetzung nur teilweise korrekt. Da ich nicht die gesamte Transkription korrigieren will, hier ein Beispiel:
1:30 „I note that you all stood up to honor our dead comrades.“ - NOT „that you have come up here“. Nicht mal die deutsche Übersetzung ist hier korrekt, da es das Wort „heroben“ im deutschen nicht gibt. Es muss natürlich „erhoben / stood up“ heißen.
So ziehen sich leider unzählige Fehler durch die gesamte Übersetzung. 😢
does this affect substancialy the narrative of the discurse?. Please, help us to understand the right way history
Tatsächlich muss ich wiederum korrigieren: Das Wort "heroben" existiert natürlich im Deutschen (es leitet sich ab von "hier oben"="up here"), auch wenn Göring hier klar "erhoben" sagt und deine Übersetzung korrekt ist. Der deutsche Untertitel mit "heroben" ergibt inhaltlich keinen Sinn, und ist ein Fehler des Erstellers.
Ich habe leider überwiegend nur die Audio angehört, weswegen ich den Rest des Untertitels nicht beurteilen kann.
Thank you brother
i remember this speech was on youtube years ago, before democracy had to be protected
1:17:00
😂
😂😂😂😂
im dead
Banter 😂
🤣The Sterling coin one is also pretty funny.
Wer kämpft, kann verlieren. Wer nicht kämpft, hat schon verloren.
That enormous eagle backdrop is a work of Fine Art.
😂
Thanks for uploading, but white text against bright background isn't comfortably-readable. Use a different image with dark background.
This is gold
The speech was given at the Kroll Opera House in Berlin, not the Reichstag which had been destroyed by fire.
That is correct. After the Reichstag fire, the Reichstag met in the Kroll Opera House. However, the word “Reichstag” here does not refer to the Reichstag building itself, but to the Reichstag as an organ of state. These are two different things. And the Reichstag building was not destroyed, but only damaged (it still exists today).
@ The building the reichstag was destroyed as a functioning building by fire but not leveled. I know it exists I’ve been in it.
i have a feeling things might turn just like this again very soon...
@ganjdalf2821
Hopefuly, otherwise Europe is done.
America is no substitute, it's a degenerate Nation who want's to be both the beacon of the World and vassalize the World.
Having to state that this upload is for educational purposes is an indicator of how stupid we’ve collectively become.
The analogy Hitler made at 1:17:01 was the closest to making a joke I've heard in his speeches 😂
Ich hoffe das bleibt Geschichte. Dessen kann man sich ja nicht mehr so sicher sein.
Your guilt is causing the destruction of your nation. I don't know how one can be so blind to reality.
Heutzutage haben wir vergessen wir selbst zu sein. So kann keine Kultur und kein Land überleben. 😢😢
Dude poked the bear.
Interesting enough, had the Germans and Japanese really trusted each other. They would have coordinated the attack on Russia and attack from both sides. But there was a mistrust that existed, once Japan had attacked the U.S. Stalin decided to believe his spy in Tokyo that Japan had no plans on attacking Russia. Stalin was able to then move his Siberian reserves about 40 divisions in number to the Moscow front. That force pushed the Germans out as they advanced on the Moscow front.
Japan had no interest in the tundra and forests of siberia they desperately needed the oil and rubber of south east Asia and they knew this would need to be protected at all cost by a huge perimeter of island fortresses in the Pacific from the USA.
Yea, the "Berlin Tokio Axis" alliance was more like two drunks who accidentally fell into each other's arms
@@leonpaul9443 plus they got thoroughly whacled by the Soviets in Mongolia shortly beforehands.
@@koperekhabsburdzki43Germany was considering an Alliance with China before, as they had a good relationship but decided for Japan for strategic reasons
I looked. I couldn't find those transferred divisions from Siberia at the Moscow front. All of the divisions that were involved in that offensive were new. Shortly after Germany invaded, there was a mass mobilization drive that created new divisions.
Even today with the modernity, you can see how similar Americans and Germans are. Both young and old people. They all have the same style. And check out The Ludolfs, they look like some Texan junkyard denizens lmao.
We have Karens that look just like American ones. The food the stuff and everything has become so American here in Germany. But in America there are still bigger foods and bigger drinks and people as well but Germany is #3 country of the fattest people.
I’m German.
youre not fkin german 🤡🤡🤡🤡
Your statement reminds me of a friend of mine. He wants to immigrate to the US so much. I asked why. He said “I want to go where the poor people are fat”. Germany too huh?
Whose poking my crown! This is educational! Just curious about the words he used, and any overlap with future politicians.
The way Hitler personally throws insults at Roosevelt sounds just like the kind of thing Trump would say.
It was Roosevelt who constantly insulted Hitler before this speech. He literally talks about this, did you not hear the whole speech ?
Ur a clown. How’d that L taste last night simp ?
And coughs into the Mic like Hillary
ja,die Warheit ist für Manchen eben hart.
@@Lev259 how dare roosevelt insult the genocidal warmongering maniac??? cmon
What a great way to learn German!!
Bro been smoking 2 much panzerschokolade and became insane thinking he could fight any1
Bro got greedy after having first blood on mid lane and a couple kills on bot lane.
A fatal flaw of anyone who thinks they know better than anybody else about anything
@@synergygaming604 You dont think a heart surgeon knows how to do heart surgery better than fast food worker? Now get back to your fast food job
@@vincentdipazio8143 What's wrong with fast food workers? They're a vital sector of the economy. The context of my comment is in regard to the little mustache man who presumed he often knew better than his generals. Thanks for playing.
@@synergygaming604 Your comment is absurd in any context. Reeks of a reddit mod/video game dork trying and failing to sound intelligent
It would be great if someone more talented than myself would record this in English like the other AI assisted speeches. Thanks in advance if it comes to pass!
He made some HUGE mistakes that costed him everything, allienating the Slavs, hating the Jews, but THESE levels of sovereignity towards the USA, Germany can ONLY dream about today. And since the 1945 till today, really. And with it, most of the EU. Except France.
It's incredibly refreshing and quite extraordinary to see Germany having this kind of attitude towards the USA. This is how a FREE leader sounds like. With it's own interests. Too bad that Germany couldn't see broader European interests beyond it's own selfish interests. Poland, Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia, weren't communist countries at that time. Only the USSR. Yet they were targeted as enemies on nationalistic basis. Sad that Europe lost it's big chance in the world cause of such stupidities. Now, German leaders can't even answer ANYTHING to the USA president without ruining their own pants...
Hitler went full Trump on Roosevelt!
Europa the last Battle: newspaper from USA With Propaganda war
I wonder why don't they show any movie about the crimes of the Americans?
GENIUS! The "extremely dangerous to our democracy" text censoring the Voldemort symbol haha
Very interesting to hear the other perspective. We will probably never know which corresponds to the truth. Are there any reports confirming whether the provocations and attacks by the Americans on the merchant ships were true?
I also find it interesting that there were negotiations with Poland over the territories before the war. However, after the illegal attack on Poland under international law, I don’t understand why France and Great Britain declared war only on Germany and not on Russia. Russia also annexed parts of Poland. It’s also noteworthy that Germany wanted to make peace with Great Britain, but Great Britain wasn’t interested in peace.
They were full of lies. Germany provoked America multiple times, first, and not the other way around. And Hitler's peace treaties are bs. The world leaders learnt the hard way that appeasement doesn't work with leaders like Hitler. Appeasement is an extremely important concept to learn about when it comes to WW2, so please educate yourself. When Britain appeased Germany after it annexed Czechoslovakia, they had a peace treaty that Hitler won't take ke things any further even after doing something illegal, which he broke by invading Poland and starting WW2
Plus Hitler had already betrayed his ally, Stalin and USSR, so there's no reason to believe he'd uphold peace treaties.
@@rayeenrafsan4080
it's so funny how Hitler comes up with excuses to breaking a promise.
"Oh yeah, we made a treaty, but.. uuuhh... they're ready to attack us... and lying to us and uuh... can't you see how they are harming the Germans?! And uuhh.. yeah that's it invade Poland!"
@rayeenrafsan4080
I've always been a relativist, thinking that we won't have enough facts to justify anything, so any viewpoint could be correct, and it's all up to subjective interpretations.
But your comment made me think: is there any way to actually point out all of Hitler's actual lies, and compare them to other leader's speeches, find lies in them also?
This would factually, and not just philosophically, like you probably saw me do under the other guy's comment, justify that nazis and neo-nazis are, well, lying and violent.
To side or not to side with them would later be up to a person, sure. But this way they won't be dillusional about it. A person joining their side would, after knowing the factual truth, perfectly understand that they're siding with evil.
Oh ma, einfach mal dämliches Halbwissen in den Äther gepustet.
We all remember December 7, 1941 and December 8, 1941, but this is hardly talked about. Not many nations delcare war on us. It was Germany and Italy that delcared war, due to the The Tripartite Pact aka The Berlin Pact.
They had to declare war only if Japan was attacked,not the other way around,learn some history
This is history! It should never be banned! I hope youtube understands! Sadly they don't in most history! Sad
This was the real suicide for millions of germans and at last for himself.
83 years ago today
The man really believed what he was saying back then. Nevertheless, he must have realized then that the cards would be reshuffled when the USA entered the war.
His predictions litteraly came true.
After WW1 America had
12 000 new Millionars .
This day it all.
Us English should have sided with the Germans in ww2. Hitler tried so many times to make peace with Great Britain. It's depressing that us English murdered our German brothers, knowing they were right. Look at the state of the world now. Here in England, our towns and cities are becoming unrecognisable, and our culture is disappearing
Da hast du recht, der Frieden wurde mehrmals angeboten und im Frankreich Feldzug britische Truppen verschont obwohl man hätte 300k Truppen vernichten können..... Glaubst du das war Zufall..... Ich denke nicht, wir wissen heute alle wie effizient die Wehrmacht war
Errr... 700 years of British Empire abroad...
Memory not much?!
Actions have consequences, laddie.
Germany raped and pillaged poor Norway and treated neighboring Denmark like shit and you talk about siding with Germany? And both Norway and Denmark are supposedly Germanic? Please.
@@mlyntoNorway and Denmark were treated with kid gloves by Germany compared to the Slavs of the East.
und was musste Sudetendeutschland alles ertragen? Denkst du es wird ewig weggeschaut? Sowas kommt von sowas...... Es wurde alles getan dafür das es kein Frieden gab nicht nur von Deutschland aus...... Russland zum Beispiel hat Polen auch angegriffen und Finnland aber dazu sagt ihr alle nix.....
The war against Germany by the USA started in July 1941 5 month before this event when President Roosevelt ordered the American Armed Forces to sink all German ships they encountered. Many German and Americans died in these encountered and at least one American destroyer ( the Ruben James ) was sunk in October 1941 with a loss of 120 American sailors loosing their lives. So the action by Roosevelt was in fact a declaration of war against Germany. So who were the aggressors?
yes, who was the aggressor? Maybe the one who invaded Poland, Denmark, Norway, the Netherlands and Belgium without being at war with them?
@@fahrradmittelfranken8207 Do you still not know after over 80 years that Poland murdered 62,000 Germans from 1919 to Sept.1 1939 in the corridor? I suggest that you read the book by the son of the world famous violinist "Menuhin" ( a Jew) Gerard Menuhin " Wahrheit Sagen Teufel Jagen". In English "Tell the Truth and Shame the Devil". Germany had every right to protect its ethnic Germans just like Putin had the right to protect its ethnic Russians in the Ukraine.
@@fahrradmittelfranken8207 So einfach ist es nicht! Da gab es überall Vorgeschichten und Provokationen seitens Polen und England. Der Weltkrieg begann erst indem England und Frankreich sich in den Konflikt mit Polen einmischten. Sonst wäre die Geschichte nach wenigen Wochen erledigt gewesen aber England wollte einen Großen Krieg , genau wie die Selben heute wieder Krieg wollten. Alte Reden verraten sehr viel was uns die heutige Sieger Propaganda verschweigt
@@fahrradmittelfranken8207deine primitive Ablenkung funktioniert nicht!!! 😂
Propaganda Troll!!!
@@fahrradmittelfranken8207
No war......also this tragic world war never falls from the sky.....there is in every case a historic-development behind it.
The Germans (and the russians today) was a threat for the anglistic dominance in the world.
The "treaty of Versailles" was the cornerstone to keep the german nation down.
Germany lost the war and is today not more as the 51-state of the USA.
Now russia.....with it's enormous natural resources is the new target for the international "free" financial system.
how did you find this?
@@CopycatkboxRUclips internet Archive
Watching for educational purposes
„Ich verstehe nicht, warum die Leute sagen, ich hätte keinen Geschmack in der Mode. Diese braunen Hemden sind zeitlos, wie guter Wein... fragt mich aber nicht nach den Hosen.“
Even now, the description of our politicians rings true
what you are not mentioning is the terror you have done prior against Germany.
Ich würde an Ihrer Stelle versuchen, die Reden auch unter deutschem Titel mit deutscher Beschreibung einzustellen. Mit englischem Titel werden sie insbesondere Englisch Sprechenden vorgeschlagen, wie man an den Kommentaren sieht. Alles Gute!
Aber genau dafür wurde es Ja hochgeladen
Soll das ein Service für rechtsextreme Neonazis sein?
Hallo cassandra ich liebe deine Arbeit! 💙💙💙
It's good that English speakers can understand the German perspective.
I velieve there is also video of this speech somewhere
Germany had a really cool leader at one time
What are you talking about? This isn't about Willy Brandt. It's about fricking Hitler :/
Ok Butthead lol
Fascinating and thank you 🙏🏻
the national anthem sounds so good
1:13:55 I feel like that modus operandi was followed by more presidents than just Roosevelt.
The "What is Europe?" part always stuck with me for some reason.
Another sign of his over-confidence, and arrogance. Already facing the Soviets and the British, he adds the USA. Sure, Adolf, take on a nation with large amounts of resources when you're already on two fronts.
Arrogance ? Roosvelt provoked him
@@filiplenart9537 Mr. Harrison?
His Army was facing a strong and unexpected resistance from the "Untermenschen" and he declares war to the 1st military power of his time...That guy was completely deliusionnal !
And many people fall for him, even now. Dumme Menschheit!
I have to say the speech itself is really quite excellent. Too bad the content is self serving b.s. but he sure could be convincing.
A bright image in the background and white subtitles. It is hard to see them. Who tf had this idea? Give him a darwin award.
Better than nothing… it will get banned by YT soon anyway
Lern deutsch
@@Luka23567never saw a nazi historical video get get banned on yt I think ur paranoid
this was the point in time when he fell into idiocracy
A bit like Trump now…
Alot of things not mentioned in "The History" books that is mentioned in this speech, one of the most important being that around 62,000 germans that were living in poland got killed BEFORE the war started, and that this was one of the main catalysts of germany invading poland.
Information on these germans getting killed in poland is hard to find. The search algorythm buries it hard.
Some time ago I did find a website that claimed that the UK sent a telegram to a certain polish general essentially giving him the green light to kill ethnic germans and if germany declared war that the UK had polands back.
Obviously, you cant link websites on youtube.
But if ur smart enough, you can find this info and this website too.
No, the Nazis wanted to arrest and murder 61,000 Germans after taking over Poland (Sonderfahndungsbuch Polen). There were armed fights about Upper Silesia and displacements but no massacres against Germans in Poland 1919-39. AFTER the attack in September 1939, yes, about four to five thousand victims. Really, you want to make us believe that Poles massacred almost 10% of all ethnic Germans in Poland? This would have resulted in a mass immigration, Germans fleeing Poland into Germany, but htis never happened.
This is fake and has been disproven many times. But even if it was true it doesnt excuse a full on extermination and attack on the whole nation. Stop trying to justify horrendous human beings
When he made the joke about the bald man , didn’t know hitler did humour !
Actually buying propaganda is INSANE
As if the allies didn’t utilize propaganda, are you retarded ?
Hitler was in desperation as his gamble versus the Soviet Union was failing, and he needed some kind of "success", a show of force. At least it hastened the ending of WW2 somewhat!
*Germany was forced into the War...*
Why? Because someone want to Dominate? Because someone want to have total control? Better zero dominance and earth without humanity.
In some sense yes. But only in some sense.
@@constantinioan5425 drunk warmonger Churchill started a war that nobody wanted in the name of poland.
appalling how this nonsense has so many likes.
he interrupted an agenda of the elites to financially exploit Germany, so he had to go and so did Germany's economic power. After that, things continued exactly as before until today. And not just in Germany
Was Hitler already present when Göring opened the Session?
Obviously he was,idiot
Hitler was also a member of the Reichstag
That empty seat was his
He couldn’t defeat Britain, so he attacked Russia. He couldn’t defeat Russia, so he declared war in the United States. What a genius.
By the time he was´nt believing in victory anyway...
@ there was no evidence that HITLER did not believe in victory in December 1941. Some of his generals BELIEVED that it was only a matter of time before Germany lost the war. However, a rational person could have no way of knowing what the outcome would be that early in the war.
@@abrakadabramo True, by November 1941 Hitler was convinced that the war was lost. "Operation Barbarossa" had already failed in the midth of July 1941 (Juli-Krisis). Goebbels' diary reflects quite well the sentiments and pre-sentiments of himself and other leading nazis. By declaring war on the U.S. he tried to look strong and hoped, maybe, maybe Japan in the Pacific and a stiff U-Boat campaign in the Atlantic (Operation Paukenschlag) may fend off the U.S. A desperate leap of faith.
You're the genius
He COULD defeat Britain. A naval invasion of Britain was seriously considered, but he decided against it. Attacking the USSR was not a matter of choice, it was either you strike first and get the element of surprise, or you get attacked first and lose any advantages.
Greece was a start of Europe in beginning of speech and then war with Greece to defend Europe. German perfect logic spin
Very interesting
Die Tonqualität ist bedauerlich sehr schlecht. Ich konnte den Führer nicht ganz verstehen…YT, bitte verbessern Sie die Ton Qualität der Führeransprachen!
Daran haben diese Lügner und Vertuscher der Wahrheit, kein Interesse!!
Nich immer beklagen! Selber was tun. Ich habe mir ein einfaches Mischpult Programm geladen und selbst optimiert.
Desweiteren geht es um die Aussagen, nicht um dein Höhrvergnügen.
Jaaaawohl!
Wir haben den Führer gebeten seine Rede noch einmal mit moderner Aufnahmetechnik zu wiederholen. Leider hat er abgelehnt.
da heulen die nazibengel
Great historical footage. Suomi mainittu 🎬🇫🇮
Danke, Italien🇮🇹🤝🇩🇪
When the article writers in our democratic newspapers declared today…
Wenn die Artikelschreiber unserer demokratischen Zeitungen heute erklären…
23:07
Major factors that saved England during World War II: Hitler's decision to invade Russia instead of England, the English Channel, which prevented a land invasion by the German Wehrmacht, and the industrial capacity of the United States, which produced and contributed thousands of tanks, airplanes, ships, rifles, ammunition, men, etc.
I suppose the Royal Air Force shooting quite a few Luftwaffe aircraft in 1940 didn't deswade the little Corporal as well.....
Hmm... yes, they totally did not attack the UK at all and went straight to the Soviet Union...
"Saved England" and how is England today?
@@j8816k still better than under german rule lmao
@@BaptisteMoreau-yx7vs uhh absolutely not. I can promise you that Hitler would not have allowed Britain to be overrun by immigrants eating away at the very fabric of the United Kingdom. Besides, there was never going to be German rule. There were no plans for anything West of Germany before the UK and France declared war on Germany.
Where we always met. Our spot of regular cadence.
It is interesting to watch the whole speech. His comment that America wanted to take over the British Empire was prescient, as was his comment that it needed the war to rescue its economy. Hitler's major blunders were setting out exterminate Jews, attacking Russia, and trying to force with tyranny his rule on all Europe, on the notion that he was thus saving Europe. If he had restricted himself only to rescuing the German economy, his place in history would be very different. It is a surprise here to see his sense of humour on display.
At that point your basically saying if Hitler wasn't Hitler he would be good lol
@@nonono9194 ussr invaded Poland on the east , invaded Finland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithonia and Romania.
"rescuing the economy" - ? - I heard once that the rationing imposed by the US government was totally a political move to get the people involved in the war effort. I don't know if that is true, but it was a shrewd propaganda tactic, like the camps for holding Japanese Americans. There are so many aspects to the war, I don't if any historian has covered them all.
@@jakekgope1061 Maybe if they did occupy Finland there would've been no deadly Leningrad siege.
1:16:54 He is calling it just „socialist“, not even nationalsocialist.
There are inaccuracies in every label, similarly "Democrats" now undermine their namesake process. Obviously many people can claim a label with different intentions.
why does the most evil man in the world sound so darn reasonable? almost as if he was onto something or maybe even right? wait beeing right is not right right???
or maybe you just have the same brain disease as he did
Der vom Frieden heuchelt und ewig nur zum Kriege hetzt. - is he talking about our time?
Hundreds of thousands of mostly young American casualties during ww2 in Europe alone, was it really worth it?
According to FDR and the Democratic Party it was all worth it.
If the US didn't intervene, the war had prolonged for sure. But the Soviets would still have defeated the Nazi Regime and Japan sooner or later. In fact the US brought all to an end much sooner, also in the Pacific, to be fair. ( Other allies too, but I'm mainly talking about the part of the US here )
In my opinion no. The USA at that time had way more in common with Germany than the soviets, but that's just my opinion. That war should've never happened in the first place. Also look at the world today and tell me it's better.
@@alexfriedman2152the world today is much, much better than what it was in the 1930-40s. How can you even raise such a stupid question?
@@alexfriedman2152 Had Roosevelt been a good president he would have opened up a dialogue with Hitler instead of threatening him.
This showed up right next to Loud Israel Music on my homepage
And there are those today (and on this channel's commentary thread) who would fall for this kind of evil nonsense.
Edgys
Edgys like hitler and goebbels
Dont worry once they enter middle school they start becoming communists
Yea, this is how powerful the nazis' hatespeech was. It numbs your mind and convinces you that gruesome actions are warranted to avert some kind of non-existent catastrophe. Ever wondered how ordinary, good people suddenly became SS wardens in Auschwitz? It was this kind of manipulation of the mind. They thought they were fighting for a just cause. It's saddening to see how times have changed, but people really haven't.
The perfect example of the conviction that grows from a shared delusion.
Germany didn't want this war but was forced into it.
100 years later, westerners will literally get systematically replaced, with their identity outlawed and the overwhelming majority will still disagree with your statement. Never bother with stupids, they said NO to Germany and commited racial and societal suicide in the process. Sad but still a laughable consequence of their action. France is done, England is done and the US is on its way. The same so-called 2 party system under so called democracy well known to be a problem in the 1940s is 100% just a rotten face letting any foreign interest and Monopoly to rule someone else's country. This will be a historical and may I add, well deserved unrecoverable miskate to Wikipedia's debunked Aryan race.
@@michelangelodrawcars5778exacly 😉
Laber nicht so einen Unsinn
@Ameisenigelytk i'm just quoting from the speech
@@jhutfre4855 but you see it's a lie, right?