After years of studying the Hitler regime, switching between beliefs that he was organic, a Rothschild patsy, or even a Jew himself, I have arrived at the conclusion that he was NOT a Jew, and he was NOT a Rothschild patsy, but he was indeed fully a patsy until 1933, with full control only since December 1941, when he took over the Wehrmacht. Essentially, he was a political PR product of the revanchist Prussian military elite that seethed with resentment over both the reduction of the German military to only 100,000 troops, seeking to restore the German military might and MIC, and also wanted to recover lost territories, even if only in the east. Austria and the Sudetenland were merely political ploys and stepping stones to the real objective of restoring the land connection between East Prussia and the rest of Germany (to which Fritz II dedicated his life also). This is evident from a number of facts:>the Nazis didn't invent the aggressive policy toward Poland; that it was officially put on hold between mid-1934 and 1938 notwithstanding, it was in fact core German policy even in the maligned "Weimar Republic" which never recognized Germany's post-WW1 eastern border, as highlighted by the Locarno treaties of 1925 when Germany finally renounced claims to Alsace-Lorraine, accepted the French occupation of the Rhineland and Saar basin, but won for itself the tacit approval of Western powers for its lack of recognition of the eastern border and therefore potential future "revision">Hitler was a Reichswehr agent (military intelligence glownigger) handed a COINTELPRO-tier task of infiltrating a small anti-establishment party, the DAP, soon taking over it, renaming it NSDAP; the overarching goal was to neutralize the socialist movement in Germany which was winning over the workers in the cities and which battled with the ex-military Freikorps, and to present that as an alternative to this movement (essentially, a controlled oppo that served the establishment's goals)
TLDR: OP is a kike
>>535946876Use case?
>>535946876koolaid .you should fund your army and respect them
>>535946876>>Hitler was a Reichswehr agent (military intelligence glownigger) handed a COINTELPRO-tier task of infiltrating a small anti-establishment party, the DAP, soon taking over it, renaming it NSDAP; the overarching goal was to neutralize the socialist movement in Germany which was winning over the workers in the cities and which battled with the ex-military Freikorps, and to present that as an alternative to this movement (essentially, a controlled oppo that served the establishment's goals)ANDHitter was to be the German version of communism, they didn't want the real communists, the red Army to get a foot hold so they created Hitler as a undercover agent, named Reichswehr, Dietrich was his handler I read some of his accounts. Hitlers public speaking skills blew everybody away.
Would you kill baby Hitler? Irrelevant. Just as the B.G. in Dune planted many "seeds" alternative to Paul, so were there many other potential Hitlers. The "Weimar Republic" was so flawed a democracy that it was more of a hybrid regime. Consider Eisenhower's farewell address warning about the MIC and its potential harmful influence on democratic processes.>Ludendorff and Hindenburg, who spearheaded the junta that ruled Germany in 1916-1918, fostered Hitler's political ascent from the beginning; Ludendorff participated in the Beer Hall Putsch and Hindenburg appointed Hitler as Chancellor and glued together the coalition in the political crisis of 1931-1933>although rejection of the Treaty of Versailles & occupation & reparations it imposed etc. was popular, the German public didn't want war, still war-weary like the French and everyone else; from contemporary memoirs and post-war testimonies it is evident that the officer cadre was much more war-mongering, supporting the war economy and rationing that started in the 1930sAbout 1/3 of the officer cadre was pro-war (specifically pro-"limited war" with Poland), 1/3 were opportunist hangers-on & rest against war from the outset. When push came to shove, the split crystallized at about 50/50. Wilhelm Keitel reported this to Hitler, even though, he stated, he "knew it wouldn't soothe Hitler's distrust in his generals." With Hitler at the helm, bred as the militarist patsy, warmongers had the upper hand though, and the naysayers were presented with a fait accompli. To smooth things over, he presented the war as a counter-attack after setting up false flags. Keitel notes that after the signing of the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact on August 23, as everyone believed that now the Western Powers would do nothing and they would have a free reign over Poland together with the Soviets. As they did not want a war with the Western Powers, remembering the bitter experience of fighting them in WW1.
After the war, high-ranking German officers upheld the "counter-attack" narrative although inconsistently. Erich von Manstein starts off his memoir with this whitewashing framing but after some pages writes about the planning and conduct of offensive/hit-and-run operations. In all the testimonies of German officers there is one consistency though. They were all for a war with Poland, even the Wehrmacht officers dismissed in 1938 who had nothing to do with it (Werner von Fritsch, Werner von Blomberg), who stated that it was necessary. Quoting von Blomberg: "to erase the shame." And they were all only disappointed that it escalated from their envisioned limited war, into a world war.Erich von Manstein lamented in his memoir that they failed to provoke Poland to attack first, for if they had then pushed it back, it would've been possible to redraw the "shameful" borders with political means. Heinz Guderian noted: "We didn't enter war lightly. The older officers and many thousands of men had experienced the First World War."
>>535947038>Use case?don't simp for patsies, it's that shrimple
>>535946876>I was wrong for years>I shilled lied on /pol/ for years>listen to my right now (my opinion is still fringe and I have no citations)Extremely cringe
>>535947266
>A notable event would be the Locarno treaties signed in 1925, which whilst nominally safeguarding Germany’s western borders with France and Belgium, would tacitly leave her eastern frontiers open to revision (owing to the lack of guarantors and security provisions). This was in line with the German foreign minister Gustav Stressemann’s words on foreign policy objectives: “The readjustment of our eastern frontiers; the recovery of Danzig, the Polish corridor; and a correction of the frontier in Upper Silesia”. By 1926, shortly before Piłsudki's coup, he would speak on the recent signing of the German-Soviet Treaty of Berlin: “[...] and the Germans since Locarno have made their second approach to the Russians since Rapallo . . . already the pincers are beginning to squeeze.”>The issue of territorial revisions persisted. French PM Laval met with Chancellor Brüning, with the latter continuing to raise the matter as a solution to Franco-German relations. Abwehr’s discovery of Polish HUMINT assets within Germany; best exemplified by the scandal surrounding the arrest and exchange Sosnowski had been collecting intelligence from various sources on not only German re-armament but also German-Soviet cooperation. Poland would ultimately seek a non-aggression pact with the Soviet Union, signed in 1932, to allow room for maneuvering against Germany.>The Polish government had been sounding out the French as to their willingness to commit to a preventive war and enforce treaty provisions (e.g., disarmament). The German government was aware of this & while the French refused Piłsudski’s proposal, it did manage to apply pressure on the new (Nazi) German government to end the customs war, sign a non-aggression pact with Poland and suspend their territorial ambitions. Former secretary of state in the Reich Chancellory Otto Meissner would note the peaceful relations with Poland owed to Hitler’s fears of French receptiveness towards Piłsudski’s proposal.
>>535947038Usecase for your post?
>>535946876Interesting post. Bump
>>535946876If you try to whitewash socialism unbump :)
>>535946876The signs are obvious. Nobody gets out of prison after two years after staging a coup.He must have been given a deal he couldn't refuse. Additionally, there are many suspicious circumstances regarding the Rothschild connection, for example how he stayed at one of their shelters (confirmed in Epstein emails), how he essentially released a Rothschild for scraps while taking a much harsher tone towards low-level jews, how the Chabad prophet Rabbi literally escaped from the Soviets through Germany, ...Anyone with pattern recognition will realize that there are too many coincidences. Although the last point is not so much about Hitler himself, but about the Nazi party as a whole
>>535950483The Rebbe Schneer(forgot the rest of his name) dude, right?
>>535950624Yes him. I also keep forgetting
>>535950624
He literally started as the head of the German communist party and a literal fed, why is anyone surprised apart from polcel nazis that he was total controlled op.
>>535946876nah, man. Hitler was a Globalist fighting globalization
>>535950372>If you try to whitewash socialism unbump :)national socialism was... socialist. just pro-establishment also and formally allowing nominal private ownership despite actually switching the economy to a state-controlled one
>>535950773Not exactly. He was a part of the Bavarian korps, but I don't think he ever was a member of a communist party.Eventually he did burn all the bridges with the communists somewhere after WWI, which I am still not sure what exactly happened, but I believe he blamed them for Germany losing WWI(which is funny because the white army in Russia also blamed communists for the Brest treaty, and both can't be true at the same time)
>>535950483I think not Rothchild, he was a zionist so contrarian to the world socialist transformation (Trotskys "continuous revolution").But Rockfeleer financed Hitler. He also had a "virology" institute in New York, and mandated modern medicine correctness. The "viruses" and health seem a big thing for internationalist socialist/bolsheviks plans.
>>535951078https://www.globalresearch.ca/history-of-world-war-ii-nazi-germany-was-financed-by-the-federal-reserve-and-the-bank-of-england/5530318
>>535946876>he was indeed fully a patsy until 1933This is correct in a way, the conservative German military establishment thought they could use him and his paramilitary soldiers to defeat their enemies on the left (since nobody really liked the conservative establishment but Hitler was quite popular). However, Hitler skilfully outmanoeuvred them and managed to get into the dominant position in government and then booted the conservatives out since nobody liked them.Hitler was based and he showed how you can dupe the system into giving you power.
>>535951078Well the Rothschilds kind of seem like the "oberjuden" to me, since they connect zionist jews with all other kinds of jews.For example, they have a strong foothold in the democratic party despite them being openly zionsit, pro netanyahu, pro Iran war.Meybe they didn't have that bridge role in the past but it is what they have now
>>535951098Hitler only took over the Wehrmacht in December 1941. He and the military establishment had been wrestling for control for quite some time by then
Also Hitler had the knight of the big knives to depose of Ernst Rohm and his group so his homosexuality past would be hidden.
Alsohttps://youtu.be/sgxC36cVanc?is=NU7dEw7U7vUB7ZKI
>>535951098That is not entirely true that everyone hated conservatives. Women gave them a lot of votes. People say women voted Hitler into power, which is false, men voted NSDAP more than women.However, women voted conservative by a huge margin and those conservative votes then enabled the Enabling Act of 1933
>>535946876So what exactly explains this retard starting an existential war with Russia, who had been supplying them with war materiel right up to the invasion? Is it all just Napoleon LARP?
>>535952118I suspect Alfred Rosenberg is responsible for it. He was the biggest USSR hawk in the Nazi party (because he was from a powerful Baltic family and his properties were nationalized by the bolsheviks)
>>535946876>Prussian military elite that seethed with resentment over both the reduction of the German military to only 100,000 troops, seeking to restore the German military might and MIC, and also wanted to recover lost territories, even if only in the east.So you've arrived at basically what every historian already knows? That's actually impressive.
>>535952118Stalin ruined international socialistm and Hitler was put in power and propped up to destroy his rule.
>>535953369The weird thing about WWII is how everyone supported everyone until things just blew up overnight.USSR was the largest exporter of oil and gaz to Germany, which couldn't have built a war machine without that. Britain just let Germany break the Versailles treaty despite the saying that Brits really hate GermansWall street financed both the Bolsheviks and Hitler.Henry Ford which Hitler admired, supported the USA, but also was the man who significantly helped the industrialization of the USSR, without which it would be significantly more difficult to defeat Hitler.And USA briefly aligned with USSR, despite basically propping up Germany before and nearly going to war with USSR immediately after.Despite the fact that in WWI, half of the monarchs fighting were friends and related, the friend-enemy distinction was somehow much clearer throughout the entire thing
>>535946876The problem most people have, is that they will have grown up with school textbooks (which are published by Jews. For example, Ghislaine Maxwell's father was involved in the company that published schoolbooks in the US. You also have "documentaries" or popular media which like to also echo this specific version of events.The key thing to note, at least for Western audiences, is that they make it seem like Hitler was just a madman who invaded Poland for no reason. In the book I read in school, it only talks about how evil the Germans were for invading Poland and starting the world war. They completely ignore the fact that the USSR also invaded and the country was carved up. The Russian version is that Poland started the war. Maybe that version is more honest and there is no Zionist Jews involved with publishing this version. Maybe they also want to whitewash their involvement in the war. Who knows. But what I do know is that once you learn about the fact that the official Jewish fairytale version is that the moral reasons for fighting the war are:>racism is the worst evil>nazis were racist and killed people based in their race>this is why Jews were targeted, unfairly and attempted to be wiped out>also nazis rejected democracy, it's dictators like Hitler that allow these kinds of war and genocideIt ignores: US put the Japanese Americans in camps. The lesser races (like Indians) were also just treated like "resources" and used as fodder (by the Brits).The holocaust myth came later, after the war, by Jews not only to shame Germans but to also try to justify the state of Israel (and the crimes they accuse Germans of, they do to the natives there).Laslty: "muh democracy" - they quietly ignore the fact that the allies were willing to team up with Stalin, who seems to have gotten away with being the "aggressor" (along with Germany) to carve up Poland. And of course, being a brutal dictator that killed a lot of people. Again it's skipped over.
>>535951694Too many men got their goose on
>>535946876big idiot, this hitler. executed the best general, send the army to die in stalingrad.
>>535946876All of this type propaganda:>"Hitler was a Jew!">"Hitler only had one testicle">"Hitler had a urination fetish and liked to piss on his niece"It's all just seething Jews that know they can't attack him directly. If they make the argument for example, that Germans don't deserve "lebensraum", to expand east by force. Then what gives Israel the same right to do something like expand its borders? Do you see? So the best they can do is say he killed over a gorillian Jews and all this nonsense.On the invasion of Russia, I think that it can be explained by the gambler's fallacy. They had a lot of sweeping success. Especially if you look at how quickly they took countries like France, the Brits fled back to their island. It's possible to see how they thought that if they could spreedrun towards Moscow and hold it that they would have a good chance, perhaps knock out the communists (which both Hitler and even his Prussian generals hated). It doesn't have to be that Hitler was a "puppet". Sometimes when the right circumstances emerge even people who would normally be enemies team up. Look at it today, there are people on the left who hate Israel as well as people on the right. Some of those people, you might not agree with their politics, maybe they like things like abortion and so on, but you can at least see that you can work together with these people. To get something done about Israel, even just economic penalties or something. I suspect there was a similar tension in Nazi Germany. Hitler could woo the working class, and he was a veteran himself, so there would be some things in common with those who maybe in a different Germany (where WWI and its humiliation of Germany didn't happen) where they would be more political fighting and so on.
>>535953599The Bolsheviks WERE pro Hitler. Stalin was misdirectioned by socialist lies.
