Nazi germany vs japan Videos

no natural resources50+ allied nations against them

And fascist italy too ;)

+OboSoma brBlackoma I really dislike the American government, that's nothing I could agree with. Do you know what the imperial Japan did back then? Consentration Camps, forcing religion and culture and so on?

America would be better if japan invaded it

What japanese Soldiers did for exaple in Nanking really was horrible. That unimaginable pain, the chinese in Nanking had to suffer ... it was saddistic and sick.And the nuclear bombs in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, were horrible too. That's no question. To drop them down above a hospital at one of the biggest cities in Japan and kill hundred thousands of japanese civilians, is awful (especially because burn wounds are one of the most painfull wounds). Sure, it quited the war, but it wasn't the right way to quit a war.

it was sarcasm....

+CrusaderPRT WHat did they do worse? Killed millions of civilians in one go? They, according to american reports, actually avoided hospitals during Pearl Harbor. The "we just had to bomb them" is a later fabrication of westerners feeling bad about their barbarity. 

Agree, what japanese did was much worse than dropping 2 atom bombs on civillians, and those bombs are still killing ppl today cuz of radiation... oh wait.....

+Jan Eriksson Dude, you've made plenty of  fool of yourself, just stop.

+DerKusari TD He's Swedish, he wants to show off about how "enlightened" he is. Pussy PC. 

+Jan Eriksson Who is racist?

How did it even MAKE IT onto there?!

+Justus Schmidt ''I hate that Hitler Schweine''

HIMMEL!!! eddie runs away like a girl

+Алиев Эльмар USSR was its own hope from russian not america 

+Nicholas Custance omg, may be becouse ussr wasthe last hope of Europe and America?

+usuariofuturista Yees)))

+Prince Banana breath of fire 4 <3

random

Oh, I thought I was an "atheist, materialistic Jew"! LOL! Either I'm a "Godless Bolshevik" or a "Christian" one! Make up your mind, Aryan cunt!

+Augusto Mazdakifilthy christian bolshevik scum, go suck jesus dick

Ok and what is it

It ain't a "Nazi video".

Happy now sir

I sorry for puting a nazi video

Shut me up, pussy. ASSatru bitchboy.

+Augusto Mazdaki shut the fuck up junkie scumbag

is just a video

ho are you

+cristian limendux pere Fuck Hitler!

+Eirik Mæhlum Don't be Blasphemous, Putin is the greatest Leader in Human history, but, he is not God.

+Robert SToner You are forgetting the border conflicts between the USSR Far Eastern Army Groups and the Imperial Japanese Army in Manchukuo (Manchuria in North-Eastern China)

+Robert SToner Russia inflicted 80% of nazi casualties, they didn't have to carry the allies in the pacific as well.

+AndrewtheDuke that was a whole what... three months? and at the end of the war. they shouldve fught them at the beginning when they invaded germany, cuz the japenese and germans were allies.the pacific countries did most of the fightings, and yall just came in and barely did anything, just like what america did during the first world war.

the mighty russia

+Robert SToner Let me help you to fight your ignorance https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet–Japanese_War_(1945)

Wish u luck going though 7,000,000 U.S. And European Troops

+Видок Арья дура усатая ))

thank dude for the fact!

War trophies.

+klaus dieter ja

+AndrewtheDuke / Gänsehaut!  Ein stolzesVolk und seine Kultur. Es ist gut dass es so etwas noch gibt.

+laiziras you is fulish

i hate china and korea

Japan = Asian Nazi

tv program

+jander korda Czech has a flag and so does Spratley. People are neither here nor there. If you think it makes a difference then you clearly need to look up how political boundaries are defined. Didn't the fact the Sudetenland required a negotiation already send you an alarm bell  if it didn't then your the idiot cuz if it was so simple Czech would have just handed over Sudetenland easily that wasn't the case same with Spratly. So sorry but the only person here proving himself to be an idiot is you. LOLOL

+bailong329 valid? just what the hell did we discuss? LOL czech has people, spratly has no people! idiot! you haven't even considered that factor!

+jander korda And yet your the one over here trying to discount a valid analogy. As far as I am concerned articles written by whoever is neither here nor there and do absolutely nothing against the fact. So you can STFUYWTSEMF. LOLOLOL (bet you anything you can't decipher that one without laughing) 

+bailong329LOL, im supporting china? i just gave a facepalm over a stupid representative of this nation. LOLOLOL, it is embarassing! the US said nothing but to tell him to refrain from saying such things. in short, shut the fuck up!  it is on forbes! manila times also has the headline "a regrettable, insensitive remark" LOL.... now by your logic, forbes and manilatimes are both defending china?now you too are embarassing, i wonder how many comments you made out there echoing the same ignorant tune. LOL!

+jander korda Do I seriously look like someone who cares about what anybody says about anyone's president including Obama? No I don't, in fact all the Presidents around the world can have a peace summit in the deepest bowel of Satan's Asshole for all I care. What I care about is the fact you are supporting China the rest can burn in hell for all I care. 

+bailong329with your twisted logic, you could really end up in dangerous conclusions. LOL im not prochina but at least they are right about calling the president an idiot LOLOLOL

+jander korda You did. LOLOL

+bailong329 i never did, LOL

+jander korda Really what a coincidence I think you are here to defend Chinese Imperialism. LOLOLOL

+bailong329 no need to make more examples. you are just here to defend an out right ignorant comment of your stupid president. you don't understand the word "self-determination" at all...

+jander korda For your argument to be true Human Trafficking wouldn't be considered a crime in many countries. So your example is invalid. Try again

+bailong329LOL, what happened with just being handed over to somebody without a say? the germans in that area will revolt anyway, they were originally part of germany and czechs were just part of austro-hungarian empire. the czechs enjoyed self-determination, why shouldn't the germans? you are the one sounding like an imperialist here LOL

+jander korda Exactly it is not maybe in your country it is a charity but in mine it is not which is beside the point which is ownership. Neither did sudetenland belong to Germany. It officially already belonged to Czech. So that ends the argument. 

+bailong329 well first of all, it is not your house, rather it is just a charity given to you in the first place with the previous owners still living in it. what right do you think you have?  it is legal in international arbitration to recognize self-determination. that is hitler's legal action, supporting self-determination.and even if we take out hitler and chamberlain, the people of sudetenland will take the fight themselves. czech is so small and just given some sovereign rights by the allies in world war1, they can take it again if they want to. imperialism at that time still existed. britain still owned india, the french in some areas of vietnam and africa, the americans own the philippines. imperialism is legal at that time, and if you are not powerful enough to protect your country from another then you could just say sorry and bow down to them. LOL..... that is what you get for ignoring facts.

+jander korda It is when the motivation of agreement is for the sake of a peace and not even giving the owners a say in the matter. Otherwise its just like saying I can negotiate with your landlord over how much of your house I can take and not even bother to ask you what your say in the matter is. If you would call that unfair then why would you say that taking Sudetenland by Germany was Legal, and all I really did was take the same situation made it more personal for you. 

+bailong329 it is not illegally taken. it is given to germany by the same powers who took it from germany. besides, if annexation failed, those people in sudetenland would have revolted anyway. hitler funded the nazi party in austria, he would do the same with germans in sudetenland. those are germans, not czech or slovakians. you yourself just got silenced after i threw the fact that czechoslovakia didn't exist before world war1, and started resorting to meaningless insults. LOL

+jander korda It is clearly illegal when you look at the terms of the Munich Agreement and who was and wasn't present. Even the reasons for Britain's agreement makes it's legitimacy questionable. Chamberlin was motivated by avoiding another WW1 and the vary fact Czech wasn't offered any say in the matter makes it an agreement made under duress. 

+bailong329 technically sudetenland was "not illegally" taken and even agreed on the munich agreement betweeen the so-called big three at that time. plus the self-determination of people which is also agreed on to be given to any group of people provided in the current international law made by woodrow wilson's 14 points. LOL, now spratly? that is waaaay different. i don't think china has winning chance at the international arbitration. are you still on about this? time just flowed and you still don't get it.

+jander korda That would imply you countered my arguments which in fact you didn't. Since the initial argument was that in both cases territories were illegally taken. Not 1 argument you provided contradicted that fact. In fact all you did was try to go around this fact in a variety of ways all of which proved irrelevant. 

+bailong329whatever man, this is over. you lost in the end you history eraser LOL, although you are good in insults, like a child putting out his tongue. now go count your president's hair

+jander korda Then why did you start giving insults then when you could have simply agreed to disagree? Let me put it to you this way lets say the whole China thing reaches a climax and for shits and giggles lets even add the threat of Nuclear War into the mix just to make the parallel more interesting then which of 2 choices sound better:1. Understanding that individuals with different academic understandings are going to have different ideas from you and therefore there is no gaurentee their conclusions will be the same as yours in which case you simply need to learn to respect those differences or2. People are either wrong or right and if they are wrong then they need to be beaten into submission.  Simply put if everything is based on absolutes then perhaps we should take our existence to its innevitable stupidity and get it over with. 

+bailong329 well, goodluck with your ignorance, i don't really waste time exchanging insults. buh-bye

+jander korda So what are you doing out of the zoo. LOLOLOL

+bailong329 actually im talking to an ignorant monkey that can type LOL

+jander korda From the looks of things it looks like your talking to yourself. LOLOL

+bailong329well that is a lot of crap in your hands dude, you can eat it as well LOL

+jander korda If I wanted to impress anyone I would show some sign of giving a crap. At the moment I don't 

+bailong329say all you want, nobody is impressed with your president's stupid comparison. first you defend it all with twisted facts, now you say they are all insignificant. you look like you just took a crap and now cleaning it with your own hands LOL....

+jander korda And your failing miserably cuz you have shown nothing that bypasses the point that Sudetenland and Spratley both had flags on them showing they did not belong to their takers. YOUR YOUR YOUR YOUR YOUR YOUR YOUR YOUR YOUR YOUR YOUR YOUR YOUR YOUR YOUR YOUR YOUR. LOLOLOLOLOLOL

+bailong329again "you're" not "your"LOL, im justifying the fact that sudetenland is not the same as spratly. and that annexation event? that was just 20years after the treaty, im sure the people in sudetenland did not forget they are germans since they voted for heinlein. now just because all fact pointed against your own fantasy, you think people, demographics, treaties doesn't matter anymore? history doesn't matter to you anymore? you are as dumb as your president then. no wonder you made a stupid comparison, a very shallow one

+jander korda No your clearly deluded if you think somehow going around the fact that Sudetenland was Czech territory and its annexation wasn't other then what it was. So sorry but bringing up old treaties, demographics, etc ain't going to change the fact. 

+bailong329 has no bearing over the facts? wow, you are deluded my friend. you cannot just twist facts the way you want just so you could defend your stupid bald president. first you say the people living in disputed lands are insignificant. now the treaty... i thought you were standing up for international law? that is the international law made up self-determination. it included woodrow wilson's 14 points.... which is how they based giving a state for the czechs. LOL.... you are full of contradictions, you can trully catch a fish through its mouth.

+jander korda Versailles Treaty is neither here nor there. If you want to bring up the Versailles Treaty you might as well say Germany should have kept its Kaizer or the Allies should have been more restrictive of Germany. So as far as I am concerned the Treaty is really a tangent at best that has no bearing over the facts. 

+bailong329you should have read about the versailles treaty. czechoslovakia was just a new state made by the treaty, they were a minority race that didn't have a country before worldwar1, sudetenland was part of germany before the ww1. they were givien self-dtermination from the austro-hungarian empire. now tell me, do the czechs have the righht of self-determination? do those people matter? LOL, you are as ignorant as your president! i just keep throwing facts at you and you feel like being debated! ignorant people are hostile to truths

+bailong329 seriously you sound like a teenager, "you still lose" LOL, you are having a history lesson here not a debate! LOL you don't sound like a man with a wife but an immature yellow supporter. now you sound like the president, ignorant. moreover you are ignorant about self-determination

+bailong329what!? people are irrelevant? people the right for self-determination! that is an international law! oh my god. and why would hitler try including czech government in the negotiations anyway? they are the enemy. france and britain agreed to that.

+jander korda You make that sound like it still matters who lives there. I already said that what the people is irrelevant. International Law doesn't base anything on who lives there it only bases it on whose flag is on it and thats it. Everything else is based on negotiation and as I pointed out before that same negotiation didn't invite its current owners. I also mentioned that that was done intentionally in order to make it a 1 sided negotiation. So you still lose. LOLOL

+bailong329 hahahahaha those people were just put under czech state without their mandate by the treaty of versailles. i thought you are good with history? sudetenland is not originally a czech state to begin with. this is the second time i already told you this. and again, "you're" not "your"..... you must be a terrible student. that is what all aquino supporters have in common, ignorance

+jander kordaWho tried to neglect the fact those same people were in a Czech state? Your not getting around this.

+bailong329LOLOLOL, who just made the claim that german speaking peoples should be under czechs? hitler didn't say it should belong to germany but rather he respected sefl-determination of the people of sudetenland. still didn't hear it? it is self-determination. not simply because they are germans. now you are accepting ignorance, being suprised by whatever facts im thhrowing up to you. LOLOLOLOL

+jander korda I am not the one making baseless assertions which is what ignorant people do. Assuming a territory belongs to another country just simply due to who lives there is a baseless assertion. 

+bailong329then, now we can conclude that you are ignorant. LOLOLOLOLOL. stop defending your corrupt aquinos. he should have just continued the talks on joint exploration.

+jander korda You invited to share how much I really knew. If that wasn't your intent then you probably shouldn't say things like " I bet you don't know ....." LOLOL

+bailong329what the hell are yout alking about? i never spoke of english to german relations. geeez by your play of this argument you could say you lost. next time you educate yourself further before saying anything so as not to be branded "ignorant" like aquino in INTERNATIONAL LEVEL. tsk tsk, by the way, i feel like you are a filipino faking his identity. you think you could inimidate me if you are a foreigner? no way, knowledge is power, you can't go beyond that with mere nationality. go learn some more with history.

+jander korda Yes as a matter of fact I do. I am also aware that even the British and Germans are related. Even the English Language and German are related. None of these however change the fact though. 

+bailong329do you even know hitler is austrian? you have no idea of how close these ethnic germans are, do you? and my point is, do you think that international law can just rule over a land filled with people and ignoring the people living in it and their clamor like the way it rules of uninhabited lands? you don't follow because you ignore the populus, all you see is the land. you didn't even know that german people are the populus in sudetenland and they were only given to the czech by treaty of versailles. this is not an invasion, it is self-determination by the people of sudetenland.and me losing? lol, you don't sound like a mature man with a wife at all. hahaha im not even trying to win here. im just trying to call aquino an idiot. and i just keep throwing facts at you since yo uhave no idea about europe between the wars.

+jander korda No I am listening your just not following. Sudetenland could have been filled with Austrians it didn't mean Germany had a right over it. That is true it can be annexed but in that case it is the circumstances that matter not the action itself. The 4 party talks intentionally excluded the original owners of Sudetenland making it vary one sided and even the Czechs knew that the last thing Chamberlin wanted was another war. Thats why he resigned after Hitler invaded Czech. The terms of the annexation was that he wasn't going to use it to invade Czech and he did. So it was done illegally. So sorry but you still lose.

+bailong329you are not listening. sudetenland is full of german people agreeing to annexation. which can be recognized by international law, again, like self-determination or secession. that is different to uninhabited lands like spratly or those american territories you have mentioned. law that applies to inhabited lands are different from laws applied to unihabited lands.

+jander korda International Law doesn't make any such distinction. There are a lot of territories in the US both north and South that don't have people but there is a reason why you don't see Mexico and Canada grabbing it whenever they choose to. Its because any attempt to do so IS a violation of international Law and according to the Geneva Convention is considered an act of war (or aggression depending on which vocabulary you prefer).    Point being International Law doesn't base territorial claims on population it bases it on how territorial boundaries are defined. I say it that way cuz you don't define territory on land the same as you do on or around the seas. Thats why illegal fishing is such a big issue. illegal fishing according to these same laws is defined as going into another countries waters and fishing there. According to these same laws this is considered poaching. Thats why many Somalis resorted to piracy. Illegal fishing was going on in their waters and no one enforced it and as a result you have a bunch of fisherman out of a job and resorting to stealing. So defining where the territorial waters are, regardless of population on nearby islands, becomes vary important for commercial reasons. In fact thats the whole point of such laws. The whole idea is to protect commercial interests and allow for uninterrupted commercial shipping and trading. The UN didn't make it up cuz they had nothing better to do.    If I was the Cuban President I can't look for an empty island in the Florida Keys and say " This now belongs to Cuba" just being there is already a violation and planting a flag there just makes it an act of war simply cuz I have just disrupted Commercial Activity in the area. Which is exactly what happened in the South China Sea. 

+bailong329 yes both china and htiler violated international law however a land with people is different from a land without one and only fishes and corals. people can demand secession and they are even granted self-determination. take example the sabah for example, philippines cannot simply say they own it considering the people in sabah does not follow the sultanate of sulu anymore,. historical claim and international law has no say in that if the people does or does not want to belong in a state. and again, sudetenland is PEACFULLY annexed since there was no german resistance but rather they were welcomed.or you could take another example, what if the MILF and MNLF combine forces to secede from the philippines? you think it is valid to liken philippine governemnt to the nazis?

+jander korda That is not the fact, the fact something is inhabited or not is  beside the point. The point is who has lawful right over that territory regardless if someone lives there or not. Its not an issue of who lives there the people who live there may not even have a nationality as we understand the term but if that territory is marked as belonging to a particular nation then it doesn't belong to anyone else only that nation has rightful claim over it. Even the UN has an entire committee that decides on disputes like this using International Law. In the case of Germany and the Sudetenland, they simply got the land by having 4 party talks which were 1 sided and excluded the territory's rightful owners. Even Neville Chamberlin who was present agreed only on the grounds that the Czech Nation wouldn't be invaded and later he did violating the terms of the treaty. In like manner China laid claim over the Spratleys by force despite what International Law in fact says about who the islands belong to. In fact international law states that anything within 200 nautical Miles of a countries shore belongs to that country. Meaning China's claim really overlaps Vietnam and Philippines Claim which was already established long before China even made it an issue. So China like Hitler violated the terms of International treaties. So like it or not it does relate and who lives there is neither here nor there. If habitation was an issue International Law wouldn't say anything about who owns what in their own waters. Fact is it does. 

+bailong329the fact is, the territories surrounding germany were inhabited. and they are not after resources. germany's claims are not as ridiculous as china's. many of german territories were stripped off by the versailles treaty. the german provinces, west prussia, poznan, and upper silesia were given to poland in the treaty. german claims are just things that belong to them a few decades before the world war. china's is ancient! places that have people in it, with german culture in it! and those people agreeing!the spratly's have no people, and it is just distributed under UNCLOS. just a simple word that could point out the difference, nazi's is annexation and not invasion. you are the one going against history, have you read forbes? i think the whole international audience is booing at aquino's nazi comparison and he is branded a terrible and amateur history student

+jander korda That may have been the excuse but that doesn't mean they wanted them there and the existence of a Nazi party there before annexation doesn't explain why not all of them accepted being under German Rule. As for the similarity with China. The similarity is in the fact they were both taken from their neighbors. The Spratleys didn't belong to China they belonged to the Philippines and Vietnam. How do I know? Well for one thing my wife happens to be a filipina and I in fact pay close attention to those distinctions. Them being uninhabited doesn't mean they weren't owned by someone else. Its just like if Mexico decided to annex parts of Arizona that have no towns or inhabitants. Whether or not people are there is neither here nor there the fact is it was taken from another country. Even the reefs and fish are territorial waters belonging to those respective countries not China. Even the UN defined these same areas as belonging to Philippines and Vietnam due to the fact they are within their boundaries. So it is the same. Don't like it thats not my problem.  

+bailong329 konrad heinlein got many support before the annexation, that is because there were many germans in there and there was even a nazi party. this was before the german annexation. as for the resistance after the occupation, that is already a different story. now, tell me, how is that similar to china's? the spratly islands are uninhabited islands. who do you think supported the chinese in there? the reefs and fishes? tsk tsk

+bailong329 you are the one who insisted hitler invaded everything. well there you go. next time do a more research before you start talking

+jander korda It was 3.2 Million Germans and he annexed the region and not invaded due to the fact he wasn't ready for a fight with them just yet. He also knew that Britain and France did not want anymore armed aggression. The Annexation was actually Mussolini's idea in order to get France and Britain to agree and exclude Czecholslavakia and Russia. During occupation only 17 % of the total population actually joined the Nazi Party and a significant portion of the German inhabitants in the region wanted nothing to do with Germany as a result 120,000 Germans were executed or killed as a result of the resistance against the Germans. 

+bailong329you probably didn't know how many germans were in sudetenland. lol,

+bailong329didn't even have much influence huh? you just said and supported it with his suicide episode. bahahahahaha how is that an argument?

+bailong329you are the one who put attention to it... im free to express myself anyway. yeah you are an ignorant asshole.konrad not having political influence? lol do you even know that more than 50% of germans in czech supported him? parts of czech in that time were not orignially belonging to the czechs, it was just given to them by paris peace conference after ww1.... konrad heinlein won more than 50% of votes in 1935 and favoring annexation. of course, you didn't even know that, germans made up the bulk of the czech population at that time between the wars.

+jander korda So why are you making it issue then if it is unrelated? As to Konrad you mean the SS Officer and Politician in Czechoslavakia and really didn't have much political influence even though he was part of the occupation he was captured by US forces and committed suicide on 10 May 1945 in Pizen Barracks. Wow it looks like I do know it proving you made another fallacy. LOLOL

+bailong329 well it is not even related to what we are talking about but implies your credibility. and about invalid arguments, so is your baseless accusation of pseudo history. so eat your own words. i bet if i'll mention the name konrad heinlein, you wouldn't even know it.

+jander korda Oh yeah and 1 more thing Ad Hominim attacks are invalid as arguments. LOLOL

+jander korda What a coincidence I did and not one author nor historian supports your claim. LOLOL

+bailong329learn real history and check your grammar hahahaahahaha

+bailong329you ignorant asshole.....

+bailong329oh my god seriously? you are now questioning my sources? hahahahaha check czech history and even austrian. google it. since you like movies as your source, try watching sound of music,

+jander korda Learn who writes history and not pseudo history. LOLOLOLOL

+bailong329"your" again hahahahaha go back to school, but this time learn history and not movies

+jander korda Obviously you don't know what an assertion is if your going to make that statement. LOLOLOL

+bailong329i didn't make any assertions.... you are just ignorant and apprently it is your first time to hear them. like i said, read about europe and how hitler struggled with the SDP in germany. you are ignorant about the how much the bolshevik success in russia has affected europe at that time. and "your" is possessive, you should use "you are" or in short "you're".... now it is about grammar, not history anymore. keep talking and expose your ignorance.

+jander korda Your the one making assertions that are not even recorded in history books not me. 

+bailong329me? threatened by you? somebody who didn't read anything about europe between the wars? and somebody who doesn't knwo the difference between your and you're? buwahaahahahahahaha what a joke

+jander korda Sounds more like your threatened by me. LOLOLOL

+bailong329 oh now you are going on the technicalities of te words? you clearly displayed a huge ignorance about the other side of the war. to your eyes, he is a simple vicious villain who just wants to conquer all,,, what a dude. hahaha is that how you view world war 2? sure he had plans of germania but not to put the whole of europe under his control, but just the german speaking countries. mussolini operated on an independent military. spain's franco and other countries remained neutral and they didn't get their butt kicked by the nazis. i don't think you even know any of these.... it is written all over the books that austrian and the czechs enoyed annexation. only france, poland, england and russia are the countries invaded by hitler.

+jander kordaSince when is wage war on europe the same as wage war on all countries? What were my exact words.

+bailong329oh really, then how come what you know is that hitler waged war on all countries in europe?

+jander korda Actual history books written by academics and even eyewitnesses and investigators or the actual event in question. Try again. LOLOL

+bailong329what history books do you read? lord of the rings? or american war movies? hahahaha

+bailong329 what? and when is that? hahaha you obviously are ignorant, it is like you see world war2 as hitler conquering the whole of europe and waged war to every country

+jander korda Not according to the History books I read. In fact Hitler was only anti communist only after communism served its purpose in Europe. 

+bailong329history is not disagreeing with me, hitler was anti-communist. im not revising history, you are just ignorant about it. he did take some countries by force.... i didn't disagree on that.... but you didn't know that he did not invade countries like spain, portugal, the scandinavian, the slovaks, bulgaria, hungary and many more.... you seem ignorant about the minor axis powers too. like i said, many looked up to germany as liberator from the communist threat

+jander korda Actually I did he in fact used in multiple campaigns he only annexed small territories and the only whole country he fully annexed was Austria the rest he took by force. That was why France and England were pissed at him in the first place. So sorry but history still disagrees with you. 

+bailong329 so just because there was blitzkrieg, a military strategy, you say that he did it on the whole of europe? lol, check history again. this is before the war and hitler never waged war against them. hitler respected their nationalities. many of these countries refused to enter the war, but they were not invaded by spain or was even considered a threat. romania, yugoslavia, bulgaria, and the other slavic countries in the east were minor axis powers. and after the war, many did not like russia, which is why they were not really bothered by hitler. russia was the real trouble. like i said, the atrocities of the cold war started even before world war 2.... hitler's main political enemy before he got elected were the communists. germany's political system that time was deeply infiltrated by the communist. i don't think you even read about that. you think im going against history? you seem clueless about european history before the war. im just throwing you facts

+jander korda If that were true he never would have needed his blitzkrieg so that logic fails. Also maybe certain people were pro nazi but all of their governments? In fact many of your so called pro nazi governments were with Stalin. The few who in fact were pro nazi did so cuz they didn't want anything to do with Russia, and did the Russians fight against him? Even historical records show Stalins shock and failure to act immediately when Operation Barbarrosa in fact started. A fact you clearly overlooked. 

+bailong329  why would you keep your peace proposal when they keep on fighting against you.

+bailong329england never accepted his peace proposal. hitler abandoned his peace deal when england made a deal with the lend lease act. and me vs history? lol, you didn't even know that most of europe was pro hitler. except poland, france, england and russia. you hardly know the situation of europe between the world wars.

+jander korda He did the same to Russia until he invading during Operation Barbarossa, and he never kept his peace proposal with England considering the fact he launched a Blitz on England. Its you vs the history not me. LOLOL

+bailong329hitler has no plans of conquering and invading and occupying like the way they do in ancient times. many of the countries in europe already had an alliance with hitler. except russia. they looked at him as a powerful force to drive out the communists.... you are good at history yeah? the atrocities of communism began before world war 2, ask the ukrainians, there are many captured nazi films on their march to ukraine being warmly welcomed by the people. even in some russian communities

+bailong329he always proposed peace to england, an alliance. not invade them. and in france he met little resistance. the french people themselves changed their national slogan: liberty, equality, and fraternity into family, work and unity. the germans did not make that for them. hitler was welcomed in spain. spanish communists were offered as training ground for nazi soldiers. you do not know the world back then, it was a recession and germany under hitler is the only one being prosperous

+jander korda Then you clearly don't know the history very well. Certain facts you definently overlooked were Hitlers plans of a greater Germania which was a United Europe not just the German speaking countries but all of Europe. Secondly France believe it or not were originally a German Tribe called the Franks this is history that Hitler in fact was obsessed with. Thirdly France was always a target of Hitlers due to the fact they are a traditional enemy going all the way back to Frederick the Great. Even when Hitler was a Corporal in WW1 he would always hear propaganda about the French as always being Germany's enemy. So long story short regardless who fired the first shot it was going down eventually. There is even evidence that Hitler's spies were already getting Military information long before France Declared War. Thats why the Maginale line ( or whatever it was called) wasn't that hard for Hitler to get around. He already had plans to avoid a trench war with the French which was what the Line was intended to do. Even when you look at the strategies Hitler used against the British in France you can clearly see he knew already everything that was going to happen. So no matter how you look at it Hitler wasn't just interested in German speaking countries he was just interested in Europe included Germany's traditional enemies. 

+bailong329no, hitler was only interested in reuniting all german speaking countries. he is an economist who took germany out of the mess of the great depression. everyone was just jealous of his achievements. that 6millions jews they say he killed? that is propaganda that came out before the war started because hitler's record is that he created 6million jobs for the germans. that propaganda was just out to ridicule him. he may have killed some jews but not six million, that is just ridiculous.

+Elbottoo Yeah why do you think we trade with you so much? Cuz your a country of thieves just like us brother. LOLOL 

ur a country of thieves.

+jander korda Yeah but Hitler already had plans of conquering them so it really made no difference who fired first. In fact many analysts at that time saw Poland and France being his next targets long before they even declared war. 

+bailong329 poland and france declared war on germany first. 

+jander korda Yeah thats true but he didn't when it came to Poland and France. 

hitler annexed austria and czech republic without firing a single shot

+Elbottoo Really, I am being sour? Huh So that must be what you would call someone who has fun at your expense. In that case I will take that as a complement, and you clearly can't write either.For one thing :-You start a sentence with a Capital letter. - Ur is actually spelt You're or You are- u is actually spelt you- Loser of a whore isn't even a euphemism nobody even cares about unless your an uneducated Redneck. LOL- And its not " Just look at the way u write" its " Just look at the way you WROTE." Wow you just proved for me that your a redneck. LOLOLOL

even if ur not philipino, ur still a shitty mudhutter, u fckin loser of a whore. just look at the way u write lololol typical mudhutter being sour

+Elbottoo And by what reasoning, pray tell, makes your think I am a filipino? Did it even pass your mind I happen to like Philippines or perhaps I have a relative who lives or maybe I just visited the place and found it much less corrupt then China. Perhaps your too stupid due to the fact Chinese are racists or as we would call them WHERE I AM FROM rednecks. " IF YOU LUMP ALL PEOPLE TOGETHER AND NOT EVEN BOTHER ASKING WHERE THEY ARE FROM---- You might be a REDNECK."  " If your kitchen stove is made from a Block of Concrete ----- You might be a REDNECK."" If you invite strippers over to a funeral ----You might be a Redneck."" If you open a can of beer for a Eulogy ----- You might be a Redneck"" If your solution to having annoying neighbors involves building a barrier( Wall, Artificial Islands etc.) ----- You might be a Redneck"Seriously I can make 1000 of these just referencing stuff I know about China and Rednecks in general. LOLOLOL

how dear you say that

yeah and he should've said "hallo" instead of hi

You wouldn't know, unless you knew Arnold-speak. (Schwarzenegger)

+Wei Mira That's funny tho.

+Zenith Wills It's NOT. It's just plain STUPIDITY.

+Unknown.Gamer da?

+gamergirl 56 Russia!? Vodkaaaaaaa! Pastaaaaaaa!

Because it is just is

+Nimu Ra You really wasted your time writing that, because the guy made this video to be funny. It's SUPPOSED to be stereotypical. He grew up in Germany, so I think he would know that.

you think I care? My best friend, boyfriend and 99% of my teachers are Austrian, and they ALL say they have Austrian accents. Would you rather me say they have Salzburg accent? That's like a Liverpudlian telling me they don't have a British accent, while we all know fine and well he does.

there's no Austrian accent it's a German accent. well there is a Austrian accent but it's a part of the German accent. the Germans have different English accents from region to region..if you talk about a Austrian accent as it would be a own accent then you would also need to write all the other German accents. Bavarian accent , Saxon accent etc....all the different German people/tribes have a different English accent. But they are all in.the branch of the German accent. so if you count "Austrian"(which doesn't exist) as an own accent then you would need to count all the other German dialects also as a own accent. and to count all of them would be much work.

Yes

How in the hell does that sound British to you???