If Hitler had won World War Two, there would be no Israel

All Jews should put aside all ideological considerations and use their brains and they would come to the natural conclusion that if Hitler had won World War Two by defeating the Soviet Union, then there would have been no Israel. Right up to the point in 1948 when Israel was born, Palestine had been a British Protectorate. If Britain had lost the war, then Palestine would have become a German Territory. As it happened during World War One, the losers in the war lost most of their colonial territories. It happened to Germany after World War One and it would have happened to Britain and France during World War Two. So vast chuncks of the Middle, Africa and Asia would have come under German Rule and the Japanese would taken over the rest, including vast expanses of China.

Soviet Forces liberated Concentration Camps with the British and the Americans coming in as spectators once Concentration Camps had been taken over by Soviet Troops. The famous Balfour Declaration would have meant absolutely nothing and instead of migrating to Palestine, hundreds of thousands would have ended their lives in concentration camps or worse.

Whatever you might think in ideological terms, facts are facts. I wonder also what would have happened if Unternehmen Barbarossa had never happened. Entire German Divisions would with Panzer would have been available at Normandy. The Normandy Invasion would have ended with tends of thousands of American Troops, British Troops and troops of other nationalities falling prisoners of the German Wehrmacht. It must be remembered that many Europeans of countries occupied by Germany were pro-German and went on to fight for Germany. So nothing was clear cut.

When talking about history, we must put ideology aside and look at the historical facts of what happened on the battlefields.

Looking at the history of Japan and at events leading to the attack in Pearl Harbour, Admiral Yamamoto was totally against the Axis. He thought that signed a deal with Germany was against Japanese best interests. In the end, the Axe was against Germany itself. If the Axis had not existed, then the Americans would have been at war in the Pacific but would not have been at war in Europe, Africa or Middle East. President Roovevelt used Pearl Harbour as justification to spread the war. Germany made a significant mistake when it declared war against the USA.

Looking at present conflicts, it must be remembered that World War Two (or World War One, for that matter) did not happen all at once. There was a series of conflicts that started long before September 1939. Japanese expansion in Asia started long before World War Two. There was also the Spanish Civil War to consider. Each conflict became a step towards the conflict that we know as World War Two.

The longer the conflict lasts, the greater the danger of nuclear war

 

The longer the conflict lasts, the greater the chances of the unthinkable happening. In 1945, President Truman decided to use atomic bombs in Hiroshima and Nagasaki to shorten the war and prevent a rising number of American casualties should American forces have to fight on Japanese soil where stiff resistance was expected. It was also a political statement for the then Soviet Union and to prevent a Soviet attack against Japan.

In 2022, the presence of nuclear devices is supposed to be a deterrent,but there is always a 'what if...' scenario in which the parties might decide to use nuclear devices. In 2020, NATO carried out military exercises 'to prepare for nuclear war'. If you prepare for something, you anticipate that it might come the time when it will actually happen. If it were to happen, it would open a whole series of new possibilities. One thing is combat with conventional forces and quite another is a scenario in which weapons that are much power powerful than the atomic devices used in Hiroshima and Nagasaki are detonated in Europe and elsewhere. What would trigger the use of nuclear devices? Would there be a preemptive attack? Who will make the first move? If there is an attack going one way, it is going to be immediately followed by an attack going in the opposite way.

If we can imagine the commotion created by the bombs thrown in Japan decades ago, it is not difficult to foresee the commotion today if nuclear bombs were to fall destroying capital cities. In order to understand what would be the prevailing mentality, we need to remember what happened in World War Two. If any of the parties had had such bombs earlier during the conflict would they have hesitated? If instead of sending bombing crews one after another to be shot down, if instead of sending U-boots to be sunk, the parties had had nuclear bombs to wipe out any armed resistance, to destroy every industrial capability, in one go, what would they have done?

Think about D-Day. If the allies had had the choice of using nuclear bombs instead of sending hundreds of thousands of men across the sea, many of whom lost their lives before reaching France, would they have they used nuclear bombs instead? If instead of loading V1s and V2s with conventional explosives Germany had had nuclear devices to put an end to the war in one go, would Germany have used nuclear bombs instead of conventional forces? The reason heavy water installations were bombed by the allies was that they did not want Germany to develop atomic devices. If Germany had had atomic bombs, would the Soviets have reached Germany? 

Now, coming back to today's realities. If there is the scenario in which it is foreseen that millions of troops would lose their lives in combat, would any of the parties choose to use nuclear weapons instead of suffering heavy casualties at the front? Why does Israel have nuclear devices? Why do Pakistan and India have nuclear devices? Why does Britain have nuclear devices? Why does anybody want to have nuclear devices? The reason is pretty obvious. 

What is the danger of economic sanctions? What was the danger of the American oil embargo against Japan before Japan attacked Pearl Harbour? If you push a country towards the wall, somebody might decide that if there are no economic benefits then war is a preferred option. Japan was becoming an industrial power in Asia and needed oil. This is why Japan decided to attack Pearl Harbour, to attack the one country that had limited Japan's chances to achieve economic development. The economy was the core issue that led Japan to attack the USA. 

President Putin's immediate reaction to the mention of further economic measures was to put the Armed Forces on alert. If the so called West is genuine, if the USA is genuine, in terms of favouring a peaceful outcome to put an end to the conflict, putting up pressure is not the right answer. If it is believed that the only way forward is nuclear war, the entire world loses.