NationStates Jolt Archive

Hey, gang

So in class, a professor suggested the idea "Whether you think you can or you can't, you're right". She called on me to respond, I said I liked the idea, but there could be exceptions.

She said it had to be either true or false, and I tried to give a counterexample.

I said, "Well, Hitler thought he could take Russia, and he couldn't."

She replied by saying "You should study your history better, Hitler was actually German and he fought against the Russians."

Her response baffled me, and I tried to explain I was talkin about Hitler invading Russia, but she moved on to other things. After class, I tried to talk briefly with her to explain that I knew Hitler was the German leader and that they were on opposite sides from the Russians, but she said she didn't have time.

If I were to say to you "Hitler thought he could take Russia, but he couldn't", how would you interpret that? (I respect if you disagree, of course, but how would you interpret the claim?)

What u said makes perfect sense.

your teacher is a retard. or you're telling it wrong.

Maybe she thought you meant that Hitler tried to gain power in Russia, but couldn't.

What you said made perfect sense though.

Hey, gang

So in class, a professor suggested the idea "Whether you think you can or you can't, you're right". She called on me to respond, I said I liked the idea, but there could be exceptions.

She said it had to be either true or false, and I tried to give a counterexample.

I said, "Well, Hitler thought he could take Russia, and he couldn't."

She replied by saying "You should study your history better, Hitler was actually German and he fought against the Russians."

Her response baffled me, and I tried to explain I was talkin about Hitler invading Russia, but she moved on to other things. After class, I tried to talk briefly with her to explain that I knew Hitler was the German leader and that they were on opposite sides from the Russians, but she said she didn't have time.

If I were to say to you "Hitler thought he could take Russia, but he couldn't", how would you interpret that? (I respect if you disagree, of course, but how would you interpret the claim?)

The teacher hates you and want to humiliate you and make you fail.

Hey, gang

So in class, a professor suggested the idea "Whether you think you can or you can't, you're right". She called on me to respond, I said I liked the idea, but there could be exceptions.

She said it had to be either true or false, and I tried to give a counterexample.

I said, "Well, Hitler thought he could take Russia, and he couldn't."

She replied by saying "You should study your history better, Hitler was actually German and he fought against the Russians."

Her response baffled me, and I tried to explain I was talkin about Hitler invading Russia, but she moved on to other things. After class, I tried to talk briefly with her to explain that I knew Hitler was the German leader and that they were on opposite sides from the Russians, but she said she didn't have time.

If I were to say to you "Hitler thought he could take Russia, but he couldn't", how would you interpret that? (I respect if you disagree, of course, but how would you interpret the claim?)

That Hilter though he could take Russia, but he couldn't? I think that your teacher is tired and/or stressed. It happens.

My quote is verbatim, but I have to admit that I can only give you my account. I kind of want to ask her, but pressing it seems lame somehow.

i'd press it. don't take shit from teachers, they're the last people that should be giving it.

your teacher is a retard. or you're telling it wrong.

My quote is verbatim, but I have to admit that I can only give you my account. I kind of want to ask her, but pressing it seems lame somehow.

Click Stand;13399627']Maybe she thought you meant that Hitler tried to gain power in Russia, but couldn't.

What you said made perfect sense though.

Ah, okay, that might have been how she took it. Maybe I should have said "hitler thought he could invade and hold russia, but couldn't".

The teacher hates you and want to humiliate you and make you fail.

Heh, could be, but for the most part, I think she can arbitrarily fail me if she likes.

That Hilter though he could take Russia, but he couldn't? I think that your teacher is tired and/or stressed. It happens.

S'good point, maybe she had other stuff going on.

She misinterpreted you, obviously...but why, I cannot say.

Also, it's possible that Germany, had more careful planning and strategy been arranged, could have won a strategic overall victory against the Soviet Union, but in no way could Germany ever hold down the entirety, given the manpower of Germany versus the Soviet Union.

Quite aside from misinterpreting your statement, she completely ignored your point.

She misinterpreted you, obviously...but why, I cannot say.

Also, it's possible that Germany, had more careful planning and strategy been arranged, could have won a strategic overall victory against the Soviet Union, but in no way could Germany ever hold down the entirety, given the manpower of Germany versus the Soviet Union.

Hitler actually knew this. Based on what I've read (which has been a lot), Hitler envisioned a 1984-esque policy of constant combat on some distant Eastern front. He thought that he could grab most (or all) of European Russia, but had no designs on the Asian landmass as far as I can tell.

She misinterpreted you, obviously...but why, I cannot say.

Also, it's possible that Germany, had more careful planning and strategy been arranged, could have won a strategic overall victory against the Soviet Union, but in no way could Germany ever hold down the entirety, given the manpower of Germany versus the Soviet Union.What if they had been able to muster the manpower of their occupied countries?

Hitler actually knew this. Based on what I've read (which has been a lot), Hitler envisioned a 1984-esque policy of constant combat on some distant Eastern front. He thought that he could grab most (or all) of European Russia, but had no designs on the Asian landmass as far as I can tell.
Interesting. In other words, he was acting foolish, like he did about a lot of things.

What if they had been able to muster the manpower of their occupied countries?

I can't say. I'm not exactly as educated on the second world war as much as I'd like to be, and in order to answer this I'd have to know the relative manpower of the occupied countries.

I can say, however, that it's unlikely they could have done that unless they were more...open/accepting/something that would give the populace reason to support them.

Could they have done some kind of scorched earth kind of thing, shred the people and land so badly that Russia would have been off the table as a player for a generation?

That MIGHT have been possible, but doing so would ultimately just get them stabbed in the back a generation or so later, and something tells me attrition wise Germany would eventually lose that sort of war.

She misinterpreted you, obviously...but why, I cannot say.

Also, it's possible that Germany, had more careful planning and strategy been arranged, could have won a strategic overall victory against the Soviet Union, but in no way could Germany ever hold down the entirety, given the manpower of Germany versus the Soviet Union.

Could they have done some kind of scorched earth kind of thing, shred the people and land so badly that Russia would have been off the table as a player for a generation?

This is quite interesting.

Like, keeping the Osterfront as the focus, the "common Enemy" against which to unite his people, like "we are at war with Eastasia and allied with Westasia" or whichever way it went?

Or like a steam vent, a place to conscript and send dissidents and officers of questionable loyalty to be chewed up?

Probably both, and never discount the possibility of thinking his empire could succeed in an eventual genocide of Asians with this little device.

Quite aside from misinterpreting your statement, she completely ignored your point.

I kind of felt so, but I could be wrong.

I also was considering the idea of someone with some kind of near clinical megalomania, thinking they can do anything/everything, or people who think they can telepathically communicate with alien space ghosts or whatever.

Hitler actually knew this. Based on what I've read (which has been a lot), Hitler envisioned a 1984-esque policy of constant combat on some distant Eastern front. He thought that he could grab most (or all) of European Russia, but had no designs on the Asian landmass as far as I can tell.

This is quite interesting.

Like, keeping the Osterfront as the focus, the "common Enemy" against which to unite his people, like "we are at war with Eastasia and allied with Westasia" or whichever way it went?

Or like a steam vent, a place to conscript and send dissidents and officers of questionable loyalty to be chewed up?

That MIGHT have been possible, but doing so would ultimately just get them stabbed in the back a generation or so later, and something tells me attrition wise Germany would eventually lose that sort of war.

I wonder, what are the historical precedents for longstanding fronts...the 100 years war, the Rome/Carthage wars?

I can't believe I started this thread and I'm the least qualified to explore the actual ideas, heh.

I wonder, what are the historical precedents for longstanding fronts...the 100 years war, the Rome/Carthage wars?

I can't believe I started this thread and I'm the least qualified to explore the actual ideas, heh.

I honestly couldn't tell you with any authority, but I suspect that due to the modern technology of World War II compared to those wars, war fatigue would have set in very soon indeed, within ten years, I'd guess. This, of course, is based not only on the weapons technology, but also the speed of communication which gives people so much more information.

Okay, these time warps are freaky...has Farnsworth been using Chronotons to bolster his NBA aspirations again?

Hey, gang

So in class, a professor suggested the idea "Whether you think you can or you can't, you're right". She called on me to respond, I said I liked the idea, but there could be exceptions.

She said it had to be either true or false, and I tried to give a counterexample.

I said, "Well, Hitler thought he could take Russia, and he couldn't."

She replied by saying "You should study your history better, Hitler was actually German and he fought against the Russians."

Her response baffled me, and I tried to explain I was talkin about Hitler invading Russia, but she moved on to other things. After class, I tried to talk briefly with her to explain that I knew Hitler was the German leader and that they were on opposite sides from the Russians, but she said she didn't have time.

If I were to say to you "Hitler thought he could take Russia, but he couldn't", how would you interpret that? (I respect if you disagree, of course, but how would you interpret the claim?)

It sounds like your teacher relised that you had caught her on this point and insted of trying to disprove you or explain it she decided to ignore you as evidenced by the fact that she wouldn't talk about it after class.

I don't know her but from how you described her actions it sounds like some of the ones I had complete idiots she probably is too.

Remember there are two types of teachers in this world those that reallyh want to teach (these are good at teaching and have some brains) and those that are only teachers because they are not smart enough to do anything else and thus have to teach to live (these are the idiots and the ones who can't teach)

I know how you feel. I had this one teacher before who knew nothing about what he taught. However, he never made a comment as backasswards as that one.

It sounds like your teacher relised that you had caught her on this point and insted of trying to disprove you or explain it she decided to ignore you as evidenced by the fact that she wouldn't talk about it after class.

I don't know her but from how you described her actions it sounds like some of the ones I had complete idiots she probably is too.

Remember there are two types of teachers in this world those that reallyh want to teach (these are good at teaching and have some brains) and those that are only teachers because they are not smart enough to do anything else and thus have to teach to live (these are the idiots and the ones who can't teach)

Could be, I don't know her well enough to say. Hopefully, she just had an off day or something, but yeah, I really felt like she didn't really hit my point.

I know how you feel. I had this one teacher before who knew nothing about what he taught. However, he never made a comment as backasswards as that one.

Yeah, it really threw me for a loop. I don't know how strong her content knowledge is, since its not a history class, but I guess I have to learn to get a thicker skin about this kind of thing.

Yeah, it really threw me for a loop. I don't know how strong her content knowledge is, since its not a history class, but I guess I have to learn to get a thicker skin about this kind of thing.

Indeed. I thunk she was you history teacher and I am relieved to find out that perhaps you school has better hopes for the future than I previously thought, but still, that's pretty much common knowledge. Although, like common sense, common knowledge is not so common anymore...

Yeah, it really threw me for a loop. I don't know how strong her content knowledge is, since its not a history class, but I guess I have to learn to get a thicker skin about this kind of thing.

I think it's more you need to understand that people are just that... people. They make stupid mistakes (honestly, how many times has something gone completely over your head?) and it doesn't mean anything. If it persists then I would approach her where ever teachers go at your school (knock on the door of the staff room if it's a small school and ask to talk to her although usually there is an office for each department) and talk to her about how you feel that she's been overlooking your points and purposely obfuscating them to make you look stupid. If you do it within earshot of other teachers she is less likely to dismiss you. Also be polite, use examples such as this one and do it on a day where you haven't had any misunderstandings with her yet and when you aren't mad at her. A lot of times when people have problems with teachers both the student and the adult are acting like they're two. Teachers, like any other human being are more likely to respond to a nice student who is honestly trying to contribute to class rather then a belligerent brat (which I don't, by any means, think you are) who wants to be a victim.

My, I'm using paratheses a lot today aren't I. Apparently I can't seperate paragraphs right now either.

Technically, he COULD, but he didn't. If he had foreseen that Russia is a big place to conquer and had an infamous winter that probably defeated more enemies than the Russians ever could, he might have prepared for it better, like having the troops bring along winter clothing and fuel that wouldn't freeze once the thermometer turned south.

Also, the Russians thought they could defeat Germany...and they were right.

Your teacher is an idiot, for starters, Hitler was Austrian. If she is going to criticise the way you say things, she could have gone to the effort of saying "Hitler was the leader of Germany".

Technically, he COULD, but he didn't. If he had foreseen that Russia is a big place to conquer and had an infamous winter that probably defeated more enemies than the Russians ever could, he might have prepared for it better, like having the troops bring along winter clothing and fuel that wouldn't freeze once the thermometer turned south.

Also, the Russians thought they could defeat Germany...and they were right.

So, we could take "you can" as meaning "it is possible you could", the premise seems more reasonable.

It still seems to me that thinking that you can is necessary but not solely sufficient to be able to, then.

And if we take "could" in the broadest sense of being conceivably able to, a self-doubter could conceivably (maybe) still win by luck or simply having underestimated their own ability.

So, I still like the idea of "Whether you think you can or can't, you're right.", but it still appears to potentially have exceptions.

Your teacher is an idiot, for starters, Hitler was Austrian. If she is going to criticise the way you say things, she could have gone to the effort of saying "Hitler was the leader of Germany".

I imagine I might have made that same mistake, so thanks for educating me on that.

I imagine I might have made that same mistake, so thanks for educating me on that.

You may have, however both your premise and conclusion remain sound, in correcting you she made an error of fact. I wouldn't lose any sleep on this one.

Hey, gang

So in class, a professor suggested the idea "Whether you think you can or you can't, you're right". She called on me to respond, I said I liked the idea, but there could be exceptions.

She said it had to be either true or false, and I tried to give a counterexample.

I said, "Well, Hitler thought he could take Russia, and he couldn't."

She replied by saying "You should study your history better, Hitler was actually German and he fought against the Russians."

Her response baffled me, and I tried to explain I was talkin about Hitler invading Russia, but she moved on to other things. After class, I tried to talk briefly with her to explain that I knew Hitler was the German leader and that they were on opposite sides from the Russians, but she said she didn't have time.

If I were to say to you "Hitler thought he could take Russia, but he couldn't", how would you interpret that? (I respect if you disagree, of course, but how would you interpret the claim?)Hitler was Austrian.

Hitler was Austrian.

You are correct, so when I tried to talk to her after class I should have said "Hitler was the leader of the German forces" instead of referring to him as "the German leader". That's my bad.

That may have been what she meant to say as well, I don't know. But he was definitely not Russian or on the Russian side.

Hell, speaking of all of this... If he gave his generals a little bit more control then he may have actually won the war and the world might be a very different place. What do I mean? When a general wanted to make a decision they had to hear from him and when it was something that needed to be done immediately, it never was. There was some landing where all of the defense was on one place, and I believe it was a Field Marshall Erwin Rommel (I think), his nickname was "the fox" or "the desert fox" or something, and he wanted to move defense to where they were actually attacked, and would this have happened... Then who knows what history would have wrote.

In Soviet Russia, Hitler takes YOU!!

Sorry.

In Soviet Russia, Hitler takes YOU!!

Sorry.

:o

"You do not live in country. Country live in you."

What if they had been able to muster the manpower of their occupied countries?
Got to keep a war on, or people will get bored of your apocalyptic claims and general craziness, in favour of an elected, if utterly boring and mediocre government.

Hey, gang

So in class, a professor suggested the idea "Whether you think you can or you can't, you're right". She called on me to respond, I said I liked the idea, but there could be exceptions.

She said it had to be either true or false, and I tried to give a counterexample.

I said, "Well, Hitler thought he could take Russia, and he couldn't."

She replied by saying "You should study your history better, Hitler was actually German and he fought against the Russians."

Her response baffled me, and I tried to explain I was talkin about Hitler invading Russia, but she moved on to other things. After class, I tried to talk briefly with her to explain that I knew Hitler was the German leader and that they were on opposite sides from the Russians, but she said she didn't have time.

If I were to say to you "Hitler thought he could take Russia, but he couldn't", how would you interpret that? (I respect if you disagree, of course, but how would you interpret the claim?)

your teacher was being an ass. she was embarrassed that her stupid pop psychology statement was destroyed so completely by the first student she had respond to it. so she tried to push it off on you and didnt want to talk about it later, not because she thought you were stupid but because she knew you were right.

"Whether you think you can or you can't, you're right" is a stupid statement taken right out of the worst oprah episode.

the proper thought is "if you think you cant, you cant" meaning that people destroy their own opportunities with negative thinking. but "if you think you can, you can" is just stupid. there are half a dozen people right now who thinkg they can be president in '09. only ONE of them will be.

:o

"You do not live in country. Country live in you."

An immigrant from Russia walks into his highschool science class. His classmates all make faces at the awful stench emanating from his body. One of the students remarked, "Jesus Chris, Boris, what crawled up your ass and died?"

Boris answered simply, "The Soviet Union."

Keep in mind, "can" is a bit different from "will". I mean, I "can" get a perfect score on a song in Rock Band. The Germans "could" have taken Russia, especially if Hitler didn't make them screw up so badly. There was the possibility.

your teacher was being an ass. she was embarrassed that her stupid pop psychology statement was destroyed so completely by the first student she had respond to it. so she tried to push it off on you and didnt want to talk about it later, not because she thought you were stupid but because she knew you were right.

"Whether you think you can or you can't, you're right" is a stupid statement taken right out of the worst oprah episode.

the proper thought is "if you think you cant, you cant" meaning that people destroy their own opportunities with negative thinking. but "if you think you can, you can" is just stupid. there are half a dozen people right now who thinkg they can be president in '09. only ONE of them will be.
Ashmoria beat me to it.

In addition, in response to this part of the OP:

I said, "Well, Hitler thought he could take Russia, and he couldn't."

She replied by saying "You should study your history better, Hitler was actually German and he fought against the Russians."

That is possibly the single stupidest thing she could have said under the circumstances. My word, oof-ah, geez, ye gods, oy gevalt -- that is some breathtaking dumb. If I were you, I'd see about getting transferred to another class. Otherwise, just do whatever you have to do to pass and get away from her as fast as possible. And make sure you document as much as you can of the bullshit that goes on her class, so you can have evidence in case she tries to give you a hard time with your grades or the school admins.

Keep in mind, "can" is a bit different from "will". I mean, I "can" get a perfect score on a song in Rock Band. The Germans "could" have taken Russia, especially if Hitler didn't make them screw up so badly. There was the possibility.
That is legitimately debatable. I do not know of any invasionary force that succeeded in Russia in the entire history of the country because of two factors, which the Russians have used as their back-up defenses forever -- its size and its winter. Basically, all the Russians have ever had to do (at great cost, yes, but still with success) is let the enemy in, and wait for the country itself to kill them in time. I agree that Hitler's approach to Russia was a bad one, but I am not sure that any other approach would have worked better. In other words, I am not sure there is a way to "take" Russia militarily, short of total destruction by bombing -- though you'd have to have enough ordinance for that -- the size, remember.

The teacher hates you and want to humiliate you and make you fail.

I got that from the OP, too. If that's indeed what happened in that incident, then that teacher is of the worst stripe -- the insufferable know-it-all who can never be seen to be less than correct in front of students. MAN, that kind of person makes my blood boil.

I got that from the OP, too. If that's indeed what happened in that incident, then that teacher is of the worst stripe -- the insufferable know-it-all who can never be seen to be less than correct in front of students. MAN, that kind of person makes my blood boil.

Yeah, I used to have to deal with a nutter like that. She told us that Stalin was the leader of Russia during WWI and refused to back down after we proved her wrong with an elementary school history text book.

Regardless of how dumb your teacher is, the proposition is false. Crazy people think they can do all manner of things they cannot do.

What u said makes perfect sense.

Whereas what you wrote did not. I've never seen "u" used before.

Firstly, the OP is justified, provided he is actually offering a correct version of events.

Secondly, Hitler could very well have "taken" Russia. But for atypical varication on his part, atypically frigid winter in 1941, and an extraordinary recovery on the part of the Russian state, Hitler would have taken Russia at his leisure.

I had a teacher who thought we fought against the Chinese in World War II, and even insisted that Hiroshima was in China.

Whereas what you wrote did not. I've never seen "u" used before.

Firstly, the OP is justified, provided he is actually offering a correct version of events.

Secondly, Hitler could very well have "taken" Russia. But for atypical varication on his part, atypically frigid winter in 1941, and an extraordinary recovery on the part of the Russian state, Hitler would have taken Russia at his leisure.
Had Stalin not had all his best officers executed before the war, Hitler probably wouldn't have had a chance. Plus, had the Japanese managed to look more threatening toward Russia, they wouldn't have been able to move their Siberian troops west to fight the Germans as soon as they did.

your teacher was being an ass. she was embarrassed that her stupid pop psychology statement was destroyed so completely by the first student she had respond to it. so she tried to push it off on you and didnt want to talk about it later, not because she thought you were stupid but because she knew you were right.

"Whether you think you can or you can't, you're right" is a stupid statement taken right out of the worst oprah episode.

the proper thought is "if you think you cant, you cant" meaning that people destroy their own opportunities with negative thinking. but "if you think you can, you can" is just stupid. there are half a dozen people right now who thinkg they can be president in '09. only ONE of them will be.

Yeah, that's kind of how I felt. I understand she was trying to be motivating or encouraging, but I kind of fell off the wagon when she implied the statement had to be true or false in some absolute sense. I think there's room for interpretation in there.

Ashmoria beat me to it.

In addition, in response to this part of the OP:



That is possibly the single stupidest thing she could have said under the circumstances. My word, oof-ah, geez, ye gods, oy gevalt -- that is some breathtaking dumb. If I were you, I'd see about getting transferred to another class. Otherwise, just do whatever you have to do to pass and get away from her as fast as possible. And make sure you document as much as you can of the bullshit that goes on her class, so you can have evidence in case she tries to give you a hard time with your grades or the school admins.


I'm kind of hoping she misheard me or something, but others who heard my response say it was as I wrote it here.

Yeah, that's kind of how I felt. I understand she was trying to be motivating or encouraging, but I kind of fell off the wagon when she implied the statement had to be true or false in some absolute sense. I think there's room for interpretation in there.

of course there is. there are times when a good attitude makes all the difference and there are times when you are going to win or lose regardless of how you feel about it.

remember that your teacher is a person too. so she was an ass that day. try not to hold it against her as long as she doesnt hold it against you.

Whereas what you wrote did not. I've never seen "u" used before.

Firstly, the OP is justified, provided he is actually offering a correct version of events.

Secondly, Hitler could very well have "taken" Russia. But for atypical varication on his part, atypically frigid winter in 1941, and an extraordinary recovery on the part of the Russian state, Hitler would have taken Russia at his leisure.

True, I admit I can only offer my own recollection of events.

I admit, I had always thought the harshness of Russian seasons and the resolve of its people were fairly constant, but I haven't studied it thoroughly. I tried to learn Russia, got a mercy C, and fled, heh.

Oh...oh...ouch, ai, ouch.

Reminds me of the time I was reading banzai trees, and found out that the Japanese evidently imported that style of plants from China, and the word (sometimes rendered in romanji as "bonsai"?) actually came to Japan from the Chinese word pun-sai.

This girl freaked and told me she hates it when people think China and Japan are the same country. I tried to explain I was just illustrating a linguistic link between the two, and that probably a lot of the Japanese language has its foundations in Chinese characters, but she continued to think I was implying that all Asia is one country.

you do have your share of misunderstandings!

i hope she understood after a while that you were explaining it not defending it.

I had a teacher who thought we fought against the Chinese in World War II, and even insisted that Hiroshima was in China.

Oh...oh...ouch, ai, ouch.

Reminds me of the time I was reading banzai trees, and found out that the Japanese evidently imported that style of plants from China, and the word (sometimes rendered in romanji as "bonsai"?) actually came to Japan from the Chinese word pun-sai.

This girl freaked and told me she hates it when people think China and Japan are the same country. I tried to explain I was just illustrating a linguistic link between the two, and that probably a lot of the Japanese language has its foundations in Chinese characters, but she continued to think I was implying that all Asia is one country.

you do have your share of misunderstandings!

i hope she understood after a while that you were explaining it not defending it.

Well, I should mention that that incident was a long time ago, the China mention just reminded me.

She was this Asian girl in San Jose, and I worry maybe she had a lot of people make bigoted comments to her, making her defensive about it, but that's conjecture on my part.

That is legitimately debatable. I do not know of any invasionary force that succeeded in Russia in the entire history of the country because of two factors, which the Russians have used as their back-up defenses forever -- its size and its winter. Basically, all the Russians have ever had to do (at great cost, yes, but still with success) is let the enemy in, and wait for the country itself to kill them in time. I agree that Hitler's approach to Russia was a bad one, but I am not sure that any other approach would have worked better. In other words, I am not sure there is a way to "take" Russia militarily, short of total destruction by bombing -- though you'd have to have enough ordinance for that -- the size, remember.

Preperation, adaptation, and supplies. Get a large number of troops prepared for the harsh climate, prepare for anything, and maintain a good supply line. Above all, don't be stupid. The Germans got stuck in Stalingrad, allowing Russia to recover enough to eventually push the Germans back into Germany. Stalingrad wasn't even important. All it had going for it was having Stalin in its name.

With a good enough number of troops, good enough technology and supplies, and good enough strategy, any nation could be conquered. The strategy is arguably the most important. An army can work around being small and having shitty guns. It can't work around shitty strategies.

It was possible to conquer Russia, just like Hitler COULD have defeated Britain. The RAF was on the verge of total destruction. The only thing that saved it was when the Germans stopped attacks on the RAF and began bombing cities. This allowed the RAF to recover enough to continue fighting until the end of the war.

Goes to show you how shitty leadership can make even the most possible goal an impossible one.

Preperation, adaptation, and supplies. Get a large number of troops prepared for the harsh climate, prepare for anything, and maintain a good supply line. Above all, don't be stupid. The Germans got stuck in Stalingrad, allowing Russia to recover enough to eventually push the Germans back into Germany. Stalingrad wasn't even important. All it had going for it was having Stalin in its name.

With a good enough number of troops, good enough technology and supplies, and good enough strategy, any nation could be conquered. The strategy is arguably the most important. An army can work around being small and having shitty guns. It can't work around shitty strategies.

It was possible to conquer Russia, just like Hitler COULD have defeated Britain. The RAF was on the verge of total destruction. The only thing that saved it was when the Germans stopped attacks on the RAF and began bombing cities. This allowed the RAF to recover enough to continue fighting until the end of the war.

Goes to show you how shitty leadership can make even the most possible goal an impossible one.
"Preparation, adaptation, and supplies." Who among us has not chanted that mantra? Indeed, I could do all kinds of swell things if I had billions of dollars and all the time in the world.

I am not a big fan of fantasy-history (like fantasy-football). I look at what the Germans actually had in terms of force and materiel, and how they were using them, and what they were trying to do, and who was making the decisions, and what they were up against in Russia, and frankly, no, I don't think that group of people could have conquered Russia. They might have been able to carve some big chunks off it, but they probably would not have been able to hold those territories for very long. I think what happened is the only thing that could have happened to those people with those resources at that time. Whether they attacked in a smart way or a dumb way, I believe the end would have been the same, based on the limitations of what they started out with.

"Preparation, adaptation, and supplies." Who among us has not chanted that mantra? Indeed, I could do all kinds of swell things if I had billions of dollars and all the time in the world.

I am not a big fan of fantasy-history (like fantasy-football). I look at what the Germans actually had in terms of force and materiel, and how they were using them, and what they were trying to do, and who was making the decisions, and what they were up against in Russia, and frankly, no, I don't think that group of people could have conquered Russia. They might have been able to carve some big chunks off it, but they probably would not have been able to hold those territories for very long. I think what happened is the only thing that could have happened to those people with those resources at that time. Whether they attacked in a smart way or a dumb way, I believe the end would have been the same, based on the limitations of what they started out with.

Pssh, they probably just needed to take Moscow, which is in the Wuropean side of Russia. They'd have to destroy and blockade all routes leaving the city before the government could leave, but it would be possible. Control the oppressive government and you control the oppressed citizens.

I honestly couldn't tell you with any authority, but I suspect that due to the modern technology of World War II compared to those wars, war fatigue would have set in very soon indeed, within ten years, I'd guess. This, of course, is based not only on the weapons technology, but also the speed of communication which gives people so much more information.

hmm no such thing could exist as technology has gone to M.A.D. and the reich would have to say hello to usa nuclear program :D...
germany was laaging too much...