- 15 Jan 2020 22:10
All the millions of dead in under Lenin and Stalin would have been justified if it had really led to paradise on earth. If it had really led to the unleashing of the human potential, the end of war, prosperity, equality and an end to alienation. Particularly at the time, not long after the First World War and then with the onset of the depression and the rise of fascism, the established order left a lot to be desired. It was quite possible to convince oneself that it was Stalin or barbarism.
Hitler on the other hand would have been fine if he'd been dictator of El Salvador. A Hitler dictatorship in Salvador would probably have been preferable and more humane than a communist dictatorship. However Hitler could just not be trusted as leader of Germany. Every leader he made a deal with bar one he betrayed to a greater or lesser extent. The one leader he never betrayed, was Mussolini. He was of course the one leader that he should have betrayed.
Wilhelm Keitel: Mein Fuhrer, mein Fuhrer, the Italians have just entered the war.
Hitler: Send a couple of divisions that should deal with them.
Keitel: No, no mein Fuhrer they have entered the war on our side.
Hitler: In that case send ten.
Because of Hitler's pathological racist outlook, its very difficult to justify Hitler's killings, even as a regrettable mistake. However just because there was a need to prioritise the containment of Germany and regime change against the Nazis at a particular point in history, doesn't mean that chasing around Nazis should be a priority today. Indeed even from the end of November 1942, although we still had to defeat the Nazi regime we should also have prioritised containing Stalin . There should certainly have been no demand for unconditional surrender.
The American army in WWII was pathetic. Over 3 years to prepare and they still got their ass whipped by less than 3 German and Italian divisions at the Kasserine Pass.