An WW2 debate that is sure to become off topic and irrelevant!

Sorry man, I already rebutted the British pilot's superiority of german ones, you can't just say that their better, and why would it be irrelevant to argue for the BF-109? Depending on the model stage, both planes had their ups and downs. I was not saying that the German tanks were quicker, only that the allied tanks did not run tracks around the german ones. And mounds of sound around El Alamein were battered by artillery? I haven't heard of that one. Sources please, and not wikipedia. Yes, there is something wrong with Bushido. It was reinvented in the 30's, and remember, it had existed since around 1200 years, so it had changed from when It was first coined after a book titled "Kojiki", Japan's oldest extant book was published. The talks about many thing, about myths and folklore, government and emperors. But it eventually talks about the feats of great warriors, and their morals. This is probably where the concept of Buddhism came from, but their isn't solid evidence. So, what I'm trying to say is that Bushido was bad back in the middle ages, when you had to serve your master to the death, and back to the 30's, when you had to serve Japan to the death. Hitler didn't surrender because he had plans, with the Battle of the Bulge, he would split the american and british joint armies in half, severing their supply routes and leaving them without a plan. However, this failed, and he lost the remaining amount of will and manpower left to push back the tides of the war. He knew that the Soviet's would've got him, he had know defences to counter the Soviet's ability to absorb casualties like a sponge. Here is the definition of both words you don't know. Quality, the standard of something measured against other things of similar kind. Superiority, the state of being Superior. Webster's online dictionary. So as you can see, they are, in fact completely different. The germans had obvious armour superiority, most if not all tanks had 75mm guns or above, exceptions would be the obsolete Panzer 1-3. They had enough oil to keep the tanks running, but the big retreat through North Africa left tanks and guns everywhere! The pictures of all the supplies the germans could not operate are incredible! Anyways, one could argue german and allied tank engine superiority, but Actual armour superiority goes to the german tanks, name one allied tank in North Africa that could easily deflect 75mm blow, and that's armour alone, no angles or deflection shooting or nothing! And besides the Churchill please. In 1944, the germans began implementing sloped armour onto their tanks, but the North African campaign was long over, so anyways, German tank crew superiority could be argued, and allied tanks had the definite speed advantage. Now, as a tank commander for either sides, which kind of tank would you prefer to operate? A German tank with superior armour and a superior gun, or an allied tank that's faster? Remember, the M4 Sherman's Main 75mm M2-M3 gun lacked muzzle velocity, and that's why the allies kept up gunning it, because it's anti-tank performance was terrible.The most successful model probably being the Sherman Firefly, it implemented the 76.2 mm 17 pounder gun, slightly evening the odds. Now, towards the Jews killing Jews thing, as I said, Hitler used the Jews a\s a scapegoat, and the final solution was just to solidfy the ideology of Nazism. Besides anti-semitism, what principles consist of Nazism? I don't want to research it, because I get all depressed when I read about mass killings and stuff. And I wasn't saying to forgive Hitler and Heydrich, where'd you get that notion from? They were terrible people. And I suppose having your nation fight to the death for no reason isn't mass murder? Hideki Tojo and his totalitarian society was no worse then Hitler's. They subtly sent men to their deaths, and Hitler directly sent people to their deaths, and mass murder doesn't completely dictate the worse leader,Hitler's charisma won him germany, and his military finesse in the beginning stages of the war were unmatched, until he went crazy at the end. Hideki Tojo was terrible at running his government, he was born into the rule, so he wasn't elected because of ability. When the Potsdam declaration was issued to the Japanese government through leaflets and mass radio broadcasts, it was flatly refused by the Japanese military high command. They showed complete disregard for the welfare of the people, and in turn, so happened the 2 atomic bombings. Both governments were't exactly humane. Sources, American wartime museum, Japanese war memorial, WW2 resources