The Treaty of Versailles did not impose sanctions on Germany against trading with the rest of the world. Clearly in spite of paying reparations, they were able to amass a very potent military arsenal between WWI and WWII. After all, who else in Europe was able to stand up to them?

I admit, I am not an economist but I venture to guess that trading with the rest of the world is not so effective when your currency is being used as confetti by the rest of the world. Again, most of Germany’s military was outfitted with outdated equipment much of it WWI era. Many of the panzers used to invade Poland, France and even the USSR were training tanks never intended to be used in actual combat. Nazi Germany was great psychologically in the years leading up to the war, giving the impression that they were much stronger than they really were. Also, it wasn’t that UK, France, USSR and USA were not able to stand up to Germany, it was that they were unwilling to deal with them when they could actually have had an effect. Preemptive war in 1936 may have been a good idea. The Nazi war machine was potent in the early years mainly due to new tactics (Blitzkrieg) and good leadership. They also were willing to fight were as the rest of the world was not.

Is that supposed to be funny? How many of these remained after Desert Storm? And of the few that remianed, how advandced could they have been given that none of them even dared to enter no fly zones during the 90's?

I remember seeing plenty of T72s (brewed up, of course) on the news footage of the invasion.

It's amazing that those on the far right will look at somethign as innocuous as a Kalashnikoff and regard it as WMD.

Unwittingly, this is probably one of the most telling statements ever. The AK47 is a WMD, just ask the citizens of any African country in the sub-Sahara, or those in Darfur, or those in Afghanistan, Iraq or South Vietnam. The AK47 is responsible for more deaths than any cluster bomb or your “white phosphorus”.