Hitlers side of the story is pretty well documented actually.
There are multitudes of sources, you apparently seem uninformed there.
He did bring Germany out of a major depression at the time,
before he went bat shit crazy.
He did not garner support there for no reason, he restored a lot of Nationalist pride in the country at the time.
He was testing weapons in the Spanish Civil War etc before the Blitzkrieg. A lot of Ernest Hemingway stories even revolved around Nazi involvement there, not so much Hitler in general.
This is a good one for starters, are many others.
https://www.amazon.com/Necessary-Wa...UTF8&qid=1468193192&sr=1-2&keywords=ken+burns
A historical fact could be differently interpreted by different groups, don't forget the added bonus by one's or a whole nation's imagination to that event.
Highlighted is the part which has been deliberately left out; many facts were dismissed as a Nazi propaganda, some conspiracy theories thrown here and there, criminalizing them for every inch of the war, while the self-esteemed allies never looked to themselves in the mirror. Playing it dumb and fool to the world.
Back before the war, the Nazi party discriminated the Jews, expelled them from prominent/financial positions and wanted them out of the whole country as much as they could. But how about the American discrimination against the blacks then, had it received half of such global criticism back in the day?
How about whole story of WWII, was it about Germany invading the world, or was it about Hitler mobilizing to save fellow Germans from discrimination/oppression in lands which belonged to the Reich in the first place before being unfairly cut off to others, only a couple of decades ago.
I imagine what the US would do if they were in his place, for example if tensions arise between you and Canada, and Alaska start paying for that in many ways. If you're a great power, is it possible to stay stand still while state-sponsored terrorism acts being endured by the Alaskans?
I mean, it seem deliberately omitted from your history that Hitler begged for that corridor to Danzig. He offered a peaceful resolve but the door was shut tight, mainly because England/France's assurance that they got Poland's back. (and of course, there is no way to believe that Britain would do such, if it wasn't assured that American cavalry would come to the aid eventually)
I believe Hitler's Germany became too big for the Capitalists, and maybe they feared his successful social model would endanger their existence at some point.
Plain and simple, honest and straight, if it wasn't for the US throwing itself into WWI then WWII, what your place would be in the world right now among the super military powers of Germany and Japan.
Whether you consider it as opinion or trash it away, the way I see it it's all about staying on the top of the food-chain when it comes to the US wars in the current and past century. All while its military manufacturers and bankers laughed their ass during every one of those.
I wonder, was there a real threat to the US mainland before/during WWII. If not, then what justified all the aid provided to the enemies of both Germany and Japan. Then you went all that Hollywood surprised and shit, after the Japs hit you back and war being officially declared upon you.
Also never to be missed, the cheapest conspiracy theory of all, that Hitler invaded the Soviets to make land for German settlers there.
Back after the invasion of Poland, Hitler in a speech he vowed to destroy Britain in case they'd declare war on Germany, again.
After the failure of Britain battle and concluding the impossibility of executing Sea Lion, what possibly could divert Hitler's focus to a totally different war theatre, against temporal ally from which he received much needed supplies, in addition of securing Germany's back from the east.
Who do you think I would rather believe, that lying filthy inhuman regime that had enslaved their own people, or believe Hitler in deeming such preemptive strike necessary in order to avoid probable future invasion by the Soviets, especially after the secret talks with Churchill - as per Hitler's side of the story. (and nobody denies the massive Soviet divisions found on those frontiers)
I believe that the "massive aid" the Soviets received after the German invasion from the US, along with promise to open another front against Hitler, might have contributed in important way to the long hold out of the Soviets. There was a good chance to crush such regime, once and forever, and save many states from much suffering on their hands subsequently. (Definitely Syria wouldn't be heading on the verge to massacre every last Syrian there in order to preserve that Russian base on the Mediterranean)
Lastly, it doesn't take a genius, PhD studies, learning divisions names and all kind of details or spending years in the archives, for someone to wonder how possibly could the US and Britain commanders have escaped the Nuremberg trials themselves, after what they had done to the German towns all-around and its German civilians.
Sorry if you won't like such thoughts, apologize if there are material misjudgments from my short-reading so far into the subject. But it's mainly to reemphasize that history is not always black or white. A Mistaken judgment, small omission of fact or wild interpretation for other, could greatly change the perception and course of the state/nation-approved written history.