Why didn't France and the UK declare war on the USSR for their part in carving up Poland?

They probably didn't have guts to take on two big powers all by themselves - declaration of war to Germany had already exhausted their willpower.


Petr

Why didn't France and the UK declare war on the USSR for their part in carving up Poland?


You can't fight the two largest continental powers at the same time. Also, the Soviets were making an opportunistic land grab from a nation that was already being destroyed by the Germans.

Also, Britain and France didn't have the same type of military options against the USSR that they did against Germany.

The non aggression pact and the sweetner to the Soviets to help themselves within the terms of the "contract" which Hitler hoped was his trumph card to provide himself with land in the east and a mutual border with Russia.

It kept his "destiny" on track and gave him the limited war in Europe his ego craved. ( And that which Munich denied him).

The assurance given to Poland was aimed at curbing German designs on Poland. The French and British did not declare war on Russia , it was a wise decision , the only decision they could make .

Hitler when faced with a similar choice ( Dec. 1941) he declared war on America , the result of that decision was fatal to his prospects of success.

Why didn't France and the UK declare war on the USSR for their part in carving up Poland?Because the Judeo-Bolshevik Warmasters like Lord Halifax were out to get Germany. Funny. Lord Halifax looks more Nordic than Hitler to me.

http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/2WWhalifax.JPG

Lets all warmly embrace those poor and misunderstood Jews and repent.

Lets all warmly embrace those poor and misunderstood Jews and repent.We shouldn't embrace anyone who actively works destroy us. Having said that, we shouldn't hate entire peoples either.

Oh yes Fade, Lord Halifax sure looks more nordic than Hitler.

http://k0nsl.digitall.ws/detox/graphs/OurRace/Hitler24234.jpg

Hitler looks so un-nordic, it's almost unfathomable.

-k0nsl

We shouldn't embrace anyone who actively works destroy us. Having said that, we shouldn't hate entire peoples either.

You are being judged daily for the whole of your race when you interact with non-whites. You are responsible and will be taken to account for the good and wrongs of your race. While good individuals (Good Jews, Good niggers) exist they are still part of their collective. I will defend the poles because I consider them part of my "in-group". I have known nice Jews and blacks, that wont make me loath their people as a collective any less.

Be aware that if any day we will have the chance to do what we need to get our destinies bacl in our hands, that we will have to do unsavory things to acomplish this. How do you plan racial segregation in the US or Europe without hurting millions of "innocent" non-whites?
Our enemies have had a field day so far in "terraforming" our civilization to their decadent needs and it will take way more than "being nice racialists" to fix this.

All of the "Germany didn't start the war" stuff is BS. Hitler knew full fucking well the British had pledged support to the Poles, he figured the British wouldn't go through with it. He gambled and lost. Attempts to present the Germans as victims are laughable. Yeah, those poor victims, with their Panzer units absolutely outmatched by the Polish military. Those evil Poles, just waiting for an opportunity to destroy Germany with unstoppable cavalry units. Total BS.

All of the "Germany didn't start the war" stuff is BS. Hitler knew full fucking well the British had pledged support to the Poles, he figured the British wouldn't go through with it. He gambled and lost. Attempts to present the Germans as victims are laughable. Yeah, those poor victims, with their Panzer units absolutely outmatched by the Polish military. Those evil Poles, just waiting for an opportunity to destroy Germany with unstoppable cavalry units. Total BS.

You may want to read this:

The Image of the Germans in Polish Literature (http://holocaust-history.info/GermansInPolishLiterature.html)


The whole point of Polish literature is simply to portray the Poles as the most good natured, the noblest, most heroic people in the world, while branding the Germans as the greediest, dumbest, most cowardly, degraded, and cruel. Constant exposure to this poison is bound to awaken the cruelest instincts, instincts which cry for war to get revenge, although one does not even know why. And since the Germans are represented not only as stupid but as cowardly as well, the entire Polish people is educated in arrogance, and taught to overestimate themselves. Thus, even responsible officials in the Ministry of War in 1939 believed that all they needed to do was to order Polish troops on horseback, armed with lances decorated with pennants, to attack German tanks, and then ride through the Brandenburg Gate as victors. The awakening was a bitter one. But the guilt for that, of course, lay, not with the frivolous, arrogant Poles, but with the wicked Germans, who had tanks. "


Adolf Hitler - An Overlooked Candidate for the Nobel Prize (http://holocaust-history.info/HitlerNobelPrize.html) (Interesting despite the comic-title)

etc.

-k0nsl

- "How do you plan racial segregation in the US or Europe without hurting millions of "innocent" non-whites?

"Our enemies have had a field day so far in "terraforming" our civilization to their decadent needs and it will take way more than "being nice racialists" to fix this.


Hey Ebus, are you this naive?

We don't have to announce all our intentions publically.

"Speak softly and carry a big stick."

Most Nazis just speak loudly and carry a toothpick.


Petr

- "How do you plan racial segregation in the US or Europe without hurting millions of "innocent" non-whites?"


Hey Ebus, are you this naive?

We don't have to announce all our intentions publically.


Petr
His stated attitude is that no matter what you do, you're damned.

Hitler said that Danzig was not the issue , he wanted poland , as much of it as he could get.
The bluff failed , what did he ask Riddentrop when britain declared war " WELL WHAT DO WE DO NOW!" .
Sinclair is spot on this Poles caused the war is hogwash.
Hitler wanted the war which he thought would be short lived against a Polish nation cut in two between Germany and Russia.
For a cause look to Berlin.


k0nsl Liked your link will read some of it later. TVM.

You may want to read this:

The Image of the Germans in Polish Literature (http://holocaust-history.info/GermansInPolishLiterature.html)



Adolf Hitler - An Overlooked Candidate for the Nobel Prize (http://holocaust-history.info/HitlerNobelPrize.html) (Interesting despite the comic-title)

etc.

-k0nsl

But what the Poles thought of the Germans isn't the question. It's possible to dislike a person or a group of people without attacking them. What reason did the Poles have to like the Germans?

Poland did not attack Germany first. If Poland had attacked Germany first, their positions would have looked a hell of a lot different. The Germans attempted to make it look as though the Polish had attacked, but that is not the same as the Polish actually attacking.

Germany's actions were not that of a poor, defenceless nation unfairly forced into war. Hitler had been snapping up land left right and centre, and was demanding land from Poland around the time the Germans attacked.

But what the Poles thought of the Germans isn't the question. It's possible to dislike a person or a group of people without attacking them. What reason did the Poles have to like the Germans?

Poland did not attack Germany first. If Poland had attacked Germany first, their positions would have looked a hell of a lot different. The Germans attempted to make it look as though the Polish had attacked, but that is not the same as the Polish actually attacking.

May I suggest that you read the entire article? You obviously didn't.

-k0nsl

Read what? The first proves nothing except that the Poles didn't like the Germans, the second says that Poland instigated war, and that Hitler wanted peace.

Beefing up the military and taking land are not the acts of a man who desperately wants peace, and neither is signing a secret treaty with Russia to split Poland up.

The Poles might have been treating the ethnic Germans badly, but Lord Haw-Haw is hardly an unbiased source. The Polish did not instigate the kind of war that came to them, nor did they attack Germany first.

In fact, the deception "Operation Canned Goods", in which German troops dressed as Poles took over the radio station at Gleiwitz, and corpses in Polish uniforms left behind as "proof", seems to show that Hitler wanted war. Why else fake a Polish attack so as to claim self-defence?

The second article is *interesting*, but nowhere does it give any proof that Poland attacked first, and the attacks on ethnic Germans were probably quite influenced by the fact that Germany was not playing nice with Poland, and the Polish and Germans hated each other anyway.

Read what? The first proves nothing except that the Poles didn't like the Germans, the second says that Poland instigated war, and that Hitler wanted peace.

Beefing up the military and taking land are not the acts of a man who desperately wants peace, and neither is signing a secret treaty with Russia to split Poland up.

The Poles might have been treating the ethnic Germans badly, but Lord Haw-Haw is hardly an unbiased source. The Polish did not instigate the kind of war that came to them, nor did they attack Germany first.

In fact, the deception "Operation Canned Goods", in which German troops dressed as Poles took over the radio station at Gleiwitz, and corpses in Polish uniforms left behind as "proof", seems to show that Hitler wanted war. Why else fake a Polish attack so as to claim self-defence?

The second article is *interesting*, but nowhere does it give any proof that Poland attacked first, and the attacks on ethnic Germans were probably quite influenced by the fact that Germany was not playing nice with Poland, and the Polish and Germans hated each other anyway.

1. The Poles incessantly called for war with Germany, thinking they would actually be capable of deafeating the German army. What fools! - And, at the same time, never given the promised support from England.

2. Hitler only wanted what was rightfully Germany's which were stolen from Germany by means of the Versallies Treaty. Besides, the land had been settled by German/Germanic people for centuries, never belonging to anything called 'Poland'

3. Badly? How about horrendously? By doing what they did to the ethnic Germans living in 'Poland' - Can't you imagine how frustrated Hitler must have felt? Imagine if there was 3 million Americans living in Iraq and being massacred in broad daylight - Do you think America would sit quiet like a church mouse? Search Google for 'The Bloody Sunday of Bromberg'. The horrors surpasses the alleged 'holocaust' in every way imaginable

4. Polish radio on 1 September 1939 repeatedly broadcast "call number 59" at short intervals. The call contained a codeword, established in collaboration with the authorities, and an order to the voivodes "administrative officials", for transmission to the police stations, to arrest all the ethnic Germans, who were already listed by name, in accordance with already existing arrest warrants. Then began the manhunt for the Germans. At the same time, the Polish singer Jan Kiepura -- discovered by a German film director and trained as a singer in Germany, made famous by the German UFA film company at a time when he was considered to have no talent in his own country -- sang the notorious "Rota", calling for war against Germany, at a demonstration in a market place in Warsaw. This, too, was typical Polish thanks for benefits received.

-k0nsl

- "3. Badly? How about horrendously? By doing what they did to the ethnic Germans living in 'Poland' - Can't you imagine how frustrated Hitler must have felt? Imagine if there was 3 million Americans living in Iraq and being massacred in broad daylight - Do you think America would sit quiet like a church mouse? Search Google for 'The Bloody Sunday of Bromberg'."

Are you trying to argue that the "Bromberg massacre" was the reason Hitler decided to invade Poland?

Nonsense - the massacre occurred AFTER the German attack!

"Bromberger Blutsonntag or Bromberg Bloody Sunday is an event that is said to have taken place on September 3, 1939 during the German invasion, ..."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bromberg_Bloody_Sunday


- "The horrors surpasses the alleged 'holocaust' in every way imaginable."

Really? Even Nazi propaganda says that the number of German victims was (at most) few tens of thousands, and even the most rabid revisionists will admit that more Jews than that got killed by the Germans during the WW II.

"Initially, Nazis claimed that 5000 Germans died in Poland in September 1939. Later, they inflated that number in 1940 to 58,000, and Hitler personally raised that number to over 60,000. De Zayas now estimates "conservatively" that number to be 5,000."


Petr

Revisionists do love to talk about figures and how incorrect they are and how they are the product of a fertile imigination.
JG and AH knew all about this.
Just what sort of support do you think Britain and France could give Poland , how do you think they would transport troops there and sustain them ?
Do you think either was prepared to attack in the West ?

The sequence of events is interesting seems you got it wrong.

Hitler had no more demands to make according to his words in 1938 , but he saw britain and France as being "little worms2.
He engineered the war thinking that it would be a three way issue between Russia , Germany and a divided and out numbered Poland.
He got it wrong.
Heydrich was the mastermind behind the "Canned goods".
If there was a fool it was Ribbentrop , he got it all wrong and Hitler believe him.
Strikes me as strange that Hitler was never the agent of agression , always the voice of reason and moderation ?

- "2. Hitler only wanted what was rightfully Germany's which were stolen from Germany by means of the Versallies Treaty. Besides, the land had been settled by German/Germanic people for centuries, never belonging to anything called 'Poland'"


Excuse me, but the territory allotted to Poland in Versailles was basically the same area that Prussia had grabbed for itself during the First and Second Partitions of Poland (1772, 1793).

(In fact, even parts of East Prussia had belonged to Poland before that.)


Moreover, those areas did have a Polish majority. ONLY in the town of Danzig (which was a Free City) were the Germans actually in the majority:


"Upper Silesia:

..

"The German census of 1900 recorded 65% of the population as Polish speaking, but the census of 1910 recorded 57%. This was due to the introduction of the category of "bilingual" inhabitants, which reduced the official number of Polish-speaking Silesians, though some of the latter spoke both German and Polish while the Germans spoke only German. In fact, according to a language map drawn up by German Professor Paul Weber, in most Upper Silesian districts east of the Oder river Polish-speaking Silesians made up over 70% of the population in 1910.
...

In fact, even after Versailles,

".... about half a million Poles were left in German Silesia, most of them in Oppeln [Opole]."

The whole Gleiwitz set-up was made to look like a call for these Poles living in the Reich to rise into rebellion.

...

"German propaganda claimed that there would be no lasting peace in Europe unless Germany recovered Danzig, the Corridor, and Upper Silesia, claiming that all these territories were preponderantly German. This was belied by the Prussian Census of 1910, but hardly anyone bothered to look at it. German propaganda had a profound impact on English and American opinion, which was unaware of the fact that only Danzig was preponderantly German. English sympathy for Germany fitted the traditional British view that Central Europe was the natural sphere of German influence, and this in turn was to underpin the appeasement of Hitler in the 1930s.

http://kufacts.cc.ukans.edu/~eceurope/hist557/lect11.htm


Petr

Danzig did not matter to Hitler, his eyes went further east.
Good excuse for a limited war when you think all the bases have been covered.

- "3. Badly? How about horrendously? By doing what they did to the ethnic Germans living in 'Poland' - Can't you imagine how frustrated Hitler must have felt? Imagine if there was 3 million Americans living in Iraq and being massacred in broad daylight - Do you think America would sit quiet like a church mouse? Search Google for 'The Bloody Sunday of Bromberg'."

Are you trying to argue that the "Bromberg massacre" was the reason Hitler decided to invade Poland?

Nonsense - the massacre occurred AFTER the German attack!

I'm trying to argue that Hitler invaded Poland to save the ethnic Germans living amidst those Poles, people hated them, and would be cruel beyond imagination.

-k0nsl

Because the Judeo-Bolshevik Warmasters like Lord Halifax were out to get Germany. Funny. Lord Halifax looks more Nordic than Hitler to me.



uh, maybe they thought that germany and ussr would ally and crush them utterly in moments?

Paul Schmidt took the "final message from Britain to Chancellery.
"....were he found an anxious party of soldiers and officals waiting for news.He was shown into Hitler's study, and in the presence of hitler and ribbentropslwoly readthe ulitmatum.
"When I finished" wrote Schmidt, " there was complete silence. Hitler sat immobile gazing before him....after an interval which seemed an age he turned to Ribbentrop, who had remained standing at the window. "What Now ?", asked Hitler with a savage look.

The invasion of Poland had more to do with a blank cheque which Stalin handed to Hitler , it provided Hitler with what he thought was his trumph card.
He could not actually understand that Britain would fight for a country which it could not give direct aid to.
A total miscalculation on his part , an endangered minority provided and excuse , his goal was much more than danzig , thus the pact with Stalin.
it seems that the sequence of evens you quote is wrong.
Are you looking for an excuse for Hitler moving east.
Destiny , as laid out in "Mein Kampf" would have more to do with it.

Hitler totally misread the British. But that was nothing compared to his ignorance of America and Russia.

How he threw any chance of winning WW2.
Britain and France , made the only reasonable decision they could by not declaring war on Russia.
Hitler failed to be so wise when he learned of peral harbour and as fade says he misjudgeed aRussia completely , not only this but it was to be done again and again all the way down the line right to to and after Citadel.
He failed to realise that war would be declared even if no material help could be given to Poland.
Who started WW2 , Hitler , because he trusted Ribentrop and he misjudged those he met at Munich.

I've purchased what promises to be an excellent book on the Poles during World War 2 called "Uprising '44" by Norman Davies.

To answer my own question, it appears that Davies shows that the treaty between the UK and Poland specifically mentioned Germany as the country the UK promised to defend the Poles against. Therefore, in purely technical and legal terms, the UK had no reason to declare war on the USSR for their carving up Poland, even though the practical reasons against declaring war on the USSR were obvious. Davies seems to suggest that appeasement was strong enough in the UK that they had little stomach for fighting anyone in the first place, so the realpolitik of "they didn't declare war on USSR because they had nothing to gain by fighting two Continental powers" seems to be consistent with his portrayal of the situation.

But I thought the fact that the UK-Polish treaty specifically mentioned Germany and nobody else was a salient point to this discussion.

To answer my own question, it appears that Davies shows that the treaty between the UK and Poland specifically mentioned Germany as the country the UK promised to defend the Poles against.

Well of course the treaty mentions Germany... The UK's whole policy was aimed at destroying or at least containing Germany. The "Winter War" occupation/invasion of Finland didn't ruffle a feather on Churchill or Roosevelt's heads. They loved "Uncle Joe", and wouldn't ever dare to say anything or do anything that might annoy or upset him.

There are "Good" reasons and "Real" reasons for everything, especially in politics. There wasn't any great love of the Poles that led to the aforementioned treaty with England. Next you'll say they created that treaty out of sense of altruism or what do the English call it? Fair play? (By Jove, old boy! Wouldn't be cricket! Letting the Hun roam all over Eastern Europe! We had to put our foot down and tell Fritz where to get off!)

Right! And the Wehrmacht really had a plan to invade England,too...

Today Poland... Tomorrow the world, right? Stupid English! Stupid French!

How many millions of lives would NOT have been lost had the stupid English and French done nothing in the wake of the German invasion of Poland? 50? 60 million? What did it all prove? Right after this massive bloodletting there was the Cold War for the next 50-plus years, as opposed to the 12 years in toto of National Socialism, war and peace together. Seems that the NSDAP wasn't quite the enemy our own "Ally" proved to be. The same enemy the Germans were fighting in the first place... The Bolsheviks.

- "How many millions of lives would NOT have been lost had the stupid English and French done nothing in the wake of the German invasion of Poland?"


If he had been allowed to crush and swallow Poland in peace, Hitler would attacked USSR anyways, silly. His appetite only grew while eating.


Petr

Stupid English , Stupid French.
Greedy Hitler and Greedy Stalin.

Yes the promise given to Poland was aimed at curbing German aggression which had Poland set up as its next victim , there was nothing wrong in this.

Given the nature of the war fought in the east and the means to an ends of the German / Soviet pact I think it was Hitler and Stalin who turned out to be "stupid".
Stalin was under the impression he could trust Hitler , even in the short term and Hitler thought that he could defeat the Soviet Union.

Smart England and Smart France , not completely , but smart enough to know what to do.
As has been pointed out before when Hitler was presented with a similar option he played the "Stupid " card.

Seems that the NSDAP wasn't quite the enemy our own "Ally" proved to be. The same enemy the Germans were fighting in the first place... The Bolsheviks.

Riiiiiiiight....

The Government of the German Reich and the Government of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics desirous of strengthening the cause of peace between Germany and the U.S.S.R and proceeding from the fundamental provisions of the Neutrality Agreement concluded in April 1926 between Germany and the U.S.S.R., have reached the following agreement....

http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/nazsov/nonagres.htm

Some enemies.

As to the basic question, why didn't Britain declare war on Russia when it occupied the eastern part of Poland, as provided for in the secret protocols to the Ribbentrop-Molotov Agreement?

The answer is of course: Realpolitik.

From Churchill's broadcast of 1st October, 1939:

...Russia has pursued a cold policy of self-interest. We could have wished that the Russian armies should have been standing on their present line as the friends and allies of Poland instead of as invaders. But that the Russian armies should stand on this line was clearly necessary for the safety of Russia...an Eastern front has now been created which Nazi Germany does not dare assail...

I cannot forecast to you the action of Russia. It is a riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma. But perhaps there is a key. That key is Russian national interest. It cannot be in accordance with the interest of the safety of Russia that Germany should plant herself upon the shores of the Black Sea, or that she should overrun the Balkan states and subjugate the Slavonic peoples of south-eastern Europe...

But what the Poles thought of the Germans isn't the question. It's possible to dislike a person or a group of people without attacking them. What reason did the Poles have to like the Germans?

Germany's actions were not that of a poor, defenceless nation unfairly forced into war. Hitler had been snapping up land left right and centre, and was demanding land from Poland around the time the Germans attacked.

The following from the 1922 Encyclopaedia Britannica is interesting:

“…under Polish pressure the Germans in the southern and eastern districts were subjected to oppressive treatment. On Aug. 19 1920 the Poles felt strong enough, indeed, to make an attempt to seize the country by force. On all sides bands of Poles, chiefly recruited from Congress Poland, usurped authority. A number of Germans were forcibly carried across the frontier into Poland, and many were killed. Several weeks elapsed before it was possible to quell this rising and restore order…It had been suggested by the Entente that non-resident Upper Silesians of the German Reich should vote outside Silesia, at Cologne. Germany protested against this, and her protest was recognized as valid by the Entente. In January 1921 the date of the plebiscite was fixed for March 20 1921. An immediate revival took place in the use of TERRORISM BY THE POLES [!!!] [emphasis added], especially in the districts of Rybnik, Pless, Kattowitz, and Beuthen. It reached its climax in the days preceding the plebiscite. Voters from other parts of the German Reich were frequently refused admission to the polls; sometimes they were maltreated and even in some instances murdered; and houses where outvoters were staying were set on fire… The day after the plebiscite the Polish excesses recommenced, and from that date onwards continued without interruption… Practically all the towns voted for Germany… the first days of May witnessed a new Polish insurrection which assumed far greater proportions than the former one. Korfanty had secretly raised a well-organized Polish force which was provided with arms and munition from across the border, and was reinforced by large bodies of men from Poland… By June 20 the British troops had again occupied the larger towns, while the Poles had the upper hand in the rural districts. As a result of the difficulties in paying his men and providing them with food Korfanty now lost control over his followers. Independent bands were formed which PLUNDERED THE VILLAGES, ILL-TREATED THE GERMANS, AND MURDERED MANY OF THEM [emphasis added.]” --- 1922 Encyclopaedia Britannica, “SILESIA, UPPER”

Poland did not attack Germany first. If Poland had attacked Germany first, their positions would have looked a hell of a lot different. The Germans attempted to make it look as though the Polish had attacked, but that is not the same as the Polish actually attacking.

After 6 years of planning pre-emptive war against Germany (beginning in 1933); after repeatedly threatening to declare war on Germany (24, 25, and 28 March 1939; 5 May and 25 August 1939); after issuing detailed military attack plans for an invasion of Germany (24 March 1939); after repeatedly assuring everyone who would listen that they could defeat the Germans with or without foreign assistance (for example, General Gluchowski, 26 March 1939, Marshal Rydz-Smigly, 17 July 1939, Ambassador Lukasiewicz, 15 August 1939; Ambassador Jozef Lipski, 31 August 1939); after being the first to mobilize, both fully (334,000 men on 23 March 1939) and partially (21 reserve divisions on 23 August 1939); after being the first to commence hostilities, firing on German passenger boats and aircraft (24, 25, 26 and 31 August 1939) *, the entire Polish air force was destroyed during the first 36 hours of the war!

* The Poles also blew up a bridge over the Weichsel, the eastern end of which was on German territory, at Dirschau, on 31 August 1939; personally I consider this a legitimate defensive action; but the Poles cannot simultaneously complain of a German "surprise attack". The point is that they were prepared for it and provoked it.

As Ambassador Henderson told Lord Halifax: "Whether you believe it or not, of all Germans, Hitler is the most moderate where Poland and the Corridor are concerned".

Also the following books might be of interest:

FLÜCHT UND VERTREIBUNG DER DEUTSCHEN by Joachim Nolywaika
DIE HÖLLE VON LAMSDORF by Heinz Esser
TRAGÖDIE UNSERER HEIMAT: VERTRIEBEN AUS DEM SUDENTLAND by Ludwig Schreiber
DER TOD SPRACH POLNISCH: Dokumente polnischer Grausamkeiten an deutschen 1919-1949
BROMBERGER BLUTSONNTAG by Bernhard Lindenblatt and Otto Bäcker

-k0nsl

...As Ambassador Henderson told Lord Halifax: "Whether you believe it or not, of all Germans, Hitler is the most moderate where Poland and the Corridor are concerned".

-k0nsl

It's fairly well-known that the British were sympathetic to German grievances concerning Danzig and the Corridor, which begs the question as to why Ribbentrop and Hitler chose not to pursue a diplomatic solution for this issue.

Well of course the treaty mentions Germany... The UK's whole policy was aimed at destroying or at least containing Germany. The "Winter War" occupation/invasion of Finland didn't ruffle a feather on Churchill or Roosevelt's heads. They loved "Uncle Joe", and wouldn't ever dare to say anything or do anything that might annoy or upset him.

There are "Good" reasons and "Real" reasons for everything, especially in politics. There wasn't any great love of the Poles that led to the aforementioned treaty with England. Next you'll say they created that treaty out of sense of altruism or what do the English call it? Fair play? (By Jove, old boy! Wouldn't be cricket! Letting the Hun roam all over Eastern Europe! We had to put our foot down and tell Fritz where to get off!)

Right! And the Wehrmacht really had a plan to invade England,too...

Today Poland... Tomorrow the world, right? Stupid English! Stupid French!

How many millions of lives would NOT have been lost had the stupid English and French done nothing in the wake of the German invasion of Poland? 50? 60 million? What did it all prove? Right after this massive bloodletting there was the Cold War for the next 50-plus years, as opposed to the 12 years in toto of National Socialism, war and peace together. Seems that the NSDAP wasn't quite the enemy our own "Ally" proved to be. The same enemy the Germans were fighting in the first place... The Bolsheviks.

The Winter War actually DID ruffle more than just a feather. Britain offered military help to Finland but Sweden denied to let them pass. "Small nations cannot afford to be heroic."
Stalin was showing expansionism when attacking Finland (they expected to conquer the whole country) and the Anglo-Saxons wanted to stop that actually. The Winter War proved that the Soviets had poor military capabilities, that's why Hitler has attacked. If operation Barbarossa would've started in the early spring, Moscow would've been razed.

Von Ribbentrop was hanged for signing the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, which preceeded and made possible the attack on Poland. Ribbentrop defended his actions on the grounds that one million Germans had been expelled from Polish territory over a 20-year period, accompanied by numerous atrocities, and that complaints to the World Court in The Hague and the League of Nations in Geneva had been ignored for just as long. These were ethnic Germans with Polish citizenship living in lands given to the new Polish state under the Versailles Treaty.

On October 23, 1938, Ribbentrop made an offer to the Poles which the British ambassador, Sir Neville Henderson, admitted was reasonable, calling it a "pure League of Nations proposal": Ribbentrop asked for a plebiscite in the Polish corridor; the return of Danzig (a 100% German city) to the Reich, and the construction of an extra-territorial double-track railway and highway across the Corridor to East Prussia, which had previously been separated from the rest of Germany and could only be reached by sea, in defiance of all common sense, that is, a land bridge to East Prussia (X 260-269 [295-304]; 280-281 [317-318]; 367-369 [416-417]).

In return, the Poles were to receive an advantageous financial settlement: a guarantee of port facilities and outlet for Polish goods through the port of Danzig. The future of the Corridor was to be decided according to the principle of self-determination, the Poles would receive an outlet to the sea, and the German-Polish Friendship Pact (signed by Hitler in 1934 in the face of bitter German opposition), would be renewed for an additional period (XIX 362-368 [399-406].

For the prosecution version of these same events, see III 209-229 [237-260)).

This was the "Nazi Plan to conquer the world" which served as a pretext for the entire war, including, eventually, Pearl Harbor, Hiroshima, and Yalta."


Hitler never made any territorial demands on Poland: on the contrary, he offered to guarantee the 1919 borders with Poland. The Poles replied that this was "insult to their honour and a threat to their independence". Danzig was never a part of Poland, and was not part of Poland in 1939: it was a so-called "free city" under the nominal control of the League of Nations.

-k0nsl

Riiiiiiiight....

The Government of the German Reich and the Government of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics desirous of strengthening the cause of peace between Germany and the U.S.S.R and proceeding from the fundamental provisions of the Neutrality Agreement concluded in April 1926 between Germany and the U.S.S.R., have reached the following agreement....

http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/nazsov/nonagres.htm

Some enemies.

Yeah, we've heard all that before but if such were the case then why were the Russians, the supposed "Friends" of Germany, preparing to invade Western Europe? Bolshevisim was the main Enemy of not only Germany but the world not only then but for a long time after WWII ended. Anti-Communism was one of the main foundations of National Socialist Germany.
Here's a fine example from 1943 (With text below):

http://www.calvin.edu/academic/cas/gpa/posters/bols.jpg

(Victory or Bolshevist Chaos)

And this from the talking points that came with the poster:

The war forced upon us by our enemies has reached its decisive stage. Everyone today realizes that in the final analysis this is an historic struggle between National Socialism and Bolshevism. The fateful question the German people, and all of Europe, face is:

VICTORY OR BOLSHEVIST CHAOS!

(The full text link is here):

http://www.calvin.edu/academic/cas/gpa/bolshevist.htm

Admittedly the link is instructions from the Propaganda Ministry but the fact remains the same: The Commies were the enemy of a free and peaceful Europe. If that wasn't the case then what was 50+ years of Cold War about?

And I still contend that England, France and America were stupid for backing the wrong horse in this race. Bolshevism could have been contained inside the borders of Russia had there not been a WWII. But that's pure sophistry, I know since the governments of both the US and England were overrun with commie spies,(And I don't know if the French were similarly infested. Does anyone here have something to add in that regard?), and symphasizers that siding up with Stalin was ineveitable. Selling the fate of Eastern Europe down the river to 50 years of communist domination and exploitation.

I'm not saying that NS Germany was perfect and they were all knights in shining armor or anything naive but the filter of all the pro-victor history has to be stripped away and an accurate account of what happened must come out. All the lies need to be reversed and have the truth replace them. All this talk of,"The Good War", "Making the world safe for Democracy",and other similar nonsense has got to go or these same mistakes are going to happen all over again one day. Think not? Look at how quickly everything boils down to a Reductio ad Hitlerum these days. Even that Tempest in a Teapot, Saddam Hussein was compared thusly. Why? Because people are brainwashed to react that way like Pavlov's Dogs. Sad how simple a creature Mankind can be reduced to by manipulation. Correcting the information about WWII, is the start in breaking the chain. Some people know today that the government lies to them but think it all started with the Viet Nam War, or Nixon but they're wrong. It started much earlier than that. Much earlier than that...

- "Hitler never made any territorial demands on Poland: on the contrary, he offered to guarantee the 1919 borders with Poland. The Poles replied that this was "insult to their honour and a threat to their independence"."


Did Hitler also happen to guarantee the borders of Czechoslovakia at any point?

There is a saying in Finnish: "If you give your little-finger to the devil, it'll rip off your whole arm."


Petr

Yeah, we've heard all that before but if such were the case then why were the Russians, the supposed "Friends" of Germany, preparing to invade Western Europe?


They wern't, actually.


Bolshevisim was the main Enemy of not only Germany but the world not only then but for a long time after WWII ended. Anti-Communism was one of the main foundations of National Socialist Germany.
Here's a fine example from 1943 (With text below):


The Nazis ranted against the Soviets in propaganda AFTER they betrayed them? Wow. :rolleyes:

If you care to look at the run up to "Barbarossa".
The Russians kept up their supply of oil and goods on time , the Germans did the opposite.

There was no impending invasion from Russia.
Dr. Brandt once upon a time ststed that an invasion from Russia was but two weeks away when "Barbarossa" broke , for a nation so much on war footing the Russians did very badly.

The poster, don't you think the word "propaganda" applies ?
A bit late as the war was lost by this stage.

As far as a goverment telling lies goes , Hitler and his goverment perfected this to an art form .
( Stalin was no better).

Yeah, we've heard all that before but if such were the case then why were the Russians, the supposed "Friends" of Germany, preparing to invade Western Europe? Bolshevisim was the main Enemy of not only Germany but the world not only then but for a long time after WWII ended. Anti-Communism was one of the main foundations of National Socialist Germany.
Here's a fine example from 1943 (With text below):

http://www.calvin.edu/academic/cas/gpa/posters/bols.jpg

(Victory or Bolshevist Chaos)

And this from the talking points that came with the poster:

The war forced upon us by our enemies has reached its decisive stage. Everyone today realizes that in the final analysis this is an historic struggle between National Socialism and Bolshevism. The fateful question the German people, and all of Europe, face is:

VICTORY OR BOLSHEVIST CHAOS!

(The full text link is here):

http://www.calvin.edu/academic/cas/gpa/bolshevist.htm

Admittedly the link is instructions from the Propaganda Ministry but the fact remains the same: The Commies were the enemy of a free and peaceful Europe. If that wasn't the case then what was 50+ years of Cold War about?

And I still contend that England, France and America were stupid for backing the wrong horse in this race. Bolshevism could have been contained inside the borders of Russia had there not been a WWII. But that's pure sophistry, I know since the governments of both the US and England were overrun with commie spies,(And I don't know if the French were similarly infested. Does anyone here have something to add in that regard?), and symphasizers that siding up with Stalin was ineveitable. Selling the fate of Eastern Europe down the river to 50 years of communist domination and exploitation.

I'm not saying that NS Germany was perfect and they were all knights in shining armor or anything naive but the filter of all the pro-victor history has to be stripped away and an accurate account of what happened must come out. All the lies need to be reversed and have the truth replace them. All this talk of,"The Good War", "Making the world safe for Democracy",and other similar nonsense has got to go or these same mistakes are going to happen all over again one day. Think not? Look at how quickly everything boils down to a Reductio ad Hitlerum these days. Even that Tempest in a Teapot, Saddam Hussein was compared thusly. Why? Because people are brainwashed to react that way like Pavlov's Dogs. Sad how simple a creature Mankind can be reduced to by manipulation. Correcting the information about WWII, is the start in breaking the chain. Some people know today that the government lies to them but think it all started with the Viet Nam War, or Nixon but they're wrong. It started much earlier than that. Much earlier than that...

Exactly right. I agree with Buchanan on this--Germany and Russia, if they had been left to themselves to duke it out on the Continent, would have "contained" each other. It's really America that throws off the balance by intervening in both "world" wars, unnecessarily.

It's fairly well-known that the British were sympathetic to German grievances concerning Danzig and the Corridor, which begs the question as to why Ribbentrop and Hitler chose not to pursue a diplomatic solution for this issue.


I was surprised to learn that both Britain and France were sympathetic to Germany's claim about Danzig. How ironic, then, that Britain and France declared war on Germany when Hitler tried to re-take Danzig by force. Can you imagine anything more ironic?? It just shows that WWII was not about Poland. It was about Britain being afraid of Germany becoming a powerful global power. In fact, at the start of WWII, Germany was already an economic powerhouse.


------

It was about Britain being afraid of Germany becoming a powerful global power. In fact, at the start of WWII, Germany was already an economic powerhouse.
Yeah, it's almost like they were concerned about their own interests, isn't it?

Yeah, it's almost like they were concerned about their own interests, isn't it?

Did that excuse Britain's act of plunging Europe into a world war?


-----

Did that excuse Britain's act of plunging Europe into a world war?


-----

Germany's control over whatever land it chooses is more important than any other concern.

Germany's control over whatever land it chooses is more important than any other concern.


Danzig was stolen from Germany. Germany wanted it back.


-----

Nice logic, Franco. Maybe Israel will apply the same one day.

http://protestwarrior.com/nimages/signs/large/pw_sign_11.gif

Nice logic, Franco. Maybe Israel will apply the same one day.

http://protestwarrior.com/nimages/signs/large/pw_sign_11.gif


yes, hopefully someday the Palestinians will be able to take back control of THEIR land :222

Did that excuse Britain's act of plunging Europe into a world war?


-----
That was not the goal, nor a result of that specific issue in isolation.

yes, hopefully someday the Palestinians will be able to take back control of THEIR land :222I guess you're a big fan of female genital mutilation and "honor killings."

Danzig was stolen from Germany. Germany wanted it back.


-----

Not only Danzig, but also Königsberg, Memel, Breslau, Kattowitz and many others might still be German cities today had Hitler been prepared to be rather more statesmanlike and operate through diplomatic channels.

It is just plain silly to maintain that Britain was itching for a war with Germany in 1939 to prevent them becoming a global power. Even David Irving shrinks from such a mad assertion.

had Hitler been prepared to be rather more statesmanlike and operate through diplomatic channels.


He did operate through diplomatic channels at first.


----

I guess you're a big fan of female genital mutilation and "honor killings."


No, but is that really so much worse then the oppression they live in under Zionism? And I would suspect, like most people, they would prefer to live under oppression that is at least customary to their own culture, then the forced oppression of another.

Also, I really only care about my own people. How the Palestinians live is no concern for me.

Nice logic, Franco. Maybe Israel will apply the same one day.

http://protestwarrior.com/nimages/signs/large/pw_sign_11.gif


Oh, that's funny.

Jews have no legit claim to Israel. So Jews lived in parts of Palestine many centuries ago. So what? Does that mean that they could demand that land back, after all those centuries?


---------

No, but is that really so much worse then the oppression they live in under Zionism?Israel's Arab citizens enjoy a higher standard of living and more freedoms than they would in any Muslim country. And I would suspect, like most people, they would prefer to live under oppression that is at least customary to their own culture, then the forced oppression of another.Funny how so many pallies are illegal immigrants who couldn't wait to take advantage of this "oppression." Also, I really only care about my own people. How they live is no concern for me.Then why back the Islamists in their war against Israel and America?

Israel's Arab citizens enjoy a higher standard of living and more freedoms than they would in any Muslim country.
UAE? Or Bahrain, but that's tiny.

Israel's Arab citizens enjoy a higher standard of living and more freedoms than they would in any Muslim country.

Yes, and I suppose this is the reason why so many of them are willing to strap a bomb to their body and blow themselves up just to take out a few of these people who are providing them with such a "high standard of living".

Then why back the Islamists in their war against Israel and America?
If I "back" the "Islamicists", it is because I can respect what they are standing against. I only wish the(white) people of the United states had the courage required to do the same thing.

UAE? Or Bahrain, but that's tiny.Actually, yes. Israel's Arab citizens enjoy more civil liberties.

As for their standard of living, it seems high only because 1) their populations are so tiny, and 2) oil wealth.

Bahrain:

Population:
677,886
note: includes 235,108 non-nationals (July 2004 est.)

In well-to-do Bahrain, petroleum production and refining account for about 60% of export receipts, 60% of government revenues, and 30% of GDP.

UAE:

Population:
2,523,915
note: includes an estimated 1,606,079 non-nationals

Its wealth is based on oil and gas output (about 33% of GDP), and the fortunes of the economy fluctuate with the prices of those commodities.

(2004 CIA World Factbook)

As with other Islamic countries, their infant mortality is higher, literacy lower, etc. compared to Israel.

Can somebody please peel out the Izzy-Pally stuff from this thread?

Can somebody please peel out the Izzy-Pally stuff from this thread?


Sorry. :(

Can somebody please peel out the Izzy-Pally stuff from this thread?How about no? The questions are valid. If Germany has the "right" to annex new territory, why shouldn't Israel have the same right? Or at the very least, the right to keep and protect what she already holds.

Yes, and I suppose this is the reason why so many of them are willing to strap a bomb to their body and blow themselves up just to take out a few of these people who are providing them with such a "high standard of living"."So many of them?" Try a tiny minority of fanatics, egged on by demagogues. Do you really believe these Islamists are thinking rationally? If I "back" the "Islamicists", it is because I can respect what they are standing against. I only wish the(white) people of the United states had the courage required to do the same thing.You think white people should blow up Jewish schoolbuses? What a striking act of courage. :rolleyes:

I was addressing the question to the organ-grinder not the monkey.

You were talking to yourself again? That's quite a nasty habit.

If I "back" the "Islamicists", it is because I can respect what they are standing against. I only wish the(white) people of the United states had the courage required to do the same thing.


So then I assume you consider yourself a coward compared even to Islamic women.

He did operate through diplomatic channels at first.
----

But unfortunately chose not to pursue them too vigorously when it really mattered.

The following being immediately prior to the signing of the Ribbentrop-Molotov Pact, and while Sir Neville Henderson was still engaged in what the British Government thought were substantive negotiations on the 'Polish Question'.

...With a gesture toward Ribbentrop he announced triumphantly that the foreign minister was flying to Moscow immediately to sign the pact. ‘Now I have Poland just where I want her!’ Now Germany could not be blockaded, because the USSR would supply all the cereals, cattle, coal, wood, lead, and zinc that Germany needed. ‘I am only afraid that at the last moment some Schweinehund might put to me a plan for mediation!’...

David Irving, Hitler’s War, p.200

So then I assume you consider yourself a coward compared even to Islamic women.

I would suspect that the average Islamic woman is just trying to survive.
But, if I compare myself to some brave freedom fighter, then yes. I can admit that.

"So many of them?" Try a tiny minority of fanatics, egged on by demagogues. Do you really believe these Islamists are thinking rationally? .


Not completely. Many of them belief(which is true)that they are in a state of war and that always causes some irrational thoughts and actions. The Israelis, on the other hand, do not even need to think rationally, as it seems they can pretty much do whatever they want to do. No matter what war crimes they may commit, they know they are not going to loose the support of "the world's only superpower."

As with other Islamic countries, their infant mortality is higher, literacy lower, etc. compared to Israel.

Yeah, its a shame they don't get the billions of dollars of aid from the U.S.

Yeah, its a shame they don't get the billions of dollars of aid from the U.S.But they do.

But they do.

Aids aren't the same as paying for oil to the filty rich folks with more gold you can raise a fist on.

He did operate through diplomatic channels at first.

A little subtlety is all it would have taken...

Chamberlain wanted OUT of Europe. He trusted in the RN and RAF to protect Britain, and didn't want to get involved in land wars on the continent. The Poles, the Czechs, the French were all on their own - let them solve their own problems

What sunk his strategy was Hitler's utter lack of tact: it wasn't enough for Germany to be powerful, she had to SEEM powerful also

The stupid theatrics and boasting, and completely gratuitous insults and humiliations - these things caused a popular revolt against Chamberlain's policy, and forced him - against his will - to sign the treaty of alliance with Poland

In this case, the Tail wagged the Dog

I am not sure if it was as simple as staying out of Europe .
If Chamberlain had really wanted to have stayed "out of Europe" he would never have been in Munich and would never have given a hand written note to the Poles.
When Hilter broke with Munich and took the rest of the Czech. nation under his " protection" everything changed.
Munich had been popular as it secured peace and "prevented war" , Chamberlain was very much the man of the moment.
It was about trying to prevent a war which was coming , staying out of Europe as a policy would have meant no Munich conference.
War would always have sucked in the major powers , seemed everyone knew this apart from Hitler who got it about as wrong as you possibly could get it.
What you say about Hitler and his policy and approach to dealing with other nations is right, the result of this was always going to be a war.

When Hilter broke with Munich and took the rest of the Czech. nation under his " protection" everything changed.

Indeed

What difference did it make to Hitler which flag flew over Prague Town Hall? What threat did the rump Czech state pose to Germany that it had to be invaded and put under military occupation? None.

It was plain petty vindictiveness: It wasn't enough to control the Czechs, they had to be humiliated as well.

This isn't statesmanship - it's schoolyard politics

And it's not just the Czechs - Hitler treated all his opponents like this

Didn't he realize the domestic political difficulties this behavior would cause Chamberlain?


If Chamberlain had really wanted to have stayed "out of Europe" he would never have been in Munich and would never have given a hand written note to the Poles.

In 1940 the Germans attacked in the west with 2.5 million men

To counter this the French provided a million men, the Belgians 500,000, and the British... 300,000

Not only was the British Army tiny, but Gort was under orders to spare the lives of his men - which explains why he chose to retreat to Dunkirk instead of fighting to the bitter end alongside the French

Clearly, Chamberlain never had any real intention of defending these countries - his actions towards them were pure tokenism

No question about it, Hitler was a thoroughly bad egg.

The BEF as small but Britain did not have the gear to build and put in the field anything bigger , in 1939 she was still largely unprepared to fight a war in Europe or anywhere else for that matter.

The events of May / June 1940 left the BEF in an impossible position - standing to fight to the death would have meant the loss of the war , retreat was the only option.
All the eggs were in the one basket with the potential loss of BEF there would be nothing left with which to fight .
The loss of BEF would have made some form of peace with Germany a likely outcome on terms dictated from Berlin.

I don't view the input into France as being token , it was all that could be done and what was done was done in an out moded manner.
For Gb. one hell of a learning curve which they were lucky to have surived.

#76 Today, 08:37 AM
Dan Dare
Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 138


DD "No question about it, Hitler was a thoroughly bad egg. "
He was no gentleman .