• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Why Didn't The Allies Back Hitler.

Regarding our former odious OPoster assertions about the Jews being encouraged to leave, I recommend highly The Wages of Destruction: The Making and Breaking of the Nazi Economy by Adam Tooze.

It covers the subject well: in short, the Nazis found that when making life unbearable enough for people that they actually leave, that those people tend to take all their CAPITAL with them. They put a stop to that, thus giving the lie to that 'encouragement' canard, and in their feverish imaginings, they dreamt up an idea where the worldwide 'cabal' could give up fortunes in gold to 'ransom' the Jews from Nazi Germany. They were quite perplexed when all the money didn't show up...
 
Mikemcc said:
Lots of confusing points on here, primarily from Truthist to be fair:

In 39 Poland was invaded by Nazi Germany AND the Soviet Union, we declared war on Germany only. Partly because we were still smarting from the costs of supporting the Whites plus a realisation that we couldn't do anything about them. In 41 Hitler royally screwed up because he had failed to conquer airfield Britain, he stupidly attacked the Soviets, bleeding his industrial base, and then the US waded in against him which effectively sealed the Nazi future.

If he kept Britain out of the war, then tackling the Soviets would probably have been acceptable to Britain and the US. Neither country was favourable towards the Soviets until Barbarossa, which happened after the Nazi's had given the UK a right royal kicking in the Blitz and got their backsides kicked in the Battle of Britain. They then really messed up by associating themselves with the Japanese who slapped the US by declaring war on the US. The support of the UK within the US had been ticking along prior to that, but it was seriously ramped up after Pearl Harbour.

If they had managed to dodge any one of these the Nazis might have succeeded. By screwing up all three, their fate was sealed.
Click to expand...

Mainly because the Soviets didn't actually invade Poland until a fortnight after the UK and France activated the Polish treaty and declared war on Germany.

If anything, the Soviet Invasion established an undeclared state of war against the UK.
 
bignickel said:
Regarding our former odious OPoster assertions about the Jews being encouraged to leave, I recommend highly The Wages of Destruction: The Making and Breaking of the Nazi Economy by Adam Tooze.

It covers the subject well: in short, the Nazis found that when making life unbearable enough for people that they actually leave, that those people tend to take all their CAPITAL with them. They put a stop to that, thus giving the lie to that 'encouragement' canard, and in their feverish imaginings, they dreamt up an idea where the worldwide 'cabal' could give up fortunes in gold to 'ransom' the Jews from Nazi Germany. They were quite perplexed when all the money didn't show up...
Click to expand...

Excellent book,and totally destroys the idea that idea that the Nazis performed economic miracles in the 1930's....one of the main article of faith for the Hitler Huggers.
 
Noztradamus said:
Mainly because the Soviets didn't actually invade Poland until a fortnight after the UK and France activated the Polish treaty and declared war on Germany.

If anything, the Soviet Invasion established an undeclared state of war against the UK.
Click to expand...
Why? Did the entente powers have a treaty guaranteeing Poland against Soviet invasion? I think the USSR got away with this because it represented itself not as an aggressor (which of course it was) but as intervening to protect residents of disputed territories from the disorders caused by the collapse of the Polish state. This was a crude pretext, but I don't think it established a state of war with the UK and France, unless their treaties with Poland provided for war in that contingency.
 
Craig B said:
Why? Did the entente powers have a treaty guaranteeing Poland against Soviet invasion? I think the USSR got away with this because it represented itself not as an aggressor (which of course it was) but as intervening to protect residents of disputed territories from the disorders caused by the collapse of the Polish state. This was a crude pretext, but I don't think it established a state of war with the UK and France, unless their treaties with Poland provided for war in that contingency.
Click to expand...


Apparently the treaty had a secret protocol:
Secret Protocol attached to the Agreement of Mutual Assistance between the United Kingdom and Poland signed on the 25th August 1939

The Government of the United Kingdom and Northern Ireland and the Polish Government are agreed upon the following interpretation of the Agreement of Mutual Assistance signed this day as alone authentic and binding.

1. (a) By the expression "a European Power" employed in the Agreement is to be understood Germany. (b) In the event of action within the meaning of Article 1 or 2 of the Agreement by a European Power other than Germany, the Contracting Parties will consult together on the measures to be taken in common.
Click to expand...
 
dudalb said:
Excellent book,and totally destroys the idea that idea that the Nazis performed economic miracles in the 1930's....one of the main article of faith for the Hitler Huggers.
Click to expand...

Well they did perform economic miracles in the 1930's but that isn't at all difficult to accomplish when you steal all the money you need from your richest citizens and then either murder them and their families so they don't come looking for their money, or turn them into slaves and put them to work building your machines of war.
 
smartcooky said:
Well they did perform economic miracles in the 1930's but that isn't at all difficult to accomplish when you steal all the money you need from your richest citizens and then either murder them and their families so they don't come looking for their money, or turn them into slaves and put them to work building your machines of war.
Click to expand...
The "richest citizens" of Germany didn't in general suffer these indignities, unless they were Jews, who constituted less than one percent of the German population. It was poorer Germans, and Jews of all social classes, as well as conquered or subject peoples, who suffered the things you refer to.
 
smartcooky said:
Well they did perform economic miracles in the 1930's but that isn't at all difficult to accomplish when you steal all the money you need from your richest citizens and then either murder them and their families so they don't come looking for their money, or turn them into slaves and put them to work building your machines of war.
Click to expand...

Doing it all on credit and promising payment from future looting also helpedl
 
Craig B said:
The "richest citizens" of Germany didn't in general suffer these indignities, unless they were Jews, who constituted less than one percent of the German population. It was poorer Germans, and Jews of all social classes, as well as conquered or subject peoples, who suffered the things you refer to.
Click to expand...

True to a degree,but a great many wealthy Germans did lose money when they found out the some of the bonds that Nazi Government sold to finance their expansion turned out to be a 1930's equivalent of "Junk Bonds".
 
Captain_Swoop said:
Doing it all on credit and promising payment from future looting also helpedl
Click to expand...

The Bonds The Nazis sold to finance their economic expansion were pretty much Junk Bonds.
"The Wages of Destruction" goes into detail about how the Nazi Economy was built on fraud.
 
dudalb said:
The Bonds The Nazis sold to finance their economic expansion were pretty much Junk Bonds.
"The Wages of Destruction" goes into detail about how the Nazi Economy was built on fraud.
Click to expand...

Reminds me of the VW down payments for a car.
100,000s paid into the scheme and only a handful actually got a car before the war started.
Though the Nazi's did get some nice vehicle factories out of it all.
 
Tolls said:
Reminds me of the VW down payments for a car.
100,000s paid into the scheme and only a handful actually got a car before the war started.
Though the Nazi's did get some nice vehicle factories out of it all.
Click to expand...
Here's a pic of a happy owner of a 1942 model VW Beetle fuelling his vehicle. This illustrates yet another Nazi economic problem: the car owner is filling her up with wood chips. Wood gasifiers came as standard fittings in 1942, in view of the unavailability of liquid motor fuel on the civilian market. http://krisdedecker.typepad.com/.a/6a00e0099229e888330120a7d232ce970b-pi
 
dudalb said:
True to a degree,but a great many wealthy Germans did lose money when they found out the some of the bonds that Nazi Government sold to finance their expansion turned out to be a 1930's equivalent of "Junk Bonds".
Click to expand...
That's not what smartcookie was talking about, nor Craig replying to.
 
Craig B said:
Here's a pic of a happy owner of a 1942 model VW Beetle fuelling his vehicle. This illustrates yet another Nazi economic problem: the car owner is filling her up with wood chips. Wood gasifiers came as standard fittings in 1942, in view of the unavailability of liquid motor fuel on the civilian market. http://krisdedecker.typepad.com/.a/6a00e0099229e888330120a7d232ce970b-pi
Click to expand...

Similar to the 'Producer Gas' trailers used in Britain. They used smouldering coal and water injection to produce gas. http://www.ltmcollection.org/images/webmax/07/9889507.jpg
 
Tolls said:
Reminds me of the VW down payments for a car.
100,000s paid into the scheme and only a handful actually got a car before the war started.
Though the Nazi's did get some nice vehicle factories out of it all.
Click to expand...

I guess those which weren't delivered to the buyers became Kubelwagen for the Wehrmacht... :D
 
Craig B said:
Why? Did the entente powers have a treaty guaranteeing Poland against Soviet invasion? I think the USSR got away with this because it represented itself not as an aggressor (which of course it was) but as intervening to protect residents of disputed territories from the disorders caused by the collapse of the Polish state. This was a crude pretext, but I don't think it established a state of war with the UK and France, unless their treaties with Poland provided for war in that contingency.
Click to expand...

Also prior to the R-M Pact Britain and France had been trying to get the USSR to come on side and provide the muscle to make their guarantee of Polish sovereignty credible. Didn't happen because Poland wasn't keen of course, the British efforts were rather half-hearted about it and of course they weren't in a position to make the kind of territorial concessions the Nazi's did.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom