Split Thread WWII & Appeasement

[theprestige]

That sounds like "they are entitled to secede if they secede successfully" in which case why talk about it in the language of rights at all?

Everybody has the right to try. Nobody is entitled to recognition if they try and fail.

Molon labe.

Possession is nine tenths of the law.

It's better to ask forgiveness than permission.

"Treason doth never prosper: what's the reason? / Why, if it prosper, none dare call it treason."

 

[Craig B]

Yes, they had same rights. But those rights never included right to secede! Nobody had them. That land was always under Czech kingdom.

Frankly, I am not even sure where the hell you get notion that settlers of land under one country should be somehow entitled to that thing...

I don't have that notion at all. The Sudeteners of 1938 were not settlers. They were the descendants of people who had been invited to enter the country more than half a millennium previously.

But in any case I don't think they were entitled to transfer any land from Czechoslovakia to the German Reich.

 

[Henri McPhee]

The appeasement policy of Chamberlain was right judgement from a military perspective.

 

[Craig B]

The appeasement policy of Chamberlain was right judgement from a military perspective.

The blue tiles in my bathroom are right judgement from an aesthetic perspective.

 

[Klimax]

The appeasement policy of Chamberlain was right judgement from a military perspective.

No. Especially from that perspective.

 

[Henri McPhee]

Americans seem to think that negotiations are appeasement. It's the utmost folly when nuclear weapons are involved, even though force may have to be used.

Jaw Jaw is better than War War as Churchill once said.

 

[Mondial]

Politicians who supported the policy of appeasement did so because they felt Germany had been unfairly treated after WW1. For instance, the Germans surrendered in 1918 after agreeing to Wilson's 14 Points. The British had a starvation blockade in place and refused to lift it until Germany signed the Versailles Treaty making that country solely responsible for causing WW1. This starvation blockade caused 900 000 civilian deaths -
https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=27&t=10005
Also if you look at the details on disarmament in the Versailles Treaty all the countries involved were supposed to disarm. Only Germany did. When the other countries (Britain, France, Belgium etc) refused to disarm Hitler ordered the rearming of his country -
https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=7937
The millions of deaths in WW1 were another reason for appeasement. A series of negotiated agreements and a peaceful revision of the Versailles Treaty were preferable to another bloodbath -
https://wearswar.wordpress.com/2017...eace-was-twisted-into-anti-german-propaganda/
https://wearswar.wordpress.com/2017...-wilful-deceptions-to-incite-a-new-world-war/
https://wearswar.wordpress.com/2018...ent-a-world-war-ordinary-people-did-not-want/

 

[ddt]

Politicians who supported the policy of appeasement did so because they felt Germany had been unfairly treated after WW1. For instance, the Germans surrendered in 1918 after agreeing to Wilson's 14 Points.

Twisting history? Germany surrendered on 11 November 1918 because collapse of the front was imminent. In those circumstances, Ludendorff pressed Hindenburg and the Kaiser to accept whatever terms, had two MPs sent to Compiègne to sign and later developed the Stab-in-the-Back legend that it was those dastardly socialists who had undermined the war effort.

The British had a starvation blockade in place and refused to lift it until Germany signed the Versailles Treaty making that country solely responsible for causing WW1. This starvation blockade caused 900 000 civilian deaths

Of course, the British blockade was only naval in nature. I'm not going to debate the numbers, but interestingly, the Hague Conventions on War allow a blockade only when it's effective, so the higher number of deaths you cite, the more you argue for its legality. And the British allowed food to be imported from January 1919 on.

And the blockade had nothing to do with the so-called "War Guilt Clause", which was not a guilt clause at all, but only meant to underpin German legal responsibility to pay reparations. The same clause existed in the other Paris suburbs treaties with the other Central Powers, and none of them bitched about that.

And let's stop bitching about the height of the German reparations. Germany paid only about 20bn Goldmarks until it stopped paying in 1931, and the payments amounted only to about 2% of the national income. By comparison, the 1871 Treaty of Frankfurt required France to pay 5bn Goldfrancs within 4 years on a national income of 22bn Goldfrancs (link).

 

[Andy_Ross]

Germany had a blockade on the UK as well. U-Boats nearly brought Britain to starvation.
Britain relied on sea routes for supply. Germany has a much longer land border than a sea coast. It didn't rely on shipping in food entirely.


Conveniently forgotten by Mondial. There was a war on.

 

[Henri McPhee]

Politicians who supported the policy of appeasement did so because they felt Germany had been unfairly treated after WW1. For instance, the Germans surrendered in 1918 after agreeing to Wilson's 14 Points.

In a way I agree that the Treaty of Versailles was unfair and there were economists like Keynes who said so at the time. The trouble was that the political situation in the world became very complex during the 1930s. There were quite a few people in high places like the Right club in the UK, including a descendent of the Duke of Wellington who were sympathetic to Hitler and Japan, and Nazis were not unknown in America. The British fascist Oswald Mosley was praised to high heaven in the British Press by the Times and Daily Mail and even the Guardian, or Manchester Guardian as it then was.

Just sticking to the British Royal family, the Duke of Windsor was put under surveillance and his telephone tapped by a detective from Scotland Yard secret political police called Albert Canning and the Duke was overheard telling Americans not to enter the war because it was now too late. Churchill with his 'with what' strategy supported the Duke of Windsor and Lloyd George in his later years was quite sympathetic to Hitler. I don't know if the Duke of Kent was mixed up in all this but I wouldn't be surprised.

Chamberlain gets unfairly blamed for appeasement, but he was the one who got The RAF and radar organised and the country prepared for war and conscription introduced.

King George V1 never wanted to be king and he was later described by the comedian Michael Bentine as a damn good king.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...land-to-be-bombed-international-10306121.html

 

[Andy_Ross]

Well, if comedian Michael Bentine thinks he was a good king that settles it.

 

[ddt]

King George V1

Are you talking about a British king or a German weapon?

 

[erwinl]

Are you talking about a British king or a German weapon?

Well.
There used to be a buzz that the king had some kind of speech impediment. There was even a suspicion that he bombed himself before each speech, which would indeed explain his performances.
Luckily he had a teacher, who knew how to doodle the text in a way the king could pronounce better.
This speech made a real impact.

I know this because I've seen this documentary once.

 

[Dave Rogers]

Well.
There used to be a buzz that the king had some kind of speech impediment. There was even a suspicion that he bombed himself before each speech, which would indeed explain his performances.
Luckily he had a teacher, who knew how to doodle the text in a way the king could pronounce better.
This speech made a real impact.

I know this because I've seen this documentary once.

I'd nominate this, but it would violate rule 12.

Dave

 

[Henri McPhee]

The millions of deaths in WW1 were another reason for appeasement. A series of negotiated agreements and a peaceful revision of the Versailles Treaty were preferable to another bloodbath -

There is a bit about this in the book Modern Money and Unemployment published in 1964 by Isidore Ostrer:

Economic conditions create war. The seed of the growth of Hitler was definitely planted in the lunatic currency arrangements fixed after the 1914-18 war.

I remember the son of the Marquis of Bath once saying on TV that his father was dangerously right wing. There were people in Britain and America who wanted to stay out of the war and not give a guarantee to Poland and that did not include Chamberlain.

 

[Hans]

There is a bit about this in the book Modern Money and Unemployment published in 1964 by Isidore Ostrer:



I remember the son of the Marquis of Bath once saying on TV that his father was dangerously right wing. There were people in Britain and America who wanted to stay out of the war and not give a guarantee to Poland and that did not include Chamberlain.

Henri go read about the The Hossbach Conference which met on November 5th 1937.

 

[Henri McPhee]

Henri go read about the The Hossbach Conference which met on November 5th 1937.

Our secret service were well aware of Hitler's intentions from at least 1934 and that information would have been conveyed to Chamberlain though secrecy would have been preserved. That doesn't mean that Chamberlain should have gone rushing off to war with outdated RAF planes and a Churchill 'with what' strategy. That could have resulted in defeat and it was touch and go in 1940. Australia and Canada and New Zealand and South Africa and Rhodesia were opposed to war in 1938 and America was none too keen to get involved at the time. A politician who has to introduce conscription can't do so without public support Fools rush in where angels fear to tread.

http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/world-war-two/causes-of-ww2/the-hossbach-conference-of-1937/

 

[Hans]

Our secret service were well aware of Hitler's intentions from at least 1934 and that information would have been conveyed to Chamberlain though secrecy would have been preserved. That doesn't mean that Chamberlain should have gone rushing off to war with outdated RAF planes and a Churchill 'with what' strategy. That could have resulted in defeat and it was touch and go in 1940. Australia and Canada and New Zealand and South Africa and Rhodesia were opposed to war in 1938 and America was none too keen to get involved at the time. A politician who has to introduce conscription can't do so without public support Fools rush in where angels fear to tread.

http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/world-war-two/causes-of-ww2/the-hossbach-conference-of-1937/

Secret service? lol, what did they do go to the book store and buy Mein Kampf? He kinda outlined his overall plan in MK and then published it.

 

[Tolls]

Secret service? lol, what did they do go to the book store and buy Mein Kampf? He kinda outlined his overall plan in MK and then published it.

I'm getting a feeling of deja vu over this conversation.

 

[Henri McPhee]

I'm getting a feeling of deja vu over this conversation.

This is what I wrote about this matter last May on this forum and it's true. Winterbotham of Air Intelligence had conversations with top Nazis and generals in 1934 and he was not the only British spy around:

This is what F.W Winterbotham wrote in his book about the invasion of Russia by Hitler. I think it's true and not embellished:

Quote:
From Eric Koch, who showed me all over the great concrete preparations in East Prussia for Operation Otto, I found out the approximate date of the operation against all Russia..........

Ever since I had joined the Secret Service in 1929 I had realized that amongst those who trod the carpeted corridors of power in Whitehall it was fashionable to smile in tolerant disbelief at anything the Secret Service told them. It was frustrating to see the information on German rearmament being quietly ignored.. As my efforts with Hitler and company had had the full backing of Admiral Sir Hugh Sinclair (Quex to his friends, "C" to the establishment, to me the Chief), he complained to the Prime Minister when he saw no use was being made of my knowledge. In 1935 I was finally summoned to appear before a Cabinet Committee to substantiate my reports. They were accepted by the committee. When Baldwin retired, Lord Swinton took over as Air Minister from Lord Londonderry, and I got the help and backing I wanted...........

After thirty years of somewhat smug propaganda on the subject of Nazi Fascism, it is difficult to tell people now how very nearly it never happened. How those of us who knew the might of the German war machine, and the accurate facts of our fight for existence, wondered at the blind optimism of the Army Staff, and of Winston Churchill himself, that we could hold the Germans in France.

It took the fall of France and great pressure from the Air Staff to convince him that things had changed since World War 1. It was at this critical moment that the greatest Intelligence triumph of all time came to our rescue, a secret that was kept throughout the war and after.