Split Thread WWII & Appeasement

[Henri McPhee]

That's interesting information from SpitfireIX.

I'm finding it difficult to find any websites which admit to British military weakness in Britain compared to Germany in 1938, apart from one or two that mention that the RAF was woefully inadequate in 1938, and the RAF thought the Gloster Gladiator was too slow.

There is some kind of gung-ho website about Britain supposedly won the war with a few interesting comments about this matter:

https://www.quora.com/Were-the-Brit...ery-battle-until-the-United-States-intervened

The British entered World War Two less prepared for war than the Germans who had planned it. This was particularly true of the British Army, which had badly neglected tank design and anti-tank weapons, as well as combined arms operations. It was less true of the RAF, which had made near-miraculous progress since Munich in 1938 and now had aircraft that were at least a near match for the Germans, save in the tactical bombing role. The Royal Navy was still a world-class fighting force, although badly deficient in escort vessels.

 

[jimbob]

That's interesting information from SpitfireIX.

I'm finding it difficult to find any websites which admit to British military weakness in Britain compared to Germany in 1938, apart from one or two that mention that the RAF was woefully inadequate in 1938, and the RAF thought the Gloster Gladiator was too slow.

There is some kind of gung-ho website about Britain supposedly won the war with a few interesting comments about this matter:

https://www.quora.com/Were-the-Brit...ery-battle-until-the-United-States-intervened

YES AND IN 1938 GERMANY WAS ALSO UNPREPARED FOR WAR - AND BENEFITED MORE FROM THE YEAR'S DELAY

 

[Garrison]

That's interesting information from SpitfireIX.

I'm finding it difficult to find any websites which admit to British military weakness in Britain compared to Germany in 1938, apart from one or two that mention that the RAF was woefully inadequate in 1938, and the RAF thought the Gloster Gladiator was too slow.

As predicted, more fact free nonsense, simply repeating the same discredited claims. If you can't provide a coherent defence of your claims Henri simply say so and withdraw them.

There is some kind of gung-ho website about Britain supposedly won the war with a few interesting comments about this matter:

And if the army was ill-equipped whose responsibility was that? If Chamberlain expected war with Germany why did he do nothing to address the deficiencies in the army after Munich? BTW it is isn't even a webpage about WWII this time, simply a couple of unattributed responses to a question posed in a search engine, you really are scraping the bottom of the barrel Henri.

 

[Henri McPhee]

And if the army was ill-equipped whose responsibility was that? If Chamberlain expected war with Germany why did he do nothing to address the deficiencies in the army after Munich? BTW it is isn't even a webpage about WWII this time, simply a couple of unattributed responses to a question posed in a search engine, you really are scraping the bottom of the barrel Henri.

I don't think that's the historical truth. It was the Labour and Liberal parties who were opposed to rearmament, not Chamberlain. He didn't suddenly think about rearmament, and getting air defence capability organised after the Germans marched into Prague. Hitler was determined to invade Soviet Russia, even if Stalin didn't know about it at the time.

There is a bit about the matter at this website:

https://www.argunners.com/victory-not-appeasement-chamberlain-hitler-munich-1938/

 

[Garrison]

I don't think that's the historical truth.

And yet the facts say the opposite.

It was the Labour and Liberal parties who were opposed to rearmament, not Chamberlain.

Chamberlain was the PM and had a large parliamentary majority, so what Labour or the Liberals thought was irrelevant. Show that Chamberlain acted in a manner that backs up your claim he knew war was coming.

He didn't suddenly think about rearmament, and getting air defence capability organised after the Germans marched into Prague. Hitler was determined to invade Soviet Russia, even if Stalin didn't know about it at the time.

Please stop repeating this utter nonsense. The point was about Chamberlain's failure to do anything to address those deficiencies in the army you mentioned. Nothing in any of Chamberlain's statements or actions supports your claim he expected war. He weakened Britain's strategic position at Munich and did little to accelerate rearmament in its aftermath. And Stalin knew Hitler had intentions in the east, it was hardly a secret.

There is a bit about the matter at this website:

Oh and this time it's a book review, of a book based on the diary account of what Joachim Fest says that Speer told him about what Hitler allegedly told him. Even if it was accurate are you really suggesting that we should accept Adolf Hitler's account as thee truth?

 

[fagin]

....
I'm finding it difficult to find any websites which admit to British military weakness in Britain compared to Germany in 1938.....

Can you think of a possible reason why?

 

[Hans]

I'm finding it difficult to find any websites which admit to British military weakness in Britain compared to Germany in 1938

Well gee that is AMAZING the British Government's conspiracy to make sure that no one knew they were weak versus German in 1938 is massive then!

Gosh, it has to be that instead of the more correct answer right Henri?

Oh and those Italians you don't want to consider: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corpo_Aereo_Italiano

You might want to read that and see how their biplane fighters did against monoplanes.

 

[geoman]

Putting the E in ISF again; thank you Hans and especially SpitfireIX.

But Hans, you do realise what you have done?

At least one of the bombers was seen...killing...Nelson

 

[Klimax]

Putting the E in ISF again; thank you Hans and especially SpitfireIX.

But Hans, you do realise what you have done?

Beauty of ellipses.

 

[Henri McPhee]

I agree that there are lies damn lies and statistics and that there was propaganda then, as it is now with regard to Syria. The number of bombers Germany had its disposal may have been exaggerated. The trouble is that sort of information would have been classified and never discussed in public.

There is some waffle about all this at this website which may not be the historical truth on the matter:

http://www.carrollquigley.net/misc/Quigley_explains_how_Germany_conquered_Czechoslovakia.htm

[quote[ We now know that Germany at that time had 1,500 planes, had built 280 a month in 1938, and had abandoned all plans to bomb London even in a full-scale war because of lack of planes and distance from the target. Lindbergh repeated his talk of woe in London, and the British Government drove its own people to the verge of hysteria by frantically distributing gas-masks, digging worthless slit-trenches in London parks, and releasing rumors of a grave lack of aircraft defenses. Although Lord Halifax, Churchill, and others were informed, about 5 September, 1938, by representatives of the German General Staff and of the German Foreign Office that Hitler would be assassinated by them as soon as he gave the order to attack Czechoslovakia, the British yielded to Hitler and sent ultimatums to Czechoslovakia, to do the the same (See Documents, II, Appendix, and H. Rothfels, The German Opposition to Hitler, Hinsdale, Illinois, 1948, pp. 58-63 and elsewhere). The assassination plot, accordingly, was cancelled at noon on 28 September, 1938. Winston Churchill has continually misrepresented the degree of German armaments and was challenged on this issue by Hanson Baldwin, military critic of The New York Times in that paper on 9 May, 1938. J.W. Wheeler-Bennett in his book, Munich (New York, 1948), says, "By the close of 1937 Germany's preparedness for war was complete... Her rearmament had reached its apogée and could hold that peak level for a certain time..." etc., etc. Mr. Wheeler-Bennett, Britain's outstanding authority on international documentation, was a high official in the Intelligence Department of the Foreign Office during the War, and was, when he wrote his book, the British editor of the captured archives of the German Foreign Ministry. His statements, so far as I know, have never been publicly challenged, and his book is widely accepted as a standard work today. Its interpretation is not supported by the documents which have been published since he wrote, including those published by his organization under the title Documents on German Foreign Policy, 1918-1945, from the Archives of the German Foreign Ministry. Volume II, Germany and Czechoslovakia, 1937-1938, (Washington, 1950). [/quote]

 

[Border Reiver]

Let's parse through the misstatements in this quote:

We now know that Germany at that time had 1,500 planes, had built 280 a month in 1938, and had abandoned all plans to bomb London even in a full-scale war because of lack of planes and distance from the target.¹ Lindbergh repeated his talk of woe in London, and the British Government drove its own people to the verge of hysteria by frantically distributing gas-masks, digging worthless slit-trenches in London parks, and releasing rumors of a grave lack of aircraft defenses.² Although Lord Halifax, Churchill, and others were informed, about 5 September, 1938, by representatives of the German General Staff and of the German Foreign Office that Hitler would be assassinated by them as soon as he gave the order to attack Czechoslovakia, the British yielded to Hitler and sent ultimatums to Czechoslovakia, to do the the same (See Documents, II, Appendix, and H. Rothfels, The German Opposition to Hitler, Hinsdale, Illinois, 1948, pp. 58-63 and elsewhere). The assassination plot, accordingly, was cancelled at noon on 28 September, 1938.³ Winston Churchill has continually misrepresented the degree of German armaments and was challenged on this issue by Hanson Baldwin, military critic of The New York Times in that paper on 9 May, 1938. ⁴ J.W. Wheeler-Bennett in his book, Munich (New York, 1948), says, "By the close of 1937 Germany's preparedness for war was complete... Her rearmament had reached its apogée and could hold that peak level for a certain time..." etc., etc. Mr. Wheeler-Bennett, Britain's outstanding authority on international documentation, was a high official in the Intelligence Department of the Foreign Office during the War, and was, when he wrote his book, the British editor of the captured archives of the German Foreign Ministry. His statements, so far as I know, have never been publicly challenged, and his book is widely accepted as a standard work today. Its interpretation is not supported by the documents which have been published since he wrote, including those published by his organization under the title Documents on German Foreign Policy, 1918-1945, from the Archives of the German Foreign Ministry. Volume II, Germany and Czechoslovakia, 1937-1938, (Washington, 1950).[5]

1. The Luftwaffe had 2,929 planes on August 1, 1938, 1,669 of which were operational. It should be noted that Luftwaffe planners felt that production of 700 aircraft/month was needed to sustain a war - and German production didn't reach that until 1939.

It is accurate to state that the Luftwaffe had no plans to bomb London - they were focussing on divebombers and modern fighters as these types were what the Luftwaffe needed to carry out operations in support of the Heer, which was the focus of Nazi planning.

2. The United Kingdom did not distribute gas-masks to civilians until 1939, after the commencement of hostilities with Nazi Germany. Same for the digging of slit trenches - these were not intended as fighting positions but rather as emergency air raid shelters and were not started until war were declared (in the words of Othias from C&Rsenal).

3. A representative of the anti-Nazi position did meet with both Halifax and Churchill in August 1938. Exactly what the representative thought to accomplish by meeting with someone not in government, and the architect of the appeasement policy is unclear, but the end result was that Chamberlain decided to carry on with the policy of appeasement.

4. Churchill indicated that Germany was a threat after the Nazis came to power and tried to get rearmament going, arguing that higher readiness was necessary in light of higher German production. Most of the world bought the German propaganda that it had a very large air force and an unbeatable army with lots of armoured vehicles. Turns out that impression was not accurate.

5. We know that German rearmament had not "reached its apogee" by 1937 and that German industry was not capable of carrying out that level of production without seriously impairing its military preparedness (taking away skilled workers and putting them in uniforms doesn't help industry, or agriculture). And your source recognizes that the impression from 1938 was wrong, based on documents available in 1948.

Essentially, your chosen article is not well researched, poorly written and plays loose with timelines. Much like most of your arguments

 

[erwinl]

Let's parse through the misstatements in this quote:



1. The Luftwaffe had 2,929 planes on August 1, 1938, 1,669 of which were operational. It should be noted that Luftwaffe planners felt that production of 700 aircraft/month was needed to sustain a war - and German production didn't reach that until 1939.

It is accurate to state that the Luftwaffe had no plans to bomb London - they were focussing on divebombers and modern fighters as these types were what the Luftwaffe needed to carry out operations in support of the Heer, which was the focus of Nazi planning.

2. The United Kingdom did not distribute gas-masks to civilians until 1939, after the commencement of hostilities with Nazi Germany. Same for the digging of slit trenches - these were not intended as fighting positions but rather as emergency air raid shelters and were not started until war were declared (in the words of Othias from C&Rsenal).

3. A representative of the anti-Nazi position did meet with both Halifax and Churchill in August 1938. Exactly what the representative thought to accomplish by meeting with someone not in government, and the architect of the appeasement policy is unclear, but the end result was that Chamberlain decided to carry on with the policy of appeasement.

4. Churchill indicated that Germany was a threat after the Nazis came to power and tried to get rearmament going, arguing that higher readiness was necessary in light of higher German production. Most of the world bought the German propaganda that it had a very large air force and an unbeatable army with lots of armoured vehicles. Turns out that impression was not accurate.

5. We know that German rearmament had not "reached its apogee" by 1937 and that German industry was not capable of carrying out that level of production without seriously impairing its military preparedness (taking away skilled workers and putting them in uniforms doesn't help industry, or agriculture). And your source recognizes that the impression from 1938 was wrong, based on documents available in 1948.

Essentially, your chosen article is not well researched, poorly written and plays loose with timelines. Much like most of your arguments

It is indeed a very sloppily researched article.
Czechoslavakia had no tanks which weighed 38 tons. None.
What they had was just as good as the what the Germans had, but they were not of the size Dr. Quigley describes.

Speaking about Dr. Quigley. Have we ever been graced with 'evidence' more recent than, say, the middle '50's? It's as if nothing has been learned since.

 

[Hans]

Putting the E in ISF again; thank you Hans and especially SpitfireIX.

But Hans, you do realise what you have done?

Ah....no I don't but I blame society - wasn't Nelson killed by the French - at least the first time?

 

[Andy_Ross]

It is indeed a very sloppily researched article.
Czechoslavakia had no tanks which weighed 38 tons. None.

I wonder if that is a misreading of the German designation for the Pz 38t their designation for the Czech Lt vz. 38.

Maybe mistaking the 't' for tons?

 

[Henri McPhee]

In other words it was precisely Chamberlains actions that prevented a coup taking place.

I can't quite see that it was Chamberlain's fault that there was no coup against Hitler. You must remember that Hitler came to power by winning an election. He was not short of public or media support in Germany. You just ASSUME that any coup attempt would have been successful. Chamberlain could not take that risk.

If you take a look at recent coup attempts there was a successful Nazi coup attempt in Ukraine after CIA and Victoria Nuland support, but the coup against Adolf Erdogan in Turkey was not so successful because of lack of public support for a military coup. There was a rumour of a coup by Lord Mountbatten and the proprietor of the Daily Mirror, Cecil King, when they were alive but that has been hushed, and covered up a bit in the UK.

There is a bit about German military attempts to kill Hitler at this website:

https://kicknode.com/colonel-claus-von-stauffenbergs-failed-assassination-attempt-on-adolf-hitler/

 

[geoman]

I wonder if that is a misreading of the German designation for the Pz 38t their designation for the Czech Lt vz. 38.

Maybe mistaking the 't' for tons?

That would make sense (the Poles had their 7TP) but then the LT vz38 / Panzer 38(t) didn’t have a “75mm cannon” as per the Quigley article. 38-ton tanks with 75mm guns are Sherman Jumbo to sub-Panther size.

 

[Garrison]

I can't quite see that it was Chamberlain's fault that there was no coup against Hitler. You must remember that Hitler came to power by winning an election. He was not short of public or media support in Germany. You just ASSUME that any coup attempt would have been successful. Chamberlain could not take that risk.

Why couldn't he? All he had to do was give the plotters a few off the books assurances, and oh yes not massively strengthen Hitler's grip on power by handing him a massive diplomatic victory. It almost goes without saying but Hitler never won an election and he was not wildly popular in 1938, in fact there was every bit as much fear of war in Germany as there was in Britain, added to which were the ongoing economic issues in Germany that crippled the civilian sector and impaired the military.

Irrelevant nonsense cut

Save your conspiracy theories for the appropriate section of the board.

There is a bit about German military attempts to kill Hitler at this website:

Can't even get the page to open, not that I suspect it would contribute anything useful if I could...

 

[Henri McPhee]

Can't even get the page to open, not that I suspect it would contribute anything useful if I could...

That's odd. That page works okay on my computer. Stalin always used to say that Hitler came to power by winning an election, but as you say it may not be the pure unadulterated historical truth. There is a bit of background to the matter at this website:

https://www.bustle.com/articles/107...g-an-election-is-powerful-its-also-misleading

 

[Hans]

You must remember that Hitler came to power by winning an election.

He didn't. I would suggest you go read about that period and the maneuvering that led to his being offered the chancellorship. The German government of that time did not directly elect leaders - do some reading dude.

Here is a wiki that covers that period with a fair understanding of its complexity.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adolf_Hitler's_rise_to_power

 

[erwinl]

That would make sense (the Poles had their 7TP) but then the LT vz38 / Panzer 38(t) didn’t have a “75mm cannon” as per the Quigley article. 38-ton tanks with 75mm guns are Sherman Jumbo to sub-Panther size.

Yes,

He was talking about these tanks. Shame they weren't in service yet in 1938, though the LT vz35 was.

There were two versions of this tank with a 75 mm gun though.
The Marder and the Jagdpanzer 38. Neither of which can even be remotely called a Czechoslovak tank, even though they were made there.

Anyway. This is so elementary and the dear Dr. having this detail wrong does not bode well for the rest of his statements.