Who started both World Wars?

Status
Not open for further replies.
9/11 posted
However, their action depended on the consent of the Scandinavian States to permit the passage of their troops.

9/11 you really, really need to read what you post. Did Germany ask Norway and Denmark if they could invade? What no? LOL

9/11 Hitler ordered the German high command (OKW) to begin preliminary planning for an invasion of Norway on 14 December 1939 – did you forget?

9/11 gibberish about the evil Norwegians

Oh my the ‘norwegians’ were asking for it? LOL

9/11 posted
Sweden acted neutral and as a consequence it's independence was respected by Germany during the entire war.

That didn’t help Denmark, Luxembourg, Netherlands or Belgium now did it?

That's April 8, still before the first date Hans mentions.

What date did the German ships leave to invade Norway 9/11? Does the 3rd of April strike a memory cord? We have discussed this before and each time you deny it all and restate the same lies again. Stop lying 9/11
 
Question to all my opponents: what is your opinion about the 16 Germans attempts to make peace with Britain? Would you not agree that it was Britain who wanted war and not Germany? This is the essence of this thread: "who started both WW1 and WW2".

I've only seen one of the texts provided and in that one you deliberately misquoted what was offered.

Why don't you post the all '16 messages of peace' or were they all. "I keep what I conquered and want and you get nothing' kinda messages?
 
At the risk of repeating someone else, would you please tell the audience why Denmark was invaded on April 9th 1940? Britain was making no move to land a force upon our shores, and Denmark had declared its absolute neutrality on September 1, 1939. In fact, it was in direct violation of a German–Danish treaty of non-aggression signed in 1939 as well.

ETA: I should add, in WW1, Denmark had been quite busy in selling supplies to the German Empire, and besides pledging absolute neutrality, Denmark, along with Sweden and Norway, had also pledged full economic cooperation with all parties. There was no reason for Germany to invade Denmark, other than as part of a war of aggression.
 
Last edited:
At the risk of repeating someone else, would you please tell the audience why Denmark was invaded on April 9th 1940? Britain was making no move to land a force upon our shores, and Denmark had declared its absolute neutrality on September 1, 1939. In fact, it was in direct violation of a German–Danish treaty of non-aggression signed in 1939 as well.

ETA: I should add, in WW1, Denmark had been quite busy in selling supplies to the German Empire, and besides pledging absolute neutrality, Denmark, along with Sweden and Norway, had also pledged full economic cooperation with all parties. There was no reason for Germany to invade Denmark, other than as part of a war of aggression.

I would agree with you that it would have been best for everything that Dutch tugboats would have drawn Britain shortly before the German coast, so that Germany and Britain could have fought it out without disturbing neutral countries, like Denmark. That however was not the case. As indicated by the account by von Ribbentrop Britain (and France) had started to attempt opening up new fronts in neutral countries. Occupation of Denmark would have had profound implications for Germany's sea ports in the Baltic. By the British and French war declarations the war had inevitably a European war, where Britain and France had already publicly said that they would not respect neutral countries.
 
As indicated by the account by von Ribbentrop Britain (and France) had started to attempt opening up new fronts in neutral countries.

Hans: of course they did – that is allowed ya know!... and Germany tried to drag Spain, Bulgaria, Hungary, Roumania, Greece, Iraq into its support – why is it ‘evil’ if the Allies did what the Axis were doing? Double standard? LOL

Occupation of Denmark would have had profound implications for Germany's sea ports in the Baltic.

Militarily insane – which is why there was not such plan. Occupation of the mainland Denmark would have brought the French and British into direct contact with the German army. An attempt to take just the island would have been unsupportable considering the inability of the RAF to quickly move bases. Denmark was occupied to support the German invasion of Norway. Did the Allies invade Denmark in WW1?

By the British and French war declarations the war had inevitably a European war, where Britain and France had already publicly said that they would not respect neutral countries.

9/11 continues to lie, the truth is that the German attack on Poland forced France and Britain into a war they didn’t want they also had said that such an attack would cause them to declare war - Hitler was foolish enough not to believe them. You will note the vicious coordinated assault they launched on Germany on September 3rd…oh wait, LOL

As indicated by the account by von Ribbentrop Britain (and France) had started to attempt opening up new fronts in neutral countries.

Hans: of course they did – that is allowed and Germany tried to drag Spain, Bulgaria, Hungary, Roumania, Greece, Iraq into its support – why is it ‘evil’ if the allies did what the Axis were doing? Double standard? LOL

Occupation of Denmark would have had profound implications for Germany's sea ports in the Baltic.

Militarily insane – which is why there was not such plan. Occupation of the mainland Denmark would have brought the French and British into direct contact with the German army. An attempt to take just the island would have been unsupportable considering the inability of the RAF to quickly move bases. You will note that in WWI the Allies didn't invade Denmark or the Netherlands....if it was such a great idea why not do it then? The British particularly like amphibious side shows

By the British and French war declarations the war had inevitably a European war, where Britain and France had already publicly said that they would not respect neutral countrie


9/11 continues to lie, by the German attack on Poland she forced France and Britain into a war they didn’t want. You will note the vicious coordinated assault they launched on Germany on September 3rd…oh wait, LOL. Not respect neutral countries? Who invaded Denmark, Netherlands, Luxembourg, Belgium and Norway first Mr. 9/11?....what, say again 9/11 we cannot hear you.....LOL
 
Last edited:
Hans: of course they did – that is allowed ya know!... and Germany tried to drag Spain, Bulgaria, Hungary, Roumania, Greece, Iraq into its support – why is it ‘evil’ if the Allies did what the Axis were doing? Double standard? LOL



Militarily insane – which is why there was not such plan. Occupation of the mainland Denmark would have brought the French and British into direct contact with the German army. An attempt to take just the island would have been unsupportable considering the inability of the RAF to quickly move bases. Denmark was occupied to support the German invasion of Norway. Did the Allies invade Denmark in WW1?



9/11 continues to lie, the truth is that the German attack on Poland forced France and Britain into a war they didn’t want they also had said that such an attack would cause them to declare war - Hitler was foolish enough not to believe them. You will note the vicious coordinated assault they launched on Germany on September 3rd…oh wait, LOL



Hans: of course they did – that is allowed and Germany tried to drag Spain, Bulgaria, Hungary, Roumania, Greece, Iraq into its support – why is it ‘evil’ if the allies did what the Axis were doing? Double standard? LOL



Militarily insane – which is why there was not such plan. Occupation of the mainland Denmark would have brought the French and British into direct contact with the German army. An attempt to take just the island would have been unsupportable considering the inability of the RAF to quickly move bases. You will note that in WWI the Allies didn't invade Denmark or the Netherlands....if it was such a great idea why not do it then? The British particularly like amphibious side shows




9/11 continues to lie, by the German attack on Poland she forced France and Britain into a war they didn’t want. You will note the vicious coordinated assault they launched on Germany on September 3rd…oh wait, LOL. Not respect neutral countries? Who invaded Denmark, Netherlands, Luxembourg, Belgium and Norway first Mr. 9/11?....what, say again 9/11 we cannot hear you.....LOL

Anyone want anymore proof that not even the Nazi believes his own lies? You can't beat base immorality with evidence.
 
Question to all my opponents: what is your opinion about the 16 Germans attempts to make peace with Britain? Would you not agree that it was Britain who wanted war and not Germany? This is the essence of this thread: "who started both WW1 and WW2".

Of course my opponents have nothing to say about this. Does not fit their self-serving stories about noble Anglos and Soviets 'liberating' Europe.
 
Winston Churchill July 8, 1940 in his diary (via Scheil):

There is only one way we can win this war. We don’t have an army on the continent. If we are able to repel an invasion (provided it will come) Hitler will certainly turn towards the east and we have nothing to stop him. There is only one means to bring him back from the east and bring him down and that is total destruction, an eradication of the Nazi-Heimat through a massive bombing campaign.

It is obvious that Churchill did not want peace under any circumstance and that he, Cooper and Vansittart would not settle for anything less than total destruction of Germany.

We should remember that with the exception of Djenghis Khan no leader of a civilized nation ever set himself goals like this. Not Napoleon, not Louis XIV, not Philip II.
 
Last edited:
More from Scheil's book:

You know how these Anglos are, always coming up with a fancy name for their 'operations': 'Desert Storm', 'Odyssey Dawn', 'Exercise Unified Spirit', 'Liberty Shield', etc., etc.

That is the Americans who actually sit down and come up with some fancy second word after the first is randomly picked from an approved list, the initial letter signifying the geographical area. The British have a single word that is randomly chosen from a list for operations. We do have the colour system of two words for weapons and equipment.
 
Last edited:
This is a summary of what Scheil has to say about the 'mysterious' flight of Rudolf Hess to Scotland, another desperate German attempt to make peace.

When Rudolf Hess said goodbye to his wife he allegedly said he would be back in 30 hours.

Within 30 hours however Hess was declared mentally confused by the Nazi regime, a view the British government would support publicly. Hess had anticipated this and proposed to Hitler a written declaration for the case the initiave would fail.

The issue here is not what exactly happened, only the diplomatic aspects of the event in a long row of other failed attempts to stop the war.

[187] The Hess affair began shortly after the attempt to establish contact to the British government via Sweden had failed… Albrecht Haushofer met Hess on September 8, 1940.

Hess enquired with Haushofer how he could establish contact with the British government.

[189] Haushofer adviced the ambassador Samuel Hoare in Madrid and Lord Lothian in Washington.

For Lothian this was nothing new. He already knew about German peace proposals as early as middle July 1940 and judged them as highly satisfactory.

[190] The Times reported: "Lord Lothian said in front of the House of Lords… that there is no alternative than to reserve for Germany a role in conformity of it’s weight, a nation which normally would be the most powerful state in Europe. An order which does not give to Germany it’s proper role cannot be anything else but artificial."

[193] Hoare and Haushofer agreed to plan a meeting between Halifax and Hoare on the British and Haushofer and Hess on the German side. These were in reality fake negotiations were conducted with knowledge and approved by Churchill to give the German leadership the illusion that real negotiations were going on. It was Haushofer who adviced Lord Hamilton as contact person and it would be him who Hess 9 months later would try to see.

[194] Hess was the victim of a British intrige. It’s main purpose was to prevent the formation of a peace faction within British politics.

[195] For the Germans it was difficult to admit that they had followed the British government with spectacular peace offers, in order to lose the 2nd man in the German state in this adventurous manner to the enemy.

[196] It is certain that Hess did represent the ideas of Hitler about making peace when he talked with government officials, including Eden.

The British government was in a difficult position these days… many defeats had recently occurred… Like happened in Norway and France, the British army was forced to retreat from Greece; even defeat and evacuation from the Suezcanal was not impossible… Lloyd George was attacking Churchill for the manner in which he was conducting war.

[198] In Britain there existed a Anglo-German Fellowship, founded in 1936, with more than 4000 members and had links to Lord Hamilton.

[201] In Britain the organisers of the H-H-H-H-operation were clearly overwhelmed by the visit of the high-ranking envoy Hess and for a long time could not decide how to deal with him. Hess had expected that an offer would be made to him. But that did not happen. Hess did not offer anything else than what had already been proposed earlier: no interests of Germany outside Europe and a British-German alliance.
 
Last edited:
Even the British acknowledged that they had intended to invade Norway.

http://www.fpp.co.uk/books/Nuremberg/NUREMBERG.pdf
Field-Marshal Wilhelm Keitel’s lawyers challenged the British government in March 1946 to produce certain foreign office and cabinet documents relating to Churchill’s identical plans for the invasion of neutral Scandinavia. The request caused a mild panic in Whitehall. Cabinet secretary Sir Norman Brooke warned the foreign office that when he took the stand Keitel was expected to claim that Hitler’s invasion of Norway had been undertaken to anticipate a Franco-British plan to go into Norway. The embarrassing thing, said Brooke, was that this defence claim was true – it would 'be supported by documents captured by the Germans in France including records of the meetings of the Supreme War Council'.

This of course makes a mockery of the official story that Hitler had willfully invaded Western Europa for collecting some additional Lebensraum. The war was forced upon him. Both in the west and later in the east.

We should not forget that Britain had a continental blockade in place and that Norway was a gap in that blockade through which essential iron ore was transported to Germany, as even the BCC admits:

Germany had also seen the signs that the British would not necessarily be bound by Norway's neutrality, and could hinder the process if they were so minded. The British position was made fairly clear when Royal Navy seamen boarded the German naval auxiliary Altmark, in Norwegian waters, to free the prisoners on board, and the Allies had indeed for some time been making plans for aggressive action to plug the gap in their blockade.

France and Britain were (justifiably) afraid of attacking Germany directly, hence the Phoney War ('Sitzkrieg'), so they followed the indirect path by trying to prevent essential resources to reach Germany. No iron reaching Germany (essential for the war effort) would mean a strategic capitulation for the alllies. And Germany remembered all to well what a capitulation would mean, namely a Versailles-2, probably even more brutal than the first one. And in the end that is what happened: a partitioning of Germany even more rigid than the first partitioning after WW1. Both WW1 and WW2 were fought, at least from the perspective of Britain and France, to prevent the rise of a dominant Germany, simply meaning not accepting the existence of a united Germany in the first place. The first time this behaviour was understandable from a narrow nationalist French and British perspective, the second time Britain and France acted outright stupid: they were so obsessively focused on Germany that they did not understand that the European power struggle gleefully was used by both the USA (and their ruling Jewish class around Roosevelt) and the Jewish initiated USSR to invade Europe and divide the loot among them.

At least France under de Gaulle understood during and after the war what France had done (the Jew(ish) Europe-destroyer and NWO agent Churchill hated the Good European de Gaulle) and aimed at reconciliation with Germany, the foundation of the current united Europe of 500M with a potential of ca. 700M if the Russian world will be included, in-line with the vision of de Gaulle (l'Europe des Patries). This is why France will be spared in the endgame concerning the Washington Jewish-led neo-Bolshevik NWO against the rest of the world in a probably inevitable WW3. Britain will enjoy no such luck. She chose the wrong anti-European horse. America could of course rescue itself from a terrible fate by organizing an Arabian-Style American Spring, using 9/11 as a starting point and realign itself with the European World (as a junior partner) after a thorough cleanup of Washington and a painfull process of secession and reunification (current North-East US). Just a friendly suggestion.
 
Last edited:
Sumner Welles in a report in 1940 to Roosevelt about Lloyd George:

Lloyd George was very outspoken about the incompetence of his own government and it's unrealistic goals being resposible for the entire war...

Mr Lloyd George immediately came to speak about the current war and described it as the most unnecessary war, by far the dummest war, that was ever conducted by Britain... He said that Britain had been stumbled into this war because of the incredible mistakes of it's last government. He remarked that neither from the standpoint of France nor that of Britain is there a single reason why the Germans should not be united in Central-Europe under one government or why Germany should not enjoy a position of preeminence in Central- or South-Eastern-Europe.

Interesting is that Lloyd George implicitly admits that the war is conducted over the issue whether or not a united Germany should be allowed to exist in the first place. The gang around Churchill opined that it was not. Not a peep about preventing Germany from acquiring 'Lebensraum', because that was not at stake at all when Hitler invaded Western Europe. That's an opinion for dumb television watchers.

Source: Scheil, footnote 105, page 508.

Talking about Lloyd George: he met Hitler in september 1936 and here are his on average positive impressions. Last sentence:
The establishment of a German hegemony in Europe which was the aim and dream of the old pre-war militarism, is not even on the horizon of Nazism. ...

Any modern mind will burst into howling laughter when he reads that but Lloyd George was right. Hitler wanted to unite all Germans in a German state and that was it. The war in Poland was forced upon him by the behavior of the Poles. The war in Western Europe was forced upon him by the British and French war garantees and declarations (with Roosevelt acting in the background as an important war monger) and subsequent preparations of the invasion of Scandinavia. The flight of Hess to Scotland was the culmination of the peace efforts by the Germans. The war against Russia was forced upon him by the outrageous demands by Molotov in November 1940 and the war preparation of Stalin along the Russian-German border, fulfilling the world revolutionary goals of Bolshevism. Molotov himself acknowledged in his memoirs that Hitler had no choice but to attack Russia:

http://www.richardsorge.com/literature/books/molotovremembers.pdf
And maybe Stalin overestimated Hitler? Maybe he thought Hitler was smart enough not to attack us until he finished the war with England?
That’s right, that’s right. Not only Stalin had this feeling but I and others did, too. On the other hand, there was nothing left for Hitler to do but attack us. He would never have finished his war with England – you just try to finish a war with England!
 
Last edited:
One of the most overlooked figures in bringing the war between Russia and Germany about was special envoy (Scheil: Sonderbotschafter) Stafford Cripps, although Creapps probably would have been a more appropriate name. Cripps was a hardcore Labourite Marxist, exactly the right man for 'conservative' Churchill, to carry out the British treason towards Europe. Cripps already had received signals that the USSR was not really interested in a German victory in Western Europe after talks with commissar Andrey Vyshinsky (the fellow who hd conducted the Stalinist show trials in the thirties and later a similar trial in Nuremberg), who had indicated to be waiting for an interesting offer from Britain. Britain that ostensibly had gone to war to protect the integrity of Poland, showed it's true colors by the agreement reached with Stalin on October 22, 1940. This Brit gave the green light to the Soviet regime to take the entire Eastern Europe, including the Baltics. It is impossible to trump British perfidy. With this result in his pocket Molotov travelled to Berlin in November. With the British backing Molotov described the non-agression agreement as 'exhausted' since the USSR had achieved all it wanted since 1939; both Germany and Britain were willing to accept the territorial gains made… The behavior of Molotov in Berlin showed that he was hardly interested in what the Germans had to offer, but rather that he went for the gold with the British offer in his pocket. Obviously Cripps did this on order of Churchill.

It is interesting to compare what Scheil writes about Cripps with the zionist-friendly editted wikipedia entry:

When Winston Churchill formed his wartime coalition government in 1940 he appointed Cripps Ambassador to the Soviet Union in the view that Cripps, an avowed Marxist, could negotiate with Joseph Stalin who was at this time allied with Nazi Germany through the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact. Cripps led a mission to Moscow in 1940 and unsuccessfully attempted to warn Stalin of the possibility of an attack by Adolf Hitler on the Soviet Union. When Hitler attacked in June 1941, Cripps became a key figure in forging an alliance between the western powers and the Soviet Union.

You can't make this stuff up!
 
Last edited:
Rich_C you'll find 9/11 does this to avoid answering questions. He a real ace at denial and evasion

I know, I've been following this thread since the beginning. Isn't it time for him to show his ignorance on the Pacific War again? Or maybe his complete lack of knowledge on how the USA joined World War I? I still think he has no clue what the Zimmerman Telegram was.
 
I know, I've been following this thread since the beginning. Isn't it time for him to show his ignorance on the Pacific War again? Or maybe his complete lack of knowledge on how the USA joined World War I? I still think he has no clue what the Zimmerman Telegram was.

He probably thinks that it was sent by Bob Dylan.
 
Plans drawn up for an invasion are the not the same thing as an invasion. A difference you are not able to understand, obviously.

Earlier in the thread he dismiss the multiple plans for a German invasion of Switzerland, as a mere nothing.....LOL

You have to understand 9/11 think. If Germany did something, anything that smelt of evil it was because of the Allies who where the puppets da joos.

The Nazis in 9/11 fantasy land were pure as snow, their stuff didn't stink and they saved themselves from a concentrated attack by virtually everyone in Europe by attacking them first....LOL
 
I know, I've been following this thread since the beginning. Isn't it time for him to show his ignorance on the Pacific War again? Or maybe his complete lack of knowledge on how the USA joined World War I? I still think he has no clue what the Zimmerman Telegram was.

Just for fun ask him why the evil joos didn't get Poland, Russia, Czechoslovakia, Luxembourg, Denmark, Netherlands, France and England to attack Germany as a group in 1937. It would have saved some time...

Oh another one to make him run. If all the holocaust victims died of starvation and disease caused by the allies why were German soldiers and civilians in fine shape and more puzzling why were allied POWs (except for the Soviets) doing okay too? Puzzling isn't it, 2 x LOL
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom