Who Started World War II?

[Wreford-Brown]

Britain delivered its declaration of war 15 mins before France, but both countries gave a deadline for the withdrawal of German troops from Poland the following day. Both declarations were conditional.

[Fahnenbohn]

Originally Posted by Wreford-Brown

Britain delivered its declaration of war 15 mins before France, but both countries gave a deadline for the withdrawal of German troops from Poland the following day. Both declarations were conditional.

Yes, but it's symbolic !

Another fact : French people was against the war with Germany. The declaration of war was illegal, the National Assembly's opinion has not even been asked ! A democratie ? lol !

We are always talking about the German officers who tried to assassinate Hitler. This is the French officers who should have had to refuse to obey to the orders, and should have had to make a State coup ! When war was over for France, the members of the government didn't assume their acts, and left the responsibility of the Armistice to a French officer (Petain). He should have understood who was the real ennemy of France, but he was too old, and was still thinking as in 1918 ...

1945 is the end of a free and powerful Europe.

[Fahnenbohn]

From Hitler's speech, october 6, 1939 :

"I have devoted no less effort to the achievement of an Anglo-German understanding, nay, more than that, of an Anglo-German friendship. At no time and in no place have I ever acted contrary to British interests. Unfortunately I have only too often been forced to guard against instances of British interference in German affairs, even in cases which did not concern Great Britain in the least. I actually considered it as one of my life aims to reconcile these two peoples, not only through mutual understanding but through inner sympathy. The German nation has gladly followed my lead in this respect. If my endeavors have been unsuccessful, it is only because of an animosity on the part of certain British statesmen and journalists, which has deeply affected me personally. They made no secret of the fact that - for reasons which are unfathomable to us - their sole aim was to seize the first opportunity in order to resume the fight with Germany. The fewer reasons of substantial nature these men have for their schemes, the more they attempt to motivate their actions with empty phrases and assertions. But I believe even today that there can only he real peace in Europe and throughout the world if Germany and England come to an understanding. Because of this conviction I have often shown the way to an understanding. If in the end there was not the desired result, it was really not my fault."

and also :

"This I ask : If forty-six million Englishmen claim the right to rule over forty million square kilometers of the earth, it cannot be wrong for eighty-two million Germans to demand the right to live on 800,000 square kilometers, to till their fields and to follow their trades and callings, and if they further demand the restitution of those colonial possessions which formerly were their property, which they had not taken away from anybody by robbery or war but honestly acquired by purchase, exchange and treaties."

[Fahnenbohn]

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

No. As I told you privately, you don't get to make your points and then demand the conversation end there. I'm sure that others have counter-points that are just as good, and they get a chance to make them as well.

OK, no problem ! As I told you in PM, I'm honestly searching the truth, and I'm open to the debate.

[Sailor Steve]

Near the beginning of all this, you said:

Originally Posted by Fahnenbohn

OK, no problem ! As I told you in PM, I'm honestly searching the truth, and I'm open to the debate.

Everything you've said since then has been the opposite. You have the truth, and every other source is lying. To me this is sounding more and more like every other conspiracy theory I've seen, from governments hiding UFOs to the Kennedy assassination to 9/11. Everything that disagrees with you is propaganda. Only your sources are honest.

If England and France had not declared war, do you really think Hitler would have set Poland free? Things he himself said indicate the opposite. They've been quoted, and you dismissed them.

I also notice you tend to not answer others except to criticize their sources. I pointed out that the Mussolini peace plan was presented after Germany invaded Poland. This makes the claim that Britain and France ignored the offer to be dishonest at best. They had a treaty with Poland, and they honored it. Invading another country and then offering peace is backwards.

All your sources try to hide the bottom line I pointed out long ago. Nobody twisted Hitler's arm and forced him to invade Poland. Documented talks between him and his generals has shown that the invasion was planned weeks before the actual event. It's probable that he expected no resistance from the Allies, just as he got none when he forced Czechoslovakia into submission. Trying to make it look like the other side's fault is diverting attention from the truth. Hitler invaded Poland. That's the long and the short of it.

[Catfish]

For what it's worth, if he wants to present evidence or unpublished material, why not, go on. Why a time limit? Translating those texts sure takes time. And, does anyone have to be afraid of its contents?

The documents are interesting enough, however all boils down to when those "offers of peace" from Italy or whoever came, and it was pretty useless to propose that after there were troops already in Poland.
And, like the reeducation, you also should not believe all what Hitler said, to make the german people believe in his righteousness to attack Poland, errm defend Germany i meant
"Seit 5:45 wird jetzt zurueck [sic!] geschossen"

Hitler wanted to go for Russia right from the beginning, and just because of that he wanted no peace with Russia. Unless Stalin would have given him some big chunks of land voluntarily, which i somehow .. doubt.

A peacefully united Europe? I assume Hitler did not really want to go to war in the west, but he had strategically only one chance to prevent a two-front war like in WW1, after England declaring war. And there were of course already plans for that, just in case. Like the US having plans for Canada, as we now know.
So it may have been England that made it a worldwide war, out of a locally restricted one like Hitler had tried, alright.

But assuming Hitler wanted peace with Russia, Poland or the jews is "a bit" ridiculous though.

[Fahnenbohn]

Originally Posted by Catfish

all boils down to when those "offers of peace" from Italy or whoever came, and it was pretty useless to propose that after there were troops already in Poland.

Why ? Hitler was ready to stop the invasion and go for an international conference. France was ready too. But Britain added another unacceptable condition to avoid it. She wanted war.

Originally Posted by Catfish

Hitler wanted to go for Russia right from the beginning, and just because of that he wanted no peace with Russia.

No, he broke the non-agression pact for very good reasons, and I will tell you why if you let me the time.

[Fahnenbohn]

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

Near the beginning of all this, you said :
"OK, no problem ! As I told you in PM, I'm honestly searching the truth, and I'm open to the debate."

Yes, and for now, you have not convinced me. You know, I really would like to be convinced, because this war was so horrible that it would be terrifying that she has been declared for bad reasons.

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

If England and France had not declared war, do you really think Hitler would have set Poland free ? Things he himself said indicate the opposite. They've been quoted, and you dismissed them.

Then, it was a localized conflict, and both sides would have to talk together to find a solution. But Poland refused that. She said that if Hitler still wanted to talk about Danzig, it would be WAR between them. So, as Hitler wanted to cure this flagrant injustice of Versailles, he had no more the choice.

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

I pointed out that the Mussolini peace plan was presented after Germany invaded Poland. This makes the claim that Britain and France ignored the offer to be dishonest at best. They had a treaty with Poland, and they honored it. Invading another country and then offering peace is backwards.

Treaties between France and Poland were null and void in September 1939, as I've clearly demonstrated. France didn't have to help Poland. Moreover, it was pure madness.

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

Documented talks between him and his generals has shown that the invasion was planned weeks before the actual event.

Yes, of course, that's logical. As head of the State, Hitler had to prepare all eventualities. That doesn't mean that he wanted to invade Poland. He was just ready to do it if Poland didn't want to know anything about peaceful proposals.

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

just as he got none when he forced Czechoslovakia into submission.

Submission ?? Hitler has just allowed various peoples that were composing this artificial state to obtain their independence. Then, he sent his army in Bohemia and Moravia to maintain order.

[Fahnenbohn]

Originally Posted by Fahnenbohn

it would be terrifying that she has been declared for bad reasons.

@ all : I would like to ask you something. Do you consider the fact that Germany was not a democracy, is sufficient to destroy the country and kill the population ?

[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by Fahnenbohn

Then, it was a localized conflict, and both sides would have to talk together to find a solution. But Poland refused that. She said that if Hitler still wanted to talk about Danzig, it would be WAR between them.

Where exactly does it say that?

So, as Hitler wanted to cure this flagrant injustice of Versailles, he had no more the choice.

As I keep saying, there is always a choice. Hitler chose to attack Poland.

Treaties between France and Poland were null and void in September 1939, as I've clearly demonstrated.

Only in your own mind. You haven't convinced anyone else.

France didn't have to help Poland. Moreover, it was pure madness.

But it wasn't madness for Hitler to attack Poland? Despite all your claims, he didn't have to either.

Yes, of course, that's logical. As head of the State, Hitler had to prepare all eventualities. That doesn't mean that he wanted to invade Poland. He was just ready to do it if Poland didn't want to know anything about peaceful proposals.

I note you didn't say he was ready to fight if attacked. You still say he was ready to fight if they didn't accept his proposals. He still attacked first. Nothing has changed.

Submission ?? Hitler has just allowed various peoples that were composing this artificial state to obtain their independence. Then, he sent his army in Bohemia and Moravia to maintain order.

Maintain order by annexing the entire country. That's an interesting way of obtaining "peace". "Everything will be peaceful as long as everybody does what I say."

You're right. Hitler didn't want war. He just wanted to take over country after country without opposition. As soon as somebody finally stood up to him, "It's their fault, not mine."

[Skybird]

Lesson of this topic: nobody had a right and should have dared to stand up against and resist the Nazi empire. It's all their fault.

Why taking the bait, guys? You know how it smells in here. Use your noses.

[Dowly]

[Sailor Steve]

This grew out of a comment made in the SH3 forums. I allowed it to stand because I want to see where it goes. I have my views I wanted to express, but since Jim is already involved I decided I needed to stay out and play referee.

I'll only say this once. If you have something to add, please feel free to do so. If you feel compelled to go beyond that, please just stay out of it. I want to see if it's possible to have a civil discussion about this.

[Cybermat47]

Originally Posted by Skybird

Why taking the bait, guys? You know how it smells in here. Use your noses.

Terrible arguments like this guy's are perfect practice for actual debates