Who Started World War II?

[Fahnenbohn]

Originally Posted by Joefour

So why didn't Britain declare war ALSO on the Soviet Union for invading Poland from the east? Instead, she allied herself with the russians. Makes no logical sense to me whatsoever, that is, unless something else was going on that we don't know about. Perhaps this should be explored too.

Indeed.

[Mr Quatro]

Originally Posted by Oberon

Well, technically it was Imperial Japan, but at that point it wasn't a world war...in fact, you probably couldn't call it a world war until 1941, but the first shots of World War II were most likely during Japans conquests of China.

Correct How could there be a World War without the USA declaring war on Germany after Japan attacked Pearl Harbor?

The debate now has centered on Germany or England anything else is after those two fired the first shots at each other and by the way when was that?

[Raptor1]

Originally Posted by Fahnenbohn

No nazis without Treaty of Versailles.

While I don't think that Nazi ideology would necessarily not have developed without the Treaty of Versailles, it would have been less likely for them to come into power.

Originally Posted by Joefour

So why didn't Britain declare war ALSO on the Soviet Union for invading Poland from the east? Instead, she allied herself with the russians. Makes no logical sense to me whatsoever, that is, unless something else was going on that we don't know about. Perhaps this should be explored too.

Britain didn't ally itself with the Soviet Union at the time, it (and France) just failed to declare war on it. This was likely a pragmatic decision to avoid cementing a German-Soviet alliance or fighting a two-front war.

[MLF]

1939
23 août

Le pacte germano-soviétique

L'URSS et l'Allemagne signe à Moscou un pacte de non-agression valable pour 10 ans. Un protocole secret répartit leur zone d'influence en Europe de l'Est. Hitler, qui obtient ainsi la neutralité de l'URSS, déclarera la guerre à la Pologne le 1er septembre. Staline en profitera alors pour agresser la Finlande, annexer les pays baltes et envahir la Roumanie. Ce pacte sera rompu lorsque Hitler lancera une attaque contre l'URSS le 22 juin 1941.
Voir aussi : Dossier histoire de l' URSS - Hitler - Staline - Histoire de la Deuxième Guerre mondiale

Source :- http://www.linternaute.com/histoire/...mondiale.shtml


Google Translate

1939
August 23

The Nazi-Soviet pact

The USSR and Germany signed in Moscow a valid non-aggression pact for 10 years. A secret protocol divides their area of influence in Eastern Europe. Hitler, who thus obtained the neutrality of the USSR declared war on Poland on September 1. Stalin then take the opportunity to attack Finland, annexing the Baltics and invade Romania. This pact will be broken when Hitler launch an attack against the USSR June 22, 1941.
See also: Folder history of the USSR - Hitler - Stalin - History of WWII

[Joefour]

Originally Posted by Dowly

That is because as a historian he has no credibility left.

I would recommend to read through the transcripts from the Irving v. Lipstadt case: http://www.hdot.org/en/trial/

That's not an answer. No one has EVER to my knowlege offered to debate him. I think there is some prize money involved too.

When I have time I will read thru those transcripts. To be honest, I really don't put much faith in the court system. Having been involved for a number of years in the civil judgment system here in Washington State, I can tell you from personal experience that it is a cesspool. Corrupt judges who refuse to follow the law, take bribes, and generally make it extremely difficult for justice to prevail. The most laughable moment was when my judge had to stop the proceedings, leave the courtroom and go get enlightened by her clerk as to what a "Writ of Execution" was. That was when I started packing up my toys and eventually got out of the business.

[Fahnenbohn]

Originally Posted by Bilge_Rat

Yes, saying the Nazis are responsible for WW2 is a bit like saying that the Americans were responsible for the American Revolution because they started the fighting.

Yes, that's it. Under the International law, "This is not the one who attacks first whi is responsible for the war, but the one who made war inevitable."

*
Let me summarize your post : Fr/Br are responsible for the nazis who are responsible for WWII. I just add this at the end of the sentence : ... by the fault of Britain, and also the French government (which declared war illegally, and I will prove it).

[Joefour]

Originally Posted by STEED

David Irving is a Hitler supporter and said many times the Holocaust was the work of others and Hitler played no part. This is a very sensitive area, David Irving went as far as questioning the gas chambers at Auschwitz. Yes I have read a couple of his books and I wonder if David Irving has read Commandant of Auschwitz by Rudolf Hoess.

I'd love to read this book by Hoess that you mentioned by I find that it is out of print!

[Oberon]

Originally Posted by Fahnenbohn

Yes, that's it. Under the International law,

What International law?

[Fahnenbohn]

Originally Posted by Raptor1

While I don't think that Nazi ideology would necessarily not have developed without the Treaty of Versailles, it would have been less likely for them to come into power.

Yes, sure. One thing : Nazism was NOT an ideology, but a pragmatic policy to get out of the deadly ideologies of capitalism and communism. But this is another debate.


(... against high finance and marxism)

Originally Posted by Raptor1

Britain didn't ally itself with the Soviet Union at the time, it (and France) just failed to declare war on it. This was likely a pragmatic decision to avoid cementing a German-Soviet alliance or fighting a two-front war.

Really, do you think that war was a solution to solve the problem between Germany and Poland ?

[Betonov]

Originally Posted by Fahnenbohn

Yes, that's it. Under the International law, "This is not the one who attacks first whi is responsible for the war, but the one who made war inevitable."

.

So if I get really honest what I think about you and your ideology and Steve throws me in the brig, will that be your fault not mine, since you didn't made my rage inevitable ??

[Joefour]

Originally Posted by Betonov

Lebensraum.
First to retake Ostpreusen they lost to Poland after WW1 and then expand to Russia to make room for the colonies were Germans will till fields and breed a master rase. At the expense of the slavs living there.

Hitler didn't want to go to war with France and England. He hoped the west would see him as a guardian against the USSR but miscalculated.

Forgive me for not being more exact in my language. What events sparked the movement of german troops across the border into Poland?

[Betonov]

Originally Posted by Joefour

Forgive me for not being more exact in my language. What events sparked the movement of german troops across the border into Poland?

Orders from superiors ??
Like hitler

[Raptor1]

Originally Posted by Fahnenbohn

Really, do you think that war was a solution to solve the problem between Germany and Poland ?

Germany seemed to think so.

Originally Posted by Joefour

Forgive me for not being more exact in my language. What events sparked the movement of german troops across the border into Poland?

The Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact was probably the deciding factor in the exact timing of the invasion, but it had been planned before that.

[Joefour]

Originally Posted by Oberon

Hitler launched his invasion first, there was debate on the possibility of declaring war on Russia, around about the time that Russia and Finland went to war I believe, but it was decided that to fight both Russia and Germany would be suicidal.
Then when Hitler declared war on Russia it was simply a case of 'My enemies enemy is my friend', Britain had no real love for the Soviet Union, heck we drew up plans to declare war on them after WWII had finished but they were thrown out as being suicidal, but Russia had the resources to defeat Germany, Britain did not, and so by supporting Russia and keeping Russia in the war, it both tied up the bulk of German forces on the other side of Europe from Britain, thus stopping Hitler from thinking about reinventing Sealion, and it gave a better chance of Germany being defeated, or at the very least keeping the war going long enough for the UK to persuade the USA to get fully involved.

And thereby making the world not safe for "democracy" but rather safe for communism.

[Oberon]

Originally Posted by Joefour

And thereby making the world not safe for "democracy" but rather safe for communism.

"Democracy" seems to have done alright for itself over the past seventy years, and I'd hardly call what NASDAP Germany had a "Democracy".