you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–][deleted]  (8 children)

[deleted]

    [–]Lugger[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

    Why did he stop the order to attack a couple of times, telling the army he needs more time for negotiations?

    Never heard of this, but even if true, it doesn't matter because he still attacked Poland unprovoked (unless you count the false-flag attack, of course).

    Why did offer peace on September 2nd (this offer was presented to the British government this day) - before France and Britain had joined the war?

    Offered peace?

    Sorry, but he had already invaded Poland, and the UK had to honor the agreement.

    The only 'peace offering' he could have made was asking the Brits to stand down and betray their allies — and obviously they weren't going to do it this time.

    Yeah, because Poland wanted German territory

    I don't even want to know where you read this, but even if true — which I'm sure isn't — it's still a piss-poor excuse for aggression. Up until 1939 Germany had been scaring the shit out of Europe, and you want me to believe that Poland and its pathetic army wanted to challenge German might?

    Britain wanted to keep "the balance of power"

    Britain tried to appease Hitler and fulfilled his every demand up until 1939. What they wanted was avoiding another war.

    He literally cites them in his declaration of war.

    You didn't get my point.

    I was asking why did Germany have to conduct a false-flag attack and murder its own citizens if the Poles had previously done something similar.

    Because Poland wanted to gain more territory and cleanse "their" country from foreigners (Ukrainians, Germans, etc.).

    Poland had a right to do whatever it wanted within its territory and nobody would have cared.

    Those were different times; there was no global police force like NATO that intervened to stop poor minorities from persecution (something-something-Serbia).

    So why did London refuse to host a conference with regards to the Danzig question?

    Look, as I've already mentioned, I don't know if what you're saying is true.

    But even if I once again take your word for it, the UK simply might have had enough with Hitler's bullshit and expansionist policies and didn't want to surrender anything else to him.

    Remember, they had already kept a blind eye on Rhineland, end of the Treaty of Versaille, Ruhr and so on.

    tell Warsaw to not negotiate with Germany

    What negotiations are you talking about?

    Germans didn't even attempt to 'negotiate' with the Poles, they conducted Operation Himmler and launched an invasion.

    [–][deleted]  (6 children)

    [deleted]

      [–]Lugger[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

      Why do attacks on commercial airplanes and raids on civilians do not count as provoked?

      Look, as I said, I don't know where you got the information about those attacks on German property, but I have a very serious reason to doubt it because, as I've also said, entire Europe was trembling in fear at the idea of war with Germany, and I doubt anyone would be stupid enough to directly raid their territory — especially a country like Poland which knew it would be crushed like a worm.

      Yes, he offered a cease fie and to retreat from all conquered territories except for Danzig. Germany would even pay reparations to Poland and in addition to this offer financial support for new investments.

      Look. It's no surprise that the Allies rejected this peace offer, and you know why?

      Because Hitler had already proven himself to be a liar; he had proven that he spat on all the pacts he made.

      Come on... Rhineland, Versailles, Ruhr... The allies had figured out that the guy couldn't be trusted. They just wouldn't fall for his 'peace' BS that time.

      So do you claim the 16-points plan was just a bluff or what? What about the above mentioned proposal on September 2nd? What about all the other peace offers?

      I think the answer I printed above covers that question.

      [–][deleted]  (4 children)

      [deleted]

        [–]Nombre27 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

        Still, one might ask if it was needed to escalate the Danzig question to the biggest war in history.

        I'm not super well-versed in history, but after reading The Fall of the House of Habsburg by Crankshaw I asked the same question about WW1. The heir to the Austro-Hungarian throne was just assassinated. Trying to find more information, but given the communist coups of royal families at that time period, I can't help but wonder if the Black Hand was also a communist organization, or influenced/led by communists. Anyway, I don't find it unreasonable for a nation to exact revenge on a country or whoever was responsible for that assassination. I find it more appalling that the other powers didn't act in a way to ensure justice for that assassination instead of total war.

        If you know more, please let me know.

        [–][deleted]  (2 children)

        [deleted]

          [–]Nombre27 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

          Interesting, thank you for the write-up.

          [–]literalotherkinNorm MacDonald Nationalism 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

          Poor grug Gavrilo. The serfs always end up doing the dirty work.

          (Thanks for the info BTW.)