ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » History, Literature, and the Arts
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags World War II history

Reply
Old 7th November 2017, 09:22 AM   #361
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 29,045
Originally Posted by Roboramma View Post
That sounds like "they are entitled to secede if they secede successfully" in which case why talk about it in the language of rights at all?
Everybody has the right to try. Nobody is entitled to recognition if they try and fail.

Molon labe.

Possession is nine tenths of the law.

It's better to ask forgiveness than permission.

"Treason doth never prosper: what's the reason? / Why, if it prosper, none dare call it treason."
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th November 2017, 09:47 AM   #362
Craig B
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 22,470
Originally Posted by Klimax View Post
Yes, they had same rights. But those rights never included right to secede! Nobody had them. That land was always under Czech kingdom.

Frankly, I am not even sure where the hell you get notion that settlers of land under one country should be somehow entitled to that thing...
I don't have that notion at all. The Sudeteners of 1938 were not settlers. They were the descendants of people who had been invited to enter the country more than half a millennium previously.

But in any case I don't think they were entitled to transfer any land from Czechoslovakia to the German Reich.
Craig B is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st December 2017, 09:16 AM   #363
Henri McPhee
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 2,931
The appeasement policy of Chamberlain was right judgement from a military perspective.
Henri McPhee is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st December 2017, 10:46 AM   #364
Craig B
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 22,470
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
The appeasement policy of Chamberlain was right judgement from a military perspective.
The blue tiles in my bathroom are right judgement from an aesthetic perspective.
Craig B is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st December 2017, 02:00 PM   #365
Klimax
NWO Cyborg 5960x (subversion VPUNPCKHQDQ)
 
Klimax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Starship Wanderer - DS9
Posts: 12,503
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
The appeasement policy of Chamberlain was right judgement from a military perspective.
No. Especially from that perspective.
__________________
ModBorg

Engine: Ibalgin 400
Klimax is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th December 2017, 02:49 AM   #366
Henri McPhee
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 2,931
Americans seem to think that negotiations are appeasement. It's the utmost folly when nuclear weapons are involved, even though force may have to be used.

Jaw Jaw is better than War War as Churchill once said.

Last edited by Henri McPhee; 20th December 2017 at 03:11 AM.
Henri McPhee is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th January 2018, 01:48 AM   #367
Mondial
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 344
Politicians who supported the policy of appeasement did so because they felt Germany had been unfairly treated after WW1. For instance, the Germans surrendered in 1918 after agreeing to Wilson's 14 Points. The British had a starvation blockade in place and refused to lift it until Germany signed the Versailles Treaty making that country solely responsible for causing WW1. This starvation blockade caused 900 000 civilian deaths -
https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=27&t=10005
Also if you look at the details on disarmament in the Versailles Treaty all the countries involved were supposed to disarm. Only Germany did. When the other countries (Britain, France, Belgium etc) refused to disarm Hitler ordered the rearming of his country -
https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=7937
The millions of deaths in WW1 were another reason for appeasement. A series of negotiated agreements and a peaceful revision of the Versailles Treaty were preferable to another bloodbath -
https://wearswar.wordpress.com/2017/...an-propaganda/
https://wearswar.wordpress.com/2017/...new-world-war/
https://wearswar.wordpress.com/2018/...-did-not-want/
Mondial is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th January 2018, 05:26 AM   #368
ddt
Mafia Penguin
 
ddt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 19,576
Originally Posted by Mondial View Post
Politicians who supported the policy of appeasement did so because they felt Germany had been unfairly treated after WW1. For instance, the Germans surrendered in 1918 after agreeing to Wilson's 14 Points.
Twisting history? Germany surrendered on 11 November 1918 because collapse of the front was imminent. In those circumstances, Ludendorff pressed Hindenburg and the Kaiser to accept whatever terms, had two MPs sent to Compiègne to sign and later developed the Stab-in-the-Back legend that it was those dastardly socialists who had undermined the war effort.

Originally Posted by Mondial View Post
The British had a starvation blockade in place and refused to lift it until Germany signed the Versailles Treaty making that country solely responsible for causing WW1. This starvation blockade caused 900 000 civilian deaths
Of course, the British blockade was only naval in nature. I'm not going to debate the numbers, but interestingly, the Hague Conventions on War allow a blockade only when it's effective, so the higher number of deaths you cite, the more you argue for its legality. And the British allowed food to be imported from January 1919 on.

And the blockade had nothing to do with the so-called "War Guilt Clause", which was not a guilt clause at all, but only meant to underpin German legal responsibility to pay reparations. The same clause existed in the other Paris suburbs treaties with the other Central Powers, and none of them bitched about that.

And let's stop bitching about the height of the German reparations. Germany paid only about 20bn Goldmarks until it stopped paying in 1931, and the payments amounted only to about 2% of the national income. By comparison, the 1871 Treaty of Frankfurt required France to pay 5bn Goldfrancs within 4 years on a national income of 22bn Goldfrancs (link).
__________________
"I think it is very beautiful for the poor to accept their lot, to share it with the passion of Christ. I think the world is being much helped by the suffering of the poor people." - "Saint" Teresa, the lying thieving Albanian dwarf

"I think accuracy is important" - Vixen
ddt is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th January 2018, 09:08 AM   #369
Captain_Swoop
Penultimate Amazing
 
Captain_Swoop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 17,201
Germany had a blockade on the UK as well. U-Boats nearly brought Britain to starvation.
Britain relied on sea routes for supply. Germany has a much longer land border than a sea coast. It didn't rely on shipping in food entirely.


Conveniently forgotten by Mondial. There was a war on.

Last edited by Captain_Swoop; 14th January 2018 at 09:09 AM.
Captain_Swoop is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th January 2018, 10:08 AM   #370
Henri McPhee
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 2,931
Originally Posted by Mondial View Post
Politicians who supported the policy of appeasement did so because they felt Germany had been unfairly treated after WW1. For instance, the Germans surrendered in 1918 after agreeing to Wilson's 14 Points.
In a way I agree that the Treaty of Versailles was unfair and there were economists like Keynes who said so at the time. The trouble was that the political situation in the world became very complex during the 1930s. There were quite a few people in high places like the Right club in the UK, including a descendent of the Duke of Wellington who were sympathetic to Hitler and Japan, and Nazis were not unknown in America. The British fascist Oswald Mosley was praised to high heaven in the British Press by the Times and Daily Mail and even the Guardian, or Manchester Guardian as it then was.

Just sticking to the British Royal family, the Duke of Windsor was put under surveillance and his telephone tapped by a detective from Scotland Yard secret political police called Albert Canning and the Duke was overheard telling Americans not to enter the war because it was now too late. Churchill with his 'with what' strategy supported the Duke of Windsor and Lloyd George in his later years was quite sympathetic to Hitler. I don't know if the Duke of Kent was mixed up in all this but I wouldn't be surprised.

Chamberlain gets unfairly blamed for appeasement, but he was the one who got The RAF and radar organised and the country prepared for war and conscription introduced.

King George V1 never wanted to be king and he was later described by the comedian Michael Bentine as a damn good king.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...-10306121.html
Henri McPhee is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th January 2018, 10:13 AM   #371
Captain_Swoop
Penultimate Amazing
 
Captain_Swoop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 17,201
Well, if comedian Michael Bentine thinks he was a good king that settles it.
Captain_Swoop is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th January 2018, 04:54 PM   #372
ddt
Mafia Penguin
 
ddt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 19,576
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
King George V1
Are you talking about a British king or a German weapon?
__________________
"I think it is very beautiful for the poor to accept their lot, to share it with the passion of Christ. I think the world is being much helped by the suffering of the poor people." - "Saint" Teresa, the lying thieving Albanian dwarf

"I think accuracy is important" - Vixen
ddt is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th January 2018, 02:57 AM   #373
erwinl
Master Poster
 
erwinl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 2,064
Originally Posted by ddt View Post
Are you talking about a British king or a German weapon?
Well.
There used to be a buzz that the king had some kind of speech impediment. There was even a suspicion that he bombed himself before each speech, which would indeed explain his performances.
Luckily he had a teacher, who knew how to doodle the text in a way the king could pronounce better.
This speech made a real impact.

I know this because I've seen this documentary once.
__________________
Bow before your king
Member of the "Zombie Misheard Lyrics Support Group"
erwinl is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th January 2018, 03:09 AM   #374
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
 
Dave Rogers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 27,403
Originally Posted by erwinl View Post
Well.
There used to be a buzz that the king had some kind of speech impediment. There was even a suspicion that he bombed himself before each speech, which would indeed explain his performances.
Luckily he had a teacher, who knew how to doodle the text in a way the king could pronounce better.
This speech made a real impact.

I know this because I've seen this documentary once.
I'd nominate this, but it would violate rule 12.

Dave
__________________
Me: So what you're saying is that, if the load carrying ability of the lower structure is reduced to the point where it can no longer support the load above it, it will collapse without a jolt, right?

Tony Szamboti: That is right
Dave Rogers is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th January 2018, 05:09 AM   #375
Henri McPhee
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 2,931
Originally Posted by Mondial View Post
The millions of deaths in WW1 were another reason for appeasement. A series of negotiated agreements and a peaceful revision of the Versailles Treaty were preferable to another bloodbath -
There is a bit about this in the book Modern Money and Unemployment published in 1964 by Isidore Ostrer:

Quote:
Economic conditions create war. The seed of the growth of Hitler was definitely planted in the lunatic currency arrangements fixed after the 1914-18 war.
I remember the son of the Marquis of Bath once saying on TV that his father was dangerously right wing. There were people in Britain and America who wanted to stay out of the war and not give a guarantee to Poland and that did not include Chamberlain.
Henri McPhee is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th January 2018, 08:00 AM   #376
Hans
Philosopher
 
Hans's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 7,591
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
There is a bit about this in the book Modern Money and Unemployment published in 1964 by Isidore Ostrer:



I remember the son of the Marquis of Bath once saying on TV that his father was dangerously right wing. There were people in Britain and America who wanted to stay out of the war and not give a guarantee to Poland and that did not include Chamberlain.

Henri go read about the The Hossbach Conference which met on November 5th 1937.
Hans is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th January 2018, 09:25 AM   #377
Henri McPhee
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 2,931
Originally Posted by Hans View Post
Henri go read about the The Hossbach Conference which met on November 5th 1937.
Our secret service were well aware of Hitler's intentions from at least 1934 and that information would have been conveyed to Chamberlain though secrecy would have been preserved. That doesn't mean that Chamberlain should have gone rushing off to war with outdated RAF planes and a Churchill 'with what' strategy. That could have resulted in defeat and it was touch and go in 1940. Australia and Canada and New Zealand and South Africa and Rhodesia were opposed to war in 1938 and America was none too keen to get involved at the time. A politician who has to introduce conscription can't do so without public support Fools rush in where angels fear to tread.

http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk...rence-of-1937/
Henri McPhee is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th January 2018, 09:36 AM   #378
Hans
Philosopher
 
Hans's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 7,591
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
Our secret service were well aware of Hitler's intentions from at least 1934 and that information would have been conveyed to Chamberlain though secrecy would have been preserved. That doesn't mean that Chamberlain should have gone rushing off to war with outdated RAF planes and a Churchill 'with what' strategy. That could have resulted in defeat and it was touch and go in 1940. Australia and Canada and New Zealand and South Africa and Rhodesia were opposed to war in 1938 and America was none too keen to get involved at the time. A politician who has to introduce conscription can't do so without public support Fools rush in where angels fear to tread.

http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk...rence-of-1937/
Secret service? lol, what did they do go to the book store and buy Mein Kampf? He kinda outlined his overall plan in MK and then published it.
Hans is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th January 2018, 10:07 AM   #379
Tolls
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 4,172
Originally Posted by Hans View Post
Secret service? lol, what did they do go to the book store and buy Mein Kampf? He kinda outlined his overall plan in MK and then published it.
I'm getting a feeling of deja vu over this conversation.
Tolls is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th January 2018, 10:18 AM   #380
Henri McPhee
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 2,931
Originally Posted by Tolls View Post
I'm getting a feeling of deja vu over this conversation.
This is what I wrote about this matter last May on this forum and it's true. Winterbotham of Air Intelligence had conversations with top Nazis and generals in 1934 and he was not the only British spy around:


Quote:
This is what F.W Winterbotham wrote in his book about the invasion of Russia by Hitler. I think it's true and not embellished:

Quote:
From Eric Koch, who showed me all over the great concrete preparations in East Prussia for Operation Otto, I found out the approximate date of the operation against all Russia..........

Ever since I had joined the Secret Service in 1929 I had realized that amongst those who trod the carpeted corridors of power in Whitehall it was fashionable to smile in tolerant disbelief at anything the Secret Service told them. It was frustrating to see the information on German rearmament being quietly ignored.. As my efforts with Hitler and company had had the full backing of Admiral Sir Hugh Sinclair (Quex to his friends, "C" to the establishment, to me the Chief), he complained to the Prime Minister when he saw no use was being made of my knowledge. In 1935 I was finally summoned to appear before a Cabinet Committee to substantiate my reports. They were accepted by the committee. When Baldwin retired, Lord Swinton took over as Air Minister from Lord Londonderry, and I got the help and backing I wanted...........

After thirty years of somewhat smug propaganda on the subject of Nazi Fascism, it is difficult to tell people now how very nearly it never happened. How those of us who knew the might of the German war machine, and the accurate facts of our fight for existence, wondered at the blind optimism of the Army Staff, and of Winston Churchill himself, that we could hold the Germans in France.

It took the fall of France and great pressure from the Air Staff to convince him that things had changed since World War 1. It was at this critical moment that the greatest Intelligence triumph of all time came to our rescue, a secret that was kept throughout the war and after.

Last edited by Henri McPhee; 16th January 2018 at 10:20 AM.
Henri McPhee is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th January 2018, 11:09 AM   #381
Hans
Philosopher
 
Hans's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 7,591
Originally Posted by Tolls View Post
I'm getting a feeling of deja vu over this conversation.
Yes now that you mentioned it their is a sniff of sameness in the air.
Hans is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd January 2018, 04:19 AM   #382
Henri McPhee
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 2,931
There was some silly journalist on the Press Review on Sky TV a few days ago saying that the leader of the British UKIP political party is the worst leader since Chamberlain. I think Chamberlain was a very clever man, and a man of wide and practical experience. He gets unfairly blamed for appeasement by ignoramus journalists and Churchill historians. He was no pacifist.
Henri McPhee is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd January 2018, 04:34 AM   #383
Craig B
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 22,470
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
There was some silly journalist on the Press Review on Sky TV a few days ago saying that the leader of the British UKIP political party is the worst leader since Chamberlain. I think Chamberlain was a very clever man, and a man of wide and practical experience. He gets unfairly blamed for appeasement by ignoramus journalists and Churchill historians. He was no pacifist.
Nor did he have romantic entanglements with 25 year old models.
Craig B is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd January 2018, 04:49 AM   #384
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
 
Dave Rogers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 27,403
Originally Posted by Craig B View Post
Nor did he have romantic entanglements with 25 year old models.
That we know of.

Dave
__________________
Me: So what you're saying is that, if the load carrying ability of the lower structure is reduced to the point where it can no longer support the load above it, it will collapse without a jolt, right?

Tony Szamboti: That is right
Dave Rogers is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd January 2018, 06:55 AM   #385
Klimax
NWO Cyborg 5960x (subversion VPUNPCKHQDQ)
 
Klimax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Starship Wanderer - DS9
Posts: 12,503
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
There was some silly journalist on the Press Review on Sky TV a few days ago saying that the leader of the British UKIP political party is the worst leader since Chamberlain. I think Chamberlain was a very clever man, and a man of wide and practical experience. He gets unfairly blamed for appeasement by ignoramus journalists and Churchill historians. He was no pacifist.
That's why he throw us to Nazi Germany. Because he was no pacifist. Well, that might make twisted sense. He wanted massive world war, so he throw one of countries with well developed military industry and healthy economic base to Germany, so they had some chance at war...
__________________
ModBorg

Engine: Ibalgin 400
Klimax is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th February 2018, 03:02 AM   #386
Henri McPhee
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 2,931
The Czechs would have lasted about three weeks, like Poland. Then what and with what? Chamberlain had right judgment, even if you call it appeasement.
Henri McPhee is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th February 2018, 04:29 AM   #387
Klimax
NWO Cyborg 5960x (subversion VPUNPCKHQDQ)
 
Klimax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Starship Wanderer - DS9
Posts: 12,503
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
The Czechs would have lasted about three weeks, like Poland. Then what and with what? Chamberlain had right judgment, even if you call it appeasement.
We had mutual defense treaty with both France and Britain. (Also with Soviet union)

You turned your back on us. You betrayed us. And as a consequence and reward you caused and got biggest war so far! You got what you wanted to prevent. You gave Hitler what he wanted and thus enabled his war of conquest. Without Czechoslovakian republic Hitler would not be able to launch it. We were final piece he had to have for his war.

Chamberlain had one of the worst judgements ever!

In short, you are WRONG!

ETA: And it is questionable if we would really fall in 5 weeks. And even if so, it would deplete resources of Germany to severe extent. They would have to destroy what they wanted (factories) And resistance would be far more effective because registry of population would be of no use anymore.
__________________
ModBorg

Engine: Ibalgin 400

Last edited by Klimax; 4th February 2018 at 04:35 AM.
Klimax is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th February 2018, 05:08 AM   #388
Garrison
Illuminator
 
Garrison's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 4,368
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
The Czechs would have lasted about three weeks, like Poland. Then what and with what? Chamberlain had right judgment, even if you call it appeasement.
How would it have been like the Poles? The Czechs had much better natural defences, the Panzer divisions barely existed, the Luftwaffe was far weaker and there was no Molotov-Ribentropp Pact so Germany would have struggled for resources to keep their war machine running. Oh and in an invasion much of that Czech equipment and industrial capacity that was massively important to Germany in the build up to the invasion of Poland would have been destroyed so any offence in the west would have been far weaker.

The time bought by Munich may have benefited the UK, but it may have benefited Nazi Germany far more.
__________________
So I've started a blog about my writing. Check it out at: http://fourth-planet-problem.blogspot.com/
And my first book is on Amazon: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B077W322FX
Garrison is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th February 2018, 05:23 AM   #389
Craig B
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 22,470
Originally Posted by Garrison View Post
... and there was no Molotov-Ribentropp Pact ...
Excellent point. The USSR had an alliance with Czechoslovakia, and even if she had not gone to war with Germany on account of it, she would not have helped Germany as she did in the destruction of Poland, a common enemy of Germany and Russia.

It is often argued that the Nazi Soviet Pact made WW2 possible, and it has been condemned on that account. If so, then the friendly relations between CS and the USSR would have made a general war impossible for Germany to contemplate. And would have made a local war against CS extremely expensive for Hitler both in resources and in diplomatic credit. Further aggressive military adventures by him might well have been prevented or deterred.

Czech tanks were so good, by the way, that Hitler used trophy ones - he never had to fight them in Czechoslovakia - in his campaign against France the following May.

Last edited by Craig B; 4th February 2018 at 05:25 AM.
Craig B is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th February 2018, 05:42 AM   #390
Klimax
NWO Cyborg 5960x (subversion VPUNPCKHQDQ)
 
Klimax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Starship Wanderer - DS9
Posts: 12,503
Thanks to both of you for providing better articulation of what I tried to say.
__________________
ModBorg

Engine: Ibalgin 400
Klimax is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th February 2018, 06:14 AM   #391
ddt
Mafia Penguin
 
ddt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 19,576
Originally Posted by Craig B View Post
Excellent point. The USSR had an alliance with Czechoslovakia, and even if she had not gone to war with Germany on account of it, she would not have helped Germany as she did in the destruction of Poland, a common enemy of Germany and Russia.

It is often argued that the Nazi Soviet Pact made WW2 possible, and it has been condemned on that account. If so, then the friendly relations between CS and the USSR would have made a general war impossible for Germany to contemplate. And would have made a local war against CS extremely expensive for Hitler both in resources and in diplomatic credit. Further aggressive military adventures by him might well have been prevented or deterred.
It should also be noted that Stalin was mightily pissed off by Munich. The UK and France had sold out his ally and he wasn't even invited at the table. That also contributed to his decision to break down talks with the UK and France and go for the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact.

Originally Posted by Craig B View Post
Czech tanks were so good, by the way, that Hitler used trophy ones - he never had to fight them in Czechoslovakia - in his campaign against France the following May.
The Czech 37t tanks also formed the core of the German Panzer divisions in the Polish campaign.
__________________
"I think it is very beautiful for the poor to accept their lot, to share it with the passion of Christ. I think the world is being much helped by the suffering of the poor people." - "Saint" Teresa, the lying thieving Albanian dwarf

"I think accuracy is important" - Vixen
ddt is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th February 2018, 09:33 AM   #392
Captain_Swoop
Penultimate Amazing
 
Captain_Swoop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 17,201
They chassis and running gear were used to build the Hetzers, my favourite German armour.
Captain_Swoop is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th February 2018, 10:05 AM   #393
jimbob
Uncritical "thinker"
 
jimbob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 18,732
To say nothing of the design of the Bren gun - used by the British Army up to the Falklands
__________________
OECD healthcare spending
Expenditure on healthcare
http://www.oecd.org/els/health-systems/health-data.htm
link is 2015 data (2013 Data below):
UK 8.5% of GDP of which 83.3% is public expenditure - 7.1% of GDP is public spending
US 16.4% of GDP of which 48.2% is public expenditure - 7.9% of GDP is public spending
jimbob is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th February 2018, 10:18 AM   #394
Henri McPhee
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 2,931
Originally Posted by Garrison View Post
How would it have been like the Poles? The Czechs had much better natural defences, the Panzer divisions barely existed, the Luftwaffe was far weaker and there was no Molotov-Ribentropp Pact so Germany would have struggled for resources to keep their war machine running. Oh and in an invasion much of that Czech equipment and industrial capacity that was massively important to Germany in the build up to the invasion of Poland would have been destroyed so any offence in the west would have been far weaker.

The time bought by Munich may have benefited the UK, but it may have benefited Nazi Germany far more.
There was nothing stopping the Czechs from going to war with Germany on their own in 1938 except that Hitler threatened the Czech prime minister at the time with bombing Prague:

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_a...r_seventy.html
Henri McPhee is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th February 2018, 10:32 AM   #395
Garrison
Illuminator
 
Garrison's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 4,368
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
There was nothing stopping the Czechs from going to war with Germany on their own in 1938 except that Hitler threatened the Czech prime minister at the time with bombing Prague:

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_a...r_seventy.html
Which has nothing to do with what you claimed earlier. Could you please address all/any of the points raised about the actual strategic situation that contradict your claim that the Czech republic would have lasted three weeks and Munich was the right decision? Or can we expect yet more silence before you dredge up some non-sequitur from a 60 year old book?
__________________
So I've started a blog about my writing. Check it out at: http://fourth-planet-problem.blogspot.com/
And my first book is on Amazon: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B077W322FX
Garrison is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th February 2018, 11:00 AM   #396
Klimax
NWO Cyborg 5960x (subversion VPUNPCKHQDQ)
 
Klimax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Starship Wanderer - DS9
Posts: 12,503
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
There was nothing stopping the Czechs from going to war with Germany on their own in 1938 except that Hitler threatened the Czech prime minister at the time with bombing Prague:

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_a...r_seventy.html
Bit hard to fight when your supposed allies threaten you for "threatening peace".
__________________
ModBorg

Engine: Ibalgin 400
Klimax is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th February 2018, 11:31 AM   #397
jimbob
Uncritical "thinker"
 
jimbob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 18,732
Originally Posted by Klimax View Post
Bit hard to fight when your supposed allies threaten you for "threatening peace".
Yes, it definitely was an incident to be ashamed of. And it made Nazi Germany stronger
__________________
OECD healthcare spending
Expenditure on healthcare
http://www.oecd.org/els/health-systems/health-data.htm
link is 2015 data (2013 Data below):
UK 8.5% of GDP of which 83.3% is public expenditure - 7.1% of GDP is public spending
US 16.4% of GDP of which 48.2% is public expenditure - 7.9% of GDP is public spending
jimbob is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th February 2018, 04:02 AM   #398
Tolls
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 4,172
Originally Posted by Garrison View Post
How would it have been like the Poles? The Czechs had much better natural defences, the Panzer divisions barely existed, the Luftwaffe was far weaker...
Just the bolded bit, but in relation to everyone else the Luftwaffe was pretty much at its peak. Remember, that's in relation. Britain and France had next to nothing that could go up against the 109, for example.

In essence, the Luftwaffe were ahead of the curve, though they would start to lose ground by 1940.
Tolls is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th February 2018, 07:16 AM   #399
Parsman
Muse
 
Parsman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Bonnie Scotland
Posts: 550
Also, not sure how much credence to give this, but I have read that many German officers at the time hoped for a war over Czechoslovakia as it would be so difficult and bloody that they would be able to act against the regime due to its unpopularity. When it went the smooth way of all Hitler's previous adventures they felt they had lost a last chance to try and resist.
__________________
I was not; I have been; I am not; I am content - Epicurus

When you're dead you don't know that you're dead, all the pain is felt by others....................the same thing happens when you're stupid.
Parsman is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th February 2018, 08:39 AM   #400
Henri McPhee
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 2,931
I know it has been said in the past that German officers would have opposed Hitler if an invasion of the Czechs happened. It's just you need to be in touch with reality about all that. Nobody was stopping those German officers, least of all Chamberlain, if that's what they wanted to do. Later on officers from German military intelligence, like Admiral Canaris and Colonel Oster, were in touch with MI6, and there were bomb plots against Hitler, none of them successful.

It's also sad for the Czechs, and I agree to the benefit of German military strength that Britain was in no condition to go to war in 1938. It would have ended in disaster. That is not Chamberlain's fault.

There is a bit about all this in an internet article:

Quote:
Some historians, for example John Charmley, believe that rather than being negligent, Chamberlain was justified in appeasing Hitler in the Munich Conference. Many historians argue that the year that was gained helped Britain build up her army. Chamberlain himself said that he would not contemplate such a guarantee ‘unless we had reasonable prospect of being able to beat her [Germany] to her knees in a reasonable time, and of that I see no sign.’ In other words, Chamberlain did not want to enter into a war with Germany unless they did have a large enough military to do this.

David Dilks, one of the leading revisionists, has been at the forefront of the historical revisionism of Chamberlain. According to Dilks, ‘the buying of time remained a strong element in British foreign policy, as it had been for several years…and to accelerate British rearmament, the spending upon which was moving swiftly forward in 1938 and 1939 and which far exceeded any expenditure upon arms ever undertaken in peace time’.
Henri McPhee is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » History, Literature, and the Arts

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:25 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.