Why was Danzig the breaking point between Great Britain and Germany?

>>17741367 (OP)
>ok you took Austria, but if you do that shit again it’s war
>ok you took Sudeten, but any more shit and it’s war
>ok you took the rest of Czechoslovakia, but any more shit and it’s war
>ok you took Memel, but anymore shit and it’s war
>takes Poland
>ok dickhead it’s war time
Fairly obvious, they got more warnings then they deserved but kept pushing their luck, then Dresden got all crispy and Berlin got carved up between the winners
The real question is “why did Germany wager their entire reich on Danzig?”

>>17741367 (OP)

>>17741422
>>17741447
reddit tier ‘answers’

>reddit tier ‘answers’

It wasn't, Poland was. Had Hitler only tried to take Danzig then there wouldn't have been war

>>17741485
Reddit response
I answered your question, now answer mine
Why did he throw away the whole german reich for a bit of pierogi land? He could’ve stopped after Czechoslovakia with a big Germany and no war, why was he so dumb?

>>17741367 (OP)
it wasn't danzing
it was polans
hitler didnt just take a danzing - he invaded Poland without war declaration

>>17741544
Because in that political climate it was irrational to think that Briatin will start a great war over Danzig. They were basically supported Germany until that point.

>>17741800
>Because in that political climate it was irrational to think that Briatin will start a great war over Danzig. They were basically supported Germany until that point.
AHAHAHA FUCKING LMAO

No fucking retard, Britain and France had huge misgivings over the Sudentland deal, they felt forced into it as a fait accompli since Hitler was going to march in anyway, they were trying to make it a serious negotiation instead of a capitulation. Then Hitler proved all their fears right by making "just one more" demand, his game was so obvious by that point that they drew the red line there, and Hitler, of course, crossed it because he always wanted war and knew it would lead to war.

>>17741367 (OP)
Churchill's jewish masters told him to do it and he did

>>17741830
What did Churchill do?

>>17741367 (OP)
It wasn't. It's just Poland acted irrationally. Nobody was willing to join a war over it.

>>17741367 (OP)
What if was operation pike was the breaking point between Western Allies and Soviet Union?

>>17741485
Trvke and right
>>17741507
Falze and wrong

>>17741422
Germany didnt know Britain would convert to islam and become a repressed minority in their home islands.
>Austria
>Sudete
>Bohemia
>Memel
>Danzig
But what does this have to do with England?
Shouldnt a stronger Germany be preferable to balance out the USSR?
Why the sudden shift in British foreign policy?
>>17741447
>born in a country that no longer exists
Hitler won the story.

>>17741516
Hitler did only try to take Danzig.
>>17741544
>throw away
he didnt, the Germans fought extremely hard to preserve their nation.
Who could have predicted the UK would take the jewish stance of zero negotiation, or that America would do a complete pivot and cut ties with Germany and take a pro English stance (something the US never had not even in WWI), or that the USSR would become a dependent on the United States.

Hitler wanted to restore Germany. Was defeating a country smaller than Texas really worth the Anglosphere becoming ZOGolem that oppresses and genocides its native populations?
>>17741548
No, he only took Danzig when he asked for a conference on September 2.
>>17741807
>huge misgivings
Show us a single speech, policy, or meeting where Britain and France declared "We are willing to go extinct in our homelands over Danzig"

>>17741854
discredit the peace movement and amplify pro-war opinions as well as advising chamberlain to take a pro-war stance.
You are aware Churchill and Chamberlain were meeting regularly in the lead up to the war yes?

>>17741965
you are a retard lmao
also 18+ website kiddo
and follow your leader
kys

>>17741956
>Why the sudden shift in British foreign policy?
That’s the real question.

>>17741993
there were no suddent shift, britains policy was to conserve status quo on the continent
with the ultimate defeat of germany that shifted and france was getting a little uppity along with the rise of the USSR
britain tolerated it until the germans stepped over the line, the next aggression would directly hurt britain (benelux states and scandinavia), so it had to be stopped

>>17741367 (OP)
Britain came extra lenght in diplomatic relations with Germany with Czeckoslovakian question and lost face when Hitler invaded Czechians. Hitler saw it as weakness instead of mercy and thought Britain wouldnt not attack them over Poland.

>>17741965
>Hitler did only try to take Danzig
https://youtube.com/watch?v=dffPcxBUwds&pp=0gcJCdgAo7VqN5tD

>>17742004
That’s fine and all but doesn’t make sense as both the USSR and the USA were bigger threats to the British status quo than Germany.

>>17741981
Get out of /his/

As someone that has no dog in the race Churchills actions don’t make any sense at all whatsoever , so what if German speaking people joined Germany? How does it affect England? Why can’t they live with Germany being the continental hegemon? The funny thing is that Hitler would probably be the sadder at the UKs current state between him and Churchill.

>>17742051
>As someone that has no dog in the race [nazi propaganda]
You nazis are so blatant itcs not even funny. Go Dresden yourself, Krautnigger.

>>17742051
Britain was protecting its superpower status over industrially mightier Germany. State leadership new the facts that Britain would lose superpower status to Germany.

>>17742051
Churchill wanted to keep England White and accomplish total Indian death, supposedly. Meanwhile Shitler didn't do shit to browns and the Third Reich even produced anti-colonialist propaganda, my my...

>>17742054
Are you fucking retarded? You have schizophrenia

>>17742062
Yep, the Axis produced pro-poo propaganda against the British Empire. Total nazinigger retardation, as always.

>>17742057
I don’t like to play this card but I genuinely don’t think Churchill pursued Britains national interest but rather a third party “ behind the scenes”

>>17742062
>>17742091
Britain would still have their empire though since hitler was only focused on (continental) Europe, plus he had no problem coexisting with Britain as another power who’d still be mightier than Germany internationally. (Accidental left out this paragraph soz)

>>17741965
>Hitler did only try to take Danzig
So why did he invade the rest of Poland and try to ethnically cleanse it.

>>17742095
to put an end to Poles invading Danzig and trying to ethnically cleanse it.

>>17741965
>so what if German speaking people joined Germany?
Polish, Latvian, Lithuanian, Ukrainian, Russian, Estonian, French and Belarussian are not Germanic languages
>Why can’t they live with Germany being the continental hegemon?
It was assumed that Germany would use their position as continental hegemon to strongarm Britain into doing what they wanted, like Germany did with their own allies.

>>17742062
>>17742065
>nazis are le brown coded
t. 45 year old romanian jew

>>17742104
Poland ethnically cleansed Danzig?

>>17742106
Sorry.

>>17742106
>>nazis are le brown coded
Yeah at this point they are.

>>17742091
Pray tell, Mr No-dog-in-the-Race, what people made up this mysterious third party ?
Also fuck jannies

>>17741800
So fucking what? That means krauts are divinely entitled to go for Danzig? Do you realize how retarded you sound?

>>17741367 (OP)
The French insisted they need a reliable eastern ally to ease the German pressure on them until they can fully mobilise. The British, knowing the French will have to provide majority of the land effort in the next war conformed with their judgement. Also you should've posted pic of Chamberlain he was the PM at the time.

>>17742144
Stop deflecting and explain how starting a world war over Germany restoring German lands is in Britains interest

>>17742227
Why are so you prickly all of a sudden? it's a simple question and I'm eager to learn, especially from someone so neutral

>>17741485
>>17741485
bitchute cope

>>17742352
It was in response to your cynical tone.

Anyway, I stand by what I said, as a bystander Britain’s behaviour seems so irrational and against their interests to the point that I can’t help but think they are serving a third party.

>>17742227
It’s not just that. First they basically strengthened Germany by letting them take Austria and Bohemia and then it’s war without any further considerations or diplomacy.

>>17742512
They will just say muh appeasement and act like Danzig is some sensible red line to start an unnecessary world war over

>>17742508
Yes we got that, but are you going to explain who said third party are?

>>17742361
>bitchute
Explain this meme

>>17742671
Is this your only rebuttal? You won’t get your gotcha moment.

>>17742772
Why are you getting so angry over a simple question?

>>17742841
No one’s angry, Schlomo. Now stop wasting my time. Normal people come here to discuss in honesty, instead of looking to feed into their victim complex.

>>17742849
Is it a hard question to answer? I feel like you could've answered it in less time than what you've spent squirming about trying to avoid it
Perhaps you're afraid of something?

>>17742227
>Germany restoring German lands
That's the problem, they weren't German lands anymore.

>>17742105
and those places didnt join Germany nor did the Germans want them in Germany.
>>17742107
about as much as the Germans ethnically cleansed Poland.
>>17742111
>performative racism
ok, post TND with your face and date attached.
>>17742118
nope, they remain the great shadow that looms over the White race, an idol to the nativists and a lingering doom over the jews.
>>17742701
shitlibs think bitchud is where we get our talking points because they all receive their talking points from similar shitlib equivalents.
The reason shitlibs are so out of place in these threads is because they think they are comparing two sets of talking points from two different camps, they dont realize they are encountering novel arguments from original research.

>>17741367 (OP)
>Why was Danzig the breaking point between Great Britain and Germany?
Roosevelt pressured Britain and Poland not to consneed on Danzig so that a war would break out and he could fix the US economy with a bout of military Keynesianism

>>17741367 (OP)
>Prior to the German invasion of Poland in 1939, there were reports of mass killings of German civilians in the Danzig corridor. According to historical discussions, the Polish Army and independent Bolshevik units allegedly slaughtered thousands of civilian ethnic Germans, known as Volksdeutsche, in this region. Estimates suggest that around 58,000 German civilians lost their lives in these massacres.

>These events occurred in the months leading up to the invasion and were part of escalating tensions between Germany and Poland. Both sides accused each other of committing atrocities, which contributed to the deteriorating relations between the two nations.

>It is important to note that these claims have been subject to debate and differing interpretations among historians. Some sources argue that these massacres were significant factors in prompting the German invasion, while others present alternative perspectives on the causes of World War II.

>>17741946
Interesting turned point event

>>17741367 (OP)
Basically every point bar racial fetishes and total domination over the world could have been achieved by 1930s Germany had anyone besides Hitler or his international socialist/commie equivalent ruled Germany

>>17743341
Isn't this literal Nazi propaganda? printed by them, as they were invading
by the people who explicitly stated that they would lie and propagandize as according to the book that Goebbels himself read and iterated upon?
This is either bait, retarded attempt at argument without any real evidence or a talkie level delusion

>>17743454
>It is important to note...
it is AI. Maybe you should read more, something following or during the war. I'm not "debating" you or anyone online because I am not a tard

>>17743519
>Tankie level delusion
>Not interested in actually talking
Well, glad to know it wasn't bait

>>17743519
>it is AI
Lol
>Maybe you should read more
Lmao even

>>17742968
>>17742105
Why not? Unequal treaties don’t change realities on the ground. Was the entire British empire speaking English beforehand? Don’t be a hypocrite.
Also a hegemonic Germany becoming unreasonable vis a vis Britain is entirely unfounded and just a fantasy, Hitler always respected the British empire and saw them as natural allies unlike his Eastern neighbours. Britain could’ve ruled the oceans they just had to accept Germany ruling the continent, but sadly Churchill served other interests than his own nation’s… >>17742859

>>17741367 (OP)
Because Britain and France were too demoralized, weak, and uncoordinated to immediately declare war on Germany following the re-militarization of the Rhineland in 1936.

The situation was stable in July 1934 when the Austrians were backed by Italy who was in turn backed by Britain and France to resist German influence in Austria. The diplomatic break between Britain and Italy caused by the Italian invasion of Ethiopia weakened the allied position on the continent. Britain, France, and Italy together had boxed in Germany. But because of the break in 1936 it was now Britain and France trying to box in Germany while the Italians immediately became an actor with unknown intentions and motivations. Britain as a naval power cared much more about the Italian navy than it did about the German navy which was still very weak.

>>17741367 (OP)
Poles were genociding vber aryans to moloch in danzig, hitler was justified in saving them and creating gross germaniuns in the process

>>17744202
>they just had to accept Germany ruling the continent
Why?

>>17744488
Well one could make a case for it in the thirties barring western europe since commies are taking over but hitler, being a retard fumbled it

>>17744494
>a case for it in the thirties barring western europe since commies are taking over
Communism was pretty effectively bottled up in the USSR, if anything the opposite was the case and the 30s saw a rise of the right in most of Europe

>>17744473
Why did Germany become so gross? Who would want a gross Germany?

>>17742111
Cope kikes

A lot of the interwar Allied leadership thought modern warfare would destroy their countries. Not in the abstract sense that it would cost a lot of money or accelerate independence movements in the colonies, but that bombing (perhaps with chemical weapons) would kill a huge portion of their population, not dissimlarly to how we think of nuclear war today. Their passivity around Austria and Czechoslovakia makes a lot more sense when you keep this in mind

>>17744488
Because they would’ve maintained their empire and continued to be a world power instead of losing half a million lives over poland’s coast line and having their country colonised by third worlders?

>>17744336
The world is big enough for more powers to coexist especially since Germany post Wilhelm II didn’t care about overseas colonies at all . In fact Britain would’ve been the biggest beneficiary of German dominance on the continent. France is a non factor as they they’ve showed us.

>>17744473
Why don’t poles say the truth.
https://www.jrbooksonline.com/polish_atrocities.htm

>>17744352
Italy annexing Albania also caused great alarm in Britain, especially when they did so right after Germany took Czechia.

People are unaware that Britain gave military guarantees in 1939 to virtually every country the bordered Italy and Germany, not just Poland.

>>17744558
>would’ve maintained their empire
Did you know the British empire was already in decline, and some historians believe ww2 actually delayed Indian independence?

>>17744558
>Because they would’ve maintained their empire
The British empire would not have lasted just because they stay out of ww2 lol.

>>17742973
Hey amerimutt ????? faggot.
Dont you got better things to do on a saturday than spamming the same thread you had yesterday?

This isnt normal behaviour.

>>17741956
>Why the sudden shift in British foreign policy?
Implying there was a sudden shift.

>>17744509
>The commies Mussolini and hitler realize the idiocy of advocating for international socialism
>They advocate a toned down fascism and national socialism respectively
>This somehow means they were right wingers out to destroy to french revolution, not just commie rabble who want to "reform" it
The 30s is the most leftist time in history, from america to China all right wing governments had collapsed under parliamentarian and fabian terror since the start of the century;
The faulty men who made Germany were being replaced by either commmunist or nazi lunatics
America was a Hamiltonian hellhole after the fed depression and FDR recession, a land where you couldn't even properly farm on your own back yard
Britain was a ruin of Keynesian and banker elites collaborating with old aristorcats who wanted their privileges made irrelevant with the industrial revolution
France was dead and Russia had one of the single most catastrophic regimes imaginable enacted upon it to the point the broken ruins are an "eurasian" abomination rather than their origin of european
Even shitholes like China and japan were taken over by leftie nationalists and literal cartoon totalitarians respectively

>>17741367 (OP)
British elites care more about Poles than their own people
If anything they should have been happy Germany was only engaging in petty feuds over land borders instead of building up their naval or colonial power

>>17744614
Why did they abandon the balance of power meme?
>>17744577
Make me a pierogi.
>>17744575
No, it would have lasted much longer if the British weren’t under threat of a foreign power and forced to cozy up to hostile anti colonial empires.
>>17744572
>decline
Meme term. The British commonwealth still has a much higher HDI than adjacent non European countries. There is no reason they couldn’t have kept it going.
>>17744570
Why guarantee Romania?
>alarm
Why? Why does Britain need to die over Central Europeans and Eastern Europeans?
Shouldn’t it benefit Britain if Germany and Italy provide an Axis of opposition to the communist sphere?

>>17743454
>literal Nazi propaganda
The National Socialists didn’t have a bureau that centralized media control. They policed their media far less and produced a significantly healthier environment for the free press.
The UK and US had a small list of things you could say.
The NS had a small list of things you couldn’t say.
We have seen fascist states and NS states and they don’t produce totalitarian surveillance states like liberal democracies do.

>>17744685
>Why the sudden shift in British foreign policy?
Implying they did.

>No, it would have lasted much longer
Ok maybe it would have lasted a few years longer, but stop trying to pretend it was going to last into the 21st century.

>There is no reason they couldn’t have kept it going.
The evidence is actually on you to explain how it could have lasted longer.
Seeing how it was already in decline since ww1 (and before).
Ireland had already become forcefully independent, and Canada, Australia, New Zealand and South Africa and become legally independent.
Britain also had no viable strategy to prevent the Indian national assembly.
They also had no way to prevent arab nationalism.
Unless you're gonna go full fascist mode, which Britain never would, since the Amritsar massacre alone sparked outrage in Britain.
Socialist political movements also had no interest in the empire since it existed at the expense of public healthcare and public education etc.

>Why? Why does Britain need to die over Central Europeans and Eastern Europeans?
Same reason Spanish people died over Central Europeans in 1614

>>17744695
Go live in a dictatorship then if you're going to glorify it so much.

You nazifags are no better than western communists, who will talk about how much better things are in communist countries, but never actually living there.

>>17742973
>shitlibs think bitchud is where we get our talking points
Its because it is. All neo-nazi are illiterate retarded hicks who get their takes from schizo bitchute videos
>b-but I get my takes from Rumble/Odyssee ect instead!
same difference

>>17741367 (OP)
Late 19th century Polish migration to London gave them influence in British politics, while Czechs by comparison had little to no influence

>>17742051
>Danzig is a free city-state under the auspices of the league of nations
>As such, it is NOT part of Poland or Germany in anyway
>a referendum is underway to determine if Danzig citizens want to remain a free state or join Germany proper
>The pro German proposal wins with Danzig set to join as a part of Germany
Got all of this? Its important to understand the next part.
>Danzig is now part of Germany, but not connected physically to Germany proper
>Hitler, acting as the head of the German state, tries to acquire access to Polish territory in order to connect Danzig to Germany
>The Polish authorities refuse citing Hitlers recent belligerent actions against his neighbored in Austria and Czechoslovakia
>Hitler leads his country to war with Poland over the contested area
>The United Kingdom had a previous alliance with Poland stating that in the case of Germany attacking either one, they would join in the fight against Germany
>based on this, The United Kingdom declares war on Germany on Sep 3, 1939, several days after the German invasion
Also, Churchill was NOT the PM of the UK at the time, Neville Chamberlain was. So this idea that you have that Churchill dragged the country into war is just factually wrong since he was not even the PM at the time. Also, Chamberlain is the one who had sought cooperation with Hitler before all this in the name of preserving peace which shows that Hitler was the belligerent war monger.

Here is the audio of the broadcast of PM Chamberlain announcing the declaration of war against Germany.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bpQ9Bn8DR74

Also, unlike Germany which was under the leadership of one man without any restraints as a dictator, The UK wasnt. The PM of the UK doesnt not have the power to go to war on his own will. The United States operates the same way, the President needs the consent of congress to enter into a state of war against another nation.

>>17744878
>>17742051
This might help too. Its a map of Germany after WW1 and you can notice that Prussia is still part of Germany, but not connected to Germany proper. Danzig would have been incorporated into the Prussian section.

Hitler wanted to connect this Prussia-Danzig section all to Germany proper by taking the Polish corridor. When Hitler invaded Poland, he was in violation of the German-Polish non aggression pact of 1933. This was a treaty the Nazi government, not the previous Weimar era German government, had signed with Poland. This meant Hitler was once again breaking his word on the international stage proving that he could not be trusted.

>>17744572
>>17744575
Well yes the empire was already on the decline because of another world war that they egged on and aggravated. Instead of learning from a mistake they’ve done and repeated it to a T.

>>17744766
>but never actually living there
Not sure if you've noticed but there hasn't been a single White ethnostate since 1945 except Orania (only open to Afrikaners) and definitely no Nazi state

>>17744839
>same difference
Holy mother of ESL

>>17744891
>egged on
Britain was not an original member of the big powers of WW1. Germany instigated their involvement when they invaded neutral Belgium.

Its interesting how you guys pull this dindu nuffin shit with Germany yet claim to clutch your pearls at other powers as war mongers. You see, defending yourself from hostile aggression makes you a violent piece of shit, but those attacking you arent and its actually your fault for not just giving them everything they demand at gunpoint.

>>17744889
>versailles peace treaty in my ass
>Polack broke agreement with central power
Dangerous based, Hitler

>>17744901
Its a common english idiom zoomer. Also, not an argument. You're an illiterate who has read zero books or primary sources on this topic. You probably havent even listened to a lecture form a historian and you get your takes on this from stale old neo-nazi channels. Be honest, you watched zoomer historian videos and think you know shit, dont you?

>>17744878
>>17744889
What does the UK have to do with East Prussia and Germany proper being connected? Before you answer that question ask yourself why there were separated in the first place and what it inevitably would’ve led to. The Versailles treaty was null and void long before September 1939.

>>17744910
Nonsensical post that has nothing to do, let alone refutes, my post. ESL slop, brown zoomer kid detected.

>>17744926
Please take the time to carefully reread my post.

>>17742051
>Not understanding that things that are good for your geopolitical enemies are bad for you

It is both right, natural and normal to want your enemies to be fractured, divided and self-defeating. It does impact England when Germany gets their shit together, just like it impacts Europe when Russia starts getting uppity or like it impacts the US when China starts getting uppity. Life is a zero-sum game, you want strength for your nation and weakness for all others.

>>17744910
HOLY KINO FPBP /thread

>>17744902
>Muh splendid neutrality

>Morocco crises
>Cordiale/triple entente
>Naval build up

Belgian neutrality is just another pretext like Danzig. Britain wanted war, well they got it, and paid for it dearly.

>>17744930
They were no enemies, the enmity was very one sided and not at all related to Britain’s national interest but a 3rd party. German hegemony was probably of least concern to Britain of everyone involved but they both times declared war on Germany over irrelevant pretexts .

>>17744990
>Belgian neutrality is just another pretext like Danzig. Britain wanted war, well they got it, and paid for it dearly.
Lol youre literally doing exactly what I said. Why are you chimping out over Britain responding to German aggression, but defending German aggression?

You guys are always so chicken shit in your disposition. Like wanting to sucker punch someone else but crying victim when someone else responds by punching you out, its that sort of nigger mentality.

>>17744878
>The United Kingdom had a previous alliance with Poland stating that in the case of Germany attacking either one, they would join in the fight against Germany
Nice try but the treaty wasn’t specified that the attacker must be Germany and they didn’t declare on the USSR.

>>17744902
>its actually your fault for not just giving them everything they demand at gunpoint.

This is what their argument really just boils down to.
"Hitler must always get what he wants and everyone must do everything possible to make that happen, or else it's going to be your fault for what happens next". Sums it up pretty much

>>17745003
>Corr bloimey lurv me britain innit lurv me brexit simple as

>>17744926
>What does the UK have to do with East Prussia and Germany proper being connected?
Because fuck German expansion.
Same policy Bismarck had with France.

>The Versailles treaty was null and void long before September 1939.
Britain and France decides when Versailles is null and void, seeing how they won the war.

>ask yourself why there were separated in the first place and what it inevitably would’ve led to.
Because the corridor was majority Polish.
Same principle the Germans felt entitled to Sudeten and Danzig.

>>17744927
Shlomo retards, we all know who the Anglo-Jew real intention.

>>17745005
The treaty did specify Germany.
Sneaky move by Britain yes, but they probably anticipated that Hitler would suck Stalin dick

110 posts and no one has mentioned that the Allies sharply increased military spending in 1938 and this obviously explains why they were more willing to escalate in 1939 than they were before

>>17745017
By that logic, Churchill wanted Uncle Sam old cock?

>>17745005
>Should one of the Contracting Parties become engaged in hostilities with a European Power in consequence of aggression by the latter against that Contracting Party, the other Contracting Party will at once give the Contracting Party engaged in hostilities all the support and assistance in its power.
Article I of the British-Polish agreement of August 1939, literally one month before the German invasion of Poland. The rest of it just goes on like this. It a country attacks either Poland or the UK, the other will immediately join in on the fight for their mutual defense.
https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Agreement_of_Mutual_Assistance_between_the_United_Kingdom_and_Poland-London_(1939)

I guess you can say that they didnt specifically say "Germany", but it still applies to them. And if we are both being honest, its obvious that Germany was the main actor they have in mind when they mention "a european power"

>>17745016
Except Britain acted rationally so your whole jew narrative collapse.
As long as you cannot logically prove that Britain was acting irrationally, you're just going to be dismissed as another /pol/fag coming here to sperg your "lol fuck kikes" autism and literally no one is going to take you seriously

>>17745020
Just take your fucking meds already.

>>17745022
>POL! POL! POL!
Take your meds

>>17745003
Think of all the territory Britain invaded, annexed and conquered, now imagine the amount of utterly irrelevant pretexts one can think of to start/declare wars ((on Britain)) over and ask yourself if that would he reasonable or not.

>>17745025
No, UK lost their own empire.

Look at 1956 suez crisis.

>>17745032
>muh whataboutism
lol youre cooked. Fuck off back to bitchute faggot

>>17745028
You saying you arent?
Your entire motivation for spamming this thread is so you can bitch about immigration and jews.
There are at least a dozen of posts in this thread alone where you try to gaslight the discussion with your "paki rape gangs" and "kikes owning the government".

But yeah nah you dont browse /pol/. You're just an average guy and everyone else is a leftist shill if they dont worship Hitler.

>>17744927
Saar! Redeem now!

>>17745022
Britain has regressed both domestically and internationally to a great degree since their actions of the 20th century , so why not explain how their behaviour is rational without bringing up corridors.

>>17745040
>Zoomer Historian
>mindbroken from his video

>>17745034
>No, UK lost their own empire.
Wasnt because of ww2 and you've yet to prove otherwise, despite it being asked here >>17744749

I honestly dont think you have any opinion of your own, you've heard someone say this so you're just repeating it. You cant actually effortpost to rationally explain your position. It's quite telling.

>>17745044
Ok Sam.
Go make another ww2 video "historian".

>>17745043
I'm more curious why Germany decided to suicide itself and all of Europe with it.

anyone else remember AltHype? He was this big time alt-right video guy who probably made the best content for that side like 10 years ago. His videos were all pretty well researched and presented in a professional manner too so it wasnt just /pol/ schizo slop.

Anyway, he set about making this big epic bitchute video where he was going to refute the holocaust once and for all, but during all his research, he found that its undeniable that the holocaust happened. And to his credit, he made his video stating as such, but it triggered his audience and he got run off the internet.

>>17745045
…cope?

>>17745060
> alt-right video guy
>hillary clinton coin word
More buzz word

>>17745061
You're just shitposting at this point.
And then you wonder why everyone hates stormfags, despite you making this thread every day and spend hours trying to "convince" people.

Are you winning yet son?

>>17745038
Yeah let’s start a world war because Britain annexed somaliland cause muh red lines! Brain dead retard.

>>17745066
nonsensical AI post

>>17741367 (OP)
>Germany, we don't want you to do X
>Germany does X
>Germany, we really don't want you to do Y
>Germany does Y
>For fucks sake, Germany if you do Z then it's going to be war. We don't want a war, war won't go well for you, it's going to be shit for everyone. Do. Not. Do. Z. Or war.
>Germany, does Z
>Germany gets fucking roflstomped to the point where half of them get handed over to the Soviets
What part of this story don't you understand?

>>17745067
>stormfags
Jew tricks don’t work here.

>>17745077
>everyone who disagree with me is a jew

>>17745073
Nonsensical kvetching. Like I said, youre done. Go back to kicking shit or whatever it is some illiterate fuck like you does for fun.

>>17745074
Nonsensical redditor post

>>17745021
>a European Power
bruh

>>17745013
Would you put yourself on fire just so your perceived enemy couldn’t scratch their inch?

>>17745079
>(You)
https://files.catbox.moe/12zir7.jpeg

>>17745088
slav are yellow everything to east of germany is an asia

>>17745021
The treaty does specifically say Germany.
It was just added in a secret protocol because Britain did not want to fight USSR and Germany at the same time if Hitler had potentially made plans with the USSR on Poland.

>>17745092
>Would you put yourself on fire just so your perceived enemy couldn’t scratch their inch?

Czechoslovakia and Austria wasnt an inch.
also
>inch
fuck off Amerimutt.

The problem with stormfags is that they look at this Danzig issue in a vaccuum and ignore everything leading up to it, because only then does it seem irrational that Britain and Poland doesnt trust Hitler when Hitler says he "only" wants Danzig.

>>17745092
Ok, now apply this same exact take to Germany on the eve of their invasion of Poland. Why ignore this but freak out over those who fight back when Germany attacks them?

>>17745108
The German ultimatum to Poland included much more than just Danzig.
They also took more than just Danzig when Poland was defeated.

Hitler self-styled himself as a champion of a peoples right to determination. It was his whole game when he claimed Austria and Sudetenland and Danzig.
And then he proceeded to annex Polish majority land and enslaved the Czechs.

>>17745118
A big thing you see neo-nazis claim is that Hitler was just trying to reclaim lands taken after WW1, but he himself refutes this in Mein Kampf. He says that he wanted to take more land based on obscure historical claims too.

His whole justification for taking Russia was that Catherin the Great was Prussian, so now Germany owns all of that lol.

>>17745108
>>17745114
Meant to say itch obviously. And last time I checked Churchill wasn’t a polack (nor from Czechia or Austria for that matter who both gladly rejoined Germany btw but never would’ve had to in the first place if diktat of Versailles was more reasonable)

>>17745123
By that logic Hamburg belongs to France since it was the French who built it.

In fact, everything west of the Rhine is French, and everything north of Hamburg is Danish since Schleswig-holstein was a part of the Danish crown.

>>17745124
>And last time I checked Churchill wasn’t a polack
CHURCHILL DIDNT DECLARE WAR ON GERMANY YOU DUMB FUCK

Seriously, how the fuck do you have the balls to even discuss this shit when you cant even get simple facts straight?

>>17745124
>Czechia or Austria for that matter who both gladly rejoined Germany

Yes the Czechs were so grateful, the killed every German who didnt leave after 1945 :')

>>17745108
>erm exqueeze me sir mayhaps i may have some of eastern europe...
ugh no way g*rman!
>ay yo crackaz gibs me dat east europe AND alla Asia n shit, also give up alla yo colonies to be my allies n puppets
y-yes massa soviets us brits will also replace our own people for you and arrest all native resistance!!!!!

>"we must put a stop at German expansionism, they want to take a city in Poland, a whole city, can you believe it?"
>meanwhile
How did early XX century politicians get away with this hipocrisy ?

>>17745139
>muh whataboutism

>>17745139
Those people were brown
Poles are white. That was the disagreement between British imperialists and the Nazis, whether Poles are white enough to count

>>17745139
Actually it was just the corridor as the city of Danzig voted to (re)join Germany.

>>17745139
Again;
The problem with stormfags is that they look at this Danzig issue in a vaccuum and ignore everything leading up to it, because only then does it seem irrational that Britain and Poland doesnt trust Hitler when Hitler says he "only" wants Danzig.

And yeah, no one said Britain and France didnt act on their own cold geopolitical interests, and geopolitical interests are fundementally selfish.
USA isnt going to let China annex Mongolia and Taiwan because "bro you took all that land from the indians, we deserve land too, or else you're a hypocrit".
You think USA is gonna take that as an argument?

>>17745139
It's spelled hypocrisy.

Can it be said that taking Germany's colonies away in the Versailles treaty backfired? Would the Germans have been nearly so aggressive in Europe if they were also busy roving around in the jungle of Cameroon?

>>17745160
imagine germany kept this but lost their european land kek go go germans in the jungle, keeeeeeeeek

>>17745151
>and ignore everything leading up to it
You mean when Germany peacefully annexed Austria a country that was 99% German, the sudeteland that was 99% German and Bohemia which was part of a German state from all its existence ?
Truly concerning, btw I just annexed 1000 trillion km2s of African land into my empire and thats based and justified, I dont even plan to exploit the land I'm not even sure it has resources or if its profitable I just want my country to look bigger on a map lol

>>17745165
>peacefully annexed Austria
Nigga, Nazis paramilitary groups were chimping out and assassinated the Austrian Chancellor

>>17745172
I'm sure the UK,France,Russia and Italy unified as nations with less casualties than 1 dude

>>17745143
Is this supposed to be funny? I not laugh.

>>17745151
The problem is that the UK basically supported Germany on many occasions even against France or Italy. The 30’s were more complicated and the sides were not as clear as post war propaganda might suggest.

>>17745165
Austria is full of Austrians, similar to how Norway is full of Norwegians, and not Swedes.
And Sweden doesn't gave claim on Österbotten in Finland just because many places are ethnic Swedish.

The absurd entitlement only reminds me how the war started, I'd call it catastrophic diplomatic mismanagement, but what to expect from a failed art student and his former wine seller.

1. Churchill was not the PM at the time WW2 in Europe started
2. It has been the national policy of the United Kingdom to never ever let a single other power dominate the continent for more than a century at this point, Napoleon and France learned this the hard way.
3. Nazi Germany was never EVER going to stop at Danzig, their entire ideology describes Poles and other Eastern European ethnic groups in the Soviet Union as "inherently subhuman peoples" that must be exterminated and their lands seized for the continued survival of the German Aryan race.

>>17745126
>>17745130
Stop hair splitting already. Churchill was a MP and very belligerent towards Germany for decades. And if you’d just concede Sudetenland/Danzig should’ve never left Germany in the first place among other unreasonable Versailles stipulations maybe just maybe there’d never be a need for a conflict.

>>17745195
>And if you’d just concede Sudetenland/Danzig should’ve never left Germany in the first place among other unreasonable Versailles stipulations maybe just maybe there’d never be a need for a conflict.
No, Germany lost its pointless conflict. Badly. It's up to you to concede that it could've avoided annihilation by not trying to annex sudentland/danzig

>>17745165
>Thinks a random stretch of Africa and Austria are of equal importance and value
You guys make very poor white nationalists.

>>17745205
>Hitler was worse than the Allies because I'm a racist
Uh?

>>17745193
And then Brits learned the hard way that they are not superior either.

>>17745195
Its not hair splitting, youre just a big fucking dumbass.

>>17745199
How does it feel losing all this over a “polish corridor” ?

>>17745217
>>17745216

>>17744766
>go live in national socialist Germany
Wish I could.
>no better than communists
except for the fact the Nazis never produced a totalitarian surveillance state.
>>17744749
>implying
They did.
>it wasnt going to last
and so the answer to nothing lasting forever is to set them on fire?
>explain how it could have lasted longer
UK wouldnt have been bankrupted and their world spanning depot and base network wouldnt be sold to the US.
>it was in decline
what does this even mean?
>Britain had no viable strategy
the British were the ones behind the national assembly.
>arab nationalism
arab nationalism isnt why they left West Asia lmao.
>full fascist mode
Britian was a liberal democracy when they murdered 10% of the arabs in the Mandate.
>same reason Spanish people died
they didnt, Spanish people died over Spanish territory claimed by Spanish people and Spanish leadership.

>>17745017
>Hitler
>Stalin
>sucking dick
yep its a poolish post

>>17744878
>Also, unlike Germany which was under the leadership of one man without any restraints as a dictator, The UK wasnt. The PM of the UK doesnt not have the power to go to war on his own will. The United States operates the same way, the President needs the consent of congress to enter into a state of war against another nation.
This is why it is easy to say Germany did not want war, they never had to engage in the duplicitous Machiavellianism the democracies did.
It is because of the checks and balances that democracies engage in antagonism, agitation, and escalation.
>>17744924
I have a degree in history, what heterodox books have you read?
Go on, name a single accredited historian who has challenged the court history.
You are obsessed with zoomer historians because you think I am like you, you think I am repeating talking points and the only way you personally think debates go is just two mouth pieces signal boosting two figures in a proxy.
I am doing original research, that is why you are failing to adapt, because youre an NPC and none of the mouthpieces on breadtube have given you marching orders, because you havent been told what to say by someone else you have nothing at all to say.

>>17745079
>>17745067
As you, tranny aviv

>>17745003
>You guys are always so chicken shit in your disposition. Like wanting to sucker punch someone else but crying victim when someone else responds by punching you out, its that sort of nigger mentality.
good description of Britain, America, and Poland.
We judge a tree by its fruits, if Britain was righteous they wouldnt be getting replaced in their homeland and raped to death.
same for America.
If Poland was righteous they wouldnt have lost more land than Germany in both wars combined.
>>17745006
If "what Hitler wants" is peace in Europe and a restoration of a major Pillar of Western Civilization, then why shouldnt Hiter "get what he wants"?
>>17745013
>expanding in their own country
>Britain and France can perpetually enforce their will upon the defeated
we see the fruits of this thinking, Britain and France have lost control of their capitols, Germany has not.
>the corridor was majority Polish
so what? Poles dont deserve to own it, they have no right to it.
Mexicans dont have a right to Texas just because theyre a majority of the people living there.
>same principle
no, the Germans had those places TAKEN FROM THEM. If anything the fact Germany defeated Poland proves Germany's claim is stronger than Poland's and Versailles was unjust for rewarding a non-Western people with Western land.

>>17745022
If they acted rationally then why did their entire country implode?
They were on rations longer than the Germans.
They lost their status as not only world hegemon but European hegemon.
They are being replaced in their own country.

>muh jews
we still havent received an answer, how much jewish influence was present in the UK?
none, some , significant? you keep trying to imply it was zero but why not outright say it? You personally believe there was no jewish lobby in Britian? Is that true yes or not?

Where did the British actually differ from jewish interests regarding Germany?

>>17745040
>immigration and jews
Why do you say this as if Whites are experiencing an existential threat?
>kikes
the term "kike" is being posted by you much more than anyone on the other side.
>paki rape gangs
your post is the only mention of this.
However it is true, British girls experience rape everyday because of poor decisions made by British leadership.
>/pol/
giving /pol/ a monopoly on social problems and racial solutions is exactly why /pol/ expands.
If there is something everyone else denies but /pol/ does not and /pol/ turns out to be right, that is a level of credulity truth itself dreams of.
>>17745058
They didnt, they fought extremely hard and they went down fighting.
Britain won and used their victory to... import rapists and destroy European independence.
>>17745045
We dont have to prove the British Empire would go on forever, we only have to prove it wouldnt have imploded.
Which is more than self evident, as their global network being sold to America made even managing the decline an impossibility.
>>17745060
This isnt what happened. I think you're referencing his "proven at Nuremberg" video which he made a decade ago to discredit the Nuremberg trials (which you may not question in Europe without legal retribution) by showing how many absurdities one has to believe to avoid prison in Europe.

>>17745073
>its ok when Britain does it!!!
>>17745108
no one is looking at it in a vacuum, your inability to see why Danzig is the most retarded thing in the line of Rhineland, Anschluss, Sudete, to go to war over does not mean people are ignoring context.
>it only seems irrational
it is irrational.
Britain has no reason to want a weak Germany with a growing USSR.
Britain has no investment or interest in Austria, Czechoslovakia or Poland.
Why does Britain even bother participating? It would be one thing if a long time British ally, business interest, or holding was under German influence, but they werent.
It was Poland and Czechoslovakia, these were fake countries put together as a yoke around another country.
>>17745118
The German ultimatum to Poland was a middle finger to an obstinate belligerent that already mobilized their military and stopped negotiating a long time ago.
>also took more than Danzig
They asked for a peace conference when they ONLY had Danzig.
They took more because Why not restore the borders of the country they were born in?
They had already gone to war, why hold themselves to their most generous offer?
>>17745123
>justification for taking Russia was Catharine the Great was Prussian
This never happened.
They never "took Russia".
They went east for various reasons none of them were pushing Tsarist claims.
The chief reason at that moment was resource acquisition.
>mein kampf
This was a prison diary speculating about Europe in 2100.
>>17745126
The French were never in Hamburg.

>>17745277
>This is why it is easy to say Germany did not want war,
lol exactly. Hitler dragged Germany into stupid wars on his own petty reasons. This is why Germany had to use the draft so much more than other nations, why so many Germans surrendered at a higher rate, and probably why Germany lost. Compared to the United Kingdom or United States which entered the war in a much higher national consensus.
>muh degree
not an argument. Also, if youre going to bring this up than post it with a timestamp, just block out your name for privacy.

>>17745291
>We judge a tree by its fruits
Heres your fruits bro

>>17743519
>>17743722
I'm holding my hands overhead in triumph. Time to shower.

>>17741422 Hitler became power mad.

>>17745397
> Compared to the United Kingdom or United States which entered the war in a much higher national consensus
War in Britain was enormously unpopular in 1939 which is why the phony war happened

>>17741422
>The real question is “why did Germany wager their entire reich on Danzig?”

It was on the verge of economic ruin from six years of massive and unsustainable overspending on rearmament and needed a constant stream of plunder to stay afloat.

>>17745971
They knew the military buildup was unsustainable as early as 1936 but continued anyway. There was an intention for a big war involving at least France and Russia way before Danzig

>>17745053
Bet you idiots watch Hakim

>>17741367 (OP)
War was a fait accompli after Poland got rolled, the real question is why we had no peace after June 40, but maybe that peace hinged on Poland for some reason? Which would have been retarded either way, given that the Allies barely lifted a finger to help them.

>pic rel

is the reason why we had ww2

>>17745971
Not really, they had the czech and austrian reserves + austerity measures lined up, the truth is Hitler knew he could beat Poland and knew that France wouldn't hold out for very long if they even bothered to attack (they didn't). If he grabbed Denmark and Norway then no one could dictate terms to him, if he got France then the war was over, but it wasn't. UK committed to total war and sold the empire to win it. Now Europe is in a devastated state. Sovs were like the doomsday timer ticking down in the background, he had no real plan for them, as evidenced by barb.

>>17746521
Youre wrong on several things.
Firstly, Hitler did not anticipate that he could beat France, the German general staff were more convinced there was no way to win in the west.
The whole reason for the extremely risky Ardenne offensive (which the generals at first refused to implement) was becaue it was Germanys only shot at winning.

Secondly, Britain suing for peace in 1940 does not determine whether Europe is destroyed.
Hitler had already decided to invade the USSR as soon as the French campaign was concluded.
I'd say his decision to invade the USSR would have been even stronger, had UK actually exited the war after France surrendered.
So UK exiting the war does not void the eastern front.
I dont see how it could void American support to the USSR either.
The majority of Lend-Lease came through Vladivostok in the Pacific, so there is no pre-condition for the UK being involved.
The Germans underestimated the Soviets and overestimated themselves, im willing to argue the Eastern Front plays out similarily.

Thirdly, I have strong reason to believe that UK and France might even declare war on Germany again, especially if Germany is attempting to carve out a Mongolian empire, France wouldnt settle for that. They declared war on Germany in 1939 to prevent German expansionism. They have the exact same reason for that in 1941.

Fourthly, you say Germany has to invade the USSR because they are an immediate threat. While this is true, it begs question; who created this situation? Germany did. They created it when they removed Poland and signed off several other states to the Soviets in 1939, they now created a situation where Germany is vulnerable and Stalin is encouraged to be aggressive because he has free hands. The Germans were in way obligated to invade the USSR but it's because of a situation they created.

>>17746562
I mean it is sort of a common trivia point nowadays to point out the doubts of OKW, but to most rational observers the weaknesses of the French military were evident. People within the British high command spoke extensively about this in the interwar years, this is perhaps chiefly evidenced by the fact they were barely able to withstand the German march in 1914.

>Secondly, Britain suing for peace in 1940 does not determine whether Europe is destroyed. Hitler had already decided to invade the USSR as soon as the French campaign was concluded.
Again that feels like an oversimplification, almost nothing in this time period was guaranteed, the only reason Germany went to war with the USSR was because they could not secure a peace with the UK and the USSR demanded the Dardanelles. Among other factors we have their pretty consistent pleas for peace following the successful conclusion of the western campaigns. This mollifies your point about the U.S involvement but U.S aid was not vitally important for the USSR barring the grain they shipped over.
>Thirdly, I have strong reason to believe that UK and France might even declare war on Germany again, especially if Germany is attempting to carve out a Mongolian empire, France wouldnt settle for that. They declared war on Germany in 1939 to prevent German expansionism. They have the exact same reason for that in 1941.
It's very hard to predict what happens post peace 1940, my assumption would be that we get a sort of continental system emerging given that usury is outlawed, whether Germany was better positioned to resist English encroachment than Napoleonic France was is a matter of debate. Most world leaders at the time thought so, which is why they threw their lots in with the falangists.

>>17746562
>Fourthly, you say Germany has to invade the USSR because they are an immediate threat. While this is true, it begs question; who created this situation? Germany did.

Sure in some of that it was user error, a continued existence of Poland would have practically guaranteed that no soviet threat would come while the union was under Stalin's control. This poses another question though, given that Poland as it was was basically a LoN puppet state, and given the LoN hostility towards Germany and its new economic system (a hostility which they similarly reserved for the soviet system), would it be wiser to choose the devil you know as opposed to the devil you don't. Germany thought it understood Russia, they were amiable in the inter-war years and the sovs even helped with secret rearmament, the LoN was something entirely much more sinister.

>>17744926
>why there were separated in the first place
krauts were forced to let go of the land that they stole and cease their discrimination and planned genocide of Polish people. It happened because krauts did their favourite thing (losing war)

>>17746579
>German march in 1914
Hitlers Germany was considerably weaker than Imperial Germany, it's not even close. This is just a distorted perception from post-war propaganda, but Imperial Germany was far more a militaristic state than nazi Germany was. 1939 Germany had just completed a rearmament from scratch so it was still very much weaker.
You're just making up arguments at this point, which arent rooted in reality. Ask anywhere, Imperial Germany was far strong than Hitlers German in every comparison.

Also, German success in 1914 relied on the surprise attack through Belgium. In 1940, the allies anticipated a German attack through Belgium. Attacking through the Ardenne was extremely risky and should have failed, it only succeded because of astronomical circumstances coming together.

>the only reason Germany went to war with the USSR was because they could not secure a peace with the UK and the USSR demanded the Dardanelles.
The only one oversimplifying here is you, saying Hitler only attacked the USSR because of the UK involvement.
You know as well as me that there was a great number of reasons why Hitler found it to be impossible for Germany and USSR to co-exist, and Hitler wasnt going to wait for the Soviets to industrialize and rearm. Also Hitler was confident in victory because of gross inaccurate intel by his command. For as long as Hitler is confident in victory, Barbarossa is materialised.

> U.S aid was not vitally important for the USSR barring the grain they shipped over
Grain?
This clearly shows you have absolutely no idea what the hell you're talking about. The food that USA sent over was almost entirely high-protein conservated food, i.e not grain.
https://warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/economics/staff/mharrison/public/lendlease.pdf
Mark Harrison is the most prominent historian on Lend-Lease. It's so anooying how Hitler-apologists are always the least knowing.
Also, real weight of Lend-Lease was the quality of good, not the quantity.

>>17746626
>Hitlers Germany was considerably weaker than Imperial Germany, it's not even close.
Sure they were weaker but by no means less capable than their counter parts in 1914, in fact they were arguably more capable. It was not a superiority of firepower that brought them victory in the Ardennes, but rather a tactical mobility that the allies rejected. The Luftwaffe was much more capable at this time too but that is by virtue of the Ruhr not being blasted into smithereens, and advantage that the allies did not capitalize on until the result of the war was already a foregone conclusion.
>You know as well as me that there was a great number of reasons why Hitler found it to be impossible for Germany and USSR to co-exist
Hitler had the soviets as an ideological enemy sure, but the issues with the USSR wasn't a difference in ideology necessarily. He knew that the soviets would not attack so boldly into Europe were there not a continued war. He thus knew that continuing the war with Allies as his primary focus would invite a soviet betrayal, allowing them to place peacemaker in this hypothetical and thus spread bolshevism through means of subterfuge.
>Also Hitler was confident in victory because of gross inaccurate intel by his command. For as long as Hitler is confident in victory, Barbarossa is materialised.
The Abwehr was treacherous, but their valuations of Germany's enemies were competing among several other burgeoning intelligence services the Reich endogenously produced through various Reichsleiters. Canaris, British asset that he was, has his role vastly overstated, but to believe that Hitler was confident of victory is to partially accept the Reich's own propaganda on the matter. Hitler was by no means confident, he had to project that to his subordinates, but it was farcical and Himmler's many justifications over the following years prove that.

>>17746562
Had Britain sued for peace in 1940 or 39 there wouldn’t be an invasion of the USSR. Maybe eventually but the Germans wouldn’t have acted anywhere near as quickly as they did. Furthermore the USSR was always bound for catastrophe.
The UK voids the major reason for the Ostfront. Without the UK there is no need for a huge resource stockpile to fight the UK.
>foreign aid would always save the USSR
Why?
>They’d win
They wouldn’t. The Luftwaffe at 100% strength and the German Navy (built almost entirely for the Baltic but forced to play Atlantic tard games) ruling the Baltic, there isn’t a way forward for the USSR even if they received lend lease, Germany would overwhelm them and at various points they did have a manpower advantage. There’s no reason to believe the British would always in all cases inform the Soviets of German operations.
>carve out a Mongolian empire
Can you speak in actual terms and not PDX meme terms?
>Germany created this
No they didn’t. What is Germany supposed to do? Go to war with the USSR in 1940 over Finland and the Baltic states?

>>17746626
>Grain? This clearly shows you have absolutely no idea what the hell you're talking about. The food that USA sent over was almost entirely high-protein conservated food, i.e not grain.
It is often transcribed into shorthand as grain, a fault of my sources perhaps, either way the food is what kept the sovs afloat considering they burned the harvests. This was the aspect of lend-lease which helped the soviets the most, all else flows from food but the soviets were also not lacking in industrial capacity especially after evacuating assets east.

>>17746613
20% of pollacks died during the war

>>17746009
This was never true. Their economy was larger than that of the UK and France.
>>17745400
>people die in war
How tragic. Anyway the Germans fought against someone who used their victory to enact White genocide.
>>17745971
Nope. Their economy was third strongest in the world.
>>17745397
Nope. Hitler tried to avoid conflict.
>draft
They were severely outnumbered. This is not evidence they wanted war.
>surrendered
Basically never unless they were surrounded or had no means to realistically fight back.
>compared to the countries protected by water
What about them? They have never even experienced 1/100th the pressure Germany was under.
The last army to invade England was in the 1680s, it was 20,000 strong and 100,000 Anglos surrendered without a major fight.

>>17746673
no Poles die, that's a Jewish lie. Germans didn't kill anybody
But we still genocided 30 million of them and kicked them out kekaaaarooooooooo

>>17746674
poltrannies really believe this shit? no wonder they are the laughing stock

>>17746663
>a tactical mobility that the allies rejected

The tactics were yet untested, hence it had no weight on paper. We are discussing what the German and allies generals believed to be true, and they could only go by what was on paper at the time, not some retrospective analysis on what we know happened.
And on paper, Germany was vastly outgunned and outnumbered. The British and French outweighted the Germans in every category of production, manpower, material, resources and armament. The only asset Germany had was their tactical superiority, which no one knew was a superiority at the time, not even the Germans. But even so, their tactical superiority likely wouldnt have been enough without the successful Ardenne sneak attack, which should have failed but spectacularily succeeded due to circumstances. You thus have two factors that couldnt be weighted as a factor. The point is that Britain and France declared war on Germany believing it was going to be an easy fight, and the Germans desperately tried to avoid war with the west, tried to make peace with the west, and had an extremely pessimistic view on any chance of Germany winning an offensive in the west.

>the soviets would not attack so boldly into Europe were there not a continued war.
He also knew that time favors the Soviets. Like I said before, Hitler isnt going to wait for Stalin to industrialize and rearm. The reason Barbarossa was rushed was because there was a window of opportunity. Come 1942 and Germany will not be able to overpower the USSR. The question is whether Hitler can live with that idea or not, and thus maintain the Ribbentrop pact into 1942.

But like I said before, Hitler had already decided in mid-1940 to invade the USSR, based on their catastrophic performance in Finland, and Germanys success in France. Lebensraum and autarky and all that also dictated his prowl for an opportunity to materalise his visions.

>The Abwehr
The Abwehr did not plan Barbarossa, German high command did.

>>17746764
>poltranny this
>poltranny that

/pol/ does not exist, it is merely a figment of your imagination.

>>17746666
>Had Britain sued for peace in 1940 or 39 there wouldn’t be an invasion of the USSR
Doubt.

>Why would Lend Lease always save the USSR?
Because Barbarossa isnt going to succeed just because UK is out. The failure of Barbarossa wasnt dictated by English interference. The Germans had underestimated Red Army strength, with or without the UK. They dont capture Moscow.
And when they dont capture Moscow, Lend-Lease will begin to kick in, and you get huge influx of trucks, tanks, food, textiles, fuel, metals, rubber, scopes, radios, etc.
And with that, the Germans are in the same mess in this alt-1942 as they were irl.

> the German Navy (built almost entirely for the Baltic but forced to play Atlantic tard games) ruling the Baltic,
The Baltics were never contested in Barbarossa so I dont see how this is a key-game changer.

>There’s no reason to believe the British would always in all cases inform the Soviets of German operations.
The assumption may very well be that there is no reason to believe the British wouldnt inform the Soviets of German operations, even if they had accepted peace.
All you do is assume, with absolutely no merit, and treat your assumption as facts rather than dubious speculations, while firmly dismissing everything that's counter to the assumption that everything will work in Germanys favor.

>Can you speak in actual terms and not PDX meme terms?
I was paraphrasing because a state that streches from the French border to the Persian border is a Mongolian-esque empire. You think Britain and France declared war on Germany to stop them from expanding in eastern Europe, but wouldnt declare war on Germany to stop them from expanding to the Black sea?

>>17746780
>The tactics were yet untested, hence it had no weight on paper.
They still had real weight, this is what granted Germany victory and it was a key part of the axis plan for "Sieg im Westen". The Germans won because the allies underestimated the same military technologies they pioneered. Pretending like this was all a fluke is stupid, were it a fluke Germany would not have been so bold as to attack, their high command was the upper crust of the most accomplished European commanders since Napoleon.
>He also knew that time favors the Soviets. Like I said before, Hitler isnt going to wait for Stalin to industrialize and rearm.
This was not at all clear at the time, Soviet might was undeniable but it relied on the continued existence of the SSR. Considering what Stalin had just been doing to ukrops and his own generals, existence for 5 or maybe more years was entirely uncertain. The allies forced him to move his time tables up because, as we know now, they had two masters.
>Come 1942 and Germany will not be able to overpower the USSR.
Stalin's plan as outlined in his may '41 speech was to invade western Europe come summer of 42, which is what finally motivated Germany to actually invade.
> Abwehr did not plan Barbarossa, German high command did.
with information from the Abwehr

>>17746811
>They still had real weight
You still dont get it.
Are you stupid?
It had no weight on paper because it was still untested.
How can you factor something that wasnt tested?
The German generals nor the allied generals did not have any idea how well German divisions would perform against a modern enemy.
If they dont know, then how can it be factored when making plans and preparations for an offensive?

>Pretending like this was all a fluke
The Ardenne offensive was a fluke because it only succeded due to outstanding circumstances outside of Germanys control.
All the French had to do was put two divisions at Sedan, and the entire offensive would have collapsed.
Even the German generals saw this and firmly rejected the plan. It was only approved because Hitler forced it to be approved, but few generals believed it would work.

>This was not at all clear at the time
Yes it was.
In fact it was what motivated Germany in ww1 as well.
During the 1913 war cabinet meeting, German cabinet express desire for war with Russia as soon as possible because Russian industrialization and modernization will put Russia irreverisble ahead of Germany. Hitler saw what German government before him had seen.

And they were all proven right because Russia (the Soviets) did become a global power when industrialization was achieved.

>Stalin's plan as outlined in his may '41 speech was to invade western Europe come summer of 42, which is what finally motivated Germany to actually invade.
Why are you making shit up for an argument?

>with information from the Abwehr
Nope, Abwehr did not plan Barbarossa, how hard is it to get it through your thick skull? This information is literally available on wikipedia you stupid moron.
The German generals planned Barbarossa. Paulus was the only general who estimated Red Army strenght to be near 300 divisions, while all other Germans estimated it to be 150 division. Paulus was right. Paulus was not a member of the Abwehr.

>>17746783
>we don't exist stop calling us out
Just go back to your shithole and this won't happen.

>>17745339
>They took more because Why not restore the borders of the country they were born in?
They took more territory than Germany had, for example Łódź and these territories had Polish majority even according to both Imperial Germany and Nazi censuses.

>>17741367 (OP)
Because hitermonkey annexed Czechoslovakia after putting on the whole song and dance about how he's totally not going to do it if they hand over Suddetenland
If he didn't, France and Britain would have bullied Poland into letting him annex Danzig - but the point is moot because the whole plan was to annex Poland

>>17746890
He never annexed Czechoslovakia.
>>17746848
>Łódź
Infrastructure was built by German industrialists. Also who cares? It’s not Hitler’s responsibility to give Poland land, also Hitler literally offered to restore the Polish state minus the claims of Imperial Germany.
>more poles lived there
Don’t care. Living somewhere doesn’t give you a claim to it. The goths also lived there. So too did an Iranic people.

>>17746808
Barbarossa would succeed more if the UK was out and Barbarossa wasn’t their only chance to win.
Moscow was only won due to British lend lease. You don’t even know what determined the battled. German tanks couldn’t pierce the British heavy armor the Soviets had deployed.
>lend lease will kill in
Why?
More naval power dedicated to the Baltic would see every state bordering that sea reinforced by heavy gun ships.
>we have to assume British would continue to aid the Soviets
Why?
>you think they wouldn’t declare a war
If they acted in their own best interests no.
The “great game” never actually saw prolonged great power conflicts. Before the jews ran England the English made peace with other great power more than they prosecuted a war to an unconditional conclusion.

>>17746845
Do you actually go on /pol/? They don’t really have Hitler threads.

>>17747011
>also Hitler literally offered to restore the Polish state minus the claims of Imperial Germany.
>more poles lived there
>Hitler wants
>Hitler says
Hitler does not get to make the rules.
The use of force was not going to be legitimized. It's that simple.

>He never annexed Czechoslovakia.
Semantics.
Call it colonized then.

>Living somewhere doesn’t give you a claim to it.
Oh so Hitlers claims were illegitimate then.

>>17747019
>Moscow was only won due to British lend lease.
Ok
Proof?

>Why?
>More naval power dedicated to the Baltic would see every state bordering that sea reinforced by heavy gun ships.
Because Von Leeb overran the Baltics in less than a month.

>Why should we assume British would continue to aid the Soviets
Why shouldnt we?

>If they acted in their own best interests no
Preventing a Germany the size of the mongol empire is in their interest.

>>17741367 (OP)
Because Hitler had shown himself to be a two faced liar and had to be taken down.

>>17741367 (OP)
Neither

>>17747011
>Hitler literally offered to restore the Polish state minus the claims of Imperial Germany.
So Hitler wanted to annex 40% of Poland which had 90% of Polish majority, even according to Germans, and where Imperial Germany engaged in racist apartheid and ethnic cleansing? Wow, wonder why Poland rejected this "generous" "peace offer"

>>17746666
>ruling the Baltic, there isn’t a way forward for the USSR even if they received lend lease, Germany would overwhelm them and at various points they did have a manpower advantage
Kek, German economy was dependent on Soviet supplies, at no point in time Germans were in position to win this war.

>>17747234
Thats not 40% of Poland.
Hitler wanted very little from Poland and Poland only lost big because they are somehow unable to be diplomatic or engage in good faith with their neighbors.
>racist apartheid and ethnic cleansing
none of this happened and Poles and Germans are the same race.
>"generous peace offer"
well Poland lost more land than Germany in both wars combined so, maybe Poland is the problem afterall.

>>17747238
>heckin nazis could never win dont you feel silly for being a nationalist? now adopt a suicidal immigration policy
can you stop arguing from the Hoi4 perspective?
Farmers beat the US without setting a single foot on US soil.
wars are not spreadsheets and calculators.

>>17747374
>muh VC
Ah yes keep parroting the meme and ignore how the NVA was a professional well established force for decades supplied by the Soviets.

>>17747040
>proof
I already told you, the deciding factor was the British heavy tanks.
>why shouldnt we
because we dont want to make assumptions?
>preventing a Germany the size of the PLC is in their interest
how?
I dont think you understand that "The Great Game" never actually saw any great power conflicts which werent resolved by small proxy engagements.
The concept of going to war over """"""interests"""""" whatever that means is a very new concept. What specific interest are you talking about?
Britain's biggest threat during the Great Game was outlined by Mackinder and Britain only fought one war to prevent this and it was solved in one (1) campaign that did not see unconditional surrender on either side.

>>17747028
>Hitler does not get to make the rules
True, I do because I won the war, and I say Hitler is right.
>force was not going to be legitimized
what do you mean? It already was. Poland used force to claim Zaolzie from Czechoslovakia, Lithuania used force to claim Memel from France, America was using force to protect economic trade interests specifically fruit pricing in Central America.
Force was legitimized.
>semantics
nope.
Annexed is a specific term, it never happened.
>colonized
and can we see these German colonies?
>Hitlers claims were illegitimate
no because the Germans had legitimate inheritance claims, the Poles merely lived there, they hadnt taken it by conquest nor did they have noble titles asserting claim over the land.

>>17747378
I am not familiar with the NVA invading washington DC, just how far reaching was this Hochiminh trail?

>>17747390
>backpeddalling
So you agree it was a professionally trained army and not "rice farmers" correct?

>>17747371
>Thats not 40% of Poland.
You are right, it's 48%
>Hitler wanted very little from Poland
Only it's total eradication and genocide of its population is not little.
>none of this happened
Both German Empire and Nazi Germany engaged in racist apartheid and ethnic cleansing of Poles.
>Poles and Germans are the same race.
Nit according to Nazis who classified Poles as subhumans targeted for extermination

>>17747386
>no because the Germans had legitimate inheritance claims, the Poles merely lived there
LOL, this is akin to "I saw it in a dream"
Curious what legitimate inheritance Germans had to 90% Polish territories like Poznan or Warsaw

>>17746841
>How can you factor something that wasn't tested?
It was tested in the negative, world war 1 had showed the unviability of static warfare infantry based break throughs. Germany may have been the first to really use an armored spearhead to its full effect but saying it was untested is ignoring the mechanics of the plan. The untested bit was the armored formations, not the offensive itself, and the armored formations were only untested in terms of their ability to maintain a break through.
>The Ardenne offensive was a fluke because it only succeded due to outstanding circumstances outside of Germanys control. All the French had to do was put two divisions at Sedan, and the entire offensive would have collapsed.
They didn't though, Germany correctly reading the ineptitude of their opponent and exploiting a weak point doesn't mean the planning was miraculous.
>It was only approved because Hitler forced it to be approved, but few generals believed it would work.
Some of Germany's best* generals believed it would work.
>Yes it was.
Stalin's grip on power was not iron, hell even with Barbarossa occurring exactly as it did in our time had Germany simply put more effort into creating a "Free Russian Army" would have likely caused upwards of 1/3-1/4 of the Red Army to desert. They chauvinistically turned away the White emigrees and Vlasov until it was too late and they were getting desperate.
>Why are you making shit up for an argument?
The May 41 speech is very real, he gave it to the general staff, even called the plan Operation Thunderstorm or something like that. It has been practically scrubbed from the internet given that it sort of affirms the barb was pre-emptive strike and for some reason history is only acceptable if it conforms to our narratives. Do I think barb was pre-emptive? Not in the immediate sense, but an Bolshevik invasion was coming.

>>17746841
>Nope, Abwehr did not plan Barbarossa, how hard is it to get it through your thick skull? This information is literally available on wikipedia you stupid moron.
Very hostile and for what reason? Yes the German generals planned Barbarossa but OKH got their info on Russian military strength from the Abwehr. No canaris did not sit down and plan a military operation, but he did give the bad information to those who did.

>>17746845
Practically no one on /pol/ actually discusses Hitler. It's a board where either you think Xi is based and red pilled because you've been duped by chicoms, or you think Putin is based and red pilled because you've been duped by vatniks, or you think Trump (Netanyahu) is based and red pilled because you have fluid in your brain. Everyone else is an Indian.

>>17748547
>genocide maniac
Netanyahu is new Churchill

>>17747468
Theres no backpedal, these were rice farmers.
If they had been a professional force they would have been a standing army, they werent, they were part time soldiers called to service as irregulars fighting as irregulars.
also afghans were and still are dirt farmers and farmed dirt while actively fighting lol, nice that you ignore this kek and also pretend the NVA was the only active combat force in Vietnam opposing the US.

>>17747498
General Government wasnt annexed tho.
>total eradication and genocide
nice head canon, this never happened.
>racist apartheid and ethnic cleansing
nope, this also never happened.
Poles being agrarians in an agrarian society where nobles ruled over estates that serfs worked on, this is not apartheid, nor is it raicst.
Poles are also not a separate race from Germans.
>classified Poles as subhumans for extermination
again no, the Official racial policy of the NSDAP was outlined in Rein's Race and Culture of our ancestors, Poles were attributed the status of Ost Baltid and a pure strain at that, considered Aryan and kindred to the Germans.
>>17747501
The Germans owned the titles to those regions of Poland.
Those had been German families with titled estates.

>>17747498
>Nit (sp?) according to Nazis who classified Poles as subhumans targeted for extermination
Yeah the Nazi racial doctrine did not classify Poles as such, no matter how you slice it the Poles that did die during the war were not executed for being Polish at an organized level except during the Warsaw Uprisings and I think in retaliation for the assassination of Heydrich, but all three of those were primarily going after Jews. A majority of Poles were actually classified as ethnic Germans following the dissolution of the Polish government in October '39.

>>17747071
>Hitler had shown himself to be a two faced liar
Like every politician ever.
>had to be taken down
Destroy your whole empire just to take down one liar. Makes total sense.
Churchill was a lunatic, just read his writings on what what he thought about war, how much he loved it. And he had some weird obsession over wanting to trying to destroy Germany (and also ally with Turkey, his memoirs can't stop fucking mentioning Turkey even though they were irrelevant in WW2).

>>17748808
Gallipoli broke him probably.

>>17746562
>Fourthly, you say Germany has to invade the USSR because they are an immediate threat. While this is true, it begs question; who created this situation? Germany did. They created it when they removed Poland and signed off several other states to the Soviets in 1939, they now created a situation where Germany is vulnerable and Stalin is encouraged to be aggressive because he has free hands

There's more to that - Germany was giving Stalin technology (blueprints, instructors) in return for raw resources (grain, oil, minerals, steel etc.)

>>17748808
>Like every politician ever.
Most politicians weren't actively threatening to annex most of continental Europe.

>Destroy your whole empire just to take down one liar.
Most of the Empire that seceded after the war was in the process of becoming independent. Winning WW2, specifically breaking Japan, allowed them to decolonize in a way that was beneficial to the UK people and ensure the spread of communism was stopped.

WW1 destroyed the British Empire. WW2 allowed the British people to accept that destruction on their own terms. It was by every measure the correct thing to do, accepting that times have changed is a hallmark of maturity and sanity.

>>17742051
Churchill was deep in debt, the rothschilds helped him with the debt, and then he decided that total war against Germany was a good idea, actually.

Keen observers will note that while Britain did declare war against Germany over Poland, they did nothing to defend it.

>>17749159
>WW2 allowed the British people to accept that destruction on their own terms.
I saw many Anglo copes in all these years but this is one of the best so far.

>>17747380
>I already told you, the deciding factor was the British heavy tanks.
So no proof? Just you making shit up.
If Barbarossa failed because British tanks, it would be quite a critical fact. Funny how it's mentioned virtually nowhere.
So yeah, I call bullshit. You're a liar. And for as long as this is a lie, then my point stands that it's highly likely Barbarossa still fails even without UK because UK was a non-factor in Barbarossa.

>because we dont want to make assumptions?
You're the one making the assumption that Britain wont feed the Soviets intel on Germany, nor declare war on Germany again.
So it's okay for you to make assumptions but it's not okay for anyone else to do it?
Why are you like this?

>I dont think you understand that "The Great Game" never actually saw any great power conflicts which werent resolved by small proxy engagements.
You're literally just talking nonsense now.
You want to convince people and change the narrative?
You're not doing a very good job.
Everyone who reads your shit is just gonna reply "?????????".

It's a fundemental fact that Britain and France would never have accepted a Germany stretching from the Alps to the Urals. They went to war in 1939 just to prevent Germany absorbing Poland, we have every reason to believe they would do so again to prevent Germany from absorbing Russia.

>>17747386
>True, I do because I won the war, and I say Hitler is right.
Hitler can do whatever he wants but there is going to be consequences for his actions = war.
Just because Hitler says and wants something, doesnt mean everyone is going to roll with it.
Hitler does not get to make the rules


> Poland used force to claim Zaolzie from Czechoslovakia, Lithuania used force to claim Memel from France, America was using force to protect economic trade interests specifically fruit pricing in Central America.
None of these were invasions. Even Germany got away with Memel and Czechia. Do you realise this? He actually got away with it, even tho is pissed off Britain and France.
But he then invaded Poland, resulting in hundred of thousand of deaths, to impose his will.
Force like that was not going to be legitimized.

>Annexed is a specific term, it never happened.
It's still semantics. I can call theft a trade, still doesnt change the fact that it was theft.
German government had complete authority over the Czechs.

>and can we see these German colonies?
Even Hitler himself labeled Czechia a "protectorate", which is essentially what a colony is labeled.

>no because the Germans had legitimate inheritance claims, the Poles merely lived there,
Can this argument be applied on the Germans too?

>>17748536
>It was tested in the negative, world war 1 had showed the unviability of static warfare infantry based break throughs.
Why are you dancing around the fact that German tactics in ww2 were regarded as unique.
It's common knowledge.
Yet you treat it like it's supposed to be news-flash.

>They didn't though, Germany correctly reading the ineptitude of their opponent and exploiting a weak point doesn't mean the planning was miraculous.
Here is why it was miraculous
1. The allies had captured the Ardenne offensive plans and could then have shifted their entire strategy. The Germans were aware that the allies had captured the plans but had no better option but to proceed.

2. Belgium has a military pact with France, which they voided right before the outbreak of ww2 specifically to avoid a German invasion, which stalled allied defensive plans. that would have joined the maginot line with the Ardenne.

3. A single traffic jam could have paralyzed the German spearhead in the winding narrow roads

4. The French airforce was observing the Ardenne forest but poor weather grounded the airforce the day of the planned invasion. Seeing how meteorology was primitive at the time, this was pure luck for the Germans.

5. A single airstrike at the bottleneck collumns would have jammed the entire invasion and caused devastating casualties.

6. Allies did detect the Ardenne offensive with reports of massing German armor and supply convoys. Gamelin personally dismissed it (i.e the offensive succeded because one man reasoned otherwise).

7. The Dyle plan ignored placing divisions at Sedan, something which was unknown to the Germans, and Hitler nearly called off the plan several times for fear that Sedan would be defended.

I literally could continue but 2000 word limit.

>Some of Germany's best* generals believed it would work.
And most of Germanys best generals believed it would fail.

>NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO YOU SHOULD HAVE JUST LET ME TAKE OVER EUROPE THIS IS UNFAIIIIIIIRRRRRRRRRRRR
what kind of fucking crybaby mentality is this?, a war of conquest (i.e: disrupting the balance of power) was never ever supposed to be easy, did nazi sympathizers unironically expect the other european powers to just stand by and let them do it?

and what's with the anger over Great Britain in particular?, they aren't the only ones who didn't declare war over Poland, so did France too, but they seem to not be discussed too much, its only those anglos.

>>17749576
>and what's with the anger over Great Britain in particular?

It's the usual Russian seething, Brits dominated them for centuries and continue to do so

>>17749576
For some reason, stormfags low-key recognize that it's in France geopolitical interest to prevent Germany from blobbing, and preserve the status-quo stability.

>>17749229
>most of Germanys best generals believed it would fail
The German generals were a bunch of limp wristed nay saying pessimistic nancy boys. Except when they were given command, then they stoically assured the Führer that they can do it.
>5000 words on how Germany only succeeded because of all the mistakes the French made
Hmm, and then Germany went on to destroy even more Soviet divisions and take more ground and give the British a whipping after whipping in the desert. It's almost like they knew what they were doing and were good at it.

>>17749576
>and what's with the anger over Great Britain in particular?
Central / eastern Europe was never Britain's sphere of influence, it's peculiar to say the least that they would go to total war over it. Especially when the last war had been fought over some eastern Europe territorial nonsense and had been so utterly devastating and unjustified.
>so did France too, but they seem to not be discussed too much, its only those anglos
France was completely mentally castrated by WW1. They couldn't even go take a piss without Britain's approval. They had a military alliance with Czechoslovakia and they flat out broke it just because Britain said jump.

>>17749607
>The German generals were a bunch of limp wristed nay saying pessimistic nancy boys.
Ok
Still doesnt change the fact that most of the German command did not have faith in Case Yellow

>Hmm, and then Germany went on to destroy even more Soviet divisions and take more ground and give the British a whipping after whipping in the desert. It's almost like they knew what they were doing and were good at it.
Ok
Still doesnt change the fact that before Case Yellow, both the allies and the Germans were unsure about the success of their doctrine, since their only frame of reference was against third-rate Polish military that got double-screwed by the Soviets.
After Case Yellow and Case Red, both the British, the Soviets and the Germans knew that Wehrmacht had a tactical superiority.

>>17741367 (OP)
They just made something up so they could declare their war. People are starting to wake up, starting to see that Hitler just wanted peace. After all, it was the UK that declared on him.

>>17749613
>did not have faith in Case Yellow
But they did have faith in repeating the Schlieffen Plan (!!!). Kind of brings into question their reasoning and their faith.

>>17748626
>a majority of the fighting done was purely by VC
Wrong.

>>17748626
>afghans were actively fighting
Now that is a good one lmao

>>17749621
Because going through Belgium was the most reasonable decision, they regarded Manstein/Hitlers idea of going through the Ardenne as madness.
And yeah, the fact that they had more faith in essentially repeating the Schlieffen Plan (but now with far less manpower and material, and with inferior armament), kinda says a lot about how much faith they really had in the western campaign in general.

Again, the whole reason why Hitler essentially veto the Ardenne plan was because it was Germanys only realistic shot at winning in the west, since they were unaware whether they really had tactical superiority over the allies or not. On paper they were outmatched, so a risky gamble was worth it.

>>17749636
>the whole reason why Hitler essentially veto the Ardenne plan was because it was Germanys only realistic shot at winning in the west
I'm not sure about that. France was one step from a civil war and the support for fascism was considerable.

>>17749742
You guys are getting more and more retarded with every post. You want to change the narrative but I feel dumber with every reply I read.

>>17749752
Between 6-10 million refugees fled from eastern France when the Germans attacked. France was not ready for war.

>>17741367 (OP)
Poland was a military junta that was trying to ethnically cleanse the ethnic German provinces that it occupied as per Versailles treaty, probably egged on by warmongering freemasons like Churchill and FDR desperate to ignite another world war since the previous one ended without enriching their central banker owners enough.

>>17749627
>do nothing
>win
wow the Taliban really knew how to play ZOG.
I guess Hitler was right, it really is a question of Will.
>>17749624
who are you quoting?
by the way, what was the most common profession for men serving in the NVA when they werent in active service, please remind me.

>>17749576
who are you quoting?
Why didnt they launch a war to destroy Germany when Germany was formed by Prussia?
If it was so bad, whyd they wait until there was a jewish lobby to act harmony with jewish interests?
>disrupting the balance of power
except Germany was a necessary balance to the USSR.
>stand by and let them do it
>Danzig
>Europe
What did she mean by this?
>France
France accepted peace, England did not.
>>17749585
>stormfags
boogeyman.

It is just objectively true the Germans were territorial revanchists, not conquerors.

Why didnt France and England declare war on the USSR which blobbed massively? Why didnt they declare war on Poland which also blobbed and became the pre-eminent Heartland power?
Why was it only the country that challenged world jewry?

>>17749215
>Consequences = national suicide
its completely against the English character to engage in a deathmatch in which they die only to spite their enemy.
>doesnt mean everyone is going to roll with it
So if Hitler wants to build a large building in Berlin he should consult Britain or else Britain is going to hold the White race hostage and throw in with hostile anti-European powers?
>Hitler does not get to make the rules
I do, and I say Hitler was right.
>got away with
There was nothing to get away with because there was no wrong doing.
England not liking something is not a pretext for war.
Memel was peacefully transferred.
Why didnt France declare war on Lithuania when they invaded Memel and took it by force from France?
>Bohemia
They invited the Germans in to stabilize their failed state.
>pissed off Britain and France
who's Britain and France?
You speak as if theyre one person.
Why are they mad? What did they personally lose? reputational damage? monetary losses? territorial losses?
If someone claims to be angry and uses that as justification for violence, but then you find they have no motivation for anger, that goes from crime of passion to premiditated.
Youre obviously not White but that carries a much greater penalty in Western law.
>hundred of thousand of deaths
It resulted in 85,000 deaths in total.
>to Impose his will
nope. To liberate Danzig which had been invaded by Poland.
>force was not going to be legitimized
Lithuania got away with it
Poland got away with it
The USSR got away with it
Why hold Germany to different standard? Is it because theres a robust jewish lobby in the UK that specifically hates Germany?
>semantics
no, it is you not being familiar with the terminology.
>theft
It wasnt theft.
>complete authority over the Czechs
not really, the Czechs still ran the show and they brokered their own foreign policy independent of Germany.
>protectorate
It was likened more to a dominion, like Canada or Australia.

>>17751856
It was real in your mind I am sure

>>17749215
>can this argument be applied on the Germans too
no the Germans held titles while the Poles did not.
Do you understand land has formal ownership beyond national claims?
Germany held formal titles of ownership, regardless of who lived there, it could have been 99% Norwegian, it would still belong to Germany because Germans had the titles of the land.

>>17751888
It was real according to Churchill and FDR themselves who didn't hide the fact that they only pretended to give a fuck about Poland to jump start a major war in Europe.
Plus it wasn't about "muh Nazis" either since 1930s Polish government made Hitler look like philosemitic moderate and was mostly about punishing Germany for ditching central banking.

>>17749211
>no proof
>Hill, Alexander (2009)."British Lend-Lease Tanks and the Battle of Moscow, November–December 1941
Please do not reply to me again.
>Barbarossa
Moscow*
>mentioned virtually nowhere
it is mentioned often, you are uninformed because your interest in this topic is purely political.
>bullshit
you were wrong
>liar
and you were still proven wrong
>my point
it was refuted because you dont know what youre talking about and did not even attempt to investigate.
>Barbarossa fails
Barbarossa was meant to be a knock out blow to the USSR.
If the Germans went half the distance they actually did and Stalin, having no hope of aid, surrendered and ceded Eastern Poland, the Baltics, Bessarabia, and they went back to a modified 1917 borders, Barbarossa would have been called a stunning success.
If the Germans had done LESS than what they did, but the Soviets made a single decision, it would have been called a success.

The circumstances of Barbarossa have to be factored in.
The Operation itself was masterful, the geopolitical circumstances around it determined its outcome.
>making assumptions that Britian wont feed the Soviets
It is an assumption the British WILL do this.
Otherwise we should assume the British doing nothing.
"the british will do something" this is an affirmative claim.
"the british will do nothing" this is a status quo.
You must prove an affirmative claim, a status quo is assumed because it requires no proof to say things will go on as they have given there is no reason for them to change.

>nonsense
ok, name the great power conflict that resulted in total capitulation in a deathmatch?
Napoleon was the only leader of a great power to actually be hauled off and that was because HE was turning down peace offers.
>change the narrative
what does this even mean? These threads are me telling you what actually happened and you shitting your pants because you think, what? Hitler will come back if people get the facts right about the 1930-40s?

>>17749211
>Britain and France would have never accepted
They accepted a Russia stretching from the Alps to the Urals (and beyond).
Why would they not accept a Germany that stretched from the Rhine to the Vistula?
(that is roughly what Hitler expressly stated multiple times)
>they went to war over Poland in 1939
and look at where they are now.
defeated, broken, on track to go extinct.
Maybe they were just too fucking retarded to live.
These are countries with IQs in the 90s and high levels of Anatolian admixture, the long arc of history does not recognize lines on a map, it recognizes genetic borders and genetic borders only, and Germany has the strongest by far of Europe while England and France have been literally and figuratively penetrated.

>>17751916
>Germany has the strongest by far of Europe
That'd the Germany that got BTFO so hard they were litterally gang raped in two?

>>17751919
Did they though? They lost less land than Poland in both wars combined. They had a MASSIVE KDR (muh civilians) no, against soldiers their KDR was huge. people tell me German BVLLs by their mere presence murdered millions of slavic untermensch, I can believe it, but focusing on the soldiers, the Germans dominated totally.
Germany reconstituted itself inbetween two hostile powers.
Something Yugoslavia has still failed to do, something Poland has still failed to do, something Russia has still failed to do.
England pretends it doesnt want more influence in the old Empire yet it continually fucks with Ireland, Canada, India, The US, and Australia/NZ/SA.

>>17752914
>Germany reconstituted itself inbetween two hostile powers.
>something Poland has still failed to do

Are you aware Poland ceased to exist for 123 years and re-emerged as a state between three hostile powers?

>>17752914
>the Germans dominated totally

>>17753876
and then it was partitioned again. then become a Soviet satellite and now it's totally dependent on the German economy.

>>17749585
the same thing applies to great Britain too though? they literally built their entire foreign policy on it so no one could get strong enough carry out an amphibious assault big enough to threaten them

the thing that bothers me is how overtly dishonest and slimy neo nazi rats are

Hitler literally wrote in his book that large scale conquest and killing white peole to take their shit was the explicit goal of the national socialist ideology

like not only does he call for war on a huge scale, he specifically talks about how the war has to be in europe against other european nations specifically because germany cant do overseas empires

on top of that, hitler literally calls for remodeling the entire german economic model on feeding its self with land wars for territory as opposed to commercial trade and diplomacy and colonial acquisitions

he basically lays out a plan for ww2 in explicit detail and almost everything is later carried out to the letter

this isnt a conspiracy. this isnt esoteric information from dubious second hand sources. this is what hitler published about his interests and distributed to millions of people (using tax money to pay himself royalties I might add)

yet you have these neo nazi worms crying about how mean everyone was to poor hitler and how the nazis just wanted peace but everything ganged up on us!!! we dindu nuffin!

so fucking pathetic. it would at least be respectable if they didnt play these niggerish "we dindu niffin!" games and actually stood up for their ideology and what it stood for

>>17754042

I like how you're selectively using /pol/ talking points about England/Poland while ignoring what that board has to say about Germany

>>17745150
>>17745139
why are you guys just straight up lying as if what you are saying isn't very easily veritably false? Hitler wanted to conquer at least half of Europe and become a world dominating super power

he literally states that this was the explicit goal of national socialism, flat out. his words not mine.

almost every neo nazi talking point in this thread debunked by Hitler himself:

>I should like to make the following preliminary remarks: The demand for restoration of the frontiers of 1914 is a political absurdity of such proportions and consequences as to make it seem a crime. Quite aside from the fact that the Reich's frontiers in 1914 were anything but logical. For in reality they were neither complete in the sense of embracing the people of German nationality, nor sensible with regard to geo-military expediency. They were not the result of a considered political action, but momentary frontiers in a political struggle that was by no means concluded; partly, in fact, they were the results of chance. With equal right and in many cases with more right, some other sample year of German history could be picked out, and the restoration of the conditions at that time declared to be the aim of an activity in foreign affairs. The above demand is entirely suited to our bourgeois society, which here as elsewhere does not possess a single creative political idea for the future, but lives only in the past, in fact, in the most immediate past
>But we National Socialists must go further. The right to possess soil can become a duty if without extension of its soil a great nation seems doomed to destruction. And most especially when not some little nigger nation or other is involved, but the Germanic mother of life, which has given the present-day world its cultural picture. Germany will either be a world power or there will be no Germany. And for world power she needs that magnitude which will give her the position she needs in the present period, and life to her citizens.

>>17754148
Germany today is no world power. Even if our momentary military impotence were overcome, we should no longer have any claim to this title. What can a formation, as miserable in its relation of population to area as the German Reich today, mean on this planet? In an era when the earth is gradually being divided up among states, some of which embrace almost entire continents we cannot speak of a world power in connection with a formation whose political mother country is limited to the absurd area of five hundred thousand square kilometers.
>Only an adequately large space on this earth assures a nation of freedom of existence.

>The National Socialist movement must strive to eliminate the disproportion between our population and our area - viewing this latter as a source of food as well as a basis for power politics - between our historical past and the hopelessness of our present impotence. And in this it must remain aware that we, as guardians of the highest humanity on this earth, are bound by the highest obligation, and the more it strives to bring the German people to racial awareness so that, in addition to breeding dogs, horses, and cats, they will have mercy on their own blood, the more it will be able to meet this obligation.

>>17754151
>>17754148

>Just as our ancestors did not receive the soil on which we live today as a gift from Heaven, but had to fight for it at the risk of their lives, in the future no folkish grace will win soil for us and hence life for our people, but only the might of a victorious sword.

>If the National Socialist movement really wants to be consecrated by history with a great mission for our nation, it must be permeated by knowledge and filled with pain at our true situation in this world; boldly and conscious of its goal, it must take up the struggle against the aimlessness and incompetence which have hitherto guided our German nation in the line of foreign affairs. Then, without consideration of 'traditions' and prejudices, it must find the courage to gather our people and their strength for an advance along the road that will lead this people from its present restricted living space to new land and soil, and hence also free it from the danger of vanishing from the earth or of serving others as a slave nation.


>Much as all of us today recognize the necessity of a reckoning with France, it would remain ineffectual in the long run if it represented the whole of our aim in foreign policy. It can and will achieve meaning only if it offers the rear cover for an enlargement of our people's living space in Europe. For it is not in colonial acquisitions that we must see the solution of this problem, but exclusively in the acquisition of a territory for settlement, which will enhance the area of the mother country, and hence not only keep the new settlers in the most intimate community with the land of their origin, but secure for the total area those advantages which lie in its unified magnitude.
>At long last we break off the colonial and commercial policy of the prewar period and shift to the soil policy of the future.

>>17754155
>>17754151
>>17754148

in conclusion: get fucked nazi rats. your great leader was one of the most catastrophically incompetent human beings to walk this earth. he was given the reigns to one of the great nations of the human race and decided to start a campaign of aggressive expansionism in an age of powder-keg Europe geopolitics and meat grinder industrial warfare, and literally exactly what you think would happen happened: he immediately started a fight he couldn't handle and his country and people were utterly obliterated as a direct result of his batshit insane, catastrophically self destructive ideology

>>17741956
>Shouldnt a stronger Germany be preferable to balance out the USSR?
The USSR wasn't a threat until they got the Baltics, Eastern Poland, and Bessarabia as well as massive influence throughout Eastern and Central Europe.

>>17754148
>>17754151
>>17754155
>>17754161
None of this refutes any of the points made in the thread.
>nazi rats
cant imagine the seething subhuman behind this, nature does not recognize political borders, only genetic ones, Germany today is stronger than those who fought against Germany.
>catastrophically incompetent
and yet he overwhelmed the preeminent militaries of the time.
>aggressive expansionism
The aggressive expansion of acting on a guarantee to Danzig?
Laughable. There was no aggression or expansionism.
>started a fight
England and France declared war on Germany.
>obliterated
and yet they are today stronger than every other European nation.
>ideology
what ideology? Show me the canon of their ideology.
Wheres their praxis?
NS isnt an ideology.

>>17754369
>the USSR wasnt a threat until they expanded into non-industrial rural areas which had no strategic resources or value
L O L
Then tell me why the fuck did Britain fight the Crimean war if the pre-MRP borders of "Russia" "wasnt a threat"???????

Youre retarded, you have no idea what youre talking about.
The USSR was the second strongest economy in the world, fielding the largest army in the world, the largest population in Europe, they had an abundance of strategic resources, they were pursuing strategic independence.
They were a threat way before they annexed a collective total of 12m dirt farmers.

>>17754144
He never said this, he said in Mein Kampf Germany must be the leader of Europe, which they are today.
Why dont you actually read what Hitler says himself? Not secret speeches but his actual words.
Hitler never wanted a war with other Europeans nor did he want to bring Europeans into the fold by conquest.
He spent half a decade in diplomatic talks with Poland where any other power would have declared war within a year.
>>17754126
>dishonesty
>outright lies
>ethnic animosity against Germany
>cope post
very nice.
>>17753909
Yes, they did.
>>17753909
The Soviet flag still flies over Poland.
The German flag flies over Germany.
>>17753876
no it didnt, Poland was re-established as a border zone by two of those who vanquished the third.
Poland was then granted more land with the defeat of the two aforementioned powers.
Poles didnt do shit, they are like a beaten woman going from one abuser to another to the shelter then back to an abuser, from a German baron, to the Austrian Urbanite, to the Slavic Drunk, the Polish race is the whore of Europe.

>>17754419
>The Soviet flag still flies over Poland
?????????

Because Hitler would have never stopped
Alsace Lorraine, Denmark and the low countries would be next to prep for the USSR war
Then they would have used all that plunder to start a war again, most likely against Italy first and then the rest

>>17754440
How does any of that concern Churchill? Aside from it being conjecture

>>17754424
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polish_People's_Republic
Same flag
>captcha: 2gaay

>>17751887
At this point you're just seething that Britain and France intervened, even though intervention is one of the most common cause for war. Had there not been any nukes, NATO would almost certainly have intervened in the Ukraine war.
There's nothing to respond to. You're just mad that Hitler did not get his way with weaker states in the east.


>It resulted in 85,000 deaths in total.
Should have been 0

>It was likened more to a dominion, like Canada or Australia.
The Germans literally called it a protectorate. Why are you changing the words? Then I am going to change the words and say it was annexed. Happy?

>>17751891
Literally any sane person will just think you're a schizo if these are your actual arguments. Im honestly starting to think you're mentally ill

>>17754522
>implying normies don’t hold private property rights as sacred
LOL
Why do you care what normies think anyway?

>>17754517
You’re coping.
>NATO would commit to a genocidal war over Ukraine
Why?
>BECAUSE THEY JUST WOULD
They didn’t commit over Vietnam.
That ended in disaster for the US.
>should have been zero
85,000 is preferable to 10x that number lol.
Why die for Danzig?
Don’t you prefer Germans over Poles anyway? Their IQs are higher, they produce more scientists philosophers and composers than both Poland and the UK.
>literally called it
It’s not a 1:1 with what you mean when you say “protectorate”.
Furthermore it was consensual on the part of the Czech government.
There was no German invasion or annexation.

You are dying on this hill because it discredits your narrative and when people look for reasons they will eventually arrive at the Jewish lobby which as we can see today is a powerful if not dominant force in British politics.

>>17754612
Why should I care what one mentally ill guy thinks? You're practically alone in your way of viewing the world.

>>17754628
The Germans called it a protectorate, so we will go by that, and a protectorate is usually a synonym for colonisation since a great many colonies were labeled "protectorates".

If we can call it whatever we want, then I prefer to call it annexation, since it was annexed in all but name.

>>17751912
>"the british will do nothing" this is a status quo.
My frame of reference is that Britain intervened when Germany invaded Poland in 1939
That Britain intervened when Germany invaded Belgium in 1914
That Britain intervened in Russia in 1850 when Russia invaded Ottomans.
That Britain intervened when France invaded Italy and Netherlands in 1802
That Britain intervened when N.Korea invaded S.Korea in 1950
That Britain intervened when Serbia invaded Bosnia and Kosovo in 1990s
That Britain intervened when Russia invaded Ukraine in 2025, albeit with material aid since direct internvention would mean nuclear holocaust.

Your frame of reference that Britain will do nothing as Germany overpower the USSR and carve out their Euroasiatic empire is based on nothing.

Want me to go through why I believe France would also intervene if Hitler launched Barbarossa?

>>17754633
Are you asking me why you keep replying to my posts?
>>17754645
>The Germans called it a protectorate
What did they mean by this (unironically)?
Because the Czechs still had a government, a local government, and formed their own trade policies.
The latter being something protectorates of the British Empire were NOT permitted.
>it was annexed in all but name
Except it wasn’t actually annexed and even it was, so what? It was consensual between the two governments involved.

You’re not only wrong about it being a “protectorate” as that word has an official designation in imperial terms while it does not in German terms, but also wrong about annexation.

>>17754683
Why didn’t the British intervene when the French invaded Germany?
Why didn’t they intervene when the Poles invaded Lithuania?
Why didn’t they intervene when America invaded the Caribbean and Banana States?
Why didn’t Britain intervene when America wrested control of the pacific from Spain?
Why is Britain always on the wrong side of history?
They always end up worse off.
But their interventions have specific causes and we can see that mere moralizing doesn’t suffice as I have produced such cases where Britain would be more obligated to intervene yet they refrained.
So in the case of Germany, why did they intervene when Germany would only have benefitted Britain?
the Jewish lobby.
>Britain will do nothing
They usually do nothing. There are decades between the examples you gave and their reasoning was different for every intervention.
Also wouldn’t Britain want a weaker USSR and stronger Germany? They have a strategic advantage over Germany with their empire and navy which Germany would not overcome by subduing the USSR.
Also this hypothetical was about if Germany and the USSR could 1v1 so shut the fuck up about Britain intervening.
Yeah go on, why would France intervene, they had a robust communist element that sabotaged their military and their defenses. Why would this divided nation go to war and collapse spectacularly like it did historically?

>>17746674
>Hitler tried to avoid conflict.
hahahaha

>>17754385
>and yet he overwhelmed the preeminent militaries of the time.
obviously not
>The aggressive expansion of acting on a guarantee to Danzig?
excpet hitler himself stated that he wanted more than danzig
>England and France declared war on Germany.
so? hitler initiated the war
>what ideology? Show me the canon of their ideology
I already posted it

>>17754419
>Hitler never wanted a war with other Europeans nor did he want to bring Europeans into the fold by conquest.

you are fucking lying to my face you nazi rat

see >>17754148
>>17754151
>>17754155


its actually insane how slimy nazis are, like holy shit you have the audacity to post this stuff when it is so easily refuted by what hitler himself literally said

you people are literally everything you accuse jews of being lmfao

>>17754385
>There was no aggression or expansionism.
lol? Anschluss? Annexation of Sudetenland? Wanton violation of the Treaty of Versailles and massing troops on its borders? Do you live in an alternate reality?

>>17746674
>Hitler tried to avoid conflict.
By aggressively annexing territory around him, violating peace treaties his country signed over a decade ago, and delivering belligerent speeches exciting his people to war?

>>17754385
>we amassed our militairy and invaded poland and their allies obviously responded like they said they would
>that means THEY started the war!

neo-nazis have to be the biggest liars in human history holy smokes

>>17754148
>this document by ""hitler"" disproves your argument
literally no different to using made up Churchill quotes to prove Churchill started ww2

>>17755676
>hitlers own "document" that he himself published and distributed is "made up" bro! because...because I said so!

neo nazis reaching new lows of dishonestly I never even imagined lmao

>>17755687
do you get paid by the post or the hour?
and what's the rate?

>>17741367 (OP)
Nothing ever happens until it happens

>>17749576
> expect the other european powers to just stand by and let them do it?
most of them did, so uh, yeah.

>>17754459
>he thinks the Polish red and white flag is a Soviet creation
Holy shit youre stupid

>>17755695
Nigger you haven't even read mein kampf, kill yourself