|
The usual claim is that Germany started WWII by invading Poland. That is war
propaganda. It wasn't even called a world war until after the US entered
into it which brought in Japan's war with China which gave the war a global
scope. So the most we can address with the invasion of Poland is war in
Europe.
So was it Germany's invasion of Poland that started the general war in
Europe? No. It was Britain and France declaring a state of war existed with
Germany which did that. Germany did not declare war on Britain and France.
Italy did not get into the war until Britain and France declared a state of
war existed with Germany.
One excuse is Britain and France had a mutual defense treaty with Poland
which they had to honor.
The first point is Russia also invaded Poland but Britain and France did not
declare war on Russia. So the treaty was selectively honored at best.
The second point is honoring the treaty, like signing the treaty, was
completely voluntary. No one forced them to sign it or to honor it and
clearly no one could have forced them to do either.
The third point is, although the intention to create such a treaty was
announced in the Spring of 1939 it was in only signed eight days before the
invasion of Poland. That is skin of the teeth to have it as a cheap
propaganda excuse.
The fourth point is, Britain and France based their war on Germany solely
upon Germany declining to obey the British ultimatum to leave Poland. The
treaty was not identified at the time. It is not reasonable to blame a
country for starting a war when, as a sovereign nation, it rationally
declined to have its actions dictated by other countries.
But if they had not honored the treaty they would not have been taken
seriously again, thought to have no honor, etc. These are all the usual
excuses but as we have seen over the centuries these are ways to excite
youth to war. When war is not in a country's interest we know they emphasize
statesmanship in avoiding war.
In 1939 territorial claims were an accepted justification for war. Both
Russia and Germany invaded Poland to reclaim land lost at Versailles as a
consequence of WWI. Poland was a small landlocked country before the war.
The victors in WWI took it upon themselves to force Russians and Germans to
become Poles. In fact after WWII Russia kept the land it retook. What
Germany took was given back to Poland. On top of that, to compensate for the
land and people kept by Russia, even more Germans and land was given to
Poland. The point being if invasion and conquest was a cause for the war it
was forgotten after the war.
Germany knew it would lead to war
Perhaps but no rational person would expect a sovereign nation to obey
another sovereign nation. And they did not know Britain and France would
honor their treaty with Poland and in fact the invasion by Russia shows they
did not honor their treaty with Poland.
Germany "knew" nothing and were half right in the failure to honor the
treaty. And even if they did know it, it was still Britain and France that
expanded the war. It is cheap melodrama to say the bad guy made the good guy
do it.
Much is made of Germany's rearmament after 1935. The fact is the treaty of
Versailles required all the combatants to disarm but Germany first. Germany
did do so in accordance with the treaty. No one questions that, within the
usual limits of cheating, Germany had disarmed as required by the treaty.
Upon doing so Germany called upon the other signatories to disarm. They all
refused to do so. As a result of that refusal Germany withdrew from the
Versailles treaty and rearmed. The point being the treaty violation was by
all the signatories but Germany. Withdrawing from such a treaty is perfectly
reasonable. Failure to withdraw would have been noteworthy.
Here it is important to note that the first section of the Treaty of
Versailles is the Covenant of the League of Nations. They are the same
package. Including in this withdrawal from the treaty was the right to
militarize the Ruhr valley and everything else that was part of the treaty.
Now that we see Britain and France chose to declare war on Germany we don't
need to be surprised or righteously indignant by Germany's invasion of
France. It was certainly reasonable under the circumstances. But there is
more.
After the declaration of war both Britain and France began preparing to
invade Germany. The British Expeditionary Force landed in France. France
mobilized its army. When Germany launched the attack French troops were in
Holland and Belgium and the British were ready to launch their invasion.
Under such circumstances Germany would have been a fool to wait until the
attack began.
This is why you never read of the Fall of France and the evacuation at
Dunkirk in the same discussion. They were the same event. It was the same
reason Holland and Belgium were taken over, to attack the French army that
was already in Holland and Belgium. In fact rumor has it they hated the
uninvited (read invading) French army so much they aided the Germans. It was
all Germany's preemptive attack to avoid giving Britain and France the
advantage of the offensive.
Some might say Britain and France were merely enforcing the Treaty of
Versailles. But they had no authority to enforce it. This is without going
into the claim they could enforce compliance three years after the League of
Nations did nothing to bring Germany back into compliance with Versailles.
But then Germany attacked Russia.
More power to them. Attacking communism is the only unquestionably good
thing they ever did. If everything Germany is accused of is true then the
Russian communists were many times worse in every category by every measure.
This brings us to another point.
The popular names of the sides were the Axis and Allies. There was no
distinction among members of the Axis or the Allies during the war. There
still is no official distinction among members today. Therefore because the
Allies included the communists the Allies were worse than the Axis by every
measure in every category.
Although in the US the press chose to cover up communist atrocities they
were well known in Europe and in fact to the US government. Lenin 4-8
million, Stalin 10-20 million and all of this before Hitler was accused of
more than a few dozen putting down an SA revolt/pedophile ring. So when
Britain and France chose to side with communism and Stalin in particular
they knowing chose to side with the greater evil. And of course when the US
joined in it also chose to side with the greater evil.
The Allies were the Allies. I didn't pick the sides.
But the Nazis hated the Jews.
Who didn't? But seriously, before the war the greatest accusation was the
Nuremberg Laws. Anyone who has ever read them knows Blacks in America would
have jumped at the chance to exchange them for the Jim Crow laws. Jews were
about 1/2 of 1% of the population of Germany while Blacks were 12% of the
population of the US.
But Nazis wanted to enslave Europe
Enslave is a semantically loaded word. No one was talking about chattel
slavery. The term was more as used by unions complaining about wage slavery.
But let us not argue definitions. To dominate was to enslave. Britain
dominated or enslaved at least 600 million people on the Indian subcontinent
alone. That is more people than there were in all of Europe. At the time
England declared war on Germany it had already enslaved more people than in
all of Europe and had done so for a century in just one place not counting
all the rest of the British colonies and mandate territories around the
world.
France had its colonies around the world including most all of Southeast
Asia. And Russia ruled the Russian empire it inherited from the Tzars and
which is largely intact even today.
In this matter we have no evidence of German intentions but a condemnation
of Germany for the imagined intention to do less than done by Britain and
France and Russia for centuries before the war.
How about a specific?
Lebensraum in the east which is considered the Ukraine. The Ukraine was part
of the Russian empire. So lets get this straight Germany is condemned for
wanting to remove the Ukraine from the Russian to the German empire. Does
that make sense? So here is some sense. In WWI, Russia and Germany made a
peace treaty in which Russia ceded the Ukraine to Germany which was
nullified at Versailles. In the 17th century the Tzar had invited German
farmers to settle the Ukraine and they had maintained their German identity.
And here someone usually brings up the German atrocities against the
Ukrainians. And I point out they were only reported by communists during the
war and if you believe communists I have a slightly used Gulag to sell you.
I also point out holocaustic material claims the "wild" Ukrainians were
eager helpers of the Germans in persecuting Jews. You can't have it both
ways.
And there were German reports of communist atrocities while wearing German
uniforms to inflame the people. You can always trust a communist to be a
communist and you know they would never shy away from doing that if they
could.
How about this whole holocaust thing?
How about it? We have already established that if it is all true it is less
than the communists by every measure in every category. I don't see a point
to exploring it here.
|