Could you tell me when the German being one state was ever formed? Oh right, that was in 1871.
Oddly referred to between historians as the
second Reich. I wonder why that is.
Before that it was a bunch of independent states.
Noope and yes. It became a bunch of independent states some time after the Treaty of Westphalia, or one can argue after Charles V. Legally it was still one state though, until a small Corsican artillery officer got bored of the whole stuff. And before Charles V, it was as much as of a 'one state' of a nation as any other in the same period. The King (Emperor) ruled over its vassals, more or less successfully.
The existence of Poland dates back to 966, so which one was older?
Which one was older is not really a question - the HRE dates back to 962, when Otto was crowned Emperor, the Eastern Frankish Empire, pretty much covering Germany after goes back to the Treaty of Verdun in 843.
As for Poland, its first King was a vassal of and paid tribute to the Emperor.
You make strange statements for one claiming to use backed-up arguments.
Suggested reading:
Holy Roman Empire - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The Holy Roman Empire (HRE; German: Heiliges Römisches Reich (HRR), Latin: Imperium Romanum Sacrum (IRS), Italian: Sacro Romano Impero (SRI)) was a realm that existed for about a millennium in Central Europe, ruled by a Holy Roman Emperor. Its character changed during the Middle Ages and the Early Modern period, when the power of the emperor gradually weakened in favour of the princes. In its last centuries, its character became quite close to a union of territories.
The first Holy Roman Emperor (German: Römisch-Deutscher Kaiser) is generally considered to have been Otto I, King of Germany, crowned in 962; Otto was the first emperor of the realm that later became known as the Holy Roman Empire who was not a member of the earlier Carolingian dynasty.[2] The last Holy Roman Emperor was Francis II, who abdicated and dissolved the Empire in 1806 during the Napoleonic Wars. In a decree following the 1512 Diet of Cologne, the name was officially changed to Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation (German: Heiliges Römisches Reich Deutscher Nation, Latin: Imperium Romanum Sacrum Nationis Germanicæ). [3]
The multiethnic Empire's territorial extent varied over its history, but at its peak it encompassed the Kingdom of Germany, the Kingdom of Italy and the Kingdom of Burgundy; for much of its history the Empire consisted of hundreds of smaller sub-units, principalities, duchies, counties, Free Imperial Cities, as well as other domains. Despite its name, for most of its history the empire did not include Rome within its borders.
The territories and dominion of the Holy Roman Empire in terms of present-day states comprised Germany (except Southern Schleswig), Austria (except Burgenland), the Czech Republic, Switzerland and Liechtenstein, the Netherlands, Belgium, Luxembourg, and Slovenia (except Prekmurje), besides significant parts of eastern France (mainly Artois, Alsace, Franche-Comté, Savoy and Lorraine), northern Italy (mainly Lombardy, Piedmont, Emilia-Romagna, Tuscany, and South Tyrol), and western Poland (mainly Silesia, Pomerania, and Neumark).
Kurfürst I would be very careful trying to defend the actions that the Germans did in 1939/1940.
I am not defending them. I am telling how things were. Burn me at the stake for it.
When were The Netherlands, Belgium, Norway and Denmark ever part of Germany? What right did they have to invade those countries?
Err, they were, I believe (see above), and no, this didn't give right for Germans in the 20th century to invade them.
On the other hand, they were invaded by military neccessity: the British and French were planning to invade Norway to cut off Germany from Swedish ore shipments; Denmark was occupied because it was, well, in the way of German counter plans to prevent this. No, it was not nice from Hitler to do so but I guess it wasn't nice from the Brits and the French to plan the same (see Operation Wilfred) for Norway under the pretext of 'helping out the Finns against the Soviets'. Their incompetency to succeed in it does not give them a moral absolution.
Belgium announced itself neutral, in practice it wasn't, though it tried desperately to become again the battleground of French and German armies. Unfurtuntely for Belgium, she was created originally just for that purpose (see:
Belgian Revolution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia).
I guess the Netherlands got in the way of things again, but frankly I have no idea why operations were extented to the NL. Perhaps the Navy wanted bases for its subs, perhaps it was irritating that the NL allowed Brit planes to fly over, or that Dutch intelligence conspired with the British to kill Hitler a few years before, a plan that gone bad when the German intel found it out (see Venlo incident), perhaps the Army simply wanted room the manouver. No, it was not nice from Hitler either, especially as he succeeded in it, but I guess Germany wanted to win the war in the West just as badly as France and Britain that initiated it and wouldn't come terms with the new status quo Germany has created.
BTW I wonder if you were the Germans in 1940, what would you have done?
And barbaric? yes the Nazi's were barbaric
Agreed. Now, how about all Germans? Because I see a distinction between ordinary Germans and Nazi party functionaries. And you?