FLYBOYJ said:
No ofcourse not, I was argueing his post that England was the agresser. England did what any free nation had to do. They did the right thing by declaring war on Germany. Read my post.
Sorens Really What If Thread
- Thread starter Soren
- Start date
No ofcourse not, I was argueing his post that England was the agresser. England did what any free nation had to do. They did the right thing by declaring war on Germany. Read my post.
the lancaster kicks ass
Major General
- 19,931
- Dec 20, 2003
Udet said:
we declared war not only due to relations with Poland and other European contries, but because it was obvious a war in Europe would affect Britian, we weren't gonna wait until the germans took france before declairing war, we were not the aggressers, we offered hitler an altermatum, he refused- he knew he was getting war............
yes we did, because we're at war, it's what waring nations do what is your point?
the BEF were not "utterly" kicked, our numbers were tiny compared to Germany's and, i can't remember which battle it was at but the BEF caused the only german defeat coming through France, it was the French army that was "kicked"...........
Let's all give a round of appause for Adolf Hitler, perhaps he wasn't that bad after all i mean if he let us escape, that's pure crap! Hitler was supprised by the speed at which the forces were pushed back that he thought it was a trap so he held his troops back, it wasn't out of the kindness of his heart......
well that's very nice of the germans, think about it, if the germans could invade and take over the UK so easily why didn't they just do it? perhaps they offered the peace because they knew it wouldn't be easy and would try and threaten us??
Good points Lanc. Chamberlain issued the ultimatum because he (and the government) had had enough of Hitler and his constant breaking of promises (Rhineland, Anschluss, Czechoslovakia). They decided enough was enough and declared war against the German aggressor. The BEF put it a good show in France and as Lanc said it was the French who got kicked not the British (I think you are referring to Arras Lanc).the lancaster kicks ass said:
First off, Mr. Plan_D, you are incorrect.
I am not "anti-British", at all.
I do have the bloody right to question whatever I deem is worth being questioned. So I´m to proceed accordingly.
PlanD, there are many facts of WWII that for guys like you are crystal clear; no further questioning or gathering of possible new evidence is necessary for the truth is now public domain. I of course do think different regarding some of such facts,
If it sets you off to read my comments just skip them.
Jabberwocky:
Adendum to my previous comment: Hitler had great respect and admiration for the British Empire long tradition of power and world domination.
Lancaster Kicks ass:
Right, Great Britain issued an ultimatum to Germany to no avail -of course-. Now tell me, why is it no declaration of war was issued against the Soviet Union when it joined Germany in invading Poland?
What was Great Britain´s decision making pattern there?
I am not "anti-British", at all.
I do have the bloody right to question whatever I deem is worth being questioned. So I´m to proceed accordingly.
PlanD, there are many facts of WWII that for guys like you are crystal clear; no further questioning or gathering of possible new evidence is necessary for the truth is now public domain. I of course do think different regarding some of such facts,
If it sets you off to read my comments just skip them.
Jabberwocky:
Adendum to my previous comment: Hitler had great respect and admiration for the British Empire long tradition of power and world domination.
Lancaster Kicks ass:
Right, Great Britain issued an ultimatum to Germany to no avail -of course-. Now tell me, why is it no declaration of war was issued against the Soviet Union when it joined Germany in invading Poland?
What was Great Britain´s decision making pattern there?
FLYBOYJ
"THE GREAT GAZOO"
DerAdlerIstGelandet said:
Sorry Adler - I meant that question for Udet
Udet how can you even question Englands motives? Germany was the aggressor not the British. I think you have your ideas of the war a bit twisted.
Britian and France's mistake was not in declaring war, it was in waiting for battle.
Had Britain and France immediately pushed into Germany the war would have been over before it started and Hitler and his gangster's would have been finished.
Sitting back and waiting for Germany's response to their declaration of war was just stupid.
=S=
Lunatic
Had Britain and France immediately pushed into Germany the war would have been over before it started and Hitler and his gangster's would have been finished.
Sitting back and waiting for Germany's response to their declaration of war was just stupid.
=S=
Lunatic
I agree Lunatic, it was possibably the worst decision of the war. France and Britain would have had the advantage in men and machines and the war as you say would have been over before it started or at least an artmistace signed. Then maybe though Hitler would of tackled the USSR with only one front too worry about and victory would have been a distinct possibility.Lunatic said:
Glider
Major
The British wanted to start bombing operations against German militery targets from day one but France wouldn't let us. If we had, there was a good chance that it would hav provoked the Germans into action of some kind, before they were really ready.
Instead we had the Phoney War which gave the Germans all the time they needed to prepare for the assult on France which as we all know worked so well.
Rushing them may or may not have changed the result but waiting certainly didn't help.
Instead we had the Phoney War which gave the Germans all the time they needed to prepare for the assult on France which as we all know worked so well.
Rushing them may or may not have changed the result but waiting certainly didn't help.
syscom3
Pacific Historian
Ive been under the impression that in 1937 through the invasion of Poland, the German military was waiting to pounce on Hitler the moment his grandiouse schemes failed. If Britain and France were to attack the Rhine in 1939, then there would have been a coup-d'etat and that would have ended things right there.
That I can agree with, and then there never would have been a way to attack Russia anyhow. Whether there would have been a coup I do not know though. I do know one thing though that WW2 would never have become WW2.
Jabberwocky
Tech Sergeant
Glider said:
That isn't stricktly true.
Both Britain and France agreed to the 'Roosevelt Rules' with regard to bombing in 1939. These prevented them from bombing targets that might incur civilian casualties. In an attempt to take the moral high-ground the bomber arms of France and Britain essentailly hamstrung themselves for 4-5 months. So, while Germany was formation bombing Warsaw and Lodz, the RAF and French Airforce were reduced to bombing warships moored in North Sea harbours and flying mining operations. The RAF prevented its bombers from attempting to hit anything even tied to the docks, for fear of civilian casualties!
Still though they should have invaded Germany in 1939 and as was said it would have all been over. Even Germany Military Leaders at the time warned Hitler that Germany was not ready for war but Hitler and his cronies would have nothing to do with it.
Nonskimmer
Captain
I've often read that the German retaking of the Rhineland in 1936 was a huge gamble on Hitler's part, with a lot of bluff involved. The Wehrmacht was far from being up to war strength in 1936. In the event that the French Army had actually moved in to confront them, the German forces had orders to turn and run full tilt back over the Rhine.
That is what I have heard also and it does not surprise me because the Germany military was not ready in 1939 so they were certainly not ready in 1936. I think the fact that his bluff worked so well is why he chose to invade in 1939 rather than in 1941 or so.
That's exactly what the Wehrmacht were ordered. All the French had to do was show face in the Rhineland and the Wehrmacht would have retreated back across the river.
Udet, I assume you have little idea of the reasoning behind the British invasion of Norway. Britain wanted to secure the iron ore from Sweden to ship back to Britain via Narvik. They also wanted an open land route to supply Finland with men and arms against the Soviet Union. Britain was willing to be at war against the Soviet Union and Germany at the same time. However, Britain was expelled from Norway by better equipped German forces and the plan never got moving.
As is seen with the British plans, they were willing to combat anyone who was attacking her allies. However, when it was realised that Britain was in a bad situation, as Churchill said; "I'd sell my soul to the devil to defeat Hitler."
Udet, I assume you have little idea of the reasoning behind the British invasion of Norway. Britain wanted to secure the iron ore from Sweden to ship back to Britain via Narvik. They also wanted an open land route to supply Finland with men and arms against the Soviet Union. Britain was willing to be at war against the Soviet Union and Germany at the same time. However, Britain was expelled from Norway by better equipped German forces and the plan never got moving.
As is seen with the British plans, they were willing to combat anyone who was attacking her allies. However, when it was realised that Britain was in a bad situation, as Churchill said; "I'd sell my soul to the devil to defeat Hitler."
syscom3
Pacific Historian
I have never heard a theory that Germans's economy would have collapsed by 1940.
Users who are viewing this thread
Similar threads
