Who started WW2?

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

People can always complain, I have major issues with the terms of the Treaty of Picquigny in 1475.

Oh really, I have major issues with the terms of the Treaty of Lutatius! Beat that!

 

[pbehn]

Oh really, I have major issues with the terms of the Treaty of Lutatius! Beat that!

I always knew you were a Xanthippus fan boy.

 

[The Basket]

People can always complain, I have major issues with the terms of the Treaty of Picquigny in 1475.

One must be mindful.
there are still people out there who celebrate stuff from hundreds of years ago to show thier national pride.
So treaties and long forgotten battles are still been fought over in the minds of these people.
rightly or wrongly.
Anyhoo...is the treaty of Versailles still actually in place?...i could do with some of that German money about now.

 

[parsifal]

I joined the forum in 2008, and notice that most of the discussion occurred before that. I don't believe that Ive commented on this thread before.

It's a bit of a nonsense to argue "who started WWII" in my opinion. Working on the principal of "it takes two to have a fight", you would have to draw the conclusion that a fight started, between two adult nations. For me its as simple as this….both sides started but who was the side most culpable for the outbreak of war?

Certainly there are extenuating circumstances on the german side, but so too are there extenuating circumstances for the other side as well. Those background issues did not, of themselves lead to war. Any realistic assessment of the lead in to WWII has to conclude that there was no-one standing behind Germany forcing their hand. The germans had a list of grievances, for sure, just as nearly every other nation in the world had grievances. With some notable exceptions like Italy and japan, Most nations were driven by the desire to maintain peace. In recent years there have been some outrageous claims made that in fact Germany was forced to war, but im not seeing that. I think the germans were shocked by their defeat in 1918, and offended by what many saw as a trick peace treaty and an unfair one. The economic collapse, the rise of ultra nationalism and militarism, never far from the surface in Germany (until after 1945) all contributed to Germany's list of complaints, but none of them explain germany's decision to engage in an aggressive war, and in so doing bring misery to themselves and most of the world with it.

The question posed is the wrong one to ask. Germany is not the cause of WWII, at least not the sole cause. But Germany stands alone and guilty as being the nation that decided to embark on an aggressive war, for whatever reason. But still guilty nevertheless.

 

[The Basket]

Thats a very sticky wicket you're bowling on.

 

[pbehn]

One must be mindful.
there are still people out there who celebrate stuff from hundreds of years ago to show thier national pride.
So treaties and long forgotten battles are still been fought over in the minds of these people.
rightly or wrongly.
Anyhoo...is the treaty of Versailles still actually in place?...i could do with some of that German money about now.

I know what you mean, having worked around the world for years I became accustomed to being responsible for all the ills in that country after a certain hour in a bar. I caused potato famines, nuclear attacks, mass starvation and religious persecution throughout the globe. My personal rejection of Napoleon caused disaster in Europe and my support for a tyrant like Horatio Nelson set back European culture for decades. However my worst personal failing turned out to be at the Battle of Killiecrankie. Laughing hysterically at the name in a bar in Wick set my career in Scotland on a course from which it never recovered. Happily there were other places to work.

 

[The Basket]

I do find it odd that certain groups have photographic memories one moment and total amnesia the next.
However Gavrilo Princip did some shooting for a Yugoslav homeland and to be free of Austria.
And guess what....after WW1 the Yugo state was created and the Austrian empire folded. So Mr Princip got his goals. Probably the only major player in WW1 who achieved his to do list. Not sure about Yugoslavia if that will be succesful but time will tell on that one.
Arguing with a extreme nationalist is about useful as a chocolate teapot.

 

[buffnut453]

I joined the forum in 2008, and notice that most of the discussion occurred before that. I don't believe that Ive commented on this thread before.

It's a bit of a nonsense to argue "who started WWII" in my opinion. Working on the principal of "it takes two to have a fight", you would have to draw the conclusion that a fight started, between two adult nations. For me its as simple as this….both sides started but who was the side most culpable for the outbreak of war?

Certainly there are extenuating circumstances on the german side, but so too are there extenuating circumstances for the other side as well. Those background issues did not, of themselves lead to war. Any realistic assessment of the lead in to WWII has to conclude that there was no-one standing behind Germany forcing their hand. The germans had a list of grievances, for sure, just as nearly every other nation in the world had grievances. With some notable exceptions like Italy and japan, Most nations were driven by the desire to maintain peace. In recent years there have been some outrageous claims made that in fact Germany was forced to war, but im not seeing that. I think the germans were shocked by their defeat in 1918, and offended by what many saw as a trick peace treaty and an unfair one. The economic collapse, the rise of ultra nationalism and militarism, never far from the surface in Germany (until after 1945) all contributed to Germany's list of complaints, but none of them explain germany's decision to engage in an aggressive war, and in so doing bring misery to themselves and most of the world with it.

The question posed is the wrong one to ask. Germany is not the cause of WWII, at least not the sole cause. But Germany stands alone and guilty as being the nation that decided to embark on an aggressive war, for whatever reason. But still guilty nevertheless.

Hmmm...not sure I agree with all your points. Germany was not alone in embarking on an aggressive war. Japan and Italy both did similarly, albeit to differing extents.

While I have some sympathy for the view that the Versailles Treaty was overly harsh, that does not provide justification for Germany to invade all of Poland, Western Europe and the Soviet Union. Had Hitler and his cronies elected opted for more limited objectives, say a remilitarized Germany and adjustment of borders to bring in certain regions that contained a large proportion of ethnic Germans (eg Sudetenland), then we probably wouldn't be talking about WW2. While it would have offended France and Britain, it's possible that a more reasonable (and ultimately peaceful) accommodation could have been reached.

Unfortunately, there was no such appetite for limited objectives within the Nazi hierarchy. When presented with the option of pausing to consolidate or embarking on (yet) another offensive, Germany consistently chose the latter route. The same was true of Imperial Japan. The nationalistic/racist propaganda which said that "our race is better than the races currently occupying those lands" drove an insatiable desire to own more land and subjugate those peoples who were "beneath us". One could argue this was simply an extension of the imperialism perpetrated by many nations in the preceding 150 years but no other nations matched Germany or Japan for their oppressive subjugation of other peoples during this period of rabid expansionism (1937-1945).

 

[pbehn]

Sadly for the world Germany was a brand new nation only formed in 1871. Experience in Africa and elsewhere shows that newly formed nations take decades or even centuries to settle into a coherent system.

 

[swampyankee]

Check out the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk.
The Germans cant complain about Treaty of Versailles when they themselves imposed an extrmemly harsh treaty on the Soviets.

The pre-WWII Germans were just such special snowflakes that other people have had to apologize for their behavior for decades.

Brest-Litovsk was harsh, probably harsher than Versailles but no one uses it to justify Soviet invasions of Ukraine, Georgia, Poland, or the Baltics.