One German's Opinion on the Ill Fated and Catastropihic Effects of Appeasement

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
anitram said:


Just more ridiculous, funny, cute nonsense from diamond. He occassionally spams here like this and unfortunately even if you put him on the ignore list, his wisdom beckons us all and we start reading his works, salivating occassionally and basking in his infinte wisdom..

It's a classy kind of trash sort of, the man is artful in an abstract kinda way and somedays he's just plain adorable.

:up:

i love canadian women.
:)

db9
 
I know I've said this before and I know everyone's going to disagree but...

At the same time as declaring "Peace In Our Time", Chamberlain was also agreeing to massive amounts of spending on the armed forces. Yes, if we hadn't appeased Hitler early on (stepped in over remilitarising the Rhineland for example) then WW2 may never have happened. However, there did come a point when Germany (which had been remilitarising for years) was far, far, far too militarily powerful for the UK (which had been demilitarising for years) to even contemplate fighting. "Peace in Our Time" was merely a play for time, if war had broke out then then we'd have lost, no question.

As for the whole "USA won the war" thing. I find that attitude rather insulting for pretty obvious reasons... I appreciate that the USA were a major, major factor in victory but there were many, many others. The Battle of Britain was one no-one's mentioned yet but I agree with Financeguy that the invasion of the Soviet Union was probably the most important. The sheer resilience of the people there- Siege of Leningrad, anyone?
 
TheQuiet1 said:
I know I've said this before and I know everyone's going to disagree but...

At the same time as declaring "Peace In Our Time", Chamberlain was also agreeing to massive amounts of spending on the armed forces. Yes, if we hadn't appeased Hitler early on (stepped in over remilitarising the Rhineland for example) then WW2 may never have happened. However, there did come a point when Germany (which had been remilitarising for years) was far, far, far too militarily powerful for the UK (which had been demilitarising for years) to even contemplate fighting. "Peace in Our Time" was merely a play for time, if war had broke out then then we'd have lost, no question.

This is a good point. There is an argument to be made that Chamberlain's 'appeasement' was actually tactics to allow Britian a chance to build up their defenses. Many conservatives would have held that view in 1938 or thereabouts.
 
TheQuiet1 said:
I know I've said this before and I know everyone's going to disagree but...

At the same time as declaring "Peace In Our Time", Chamberlain was also agreeing to massive amounts of spending on the armed forces. Yes, if we hadn't appeased Hitler early on (stepped in over remilitarising the Rhineland for example) then WW2 may never have happened. However, there did come a point when Germany (which had been remilitarising for years) was far, far, far too militarily powerful for the UK (which had been demilitarising for years) to even contemplate fighting. "Peace in Our Time" was merely a play for time, if war had broke out then then we'd have lost, no question.

As for the whole "USA won the war" thing. I find that attitude rather insulting for pretty obvious reasons... I appreciate that the USA were a major, major factor in victory but there were many, many others. The Battle of Britain was one no-one's mentioned yet but I agree with Financeguy that the invasion of the Soviet Union was probably the most important. The sheer resilience of the people there- Siege of Leningrad, anyone?

Interesting points. The Siege of Leningrad was an incredible show of resolution by those people. There are famous Russians alive today who lost family members in the Siege, including figure skater Alexei Yagudin. It's downright disrespectful to deny their role in stopping Hitler.
 
Back
Top Bottom