It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Why did WW2 happen when it happend?

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 8 2006 @ 08:37 PM
link   
From the German perspective, it seems that WW2 was a long-time waiting, shock to the world. Suddenly, Germany had declared that it was being attacked by Poland (which could barely field a cavalry from the 1800s let alone an army from the 1900s) and was soon overwhelmed by German forces.

This has often been the version of history presented to the public...an agressive Germany, seeking to expand her Empire.

But was the reason more of constraint than of lust for power?

Reading the 1939 Times Magazine explaining the "Man of the Year" in 1938...I'd have to say it is the former.

By 1938, projections were that Germany was on the verge of collapse. Their Economy was falling apart, and spiraling out of control.

Exchange command economy was reducing the standard of living of Germans and her neighbors relying on her trade (that was the economic reform that brought them out of the depression, trade machine parts and finished products for raw resources from Eastern European nations).

German agriculture was falling steadily behind, while they began more and more to collectivize farming (very socialistic).

Businesses fell more and more under control of the State.

And as the magizine stated: "More guns and tanks are produced and less butter".

Is it not so much that Germany wanted to go to war in 1938, but needed to go to war in 1939 ... or else lose all ability to wage an aggressive war?!

To those who watched the closing events of the year it seemed more than probable that the Man of 1938 may make 1939 a year to be remembered.

[edit on 8-2-2006 by Stratrf_Rus]




posted on Feb, 9 2006 @ 11:51 AM
link   
The German economy was not ready for war in 1939, Hitler didnt expect the Allies to defend Poland when it was so obvious they couldnt.

The Nazi's didnt expect the economy to be ready until 1941, a plan that was disrupted by the war and meant that the German economy didnt peak until 1944, when it was too late.



posted on Feb, 12 2006 @ 04:05 PM
link   
There were in Europe a series of continuous wars from the 1840s into the 1870s with nations jockying for position and power. These continuations culminated in the Great War of 1914...and eventually the Second World War. This is not how most of the history books read.
The Germans were constantly outmaneuvered by the Crown or the British Merchantile association operating out of London in their attempts to gain control over world markets ..both in the production side and consumption sides. The Germans found themselves constantly having to sell thier goods through English or Crown controlled markets and the Crown got the bulk of thier profits. SAme thing in the Orient with the Japanese who were also industrializing their nation with help from the British and Americans. THey too found themselves on the short end of the stick.
By World War One or the Great War...Germany attempted to break out of the British Naval trading monopoly by building a railroad overland from Berliln to Bagdad...this railroad became known as the Orient Express. This being the German solution to the British Navy and a overland route to trade in the mideast and eventually the orient.
The Crown ...under the cover of the British Navy and Army were having none of this..competition. With the help of allies and under severe treaty limits the Germans were put down ...the Versailles Treaty.
The treaty limits were so severe on Germany that it gauranteed a rise of a Adolph Hitler...whether it was Hitler or someone else ..it would have happened anyway. If not Adolph Hitler...it would have been someone worse. Germany once again ...industrialized with the help of many Western banks and industrial manufacturing firms and rebuilt her industrys and eventually her war machine. Once again Germany branched out to regain what she felt was her right to trade in the world and receive the bulk of her profits to herself ..not the Crown.
By the 1930 this was also the case with Japan...she decided to branch out and go it alone to seize what they felt was their due as a industrial and soverign nation. Italy was to join them .
The problem with these three nations is simply that the nations and rescources they coveted were under the control of the Crown...the British Merchantile Association. The history of the Crown is that they always covet the Lions share. Anyone attempting to break out of the Crown's imposed limits on world trade..will find themselves going up against a multi nation alliance. This is true unto this day. The Crown will get many nations involved in a world war to protect her trade from unauthorized competitors.
This was the origins of World War 2..it was a continuation of other struggles not yet solved.
This struggle continues unto this day. Saddam Hussein thought he would be able to operate on the world stage as a independent. He seized neighboring Kuwait.. a small nation with oil resources and commercial arrangements long since in place and developed by western know how and resources. This is soverign territory as are the buisness arrangements ...no independents are allowed to interfere in this. The hands in this pie are much bigger than the Emirs of Kuwait or the leaders of Saudi Arabia.
The Muslims themselves are attempting to move back onto the world stage..to bring back their greatness under their religion ..of past empires/glory. They will come into conflict ..with another religion...The World Merchantile Associations...Banks...oil companys, insurance companys, Security companys and the other buisness operating within this umbrella. Make no mistake..about this..the World Merchantile Associations are definitely a religion...in conflict with other trading associations...and thier religions. Only a religion of devoutness and zealousness can assure such a horrendous death toll in such a struggle for markets and keep the true nature of these wars ...the true religion ....hidden from the public for so long.

What I notice in history is that there seems to have been and continuing unto today ..a world class war...sometimes quiet ..sometimes open.. a conflict for world resources and trading routes to ship the resources and finished goods. This struggle seems to go back to the Spanish Empire though traces of it can be found back to the Romans but with Rome on a smaller global scale. New players come and go on this field...as nations come and go. But when one looks closely it is always the same pattern. Control of Markets. World War 2 was only a small facet of this continuing war...or conflict for Market Control.

I am currently asking myself ..when the Communist Chinese will decide that they are getting the short end of the stick by the control agents of this Merchantile Association..and go it alone as did the Japanese prior to WW2. They are most certainly building up thier military in this arena. We too are begining to reposition our militarys with more emphasis on deployments to the Pacific Arenas.

There is much more to this ..but this will suffice for now...

The struggle for Market Share continues.

Suggested Reading "The Empire of the City"
by E.C. Knuth

Thanks,
Orangtom



posted on Feb, 12 2006 @ 04:44 PM
link   
Intriguing.
Explains a lot.

Thanks.

You have voted orangetom1999 for the Way Above Top Secret award. You have two more votes this month.



posted on Feb, 12 2006 @ 04:47 PM
link   
The 1930s was a rough time economically especially in Germany. The Danzig Corridor was next on Hitler's agenda after Czechoslovakia via the Sudetenland Germans question. So far Hitler had "some excuse," for war because there were germans to be "re-incorporated" (Sudetenland Germans and East Prussians.) Then France and England declared war because the Poles had been invaded. But there were other factors involved too I believe. The whole complex motivational picture would probably be hard to flesh out at this point in time.



posted on Feb, 12 2006 @ 11:44 PM
link   
I agree..the Question of the Danzig Corridor was very important to the Germans. They never really trusted the Russians and were not going to leave them at thier back. The reaccquission of the Sudetenland is a question of ancient titles...to which Germany felt she had a right. To go where Germans were..and to rule for Germany. A look at a pre and post World War 1 anf 2 maps is very helpful and intresting to see how the world was divided up by the victors.
There were of course overlaping treaty arrangements both in the first world war and then the second but there is more to it ..than just the treatys.
What is obvious to me is that after the wars...someone got Germany and Japan for a song...I dont think they really wanted Italy. They then rebuilt Germany and Japan in the new image and the ground was laid for the new production area..with some of the most skilled and diciplined labor possible and for pennys on the dollar. This appeared to be a world wide..urban renewal project ...at public expense. Exactly the same thing seemed to happen in Korea..when the war was over the new Generals moved in and set up shop...General Foods..General Electric .General Motors...and all the other Generals moved in for pennys on the dollar. This is called "urban renewal" war style. The bulldozers just happen to be bombers with accurate bombsights...today..GPS guidance to properly prepare the ground for the new Generals who are running the show from behind the scenes...mostly unseen.
This may seem a bit wild to some who never read history but if you live long enough to watch history unfold or talk to people who actually lived through it ...it can be quite revealing.
So who is setting up shop in Iraq??? And of course if possible who is standing in line to set up shop in Iran..when it is properly urban renewed??? The ground properly prepared??

What I notice historically is that when nations are broken up ..into smaller nations ...this with the passage of time is a gaurantee of further war. Seems to me that Slovakia was at one time a independent country ..as was other nations which were combined to form Yugoslavia. When they broke back up again it gauranteed war. This seems to be the pattern of human operations from time to time as if it was intended to gaurantee war.

Oh ..and in case you think I am a nut case...when you prepare a ground properly like Germany and Japan...and over time the costs rise and profits fall..what do you do..where do you go for the next prepared ground??? Or have you been preparing the ground all along......looking foreward to where the new markets are...by the introduction of a ping pong team..to smooth the way.??? Ping Pong Diplomacy??? Some of you may recall this intresting piece of history.

Something for some of you to think about .

Thanks,
Orangetom



posted on Feb, 13 2006 @ 02:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by Stratrf_Rus
From the German perspective, it seems that WW2 was a long-time waiting, shock to the world.


No shock really as Britain bankrupted herself preparing for this exact war. You don't do that unless you know what is coming even if the politicians claim ignorance to keep the civilians in the dark.


Suddenly, Germany had declared that it was being attacked by Poland (which could barely field a cavalry from the 1800s let alone an army from the 1900s) and was soon overwhelmed by German forces.


The Polish army fought better taking into account their defensive plan ( based on promise of immediate allied help) and the numbers employed on both sides. They were outnumbered two to one and still and comparably inflicted far more damage than the Allies managed. Neither the Poles or the French got their due in fact.


This has often been the version of history presented to the public...an agressive Germany, seeking to expand her Empire.
But was the reason more of constraint than of lust for power?


Germany WAS aggressive and Hitler certainly had a lust for power whichever way i have tried to argue it in the last few years. The guy had nerve and he outwitted the allies at all turns for some time.


.I'd have to say it is the former.

By 1938, projections were that Germany was on the verge of collapse. Their Economy was falling apart, and spiraling out of control.


The same can be said for Britain and they certainly did not have the German living standards for the time.


Exchange command economy was reducing the standard of living of Germans and her neighbors relying on her trade (that was the economic reform that brought them out of the depression, trade machine parts and finished products for raw resources from Eastern European nations).


The German standard of living was increasing even in 1941 despite what you have been told....Hitler risked everything on the assumption that living standards must remain very high at home as he believed the first world war was lost due to the home front collapsing.


German agriculture was falling steadily behind, while they began more and more to collectivize farming (very socialistic).
Businesses fell more and more under control of the State.


Well it was a socialist system so one assumes all these things anyways. That being said living standards were going up....


And as the magizine stated: "More guns and tanks are produced and less butter".


Tank production ( and everything else) suffered so that the civilian economy would be as little disrupted as possible. Hitler's choice in this regard contributed in no small part to the ultimate German defeat....


Is it not so much that Germany wanted to go to war in 1938, but needed to go to war in 1939 ... or else lose all ability to wage an aggressive war?!


And Britain would have been bankrupt by December 1940 even if the war did not start when it did.


To those who watched the closing events of the year it seemed more than probable that the Man of 1938 may make 1939 a year to be remembered.


And that he sure did with no little help from the allied side.


Stellar



posted on Feb, 13 2006 @ 02:51 PM
link   
So few people have any Idea tom! I could argue ( but i wont) a few points but agreeing on that much would help the world's people no end in helping themself.

You got a wats from me and i'll leave it at that.


Stellar



posted on Feb, 13 2006 @ 03:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by StellarX

Originally posted by Stratrf_Rus
Suddenly, Germany had declared that it was being attacked by Poland (which could barely field a cavalry from the 1800s let alone an army from the 1900s) and was soon overwhelmed by German forces.


The Polish army fought better taking into account their defensive plan ( based on promise of immediate allied help) and the numbers employed on both sides. They were outnumbered two to one and still and comparably inflicted far more damage than the Allies managed. Neither the Poles or the French got their due in fact.

Niethether the French nor the Poles were truely prepared for the new kind of mobile warfare fielded by the Germans. Polish reliance on allied help failed for some of the same reasons as French resistance to the German invasion in that noone expected ANY country to be able to sweep through and consolidate a victory that fast.

German tank production was also a factor in how the early days of the war played out. Despite popular opinion, the German Panzers of the early days of the war SUCKED! Prior to the war, many of Germany's training excercises were conducted with trucks carrying plywood armor as mock ups of the tanks they didn't have yet. The results were particularly disasterous for Poland, who dispatched traditional clavery against the plywood mock ups, only to find the Germans had gone and produced actual tanks.

Recommended reading on German armor:
Panzer Battles, by Maj Gen F.W.Von Mellenthin
Panzerkrieg, by Peter McCarthy & Mike Syron.

(I didn't really enjoy the second book nearly as much as the first, but as the first book is based on the personal expieriences of the author, it's scope is considerably more limited in terms of the industrial influences.)



posted on Feb, 13 2006 @ 03:25 PM
link   
Anyone wanting to learn more about WW2 in a entertaining way i reccomend Hearts of Iron 2. Most educational videogame based on WW2.
You can see the war from all sides. The most intresting part that gets dropped out of many WW2 classes, is that Poland was formed after the great war from the Versailles Treaty, land from Germany, and the Prussian were taken to form Poland. Hitler saw Poland as in away occupied fatherland territory. So i can see why he attacked, as he saw the Versailles Treaty as a shame anyway.
Im not saying Hitler was a good man, but the more i read through history and am not constantly bombarded with holocaust stories which creates a emotional responce which clouds peoples judgement. I understood Hitlers actions more and more, if the nazi's one today we would be discussing how demon like Winston Churchilll was.

Great post orangetom1999.



posted on Feb, 13 2006 @ 03:59 PM
link   
Some of you are really up to speed. It is encouraging to see such.
I only have time to post this before making haste off to work. Will post more when I get off and some rest. Long night tonight. !2 hours.
Thanks for some great posts.

Orangetom



posted on Feb, 14 2006 @ 03:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Travellar
Niethether the French nor the Poles were truely prepared for the new kind of mobile warfare fielded by the Germans.


Well it was not unexpected as such as they all prepared their on armies along the same general lines. It is simply another myth that no one imagined tanks could be used to achieve breakthroughs; it was in fact the reason they were created in the first place. What got the allies and everyone else was not new technology and ideas but the German armies mostly brilliant employment and tactical /operational skill.


Polish reliance on allied help failed for some of the same reasons as French resistance to the German invasion in that noone expected ANY country to be able to sweep through and consolidate a victory that fast.


If the Western allies declared war on the same day as the German invasion things might very well have been different. The Poles would not have conducted such a defense if they expected no help from their "allies".


German tank production was also a factor in how the early days of the war played out. Despite popular opinion, the German Panzers of the early days of the war SUCKED!


Germans panzer's did not as such " suck" but they were certainly not the death on wheels that allied apologist have tried to make them. Allied tanks, as you probably know, were on the whole superior and they had more of them.


Prior to the war, many of Germany's training excercises were conducted with trucks carrying plywood armor as mock ups of the tanks they didn't have yet. The results were particularly disasterous for Poland, who dispatched traditional clavery against the plywood mock ups, only to find the Germans had gone and produced actual tanks.


That might have happened but we have no reason to believe it did. The poles had cavalry troops ( so did the Germans) but they fought dismounted. The polish cavalry troops, in that famous incident, were surprised by German tanks and were running away....


Recommended reading on German armor:
Panzer Battles, by Maj Gen F.W.Von Mellenthin
Panzerkrieg, by Peter McCarthy & Mike Syron.


If i find them i might check them out.


Stellar



posted on Feb, 14 2006 @ 03:36 PM
link   
Thanks for some great posts on this thread.

Of intrest to me is the poster who stated that the early German tanks in WW2 sucked. I am inclined to agree with this assessment. However ...even in their state of suck..I would think that the German tanks/armor combined with their tactics were far advanced of what other nations had at that time.

I have been reminded by the olde man ...who taught me so much history ..in a narrative he told about Charles Lindburg. It seems that Charles Lindburg after he had flown solo across the Atlantic in 1927 became a world wide celebrity. He was invited into many high political and diplomatic circles with his new status. He often attended many high class partys. Lindburg was invited by the Germans to see the new Messerschmidts coming off the production line.. the Junkers, The Dorniers. Same with visits to Japan.. he saw the Japanese Zeros. Charles Lindburg realized that the west was way behind in development of aircraft of this caliber. In explaining this to some British Generals and Admirals at a diplomatic function the Generals told him...."the air is relatively insignificant ...it was artillery on the line in the last war ..laddie!!!" They did not understand the awsome power of the airplane properly used. They were still fighting the last war.
Wellington was the same way..."We won at Waterloo with musketry....". Except this was not Waterloo....it was in the Crimea...and the British got slaughtered in the Crimea before they caught on .
So many are still fighting the last war witht he last wars thinking.

It was so with the tank..and tank infantry tactics combined. They could not believe that the buisness of war could move so rapidly. This was proven out in the two desert wars...Even this tank warfare has undergone a significant change since WW2.

For a overview of the new tactics and thinking in place in much of our military today and the changing emphasis on smaller unit tactics favored by Rumsfield and others ..I recommend a book by

Robert Coram

"Boyd"

This book it about Air Force Colonel John Boyd and how he went on to think through tactics and aircraft construction ..to realize we had the wrong airplanes for the Vietnam war. The designs of the F16, F15 and the A10 warthog came out of the group of thinkers of whom he was a intregal
part. John Boyd went on to take this thinking in tactics further to teach the Army and Marines to get out of this suicide tendency they had of charging right up the middle suffering huge casualtys for poor results. In JOhn Corams book he quotes John Boyd as naming this suicide technique ..pee diddle diddle right up the middle. Very appropriate.

This line of thinking seemed to have paid of ..in the two desert wars by the speed of events. This did not go unnoticed by other nations. Especially the Arab nations.

YOu know...furthermore on the subject of German Engineering ..we have locally a war memorial museum here in Newport News, Virginia. IN the display cases they have numerous small arms of the past wars. One of them is the German MP 40 submachine gun. I was quite astonished to see the exploded view of the internals of this weapon. On first glance It was obvious how many internal parts there were in this weapon. I immediately realized that while it may have been a fine weapon it was over engineered and did not follow the KISS principle.
Compare this to the M3 .45 caliber grease gun.
No doubt their MP44 was groundbreaking in that day ..the mother of current model assault rifles...but I wonder about its overengineering too. By the way ..some of these MP44 early assault rifles are turning up in Iraq along with ammunition for them. Amazing to me.!!! I suppose many of these will find their way into museums too.
It made me wonder about so many of their tools or weapons on the German side. By this I mean not following the KISS Principle.

ONce again I must make haste off to work. Thanks for great posts Gentlemen

Orangetom



posted on Feb, 15 2006 @ 01:31 AM
link   
Just a point on the armoured forces aspect - UK fielded the world's first armoured division in the early 1930's and trained for armoured breakthrough.

The Germans studied this on visits and were most impressed. UK disbanded the division for budget reasons but the Germans had seen the future.

Initial German tanks were indeed poor - the mark 2 was put into production despite being a training vehicle. One of the reasons Hitler went into Czech was to take over the Skoda works and get the T38 - these were possibly the best all-round tank at the time and the chassis served on 'till late in the war as SP artilllery / tank busters etc

Perhaps the most important German innovation was to integrate airpower to act as artillery allowing speed of the support arms to match that of the armoured forces.



posted on Feb, 15 2006 @ 08:38 AM
link   
from what i understand hitler and especially the germal general staff viewed war starting in 39' as to early for them as they had not fully rearmed (hence pressing lame training tanks like the mk I & mk II into combat).....but they calculated that their possible opponents would have also neared completion of thier rearmaments and would have posed a much greater challenge (maybe unbeatable)....so they gamble was taken to strike early and hard, which came so very close to paying off.

also on the point of german innovation: thier greatest of which was to tie in the multitude of advancements during the inter-war period with a strategy to utilise all of them to the full, to make the whole greater than the sum of the parts if you will. this extended past mere combat tactic to things like, which in themselfs were a revolution to things like (what we know now as) psy-ops, (the wailing sirens on the stukas a prime example) to demorolise the enemy's troops and terrorise thie civilians.



posted on Feb, 15 2006 @ 09:13 AM
link   
The Germans conducted training exercises in the Soviet Union in the 1920's where Guderian first drew up the Blitzkreig tactics.

Also, seems many people here seem to forget that Poland was invaded by the SOviet Union as well and split between the two agressors.



posted on Feb, 15 2006 @ 12:02 PM
link   
i cant believe so many peopelare arguing about how world war 2 started.
it was started because hitler wanted more land for the arien race and to right the wrongs (as he saw it) from world war 1 and england and france got fed up with appeasement because it wasnt working so the y declared war on germany.

Justin



posted on Feb, 15 2006 @ 04:55 PM
link   
Lidell Hart creates indirect approach / blitzkreig theory

www.absoluteastronomy.com...

Guderian translates books of Lidell Hart and Fuller

users.pandora.be...

British Experimental Mechanised Force in 1927 (later disbanded)

en.wikipedia.org...

No argument from me on why WW2 started just clarifying the development of armoured tactics / blitzkreig



posted on Feb, 15 2006 @ 06:02 PM
link   
I believe that Lindeburg played a big role in the start of WWII, Lindeburg told the world(after he went on a spy mission to germany) that the German Luffewaffe was far superior to that of any airforce in the world, and that we should pretty much all do what they wanted because we would not stand a chance at ALL.

So what ended up happening was Hitler took advantage of this treaty of fear, and took everything he wanted, czechoslovakia, Poland, and during the Nurenburg trials, the world was told by the Nazis that in truth, the western world bought all that Lindeburg had sold them, Lindeburg was basically shown hangers and hangers of 15-20 year old airframes and was lead to believe what wasn't there.

So in truth, if the world had made an attempt to stop Hitler pre-1940's, they would have, very easily.

Shattered OUT...



posted on Feb, 16 2006 @ 03:50 AM
link   
bah, we're not arguing in here, just reviewing the vairous aspects of what was going on, and what nations believed themselves capeable/incapable of to get the war started.

Japan's participation in WWII was for some of the same reasons as Germany's. Like Germany, Japan's government had gone over to fascism, though of a slightly different style. Japan's ambitions were primarily regional, as she wished to dominate the "Merchantile Association" of south-east asia. With Germany's invasion of France, Japan took the opportunity to take over the French colonies in the area "for safe keeping". Korea and China were also on the list of places Japan wished for direct control over, but it was U.S. interference in the later that eventually led Japan to believe they should declare war on us.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join