reply to post by kro32
I ignored the example you brought up because you did so with blind ignorance as to the historical context and the reason as to why it even occurred.
Without analyzing and accepting the timeline and buildup to the war, which was overwhelmingly the fault of our previous intervention for ideological
supremacy during the First World War, we are merely arguing over history in the context of “to the victor go the spoils”, this time a spoils of
controlling historical context.
How about addressing why we instigated the Germans into being our enemy by raiding their ships, imprisoning their seamen, and harassing them illegally
in international waters? Why not talk about our involvement with the Soviet Union in regards to the creation of a United Nations once we overthrew
Hitler in Germany? Let us discuss the issue of Roosevelt selling arms to the United Kingdom rather than building up our defenses here at home in the
event of a possible attack by the Japanese or Germans? How about you explain why the Western powers (UK, US, France) were actually the ones pushing
How about the hypocrisy of the British by sanctioning Mussolini’s Italy for the Italo-Ethiopian war while they had their own imperialist adventures,
this drove the Italians into bed with Hitler, which almost resulted in war in 1936 that caused the remilitarization of the Rhineland? What about the
Franco-Soviet pact which also resulted in Germany’s remilitarization by trying to create a containment which angered nationalistic Germans who were
being surrounded on all sides because it in itself was an act of aggression against Germany and a violation of the Locarno Treaties. How about the
fact that Hitler wanted to reclaim the Polish Danzig so as to allow for a common defense against Soviet Russia? Why then did Britain in 1939 guarantee
independence to Poland other than to guarantee a war between the two nations which would otherwise have formed an alliance against their common
Why does the Western history forget to mention how Hitler wanted an alliance with Britain rather than war because his biggest perceived threat was
Stalin? Why was it that Chamberlain was the first to declare war and Churchill rejected Hitler’s peace agreement in 1940? Would you mind explaining
this excerpt from Winston Churchill’s memoirs for me?
"One day President Roosevelt told me that he was asking publicly for suggestions about what the war should be called. I said at once, "The
Unnecessary War." There never was a war more easy to stop than that which has just wrecked what was left of the world from the previous
When Joachim von Ribbentrop made a final offer to the British Foreign Minister Sir Nevile Henderson on August 30, 1939 it was a genuine agreement to
avert war which the British refused. How about explaining Churchill’s acceptance of the Morgenthau Plan which was a genocidal plan by Henry
Morgenthau and his deputy the Soviet agent Harry Dexter White to give the power of Europe to the Soviet Union? And what about Churchill’s support
for the British forced sterilization and segregation of the mentally unfit in 1914, also espoused by Theodore Roosevelt years before, which was used
as a model for the Nazi Action T4 program?
Hitler was no threat
to Western Europe, he only wanted to move into Eastern Europe an ally with those states to create a bloc against the
Soviets, he even wanted an alliance with Britain because he had assumed that they too were against the Soviets. The entirety of World War II was
caused by either completely incompetent leaders or Germanophobic and hypocritical Western politicians who believed the Germans were out to conquer the
world. Operation Barbarossa is often cited as some sinister master plan but was actually an attempt by Hitler to force Britain into peace before
bringing the Soviets in on the Allies side. And the entire Holocaust would not have to been to such a degree had Britain accepted Hitler’s 1939 and
1940 attempts at peace which through their rejections allowed him to militarily expand into Eastern Europe where most of Europe’s Jews lived.
The entire idea proposed by Gerhard Weinberg that Hitler wanted to conquer the world was a lie. The citing by FDR that Hitler’s “master plan to
conquer Central and South America” was actually produced by British intelligence and not able to be found in any historical records in Germany.
Never did Hitler have any idea of global conquest; he was too paranoid about Jews and Soviet, which he assumed to be the result of Jews.
Do we even discuss the fact that Roosevelt and Churchill gave the Soviet Union Eastern Europe at the Yalta and Tehran conferences? What about the
expulsion of ethnic and national Germans from Eastern Europe from 1944-50 which resulted in 2,000,000+ German deaths which was approved by Churchill
and British leaders while they were using victor’s punishment against Nazi’s during the Nuremburg trials, charging them with crimes against
humanity while they themselves at the very same time were approving the expulsions.
Everything, everything during World War II and the consequences as a result thereof would never have happened. Not only for the fact that had the UK
not promised Poland Independence in 1939 or it’s twice rejection of a peace agreement with Germany but also for the fact that the US intervened in
World War I to turn it into an ideological battle for control of the Western world and its ideals.
There, is that answer good enough for you?