Causes Of World War II

Originally posted by Temujin i disagree. 3 is actually really redundant. Hitler was going to get Czechoslovakia anyways, he had already plans to take it by force if he doesn't get it at Munich. this is actually what happened with Danzig which started the war. so appeasement only postponed ww2 but it is most certainly not a cause.

I'm not so sure appeasement really 'delayed' WWII.  If Hitler had gone ahead and attacked Czechoslovakia, assuming that the agreement at Munich doesn't happen, then you're looking at a weaker Germany facing not only a decent Czech army in it's own 'Maginot Line', but also the French, British and possibly the Poles as well.  In addition, the Soviets would be obligated to support the Czech's, although without transit rights through Poland or Rumania, they may not have been able to offer much direct assistance.  Add to all of that the fact that Germany was much weaker militarily in 1938 than in 1939 and the prospects don't look very good for Germany.  Hitler would either have to back down or face a quick defeat.  What Hitler WANTED was an isolated war against Czechoslovakia alone.  However, given the diplomacy at the time, that wasn't a realistic expectation.  The outcome of Munich was a significant factor in turning Stalin away from a 'collective security' approach which opposed Germany and towards collaboration with Germany.  That, combined with the poor relations with Poland produced the Nazi-Soviet pact, once Hitler determined that France and Britain were not going to allow him to have his 'isolated' war against Poland. 

I would give Hitler credit for being able to recognize an obviously 'no-win' situation, and back down in time.  Thus appeasement in effect brought on WWII, by allowing Germany to manoeuver themselves into a position where they felt they might reasonably win.  At a minimum it would have taken much longer for Germany to build up to the point where they could have taken on multiple opponents at the same time, without the resources provided by their occupation of Czech territories, or the resources supply to them by the Soviet Union due to the pact.

Sure but breaking the Treaty of Versailles is different then an inevitable path to global conquest isn't it? Do you think the Weimar Republic was heading in that direction?

Originally posted by deadkenny I'm not so sure appeasement really 'delayed' WWII.  If Hitler had gone ahead and attacked Czechoslovakia, assuming that the agreement at Munich doesn't happen, then you're looking at a weaker Germany facing not only a decent Czech army in it's own 'Maginot Line', but also the French, British and possibly the Poles as well.  In addition, the Soviets would be obligated to support the Czech's, although without transit rights through Poland or Rumania, they may not have been able to offer much direct assistance.  Add to all of that the fact that Germany was much weaker militarily in 1938 than in 1939 and the prospects don't look very good for Germany.  Hitler would either have to back down or face a quick defeat.  What Hitler WANTED was an isolated war against Czechoslovakia alone.  However, given the diplomacy at the time, that wasn't a realistic expectation.  The outcome of Munich was a significant factor in turning Stalin away from a 'collective security' approach which opposed Germany and towards collaboration with Germany.  That, combined with the poor relations with Poland produced the Nazi-Soviet pact, once Hitler determined that France and Britain were not going to allow him to have his 'isolated' war against Poland.  I would give Hitler credit for being able to recognize an obviously 'no-win' situation, and back down in time.  Thus appeasement in effect brought on WWII, by allowing Germany to manoeuver themselves into a position where they felt they might reasonably win.  At a minimum it would have taken much longer for Germany to build up to the point where they could have taken on multiple opponents at the same time, without the resources provided by their occupation of Czech territories, or the resources supply to them by the Soviet Union due to the pact.

mmh don't think so. Poland and Czechoslovakia weren't exactly good friends, actually Poland participated in the division of CZ. also the Wehrmacht was more or less the same that would begin the war with Poland a year later. eventually the Czechoslovakian defense mattered little to Hitler, just like fighting the whole world mattered little to him.

there are two answer, a short and a long one

Hello to you all

Bankotsu, in view of what you asked recently in another thread, is it not significant that everybody dismisses your position?

Originally posted by Bankotsu Hitler wanted to expand east and Britain encouraged and let Hitler expand eastwards against Russia.

Edited by deadkenny - 20-Jul-2008 at 15:59

Originally posted by Bankotsu deadkenny, I have refuted all of your above points before, but you keep on repeating it over and over. Why? So you refuse to agree with my refutations?

Well the reason is, according to the guy Robert Jackson, is a different government in France and a better chance for the Czechs to defend their territory successfully. Germany in 38 was still weak and hitler was still not extremely popular. The Army under Halder was still planning for a coup and he said that if the plans for Czechslovakia failed, Halder would have definetly made the coup.

Originally posted by Bankotsu deadkenny, I have refuted all of your above points before, but you keep on repeating it over and over. Why? So you refuse to agree with my refutations?