Question on WWII

[bombshoo]

Obviously, Hitler was evil, and Britian, the USA, and France eventually were trying to stop this, and fight for justice, but my question is, did Britian and France want Germany not to annex Czechoslovakia, and Poland, because they were afraid it would threaten their power and prestige as nations, more like WWI, or were they initially concerned about the populace in those countries well being?

If they only orginally cared because they thought that it would make Germany a power and influence rival, when did they start caring and realize that what the Nazis were doing was horrible?

I guess the same goes for Japan...The Rape of Nanking was known worldwide..did this actually hurt Japan and make them seem evil to the world, or did most not even care until their possesions were in danger?

 

[JohnRM]

It is one thing to care about what is going on, but it was quite another to be able to do something about it. Two things -- The European nations were devastated after WWI and were mostly broke and tired. Furthermore, it was a big world back then. For the UK, at least, to fight a war with Germany was like the Earth fighting a war with the Moon. For the UK and the USA to fight a war with Japan was like fighting a war with Mars. The logistical aspect is probably the single greatest task of World War II and it has been mostly overlooked. Nothing of the same proportion was ever attempted before, nor since. The closest that you can come is the Berlin Airlift.

 

[rilnator]

Britain and France didn't think she was worth fighting a world war for. She was a relatively new country (formed after WW1) and I think Chamberlain sympathised with Hitler with regards to re-uniting the German people. The Germans made it look as though the Sudentens were being victimised ( the formula he used for Poland and Austria). Hitler assured him this would be the last land grab.

France and Russia- not Britian, had guarenteed the Czech's survival as a nation but France didn't want another world war and the Russians weren't going to move unless the French did. The Soviets also would have had problems getting troops to Czechoslovakia as the Balkan countries didn't trust her.

As soon as Hitler bought up the Danzig question Chamberlain put his foot down and didn't budge. The Brits did have a treaty with the Poles. He must have finally realised what kind of man Hitler was.

There is an argument that British and French back stabbed the Czechs so they would have time to get ready for another world war. I agree with this argument and think Chamberlain did the right thing and had his countries best interests at heart.

I find it amusing that while Hitler was carving up the Czech state The Poles- just like vultures were more than happy to grab the Tsechen province of the helpless country.

They would soon learn.................

 

[privatehudson]

Co-incidentally, Hitler would always rant that he wanted to actually fight in 1938 rather than 1939, although IMO things probably would have gone even worse in 1938 for him.

 

[Dragonlord]

Nations do not often go to war because other nations or their leaders are perceived as 'evil'. Moral indignation is usually not enough, it's always about protecting one's own interests. The sole exception I can think of is the Bosnia intervention.. peacekeeping by the UN isn't in the same league.

In WWII, the Allies certainly didn't go to war against Germany and Japan because of moral indignation. They (France and Britain) did declare war against Germany over Poland, but that was IMO because they finally realized that Hitler's ambitions couldn't be appeased, so they tried to set him limits in the only way they knew.
Remember, they didn't actually DO anything much against Germany (Phony War) until Germany attacked France. The French and the British Expeditionary Force sat on their hands and watched Germany Blitzkrieg Poland, probably unbelieving things could go so fast..
I agree that Hitler was evil, but that wasn't apparent to most people at the time..

And Japan? No-one went to war against Japan, whether over Nanking or Manchukuo, nothing happened until Japan attacked.

 

[privatehudson]

I very much doubt the BEF would have been that capable of intervening in the Polish campaign or attacking Germany during it, especially since the French were extremely reluctant to do so. Ultimately, nations care about their own self interests, and going to war when you don't have to over a country you don't consider important simply isn't going to happen.

 

[Dragonlord]

I very much doubt the BEF would have been that capable of intervening in the Polish campaign or attacking Germany during it, especially since the French were extremely reluctant to do so. Ultimately, nations care about their own self interests, and going to war when you don't have to over a country you don't consider important simply isn't going to happen.

I quite agree on both counts. The BEF couldn't have attacked on it's own hook.

 

[privatehudson]

Plus in the phoney war there prevailed a very niaeve attitude to the war, an example being a RAF officer who protested that bombing the Black Forest should be considered a warcrime because it was "private property" A few French Generals were also quite obstinate about the war, one saying something like "we are not Poles, it cannot happen here" when asked about blitzkrieg.

Many in the west were about to get a very rude awakening

 

[Adler17]

IF the French AND the British intervened earlier and attacked when the German soldiers were in Poland Hitler would have lost the war very quickly. Germany was unable to fight at two fronts that time. But the French and British generals were not of the quality of German generals in that time...

Adler

 

[privatehudson]

To be fair, many German Generals weren't that brilliant either, not all of them agreed with Blitzkrieg and the tactics of 1940 for one

 

[Adler17]

Yes, but the Germans executed their risky plans surprising the enemy. After Poland the French didn´t learn their lesson. I do not think that the German generals would have made the same error as the French did.

Adler

 

[privatehudson]

Nope, they made entirely different but often as ridiculous ones instead

Still, to have been a fly on the wall in the French planning sessions before the war and to have said "And what if they just... go round the maginot line?" would have been fun

 

[dgfred]

Nope, they made entirely different but often as ridiculous ones instead

Still, to have been a fly on the wall in the French planning sessions before the war and to have said "And what if they just... go round the maginot line?" would have been fun

It would have been fun, but they would have laughed that quote right out
of the room . It was a rude awakening indeed.

 

[JohnRM]

I took less than three weeks to conquer Poland. It would have taken the allies longer than that simply to organize their military for war.

 

[Case]

Still, to have been a fly on the wall in the French planning sessions before the war and to have said "And what if they just... go round the maginot line?" would have been fun

The French actually expected the Germans to go around the Maginot line, and attack through Belgium - hence the majority of the French mobile units being sent into Belgium in May 1940. The purpose of the Maginot Line was to force the Germans to take an indirect approach into France and to free up troops for the French mobile units, and it was sucessful in both objectives.

The critical mistake the French made was to assume that the Germans wouldn't send significant forces through the Ardennes. As Alastair Horne points out in his classic book 'To Lose a Battle', if the French had stationed a couple of decent divisions in the Ardennes sector they probably could have held off the Germans and survived.

 

[Esckey]

During WW2 nobody learned from any lesson or mistake. French got surprised by the Germans in the Ardennes.........4 years later the Americans got surprised by the Germans in the Ardennes. The Germans never fully took Sevestapol cause they stopped to bomb it to crap.......they also never took Leningrad for the same reason. But hindsight is 20/20