[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vm / vmg / vr / vrpg / vst / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip / qa] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / pw / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / vt / wsg / wsr / x / xs] [Settings] [Search] [Mobile] [Home]
Board
Settings Mobile Home
/his/ - History & Humanities

Name
Options
Comment
Verification
4chan Pass users can bypass this verification. [Learn More] [Login]
File
  • Please read the Rules and FAQ before posting.

08/21/20New boards added: /vrpg/, /vmg/, /vst/ and /vm/
05/04/17New trial board added: /bant/ - International/Random
10/04/16New board for 4chan Pass users: /vip/ - Very Important Posts
[Hide] [Show All]


Starting February 1st, 4chan Passes are increasing in price.

One year: $30, Three years: $60


[Advertise on 4chan]


File: 1689217479326819.jpg (125 KB, 750x960)
125 KB
125 KB JPG
>We
*rejected german peace overtures*
>were
*allied with the bolsheviks, did their best to save the bolshies' totalitarian hellhole*
>the
*firebombed german cities, killed hundreds of thousands of german kids; tortured german pow's*
>good
*the brittish public cheered for every german city that was razed and every kid they managed to burn alive*
>guys
>>
File: fact.jpg (118 KB, 524x703)
118 KB
118 KB JPG
That was Hitler's plan for UK by the way.
>>
>>17422655
>*allied with the bolsheviks, did their best to save the bolshies' totalitarian hellhole*

The stormfaggot has had to change this due to Nazi Germany allying with the Soviets utterly mind broke him. Lol. Lmao even!
>>
File: Smol Anne.jpg (446 KB, 1355x1996)
446 KB
446 KB JPG
>>17422655
>*rejected german peace overtures*
>...only after Nazi Germany broke practically every treaty it had ever signed

I know scraps of paper mean nothing to you Hans but here in the South, your word of honor means everything. Maybe you should take a hint.

>*allied with the bolsheviks, did their best to save the bolshies' totalitarian hellhole*

Three words,

Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact

>*firebombed german cities, killed hundreds of thousands of german kids; tortured german pow's*

Could have ended it at any time by overthrowing Hitler or surrendering.

>*the brittish public cheered for every german city that was razed and every kid they managed to burn alive*

The loudest critic of the bombing of Dresden is David Irving who's literally fucking British.
>>
>>17422693
> overthrowing Hitler or surrendering.
Bad faith. Such actions were criminal and unthinkable for the Germans.
>>
>>17422659
why not post the source this is based on instead of some redditor's blog
>>
File: 1714059527342303.png (317 KB, 1069x609)
317 KB
317 KB PNG
>>17422659
>>
>>17422655
Nazism will never be rehabilitated.
>>
>>17422698
It wsa bad faith in Hitler that got Germany in that mess
>>
File: 1735912333244.png (1.33 MB, 1080x2340)
1.33 MB
1.33 MB PNG
>>17422655
Its insane that people can't see this. We need to rise up, rise up now, rise up let our roar be heard. We chose wrong, but there is still time to fix our mistakes before they are set in stone. We can rise up, make them feel our muscles. Our policy will be hard but fair. We will no longer be under the yoke sicne 1945. We chose the wrong way! We need to rise. And we could have a great future again. Where men are allowed to be MEN. And there are no tampon's in the mens toilet
>>
>17423713
>twatter screenshot
Didn't read.
>>
>>17422655
Not true, the British generally had the false impression they were "liberating Germans from Hitler." Your post would be an accurate description of the Russians though
>>
>>17422655
>*allied with the bolsheviks, did their best to save the bolshies' totalitarian hellhole*
Lmfao faggot
>>
File: apu's consideration.jpg (35 KB, 664x527)
35 KB
35 KB JPG
>>17423713
>fresh breast milk ice cream
going a bit too far there pal
>>
>>17423929
How is that an incorrect assertion?
>>
>>17422655
Anglos have effectively destroyed all self-conscious whites. That includes the American South, then the Boers, then Germany, then Rhodesia, and South Africa.
>>
>>17422655
Hitler wasn't selling the German people anything different than the Kaiser did, Germany must take its rightful place by force since the world refuses to acknowledge its greatness. The reason the US still has so many troops in Germany is to keep it from doing the same shit again.
>>
File: chris handsome.jpg (39 KB, 840x473)
39 KB
39 KB JPG
>>17423713
>fresh breast milk ice cream
The absolute insanity of nerds typing this out lmao. What the fuck, have you losers ever talked to people in real life? My granddad, a Hungarian farmer, would've slapped me senselss for saying something so perverted
>>
>*allied with the bolsheviks, did their best to save the bolshies' totalitarian hellhole*
Who's gonna tell him?
>>
>>17425860
he has been told multiple times, he just copes by saying it doesn't count
>>
>>17425860
This is a demoralization thread spammed by pajeets. Nobody in this thread is actually German or at the very least pro-Nazi.
>>
File: Non Agression Pact.jpg (273 KB, 1333x566)
273 KB
273 KB JPG
>>17422655
>allied with the bolsheviks
Treaty of Brest-Litovsk 1917
Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact 1939
>>
>>17425899
>Stalin is the bride
Let's be real here he was the one wearing pants in their short relationship
>>
>>17422693
The "-" is a word as well, retard.
>>
>>17422659
based Himmlerman
The villain we needed not the one we deserved.
>>
>>17422665
>allying with the Soviets
name the alliance, when did Germany and The Soviet Union make a formal military assistance treaty?
>>17422693
>your word of honor means everything
and the Germans never broke a single treaty.
>MR pact
Which wasnt a formal military alliance while the British did establish the mutual military assistance treaty with the USSR.
>people deserve to be murdered for not killing their democratically elected leaders
what the fuck?
>even the British themselves recognize their mistake
True.
>>
>>17422768
already had been.
You just dont like when its used by Gentiles.
>>17425559
What does this even mean? Germany was the most domestic self concerned and least expansive colonial power.
Whenever England got the upper hand on France they annexed the entire country, Germany effectively demolished the French army and took a small river valley that was historically apart of the Germanic cultural sphere.
>>17425860
>>17425864
>>17425880
Why do you mistake a non-aggression pact for a military alliance?
>>
uh oh the rajeet is back
>>
>>17426004
You are literally a self admitted jew living in Switzerland thobeit.
>>
>>17422655
SAAAARRR
>>
>>17423713
lol what the hell is wrong with stormweenies?
>>
>>17426004
>>17426082
Why is op a pajeet, exactly?
>>
File: old hess.jpg (66 KB, 634x667)
66 KB
66 KB JPG
The fuck did this big eyebrow having Kraut do to make the British kill him?
>>
>>17425997
>Why do you mistake a non-aggression pact for a military alliance?
He desperately want to avoid admitting that the narrative about Churchhill being a hero, which he grew up with, is nothing but lies and that the man doomed not only his country but the rest of europe. Pretending, ridiculously, that the germans were equally complicit in supporting the soviet union helps him with that.
>>
>>17426256
>aggressively shills for hitler
>has severe seething episodes about the British especially churchill to the point he outright makes up scenarios to say they are dumb
>refuses to ever post his hand while saying he is totally white
>also just tends to be most active during said pajeet times
you can probably put two and two together
>>
>>17422655
Rejected lies.

Helped the side whose only crime was self defence.

Caused very few civilian casualties compared to Germany.

Civilized Germany.
>>
>>17422698
Then they are a criminal people and there was no innocent person left.
>>
>>17425992
Germans broke every treaty.
After the Germans declared war and invaded their allies.
Hitler was nit democratically elected nir did he respect democracy.
The mistake wss not killing more.
>>
>>17425997
>Whenever England got the upper hand on France they annexed the entire country,
Like during the Napoleonic war.
>>
>>17422693
Prove you a white dixoid and not an ellis islander if not an actual subhuman shitskin.
>>
>>17425559
The world doesn't owe the Germans a thing. They were French rapebabies for hundreds of years and never good enough to build an intercontinental empire
>>
>>17425992
>name the alliance, when did Germany and The Soviet Union make a formal military assistance treaty?
Molotov-Ribbentrob pact.
>>
>>17426990
You first.
>>
>>17426990
coal
>>17426004
gem
>>
>>17426280
Can’t blame Indian for loving Hitler.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NsLAdKk4t7U
>>
>>17426833
>>17427032
Even league of three emperor pact collapse, history repeat
>>
File: you bore me.webm (726 KB, 1120x656)
726 KB
726 KB WEBM
>>17422749
If OP gets to make the exact same thread every week then I get to copy and paste replies form previous threads too.

The article in the post you're replying to is this: https://listverse.com/2017/08/20/10-plans-hitler-would-have-put-in-motion-if-the-nazis-had-won/
which links to this article: https://www.pajiba.com/tv_reviews/ssgb-some-brits-dont-think-it-sounds-all-that-bad.php which links to this wikipedia page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Sea_Lion#Planned_occupation_of_Britain which sources that information form these books:
-Shirer, William L. (1960). The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich. Simon and Schuster, New York. pp. 782, 943
-Otto Bräutigam: "So hat es sich zugetragen…" (Holzner Verlag, Germany 1968, p. 590)
-Adolf Hitler: table talk 5 November 1941 (in: Hitler's Table Talk, Weidenfeld & Nicolson, 1953)

Now do you think the idea is wrong because these sources are factually wrong and historically inaccurate, or because they're not pro-Hitler.
>>
>>17427033
I didnt claim to be a dixoid and posted porn you retard.
>>
>>17426830
>the peace offers were lies
False.
>self defense
The civilians of Danzig are not military targets, Pidor.
>compared to Germany
Germany never killed civilians as a war time measure. The British did.
>civilized Germany
Look at a list of every composer from Europe, compare the number from Germany to the number from England LOL.
Anglo-Saxons are literally from Germany.
>>17426833
What treaties and what part specifically was broken?
Hitler was democratically elected, he won a plurality of the votes.
>the mistake was not killing more Europeans
Jewish
>>17426835
Britain wasn’t in a 1v1 during the Napoleon war and they never held the upper hand against France. It was Russia that defeated them then another coalition thereafter.
However when they did 1v1 the British took the whole of France.
The British do this to everyone like they did to the French, to the Boers, to the Irish.
Germany never actually took an entire country in one sweep unless it was itself a German speaking country and technically they never even did that.
>>17427000
Actually the world does owe the Germans not trying to murder them.
Furthermore the Germans have no French paternal lines.
The Germans literally had an intercontinental empire though. There are still more Germans abroad in former German colonies like in Africa than French in former french colonies.
>>17425559
>must take its rightful place by force
Germany already did and the US approved. Also stop quoting The HOI4 monarchist line.
Germany was the most domestically concerned European power historically fighting far fewer wars of expansion than France or England. You just dislike the Germans because they did it better.
>>
>>17427450
They’re wrong because they’re factually wrong and Hitler’s table talks is not a well sourced book even in the age of woke it has been shredded for its lack of historicity and the uneven distribution of claims and evidence.
>pro Hitler source
What even is a “pro Hitler source”?
Something that doesn’t outright lie about Hitler is pro-Hitler
If Hitler was truly so evil you wouldn’t need extensive poorly source books from 80 years worth of authors who white wash everything Western and Soviet while really reaching for ways to condemn Hitler.
There’s also the problem of the endless web of fallback explanations.
>Hitler was going to do “x”
Well why didn’t he?
>he uh didn’t have uh something
The Germans sat on Poland for 5 years with enough ammo to kill the entire planet, 90% of Poles survived despite the efforts of the Home Army. Yet this called a genocide of Poles.
The Germans sat on Bohemia for even longer and during peacetime. Where’s the grand enslavement and mass genocide?

This “if the Nazis had won” is just another cope to explain why Western foreign policy followed Rodef Jewish law lmao.
>>
>>17422655
What's the real point of spamming these threads? None of us have a time machine to go back. Are we gonna just bellyache till we die?
>>
File: mass killing sites.jpg (247 KB, 1069x872)
247 KB
247 KB JPG
>>17427639
>Germany never killed civilians as a war time measure
>>
File: notes on nationalism.jpg (53 KB, 773x647)
53 KB
53 KB JPG
>>17427691
>>
>>17426272
>He desperately want to avoid admitting that the narrative about Churchhill being a hero, which he grew up with, is nothing but lies

Literally all of reddit believes this you fucking moron. Stop trying to sound like you're revolutionary. /pol/faggots and Reddit trannys are literally two sides of the same coin.
>>
File: _F9IMrxw_400x400.jpg (53 KB, 400x400)
53 KB
53 KB JPG
>>17422655
Post hands
>>
>>17427639
>>17427656

I am 100% convinced at this point that you are as neet and have autism. Seeing how you've kept this going for over a year now.
>>
>>17427639
>False
No, it's the truth.

>The civilians of Danzig are not military targets, Pidor.
They were animals, not civilians.

>Germany never killed civilians as a war time measure.
Correct, they killed them as part of their plot to wipe out all of human civilization.

>Hitler was democratically elected, he won a plurality of the votes.
Democratic system didn't work that way.

>What treaties and what part specifically was broken?
Everything? Both the spirit and the literal meaning.

>However when they did 1v1 the British took the whole of France.
When was that? When you were playing Europe Universalis 4 doesn't count.

>Actually the world does owe the Germans not trying to murder them.
It did. The German people existed because for a act of mercy.

>You just dislike the Germans because they did it better.
Lost two world wars.
>>
>>17426272
Churchill was not a hero, but he still helped save Europe. Not just that, but he saved it's soul, if only by accident, through teh nobility that was the destruction of Nazi Germany.

He purified himself and others through the act of righteous bloodshed. The impurity of the Nazi being was corrected, their blood was santificied by the ground it was shed on, and Europe was better off for it.
>>
Allies stole rightful German land, that alone shows their terroristic, barbarian ways. Giving it to Poles was the most insulting way of conducting affairs and I'm happily cheering on now see the European white, native population of France, UK, Russia & USA
>>
>>17427774
A few problems. Firstly there is no way to verify these beyond finding actual bodies because Eastern Europe still living largely a pre-modern way of life so any farmer claiming someone murdered his entire family will be taken at face value even if his family turns up alive at some later point.
Secondly, there is no reason to take these people at face value as they have a tremendous incentive to lie for both political and financial reasons during and post war.
Thirdly, this region of the world was home to the largest partisan movement and largest partisan army in the world. The Germans were not going village to village indiscriminately killing civilians, like the British did in Palestine, the Germans were using typical counter partisan security measures common to the times and much more benevolent than the measures deployed by the USSR or the British Empire or Yugoslavs.
These were also not people being indiscriminately firebombed, even if we assume these are innocent civilians, they are being discriminated against on an individual level rather than condemned as “people who made the mistake of living in the target zone”, at the very least, assuming every slander against the Germans is true, they at least did it in an organized and discerning fashion rather than callously blasting away without discerning friend from foe.
Many POWs, neutral and even allied civilians died to British bombings.
How many German citizens who were also members of the NSDAP were executed in a mass killing in Poland?
>>17427887
You have been entering into Revisionism threads for a year?
>>
>>17428279
Could you please post a couple of books on the eastern front, partisan warfare, and massacres that you got these ideas from? I'd be very interested to find out if anything other than that fucking Mattongo toilet paper has entered your skull
>>
>>17428279
>The Germans were not going village to village indiscriminately killing civilians, like the British did in Palestine, the Germans were using typical counter partisan security measures common to the times and much more benevolent than the measures deployed by the USSR or the British Empire or Yugoslavs.
This nigga is delusional
>>
All the "hitler was actually le good guy" talking points ive seen are rendered moot by reading mein kampf where Hitler explicitly talks about his intent on attacking other European nations for economic gain

he even goes as far as to specify that it HAS to be whites whites who die too, because Germany cant into colonialism
>>
File: 1713036509719367.png (214 KB, 600x903)
214 KB
214 KB PNG
>>17428279
Ok.
Lets put this into perspective.

1. Can you prove any German woman was actually raped and not just straight up gave false testimony?

2. Can you prove Dresden was actually bombed without using fabricated photos and actually show me a document signed by Churchill to bomb Dresden.

3. Can you prove the Volga Germans were actually exterminated and not just relocated.

4. By your own definition of evidence, can you prove the communists ever did a single genocide? Can you prove anyone died at the Gulags? Can you vertify the bodies? Can we really trust historians?
>>
>>17422655
It's honestly kind of remarkable how the Western Allies openly had a policy of extermination of German civilians and how it seems to be kind of accepted and tolerated today.
>>
>>17422693
The only notable thing about dixoid history is them being traitors to the Union.
>>
>>17428279
>Firstly there is no way to verify these beyond finding actual bodies
Muh bomes and all that. Except of course said bomes were discovered long ago and you retards are either ignorant of or purposefully ignore them. When your ilk are told about them just jump onto the cope about how "we can't know they were murdered". As if hundreds of thousands of bodies being buried in the middle of nowhere is completely ordinary.
>https://www.researchgate.net/publication/250397297_Excavating_Nazi_Extermination_Centres
>The excavations at the Rzuchów forest (Fig. 6), focused mainly on five mass graves (Pawlicka-Nowak, 2004a: 22-24, Pawlicka-Nowak, 2004b: 59-64), and eight ‘objects’. These are remnants of structures or installations, four of which are defined as ‘field furnaces’ and four as ‘crematoria’ (2004a: 18-21). The graves vary in length between 62 and 254 metres, and in width between 3 and 10 metres. Depths of 3-4 metres are recorded only for two mass graves, 2 and 5. They were filled with grey soil, burnt waste and ground human bones.
>The mass graves (Fig. 8) are up to five meters deep and their fill consists mostly of charcoal and cremated remains. About a fifth of the graves also contains decomposing corpses in the state of wax-fat transformation. Grave 10 is one of the biggest (24x18m) and the deepest (5.2m). It consists mainly of decomposing corpses, and at the depth of 4.4m there is a layer of lime. Lime is found in other graves too and was probably used to accelerate decomposition. Mass grave 5, 32x10x4.5m, is also one of the largest graves, but it contains only layers of burnt human remains. The burnt fill is separated by sterile sand indicating multiple filling. The drilling and the analysis of sediments suggest to the archaeologists that when the centre was eliminated, there were 33 mass graves.
>>
>>17427980
>>17427988
This is a self admitted woman who has an irrational hatred of European people in particular European males.
They regularly get basic facts wrong such as believing Danzig was not a free city or believing Germany declared war on France.
Ignore this poster they bring no serious analysis to the table.
>>17428106
While it is a shame gorgeous ginger women will suffer there is justice in the fact the Merchant Souled Anglo has gotten “the bad end” of the Faustian bargain. While Germany bargained with Wotan, Germany did in fact get what Wotan promised; a good fight and thousands maybe millions of Heroes. Lines on a map are a cope. The German folk wax and wane, but an Ilian fight occurs once in a race’s history.
The Anglo bargained for a top spot in the world of international capitol and they got it, now they reap the rewards of international capital, betrayal and replacement.
I hope the generation born between 1950 and 1960 enjoyed it because 1200 years of history as well as the future of their descendants has been sold to pay for this single generation to live as kings.
The Germans still have Valhalla-a battle record showing them rolling 9:1 against the rest of the planet. What does the Anglo have once the last boomer is gone?

Cattle die
Kinsmen die
But Renown lives FOREVER
>>
>>17428418
But there aren’t hundreds of thousands of bodies. There are hundreds.
And no we don’t know if they were murdered. Where is the proof they were killed by the Germans even?
How do we know these aren’t victims of Partisan on Partisan violence resulting from multiple factions of Partisans. We know Betar and Armija Krajowa came to blows with each other and with the Ruthenian bandit gangs almost as much as they did with the Soviets and Germans.
How do we know they didn’t die of starvation or disease or collateral damage?
We don’t. To call ALL of it murder is speculation and extremely biased against the Germans.
>>
>>17428389
1
Don’t care
2
Yes the British and Germans have no incentive to lie.
>signed by Churchill
???
Churchill wasn’t the head of bomber command.
3
Don’t care but Slavs are known for ethnic cleansings. Things they still do today while Germans generally just shove off the rowdy elements and put the rest to work as employees to Junkers.
4
Don’t care
Also communists are liars who have incentive to lie. Germans rarely if ever lie compared to Slavs, Jews, and Communists.
The German personality type does not lie well. While Slavs are dumb enough to believe their own lies, Jews literally just live in an alternate world, communists make it a point of political action to deploy strategic misinformation.
To deny any of this is just absurd.
>>17428366
Actually I am correct.
Also not an argument.
>>17428358
Actually there are plenty of Jewish authors the children of partisans who cover these things and the Armia Krajowa has numerous books filled with personal accounts.
So why aren’t you well read on the topic?
What books have you read about the Partisan War in Poland?
>>
>>17428451
>But there aren’t hundreds of thousands of bodies. There are hundreds.
No
>Mass grave 5, 32x10x4.5m, is also one of the largest graves, but it contains only layers of burnt human remains
1440 metres cubed
https://www.legendurn.co.uk/how-much-ash-left-after-cremation-what-size-urn-do-i-need
>The average amount of ash left over after the cremation of an adult is about 3 to 3.5 liters
3.5 litres = 0.0035 metres cubed
Ok, the source says it's in layers with lime and sand, so lets say only 1/5 of that grave is filled with human remains, so 288 m3 of humanity
288/0.0035 gives us about 80,000 people, in a single grave, in a site with over 30 graves. And that's being generous
>we don’t know if they were murdered
>Partisans
>starvation or disease or collateral damage
I already answered this cope. Why are there hundreds of thousands of bodies in the middle of nowhere?
>>
>>17428459
Oh, you haven't actually read anything on the matter that wasn't from /pol/, have you? That's even more depressing than being misled by an actual published piece of denier history. Well, please enjoy being a retarded nigger, or if you experience some kind of miracle feel free to actually name the books that gave you your beliefs
>>
>>17428471
I don’t go on /pol/ unless theres a happening but I will take your self admission of ignorance on the topic of eastern partisan warfare as a concession.
FYI, /pol/ doesn’t have WWII threads.
>>
>>17427691
You’re supposed to go don’t to your local NSDAP headquarters and join. Oh wait. They don’t exist. Then just whine and complain about da jooz or something.
>>
>>17428459
>signed by Churchill
>???
>Churchill wasn’t the head of bomber command.

LM AO YET Stormfaggots like you
Say that the holocaust was fake
Because there are no signed documents by Hitler
Even though Hitler was not personally involved with the camps

FUCKING CHECK MATE NIGGER RETARD.
You cant find a SINGLE document signed by Churchill that Dresden was bombed. So it literally never happened.
Every German nigger is a liar until proven otherwise.
>>
It's the same thread with the same talking points over and over again. Whenever one argument is refuted OP jumps to another or simply goes in denial until the thread dies and the cycle repeats. He's a textbook example of arguing with a Jew
>>
>>17428877
He's actually a fucking Indian
>>
>>17428521
>yeah but Muh Shoah
What is wrong with these “people”?
>>
>>17428877
>>17428919
Actually neither. These threads devolve into (You) just outright lying about Hitler because the British position is so untenably moronic it has become indefensible when under any real scrutiny.
There are never any real answers given.
You will
>claim Hitler broke Munich despite never actually breaking any of Munich’s points
>claim Hitler allied with Stalin despite the MRP being a NAP not a military alliance
>claim Hitler wanted to wipe out Europeans for no reason other than???
You don’t even give reasons for that last one you usually just say “he was heckin insane”
>claim Britain was “balancing the powers” by torpedoing an independent Europe and ushering in the age of Asia and America
>claim a flight of German single engine aircraft strafing a polish stable used as a hospital (once) is equivalent to carpet bombing the entirety of middle of Europe for four entire years

The copes are endless you never give any answers you never give any analysis, you hand wave away criticism as some Neo Nazi conspiracy or Indian nationalism.

You lost, and we are watching you flail around trying to divert attention away from your loss.
>>
>>17428521
>the holocaust
???
Who is “denying the holocaust”? Everyone in these threads has always said the holocaust was a justified security measure meant to suppress war criminals, partisans, bandits, and terrorists, the fact many slanderous lies have surrounded this German security action and such lies are constantly disproven does not mean anyone is “denying” what actually happened.
No. There was no mass gassing.
No. There was no mass murdering.
Yes many Jews died in the war but they died largely of malnutrition, collateral damage, and just outright fighting in the woodlands of Poland in what was really a free for all.

Also this entire gotcha, which didn’t even work, is just whataboutism because the British behavior in WWII was unbelievably evil and lead directly to Europeans being half commie half capital and entirely ZOG.
>>
you can just smell the curry from these posts
>>
>>17428447
>self admitted woman
I thought I wasn't a woman, anon. Can you at least keep delusions together?

>They regularly get basic facts wrong such as believing Danzig was not a free city or believing Germany declared war on France.
Danzig was a free city, but Germany did declare war on France by invading Poland.
>>
>>17428447
You are denying the holocaust by claiming it was a security measure.

Though, if it was, then I think it's fair to argue every single German death during ww2 was a security measure.
>>
Danziggers had it coming.
They were willing to provoke another (a fucking 'nother!) great war in Europe. If anything Prusskis should have been culled to the last man.
>>
>>17425997
>Why do you mistake a non-aggression pact for a military alliance?
Sure looks like an alliance when you're both invading the same country at once
>>
>>17422698
All revolutions in human history have been illegal acts, and revolutionaries have been branded as criminals or terrorists.
>>
>>17429160
>when you're both invading the same country at once
SAAR! DO NOT REDEEM THE EAST!
I WILL REDEEM IT YOU BITCH!
t. Rajadolf Hitler
>>
File: smug apu.jpg (51 KB, 909x941)
51 KB
51 KB JPG
I don't want my country to be a client state of Germany or Britain or Russia or America.
I just don't ok?
Crazy but true.
>>
>>17427988
>firebombing german cities, burning hundreds of thousands of kids alive and having the brittish public cheer for this
>allying with commies, supporting a horribly evil ideology, whose adherents would go on to ruin his lands
I fail to see what's noble about any of this.
>>
>>17427980
>hurray for the noble, glorious act of burning hundreds of thousands of kids alive
>several anons repeats this
You brits haven't changed at all since then, huh? I'd argue that, with souls as rotten as yours, the collapse of your civilization was only a matter of time. You importing africans and muslims to rape your daughters was probably inevitable.
>>
Meanwhile German soldiers were doing the child burning with their own hands instead of planes.
They reaped what they sowed.
None of those German children would be dead if Hitler hadn't started a war with Poland.
>>
>>17429852
>>hurray for the noble, glorious act of burning hundreds of thousands of kids alive
>>several anons repeats this
Survival of the fittest.
Germans were unfit.
>>
>>17422655
>the brittish public cheered for every german city that was razed and every kid they managed to burn alive
Did this actually happen though?
Like ever.
I know Germans were very fond of publicly humiliating "undesirables" in their country, and their Japanese allies were even worse at that, but I've never heard of the same happening in Britain.
>>
>>17429847
The Nazi was an animal. Allowing him to be in charge of an country created an state of pure evil. This allowed good to exist through the opposition of evil, and allowed Western Europe to spiritually cleanse itself through the destruction of this evil.
>>
>>17429861
NO NOT LIKE THAT
>>
>>17429858
How are there 600,000 people in that barn?
Were those kids apart of a partisan group?
Do they even exist?
95% of those who died would have lived if Churchill had accepted Hitler’s peace offer or literally just let Poland reap what they sowed with Germany.
>>
>>17429861
>>17429903
Germans aren’t the ones going extinct.
Survival of the fittest.
There are still Germans in Namibia.
Where are the Anglos in Rhodesia?
>>
>>17429890
Can you make a serious post instead or at least walk us through your logical thought process by defining your terms?
>>
>>17430083
The only thing Poland "sowed" with Germany was existing.
>>
>>17429098
DanZoomers were victimized by Poles who chimped out on civilian liners and aircraft lmao.
>>
>>17429160
>>17429235
But it wasn’t an alliance.
They also don’t invade at the same time. The Soviets invaded much later.
Also, so what the British made a formal alliance with the judeo-Bolsheviks while Hitler didn’t.
Own up to it
>>
File: 1736873135451142.jpg (988 KB, 2880x2880)
988 KB
988 KB JPG
>>17430087
>Germans aren’t the ones going extinct.
Except every other /pol/tard is telling me they are? Which is it.
>Where are the Anglos in Rhodesia?
Anglos chimped out while German Namibians didn't.
>>
>>17429088
>the holocaust is not a historical event it is a correct interpretation of an event
LOL
Did the holocaust happen or not?
It was a security measure and the vast majority of people died as POWs due to malnutrition and collateral damage damage being caught in the thunderdome of Slav-land.
Where is the German partisan army in England?
>>
>>17430083
>peace offer
Hitler had already been given what we wanted under the expectation that he wouldn't take anymore.
Then he took more.
And more.
And more and more.
>>
>>17429085
The declaration of war on Poland was not a declaration of war against France. Simple as.
You are anonymous. But you claim to be a woman. Why shouldn’t I permit you to discredit yourself?
>>
>>17430123
>The declaration of war on Poland was not a declaration of war against France.
Except it was because Britan and France made it clear that they would enter a state of war with Germany in case of an invasion of Poland.
>>
>>17430087
>Where are the Anglos in Rhodesia?
Still there
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_people_in_Zimbabwe
There's actually more of them than German Namibians
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_Namibians
>>
>>17429029
>Indians are the ones who want to stop immigration to the UK
L O L
>>17430094
Shooting at German liners, forcing the Germans to undergo illegal search and seizures, the fact Poland was also an illegitimate state which had no problem breaking the land agreements with Germany when it benefitted them.
>>17430101
>/pol/
??
>but Germany
It’s worse in the UK and the Anglo world broadly.
Berlin is majority German. London is majority foreign.
The British were never invaded and defeated so what’s their excuse for being worse off than the Germans?
>Anglos chimped out by existing
LOL get a load of this anti-White nigger.

We are still waiting for you to prove races do not differ in intelligence lmao.
>>
>>17430135
>Poland was also an illegitimate state
How.
And Germany recognize Poland didn't it?
>>
>>17430135
>Brings up modern politics
>Gets confused when called /pol/
>>
>>17430109
>under the expectation
What expectation?
>he took more
Where? When?
Hitler only ever raised issues that Weimar Germany also faced.
You don’t know about this because you don’t know about Weimar Germany. You aren’t aware of Austria, Sudetenland, and Danzig being decades old problems that Hitler (finally) handled after years of being in power.
You don’t know this because you don’t come into these threads to trade information. You come into these threads because you have strong feelings about WWII because you were told as a child it’s the reason why the racism exists.
>>17430128
Except it wasn’t. It was literally not a formal declaration of war on the UK or France.
Not a single German lifted a finger against Western Europe until they struck Germany first.
>>17430133
Nope there are actually more German Namibians than English Zimbabweans. There are only 20,000 English Zimbabweans based on the census data. The 44,000 number comes from a foreign news article.
>>
>>17429021
>you never give any answers
We do. I just did.
>you never give any analysis,
Wrong. See: >>17429098
>you hand wave away criticism as some Neo Nazi conspiracy
Prove you are not a Neonazi without devilving into hitlerite talking points.
Pro tip: you can't.
>or Indian nationalism.
You will NEVER be huwhite.
>>
>>17430156
Germany recognized the Poland which existed in 1918, there was no reason to see Poland being a shackle on Germany in 1919 was a legitimate state. Legitimate Polish land claims begin and end with what they already agreed on with their neighbors. If Poland wanted to modify the borders without conflict they should have discussed it with their neighbors.
Instead they wanted to saber rattle and the government established by the Poles died in exile.
>>17430161
>modern politics
???
I said the Germans are demographically Better off than the UK. That isn’t a political statement it is a statement of fact.
Why are you obsessed with /pol/?
Is there something wrong with objective facts?
>>
>>17430162
>You aren’t aware of Austria, Sudetenland, and Danzig being decades old problems that Hitler (finally) handled after years of being in power.
What's even your point? This is common knowledge. It changes absolutely nothing. Weimar wanted those regions back using peaceful means, Hitler decided on a military approach.
>>
>>17430175
>and the government established by the Poles died in exile.
Because Germany invade Poland in alliance with the Soviet Union?
>>
>>17430175
>Germany recognized the Poland which existed in 1918
Germany lost the war, you know that? Germany also signed the Versailles Treaty where they very much recognized the later Polish border.
Why do you even think that Germany had any say in this? They were the defeated party. They signed whatever the entente presented them.
You really seem to struggle to grasp that.
>>
>>17430170
>we do
Nope.
>Danzig is at fault because I said so
LOL
Poland illegally occupied Danzig. You ignore this and can never give an answer.
Claiming Danzig was at fault is the same as someone claiming “Germany simply deserves to conquer Poland”.
It’s not a real answer.
>Neo Nazi
>Hitlerite
Do you even hear yourself?
You call anything that isn’t shamelessly biased in favor of your personal opinion Neo Nazi Hitlerite talking points.

What if these are just the facts?

I am White with blue eyes and light brown hair.
This attempt to ‘culture-jam’ non-lefties doesn’t work. This worked on lefties in 2016 with the “how can I be racist if I am black? How can I be a misogynist if I am a woman?? I am a a gay trans black woman and I think woke sucks!!” This only worked on shitlibs because shitlibs are retarded ideologues who fall for rhetorical parlor tricks.

This doesn’t work here. You aren’t going to discredit Hitler in the eyes of unbiased Whites by associating him with browns.

Also the dismissal of things because they are Jewish works because of the reputation of the Jews.
There is no reputation of associating Hitler with brown people in modern American media or academia. It simply doesn’t work.

You are trying it and I applaud your efforts. But you lost.
Leftism lost. You were completely outmaneuvered by the Jewish Right and now it’s gentiles vs jews largely independent of politics.

You got eliminated, sorry, thanks for playing, try again in another 800 years when you fall for some other political psyop in whatever civilization comes after this one.
You lost.
It wasn’t even an impressive loss.
You were exposed as bovid retards and stripped of all power in a single media cycle.
>>
>>17422655
>*rejected german peace overtures*
Only because Germany made it clear it did not respect treaties.
>*allied with the bolsheviks*
See Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact.
>1689217479326819.jpg
Modern issues of immigration to Britain are independent of the outcome of WWII.
Every week with this same bullshit.
>>
National Socialism is a leftist ideology you dumbo.
Literally in the name.
>>
>>17430194
>Poland illegally occupied Danzig
Poland never occupied Danzig, It was a free city ruled by the local nazi party
>>
>>17425565
>my dad would commit child abuse if i said something stupid!
Horrible. I hope CPS took care of him.
>>
>>17430194
>Claiming Danzig was at fault
It was.
>M. BECK to-night, through his "chef de cabinet," informed me that at four customs posts on Danzig-East Prussian frontier Polish customs inspectors were to-day informed that by decision of Danzig Senate they would henceforth not be allowed to carry out their duties.
This is what started it.

What, never heard about that?
>>
>>17430204
And it suffers from the same deluded identity politics retardation.
>>
>>17430178
It exonerates Hitler of expansionism and places him firmly in a line of German leaders that no one had any problem with. So we must ask, what was the problem with Hitler if the charge of expansionism is debunked?
It was Hitler against the Jewish mafia.
English Jews didn’t have a problem with Weimar Germany shirking their war debts or grand standing against Poland. It was only when someone arose who didn’t play Shalem did the self described international jews like Samuel Untermeyer and Henry Strakosh chimp out and declare war on Germany.
>>17430182
Germany and the USSR never had an alliance. Why are you calling a non-aggression pact an alliance? It is a non-aggression pact. It does not guarantee mutual military assistance like the British alliance did.
>>17430188
>Germany lost the war
Which means Poland should diplomatically isolate itself, invade its neighbors, and escalate tensions with neighboring major powers?
We know why Poland didn’t play nice with Germany. It’s not even like some secret table talks nonsense, the Poles told the British they expected to be able to hold off the Germans long enough for the Anglo-Frank to win in the West.
Poles unironically believed they could take on the German army.
>they were the defeated party
They signed an armistice.
It’s irrelevant if Germany surrendered unconditionally in 1914 even, Poland wasn’t the victorious party which is why it strained their relations when they quickly gobbled up all the land they could in wars of naked conquest.
>>
>>17430222
>It exonerates Hitler of expansionism
It doesn't.
>They signed an armistice.
And a peace treaty, and further legal documents.

>Poland wasn’t the victorious party
So? No, seriously, what's even your point? How is any of the stupid shit you write relevant in any way? For some bizarre reason you think that legal documents and treaties are less binding than what Germany wanted.
>>
>>17430222
>It does not guarantee mutual military assistance
They did give mutual military and economic assistance to each other though.
It was an alliance in all but name, as in, it was an alliance in *practical reality,* which is all that matters.
>>
>>17430204
I don’t care about Left-Right. But I know (You) are a Lefty so I wanted to remind you, you lost.
ZOG right completely annihilated ZOG left.
No true Left has even existed for 35 years.
>>17430209
Nope. They increased their Westerplatte Garrison illegally which constituted a violation of Danzig’s sovereignty as defined in the League of Nations and treaty of Versailles which was cause for Germany, a guarantor of Danzig to declare war on Poland.
However more than this, Poles were firing upon Germans from within Danzig.
Poles were for decades subjecting Germans to illegal search and seizure in Danzig.
By all legal metrics Poland is at fault.
You can argue their infractions were minor given the scale of what occurred afterword, however they were still infractions.
>>17430213
No what started it was the Poles funneling in thousands of uninformed Thugs after Hitler was elected. The Poles even violated the sovereignty of Danzig in the early 30s when they doubled their garrison, something they did twice, illegally both times as defined by the treaty of Versailles and the League of Nations.
But you never heard of that did you?
Read more.
>>
>>17430230
>ZOG right completely annihilated ZOG left.
>>
>>17430090
I did.

Nazis are animals, not sapient human beings. None of their behavior or believes are human. They were entirely lizard brain impulses bereft of any understanding of reality. Thus, animals.
>>
>>17430230
>thousands of uninformed Thugs after Hitler was elected
Well, that's cute. Makes you wonder why Hitler signed that non-aggression pact with Poland then. Or why he said this on 30 January 1939:

>We have just celebrated the fifth anniversary of the conclusion of our non-aggression pact with Poland. There can scarcely be any difference of opinion to-day among the true friends of peace with regard to the value of this agreement. One only needs to ask oneself what might have happened to Europe if this agreement, which brought such relief, had not been entered into five years ago. In signing it, this great Polish marshal and patriot rendered his people just as great a service as the leaders of the National Socialist State rendered the German people. During the troubled months of the past year the friendship between Germany and Poland was one of the reassuring factors in the political life of Europe.
Such good friends, am I right?

By the way, the events you described happened before Germany signed a non-aggression pact with Poland. In 1933. It happened again during the pre-WW2 tension, but even Germans themselves don't mention it in their correspondence with the British.
>>
>>17430221
All politics is identity.
>>17430227
It does because it calls into question why was Hitler the man who took the heat for things others before him had done?
Why was Hitler specifically targeted by organized Jewry before even taking office?
Restoring your old territories is also just not expansionism. Expansionism is expanding, not (re)litigating existing claims.
>and a peace treaty and further documents
And?
>so?
So Poland isolated itself by not settling with German among others.
Poland could have avoided any tension with Germany by adhering to the previous land agreements.
Poland at the very least could have decided against invading Ukraine and Russia.
But Poland wanted to actually take land that was never really theirs and that they hadn’t even ruled for over a hundred years.
The British and French correctly believed Poles were stupid and violent enough to isolate themselves and thus become reliant on foreign guarantees.
>>17430228
Nope. It wasn’t a formal alliance as it did not guarantee military assistance.
It was literally a non-aggression pact.
>in practical reality
In practical reality it’s still not an alliance.
> German and Soviet cooperation in the invasion of Poland has been described as co-belligerence.[9][10]
> Co-belligerence is the waging of a war in cooperation against a common enemy with or without a military alliance. Generally, the term is used for cases where no formal treaty of alliance exists.
>>
>>17430107
The holocaust happened .

If it is a security measure, then so was killing every single German. Which the allies did not do.
>>
>>17430255
>did not guarantee military assistance.
Irrelevant because they still gave it to them.
>>
>>17430222
>It’s irrelevant if Germany surrendered unconditionally in 1914 even, Poland wasn’t the victorious party which is why it strained their relations when they quickly gobbled up all the land they could in wars of naked conquest.
So Poland won a war against Germany, and Germany agreed to the peace terms, but it wasn't legal because it was the wrong war?
What am I not understanding here?
>>17430230
>Westerplatte Garrison
Oh no, not one small military base of 200 people! I suppose the US occupies and controls Cuba since it has a base in Guantanamo bay
>which was cause for Germany, a guarantor of Danzig to declare war
Germany and Poland went to war in 1933?
>>
File: 87dvzj-1159517815.png (192 KB, 500x500)
192 KB
192 KB PNG
>zog this
>migrants that
This is just a/pol/ thread.
>>
>>17430255
>It does because it calls into question why was Hitler the man who took the heat for things others before him had done?
Done what? Shit, what are you even talking about?
Man, you write so much dumb fucking shit it's insane. Poland isolated itself which is why it had treaties with France and signed non-aggression pacts with Germany and the Soviets? Do you even know what the fuck you're talking about? How is this isolation, you dumbo?
>>
>>17430233
This is why you lose.
>>17430249
You haven’t.
Define
>Nazi
>animal
>human being
>the morality which justifies the murder of man/animal
>where does this morality come from
>any understanding of reality
What does this even mean?
Someone who has no understanding of reality could not built tanks, the Germans built tanks, thus they do not fit the criteria of having no understanding of reality.

I understand you as a tranny have no ability for abstraction, but I am giving you this in the hopes it causes you to shut the fuck up so I can speak with the handful of lefties here who have more than two but less than three brain cells

>>17430250
Because Hitler was trying to repair and normalize relations in the hopes cooler heads would prevail. To no avail or anyones surprise the Poles were incorrigibly retarded diplomatically.
What your last state existing in 1795 does to a mfer.
>>17430257
The holocaust was a security measure because Jews were overrepresented among partisans.
The Germans were not overrepresented among partisans. The Jewish partisans predate the holocaust security measure.
Again, we are waiting for you to show us these German partisans operating in England or the US.
>>17430261
It’s not irrelevant. It doesn’t matter if they worked hand in glove, they didn’t have a formal alliance.
If you’d like to compare assistance given to the USSR we can do that. Now how much lend lease tonnage did Germany give to the Soviets again?
>>
>>17430267
>Poland won a war against Germany
???
No.
Poland didn’t win a war against Germany which really upset the Germans when the Poles were given right of conquest over Germans.
>oh no
As I said, you can say the infraction is minor, but you can not deny it happened, we are no longer arguing if Germany had a legal right to go to war with Poland we are now arguing was Germany’s degree of force applied disproportionate.
Which is entirely different to a question of “Did Poland give cause for a German invasion?”
>Cuba
Irrelevant also the US is not violating any limit or treaty set down by having a garrison in Cuba in the way Poland was by having a garrison (of increased size) in the Westerplatte.
>Germany went to war in 1933
No, Hitler tried for the better part of six years to resolve the problem diplomatically, he had a very strong position given most Poles didn’t want Danzig and some Poles were willing to accept Germany’s offers of exclusive deals and guarantees, the Polish ultranationalists and British and French diplomats ensured negotiations would fail.
>>17430283
>jews don’t exist
>brown people don’t exist
>/pol/
???
>>
File: fad.jpg (126 KB, 1920x1541)
126 KB
126 KB JPG
>>17430300
>>jews don’t exist
>>brown people don’t exist
That's not what I wrote though
>>
>>17430287
>It doesn’t matter if they worked hand in glove
Yes it does.
>>
>>17430286
Poland had treaties with countries like France and the UK BECAUSE they were isolated. Do you understand? If Poland is threatened by a major power, their logical move is to cozy up to another major power.
The British have been doing this for hundreds of years. This is the actual origin of the modern understanding of “divide and rule” you put your “friend” into a bad position so they become reliant upon you
>non-aggression pacts
These are proof of strained relations, also are you going to push the narrative Poland had good or even tolerable relations with its neighbors at the time?
They literally invaded what would become the Soviets in the 20s. Gave nothing to the Lithuanians, invaded Czechoslovakia(an actual invasion), and tried to put together a kind of eastern entente with Hungary and Romania two powers hostile to the Soviets and dubious toward the Germans.
This is what isolating yourself looks like. They were playing fast and loose around the local toughs and got their shit kicked in because of it while Britain laughed maniacally an ocean away because they got their war for free from the Poles.

It’s like you walk into a bar looking for a fight, do you randomly start hitting people or do you insert yourself in an existing conflict on the losing side so you can say “well officer I had to step in look at what happened to my friend here”.
>>
>>17430314
It doesn’t because the original claim was they were in allied. They weren’t.
The second claim which you now backpedal to is they were working together. Well ok but England was working together with the Soviets far more than the Germans ever did and the English had an actual alliance with the Soviets.
>>
File: map-1-1.gif (398 KB, 1949x2067)
398 KB
398 KB GIF
>>17430300
>>Poland won a war against Germany
>???
>No.
>Poland didn’t win a war against Germany
They did though
>As I said
No, not as you said. A concrete bunker with 200 poles is not the same as Poland occupying all of Danzig in the same way a twig is not a tree.
>Irrelevant
It's an example to compare against you dullard
>also the US is not violating any limit or treaty
Not sure the Cubans would agree
>No
So you lied?
>>
>>17430319
You literally don't understand what isolation means. How was Poland more isolated than Germany or the Soviet Union?
How is the Polish-bolshevik war relevant to what happened in 1939? Soviets invaded also other countries. Was Finland also isolated? Romania? Baltic states?
Also, now you're shilling for fucking Soviets, lol. For reason you are absolutely unable to explain you seem to really hate Poland.
>gave nothing to the Lithuanians
Why should Poland give something to Lithuania?
>invaded Czechoslovakia
No? Poland issued an ultimatum and the Czechs agreed on it. Polish-Czechoslovak war from 1919 was started by the Czechs.
>>
>>17430255
>Why was Hitler specifically targeted by organized Jewry before even taking office?
Because he was a RABID foaming at the mouth tier anti-semite.
In your view, whenever people didn't give Nazi Germany everything it wanted and more, they are justified in chimping out. Whenever jews organize to combat a threat to their livelyhood, it's an international conspiracy all of a sudden.
>>
>>17430342
>they did
They didn’t. They were given the land by Versailles. Besides if right of conquest is a legitimate form of land claim then ok Germany had a right to rule Poland because they took the land from Poles and Poles and Germans both accepted this as a legitimate form of land claims, something they didn’t share with Britain or France btw.
>is not the same
Not my words. League of Nations stipulation. It was the league which asked Poland to downsize their garrison back to legal levels.
>not the same as Poland occupying all of Danzig
Irrelevant. They were in violation of the regulations placed on the garrison which was a violation of Danzig’s sovereignty and therefore a legitimate cassus belli for the guarantors of Danzig like Germany to act.
>it’s an example
It’s not comparable.
>the Cubans
Well the Cubans aren’t apart of the League of Nations nor is the United States. Their personal opinions don’t matter.
Just like it didn’t matter to anyone that Danzig didn’t want any Poles. It was when Poland violated Danzig’s sovereignty according to the LoN and treaty of Versailles that Germany was vindicated in acting on their guarantee of Danzig.

It also calls into question the actions of other signatories of Versailles and of the League of Nations who did not act on Poland and instead eventually acted against Germany who legally speaking was in the right.
Where’s the lie? No one said Germany went to war in 1933.
>>
>>17430599
>They didn't
They did.
True said war did contain the capture of the corridor, but neither was Alasce captured by the French or Eupen by the Belgians before November 1918
Besides, the creation of the Polish corridor didn't come out of nowhere, it was one of Wilson's 14 points. Germany was well aware it they would lose the region it to Poland.
>Not my words
Who's words then? Source
>Irrelevant
It's literally your entire argument
>It’s not comparable.
>Two examples with a small military base on the territory of a smaller state, where the smaller state opposes the existance of said military base
It is directly comparable
>Well the Cubans aren’t apart of the League of Nations nor is the United States. Their personal opinions don’t matter.
You absolute imbecile, are you geniunely retarded or just pretending not to understand?
Also Cuba was a part of the league of nations you retard
Also if the opinions of states not a part of the LoN don't matter, then Germany's opinions didn't matter outside of 1926-1933
>Where’s the lie?
You said Hitler declared war on Poland because of the increased size of the polish garrison, which occured in 1933. Evidently he did not, as no war occured for another 6 years.
>>
>>17430359
Isolation does not mean zero relations you mongoloid.
For example North Korea is considered Diplomatic Uranium, they are considered isolated, the reason being they have strained relations with their neighbors and many great powers, this drives them into the arms of China one major power which they have relatively normal relations with.
Germany was isolated. They were facing down a very hostile Anglo-Frankish ring meant to contain Germany.
Finland wasn’t isolated because they were able to maintain normal relations with their neighbors such as Norway, Sweden, and to an extent Germany.
Romania wasn’t invaded and no they weren’t isolated.
Isolation wasn’t the sole cause of Poland being invaded but it was a contributing factor considering their hostile neighbors surrounded them completely.
>shilling for the Soviets
Are you like unable to interact with history in an unbiased way? If some fact gives credence to a Soviet grievance is that fact now pro-Soviet?
No it’s just a fact of reality.
>you hate Poland
I don’t. But I can acknowledge Poland brought the war upon themselves.
>why should Poland give something to Lithuania
They have a shared history and both had reason to be in a unified front against Germany and Russia.
The Poles invaded Czechoslovakia in 1938.
>>
>>17430596
>Hitler was le antisemitic
no, Hitler had a healthy self preservation instinct which the Jewish mafia being naturally predatory did not like.
Furthermore it doesn’t matter if he was anti semitic, the jews influencing their host nation’s policy to settle personal grudges is inexcusable.
>in your view
My view?
>giving Germany everything it wanted
Everything Germany wanted?
You mean all 2 land disputes Germany had with rogue states?
>and more
And more?
>when people defend themselves against Jewish predation it’s a threat to the Jews and the Jews are justified in manipulating foreign policy to escalate/cause wars
This is why we are correct in not allowing them in our countries or near the levers of power.

It is literally the definition of an international conspiracy when ethnic partisans coalesce to use international influence to attack someone.
>>
>>17430283
It's literally a /pol/fag neet with autism that starts posting this threads almost 5 times a week on US hours.

You can tell it's the exact same anon by the way he formulates his posts with the constant "???????" and one-liners of naysaying. He has been doing this for over a year now. Certified NEET and mostl likely have autism. Not even an ordinary stormfag would treat this shit like a job the way he does.
>>
>>17430630
They didn’t.
I am not talking about capturing territory. The Poles did not defeat Germany in 1919. Britain and France defeated Germany in 1919. You can make the case for Right of Conquest on this technicality but then you must apply it evenly and state that Germany was twice in the right for conquering Poland.
>who’s words
It is in article 127 or 128??? Don’t quote me on the article number but in Versailles and the League of Nations charter it stipulates the parameters for Polish-Danzig relations and Danzig-German relations.
My entire argument is Poland violated the parameters laid out in Danzig’s founding document.

It is not comparable because US-Cuban relations aren’t being overseen by an international court nor was Cuba or the US base in Cuba established by an international court.
It is totally different. Your example would work if say America and Russia signed a treaty stating both Guarantee Cuba and America is allowed a base with a certain number of soldiers on it, if America goes over that limit, Russia would have a legitimate cassus belli for war.
This is obviously not the US-Cuba situation as we know it.
>Cuba was part of the League of Nations
The League of Nations doesn’t exist anymore and Guantanamo was not formed by the League of Nations nor did the League of Nations limit the number of US troops that can be stationed in Cuba.
>Germany’s opinions don’t matter
Ok? This was certainly the prevailing view among the British and French.
>you said Hitler declared war on Poland because
I said Hitler had a REASON to declare on Poland in BOTH 1933 and 1939. Poland increased the garrison twice, illegally.
Hitler didn’t declare the first time and the Poles backed down.
The second time Hitler did declare but by then negotiations had completely broken down.
Let me state it again.
Poland violated Danzig’s sovereignty twice (two times!). Once when Hitler came to power and again in 1939.
Hitler tried diplomacy first.
>>
>>17430702
You sound like you’re losing.
>>
>>17430727
lol it's just pathetic because 90% of the replies are you.
You are literally mass-quoting everyone and it kills every discussion and turns /his/ into a ghost town because people are just sick of this shit.
>>
File: 888762.png (2.36 MB, 1920x1335)
2.36 MB
2.36 MB PNG
Still no hands in the thread
>>
>>17430722
>They didn’t.
>I am not talking about capturing territory
Keep coping
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greater_Poland_uprising_(1918%E2%80%931919)
>You can make the case for Right of Conquest
Yeah but I won't. You're the only one claiming Poland taking those lands was "illegitimate" since they apparantly were given them rather thn conquered it for themselves. It is a stupid arguement and also wrong.
>It is in article 127 or 128???
Section 11 covers the estabishment of the free city of Danzig
>https://avalon.law.yale.edu/imt/partiii.asp
Point to the part where the word "occupied" is used to reference to Danzig and Poland
>It is not comparable because bla bla bla
Does the USA occupy Cuba?
No?
Then Poland did not occupy the Free city of Danzig
I don't care about anything else
>>Germany’s opinions don’t matter
Your own words and opinion, not nessaceraly mine.
>Poland increased the garrison twice, illegally
Germany wasn't a part of the LoN though, so according to you their opinions didn't matter.
>>
>>17430780
It's not even a pajeet, its a mutt faggot larping as german natsoc. He treats this shit like a job because hes obssessed about "winning".
But I am 100% convinced he has brown eyes and diagnosed with autism.
>>
>>17430763
>mass quoting
Where?
>>17430780
>>17430796
Blue eyes, Light brown hair, continue to seethe.
>>
File: WE.png (403 KB, 720x1367)
403 KB
403 KB PNG
>>17431315
>Blue eyes, Light brown hair
These factors are irrelevant if you're a non-aryan.
Even having white skin wouldn't save you.
>>
>>17423713
>And there are no tampon's in the mens toilet
idk those could come in handy when you have diarrhea
>>
>>17430791
>Greater Poland Uprising was the cause of the Hundred Days offensive
L O L
>I wont
but you are.
>given them
They were, Poland's post war borders were defined at Versailles not the separate treaty between Germany and Poland.
Article 102 places Danzig, a free city independent of Poland, under the protection of the League of Nations.
The league of Nation charter (Article 10) defines what Poland did as an act of aggression as it violated Danzig's territorial integrity and political independence.
Poland's garrison in Danzig was determined by the Leage of Nations in 1921, and capped at 88 (based) men and no fortifications were to be made by the Poles. They violated both stipulations, the first one twice.
>does the US occupy Cuba
Yes, it occupies a part of Cuba as per an American-Cuban agreement not overseen by foreign powers.
The 1903 Cuban-American treaty even calls the American base an occupation.
>then Poland did not
They did.
They also violated the stipulation of having more men than they were permitted and constructing fortifications.
>your own words
??
I am saying when discussing the legality of the league of nations and versailles (which is what established Danzig as guaranteed by league members which Germany still was when Poland violated the terms) it does not matter how any particular nation "feels" what matters are the specifics of the treaties, Poland was in clear violation (twice) regardless of how anyone "felt" about it.
>Germany wasnt part of the LoN
They were in March 1933, they withdrew in November 1933, 8 months after Poland had transgressed the agreements.
Their opinions dont matter either way, what matters is did Poland violate the regulations regarding their ammunition depot in the Westerplatte, Yes they did.
Did they do this when Germany was apart of the LoN?
Yes they did.
>>
>>17431348
It isnt me making these threads.
>non-Aryan
being a European makes me Aryan regardless of my pigmentation, my Nordic pigmentation is just further mogging.

What's the point of this "people I dont like are brown" meme? If you are trying to imitate the 'quick-kill' tactic of broadly """""right""""" wing types its not working. It works for them because they are all on the same page and their primary concern isnt about rebutting dumb garbage espoused by lefties. They are concerned with shifting the narrative, thus this tactic is effective because it shuts down discussion.

However that option isnt available to you because if you shut down discussion regarding this specific topic it only generates further inquiry and animosity towards those attempting to censor.

You have a "feeling" of what works politically but you are misapplying it because you lack the fundamental grasp of how discourse and dialectic functions.

For whatever reason the racist """"right"""" has extremely robust social instincts while, whatever you are, dont pretend you arent a lefty, is socially retarded.

Your worldview existed because it was protected by a firewall of calculated ignorance and moral grandstanding. This doesnt work in a discussion about the specifics of foreign policy where one be well versed in obscure and hard to find policies and events which give context to large events.

Your views are no longer safe.
>>
>>17430630
>Also if the opinions of states not a part of the LoN don't matter, then Germany's opinions didn't matter outside of 1926-1933
Correct.
You may begin seething and making arguments from incredulity at your convenience.
>>
>>17431441
Rightoids simply want to dominate us lefty cucks?
Are you sure you aren't gay?
>>
>>17430722
>I said Hitler had a REASON to declare on Poland in BOTH 1933 and 1939. Poland increased the garrison twice, illegally.
But you know that Germany had absolutely nothing to do with Danzig? Like, no treaty, nothing? They weren't the protectors of Danzig, Poland was. The whole thing was only between Poland, Senate of Danzig and LoN.

Also, don't make me laugh. In 1933 Germany was weak as fuck. Poland could easily defeat it. Hitler not only didn't declare war but decided to sign a non-aggression treaty. Danzig wasn't even mentioned in those negotiations.
>>
>>17431560
What pissed the Germans off was the fact that Poland decided to defend their rights in Danzig. After Poland issued an ultimatum to Danzig Senate to reinstate Polish custom officers, Germany send a note of protest to Polish government.
This was the reply:

>The Government of Polish Republic have learnt with liveliest surprise of declaration made on 9th August, 1939, by State Secretary at German Ministry for Foreign Affairs to Polish Chargés d'Affaires ad interim at Berlin regarding existing relations between Poland and the Free City of Danzig. The Polish Government indeed perceive no juridical basis capable of justifying intervention of Germany in these relations.

And:

>If exchanges of views regarding the Danzig problem have taken place between Polish Government and German Government these exchanges were solely based on goodwill of Polish Government and arose from no obligation of any sort.

This rather reply made the Germans realize that Poland will not give up Danzig willingly.
>>
>>17422655
>rejected German peace overtures
“Let us invade all our neighbors, including your Allie’s you specifically said you’d defend if we invade them” isn’t a peace overture.

If Germans weren’t acting like violent niggers, the capitalist powers wouldn’t have allied with the Soviets

Cope and seethe, cuck. Don’t start wars if you’re so weak that the enemy will kill your people. Besides, Germans killed tons of other country’s kids, so blow it out your ass.

Don’t bomb places like Warsaw, London, or Rotterdam then complain when the people you bomb cheer you getting bombed.
>>
File: 1708147094924747.png (826 KB, 1000x1500)
826 KB
826 KB PNG
>>17431315
>Blue eyes, Light brown hair
Where? Post them, post hands too coward
>>
>>17422655
>*rejected german peace overtures
Yeah, and? The Soviets made peace offers to Germany too when the krauts were still demolishing Soviet armies left and right and winning in '41. They didn’t accept any of them.
>>
>>17427988
>he saved it's soul
No way this is any any way a sincere post and not 1000% falseflagging bait. A sincere pro-Churchill or anti-Nazi poster would never bring up this self-goal considering the modern state of Europe.
>>
>>17427639
>Anglo-Saxons are literally from Germany
No, Angles were from Denmark, and Saxons were Scandinatians who'd migrated south into what would become Germany ca. 1900 years later. They were not "German" in any way. AS were Scandinavians plus other Scandis with some admixture with local "celtic" peoples already living in what's modern Holland and NW germany.
>>
>>17432127
*ca. 1900 years before Germany existed.
>>
>>17432127
Angles, Saxons, and Jutes were all West Germanics. Not North Germanics
>>
>STILL no hand

Absolutely Jeeted.
>>
Neither allied or axis won. Yet, there seems to have been a winner given the wests subjugation in these modern times. I will postulate that it had to do with Antarctica, but that’s a dive we don’t need to do, since if, we as america really wanted to remove the fangs sucking our blood a good war with the UK was necessary. Instead it seems this power that had skipped around and found itself in the UK has just shifted to america and we are hosts of parasites.
>>
>>17431441
>being a European makes me Aryan regardless of my pigmentation
>regardless of my pigmentation
Ok saar.
>>
>>17422655
All true. The Allies were more evil, but Hitler certainly wanted to colonize European Russia with Germans.
>>
>>17422655
There were no "good guys" in WWII.
The Allies were simply the lesser evil.
>>
4chin wouldn't exist under a national socialist regime and you wouldn't be allowed to publicly criticize official history or government policy.
The fact that you're here shows you lost.
>>
>>17432441
But they weren't. The whole discussion is just silly. There was absolutely nothing forcing Germany to invade on the 1st September 1939.
The /his/ Nazi basically ignores every single transgression done by the Nazi Germany while vastly exaggerates the ones done by the allies.
>>
>>17432559
Why not? Britain and the US didnt allow media to publicly criticize government policy.
The Gestapo couldnt even get "defeatists" arrested until the government itself literally broke down.
Protectionist countries tend to enjoy more meaningful freedoms like freedom of speech as a general rule compared to democracies which almost inevitably turn into state curated media cycles, been happening since the Ostraka system in athens bro.
democracy just sucks but you arent allowed to see the problems.
>>
>>17432367
>>17432434
These are israelis btw, they mistakenly continued posting when one of these threads was moved to /pol/.
>>
>>17431506
how is that the takeaway from the post?
The central thesis is the following, "Alt-Right" (whatever you want to call the current transgressive antithesis to the status quo) tactics do not work when used by lefties because the tactics are highly contextual.
Thus the strangeness of lefties parroting faux-racism to combat the perceived menace of racism.
>you dont like brown people? you must be brown then therefore we dont like you
This does not work.
>>
>>17432716
You are brown Gupta, we all know it. Poo in loo remember!
>>
>>17432718
You are brown though. Hence why you are in the street shitting yourself in terror at being asked to post hand. Post hand.
>>
>>17426261
The jews are a vengeful people and hold grudges for hundreds if not thousands of years. They were going to kill him much sooner, not because he was comically evil or because he had done something terrible to them, but because he was heroically naive, almost to a fault. They killed him because he had a good reputation.
>>
>>17430702
>?????? posting
That's some other dude. t. op
>>
>>17422655
What is a "peace overture"? More neo-Nazi handwaving?
>>
>>17430197
>Modern issues of immigration to Britain are independent of the outcome of WWII.
How can you say that when we all know that Britain would be 99+% white if germany had won the war? Siding with germany, clearly, was your best chance of saving yourselves, and you decided to firebomb kids and ally with bolsheviks rather than grasping their hand in friendship.
>>
>>17429858
None of them would have died either if you hadn't enthusiastically butchered them, you know. I don't see any moral reason for why germany wanting to save europe from bolshevism meant that all the little hans' and gretas in Dresden deserved to die. You even gave out medals for burning kids alive.
>>
>>17433048
Britain was 99% white BEFORE the war. The only reason browns are in the UK in the firstplace is because of the war.
>>
>>17433059
>We want ti save Europe from Bolshevism!
>That'd why we are invading and massacring the most anti-Bokshevik country in Europe and the invading and massacring a dozen other European countries.
>>
>>17433076
No, it's because of colonialism. Turns out empire is a two way street.
>>
>>17433059
>I don't see any moral reason for why germany
-why*
>>
>>17433076
And, you know, you saving commies, their cultural marxism and a certain tribe of subversives.
>>
>>17433086
What commies would need to be saved had there not been a war?
>>
>>17431560
>no treaty nothing
They were apart of the League of Nations and they remained signatories of the treaty of Versailles.
Both required Germany to be a guarantor of Danzig.
>Germany was weak in 1933
ok?
>>17431577
They violated their rights in Danzig.
>>17431578
Britian and France didnt defend their allies though.
They completely cucked out on Poland after they got their war with Germany.

Also, yes a peace overture is a peace overture.
>the capitalist wouldnt have allied with the Soviets if
They literally allied with the Soviets over the Rhodesia question, they just hate Europeans.
>dont start wars
Germany didnt.
>Germans killed tons of other countries kids
nope.
How many?
Give us a number.
>Warsaw
Warsaw was a frontline city occupied by Polish soldiers, the Germans never carpet bombed Warsaw, TOTAL Civilian casualties in Warsaw was less than HALF of Bremen and Dresden and Berlin and Hamburg.
>>
>>17431578
I should mention Rotterdam was also a city occupied by Soldiers and neither London nor Rotterdam were carpet bombed.
Also you are aware the British were carpet bombing allied and neutral countries as well just because they were in the German zone of control yes?

You are arguing against Germany as if Germany was the only victim of British bombing.
most of Europe was the victim of British bombing to the point where Churchill considered shutting down bomber command because it was too bad for him, the shabbos golem.

You dont even know the sides in the debate, you have Hitler derangement syndrome so anything that isnt couched in anti-Hitler statements to you seems pro-Hitler.

What if Britain didnt literally just bomb continental Europe indiscriminantly?
>>
>>17431929
Did they?
Source?
>>17432127
Nope. ALL Anglo-Saxon Burials in both Germany and the UK resemble Modern Germans from Bremen to a 1:1.
not Dutch, not English, not Swedish, GERMANS FROM BREMEN.

The city the Britons bombed for half a decade.
Those faces, those people, their voices, they were identical to Hengest and Horsa.
>https://www.researchgate.net/publication/363736520_The_Anglo-Saxon_migration_and_the_formation_of_the_early_English_gene_pool

The British Isles produced fat, stupid, psychopathic, ultra-violent, S L A V E S.
>>
>>17432721
>>17432724
I am White and not israeli which is why you hate what I say lol.
>>
>>17433311
so post your hand
>>
>>17433319
if you post your face I will post my hand and my eyes.
>>
>>17422659
Bro and then
And then evil hitler said he was going to groom little children!
>>
>>17433296
>>Germans killed tons of other countries kids
>nope.
>How many?
>Give us a number.
"The G*rm cries out in pain as he strikes you"
>>
>>17427450
The table talks are completely fake, so if those other sources agree with them, they're fake as well.
>>
File: 1737047094144365.jpg (23 KB, 392x272)
23 KB
23 KB JPG
>>17433076
>froth at the mouth at whites that don't hate their race and do your best to murder every single one of them
>court literal bolsheviks
I'd argue that, even with germany going too far in a few places, the german people's courage and determination in their battle against bolshevism made them the good guys of the conflict. They would have undeniably created a much better world, and you retards snuffed it out.
>>
>>17435422
Who are you quoting brownie?
>>
>>17435422
Hitler would 100% be for islamization of England. He considered Islam to be aryan religion.
>>
>>17435427
The average british person at the time and ever since.
>>
>>17435435
That was just bullshit to get access to cannon fodder. Does anyone really think otherwise?
>>
>>17433403
>I will post my hand and my eyes.
Lies.
I posted my photo ID once in response to a similar challenge and you did nothing of the sort.
>>
>>17434895
So I take it you can not give a number?
>>17435427
>>17435435
Holy shit shut the fuck up. You are so obviously shitlibs who don’t care about the English people.
>Hitler this Hitler that
It’s not Hitler browning the UK.
If you want Whites to abandon Hitler then stand with us when we demand the extermination of these subhumans murdering and raping British children.

You’re going to get a bullet alongside them, that’s why you won’t defend the British people because when we do throw down you know you’re going to be on the wrong side of history against the White side of history.
>>17435854
You’re a Swiss Jew who covered their face. Go back to swindling around a trade post in the levant you Semitic dog.
>>
>>17436068
>Hitler worship thread
>REEEEEEEE STOP TALKING ABOUT HITLER

You are too much of a spineless, gutless coward to even post a picture of your hand. You. Aren't. Going. To. Do. Shit.
>>
>>17436068
>It’s not Hitler browning the UK
And it wouldn't be Hitler stopping the UK from getting browned
>>
>>17436330
>hitler would totally mass-import africans!
lol If this is the quality of your arguments, brit, you must know that you're full of it. Hitler would be far more likely to commit genocide on the african continent than letting them come here.
>>
>>17436380
My boy Hitler doesn't commit genocides, rabbi
>>
File: 1601413128022.jpg (37 KB, 578x703)
37 KB
37 KB JPG
>>17436083
>criticizing British foreign policy is Hitler worship
This is either extremely bluepilled or extremely redpilled depending on who is saying it.
>>
>>17436330
>it is inevitable that the British get raped to death and replaced by browns
absolute insanity.
>>
>>17436412
If you want to suck Hitler's cock then go ahead, but the Brits deserve to solve their problems without foreign intervention
>>
>>17436421
Their problems are the result of foreign intervention.
I have no idea why you are fixated on Hitler.
>>
>>17436462
>Their problems are the result of foreign intervention
It doesn't take another foreign intervention to fix them
>I have no idea why you are fixated on Hitler
Me? I just said "Hitler wouldn't solve your problems" and you immediately rushed in to argue with it
>>
>>17436472
>It doesn't take another foreign intervention to fix them
no one is advocating for this however a foreign intervention could be helpful.
Plenty of nations throughout history were liberated via foreign intervention.
>Hitler wouldnt solve your problems
What does this even mean?
What is being argued is this, the problems the British faced post-war would not exist if they 1. had not gone to war. 2. had lost the war to Germany. 3. made peace with Germany in 1940.
>>
>>17436494
>no one is advocating for this
This whole thread is meant to convey one simple message: Hitler should have won to fix our present problems
>however a foreign intervention could be helpful
See, you just want to suck a foreign cock
>the problems the British faced post-war would not exist if they
>1. had not gone to war.
Wouldn't have mattered. The British were always hostile to Nazis
2. had lost the war to Germany.
Cuck opinion. It would have been much worse then
3. made peace with Germany in 1940
See No.1. Just look at how many coalitions the British organised against Napoleon no matter how often they were forced to sign peace with him
>>
What is a peace overture? You can't answer this.
>>
>>17436660
Opening peace offers
>>
>>17433296
>They violated their rights in Danzig.
After Danzig violated the rights of Poland.

>They were apart of the League of Nations and they remained signatories of the treaty of Versailles.
>Both required Germany to be a guarantor of Danzig.
Nope, literally a lie. Germany had nothing to do with Danzig and this is explicitly stated.

You're wrong as always. I don't think you were right even once.

So where are we ow with this?
Hitler should declare war on Poland for increasing the garrison on Westerplatte because Germany was still in LoN:

Meanwhile Article 12 of The Covenant of the League of Nations:

>The Members of the League agree that, if there should arise between them any dispute likely to lead to a rupture they will submit the matter either to arbitration or judicial settlement or to enquiry by the Council, and they agree in no case to resort to war until three months after the award by the arbitrators or the judicial decision, or the report by the Council. In any case under this Article the award of the arbitrators or the judicial decision shall be made within a reasonable time, and the report of the Council shall be made within six months after the submission of the dispute.

You just lie and lie and lie again. You are unable to understand the simplest judicial documents again and again.
>>
>>17436774
>Britain and France doesnt want Germany to conquer Poland
>Tells Germany they will declare war if Germany conquers Poland
>Germany conquer Poland
>Germany makes peace offers based on Germany keeping Poland
>Britain and France doesnt approve
>This is now supposed to a mindblowing fact that completely redeem Hitler
>>
>>17436798
>Poland garrison an extra 100 men on March 6 1933
>Poland withdraw the men on March 16 1933
>This now justified Germany and USSR deleting Poland in 1939 in a supposed defensive war.
>>
>>17436800
This is your headcanon. Hitler's demands over Danzig were legitimate, and his attempts at negotiation were overly-generous. He also offered a ceasefire on September 2nd and peace talks. Long after the fall of Poland he offered a reestablishment of a Polish state. And your narrative falls apart when you notice that Poland was handed over to the USSR after the war anyway.
>>
>>17436410
>the British foreign policy in question is not just immediately giving Hitler everything he asked for
>still no hand

Jeet.
>>
>>17436829
>Long after the fall of Poland he offered a reestablishment of a Polish state.
Not the same Poland as existed in 1939.
A smaller and weaker Poland.
And he pinky promised to respect the independence of a smaller and weaker Czechia.
The allies made it very clear: attempt to conquer ANY of Poland and we will declare war. He did it anyway and then Pikachu face when his peace offers, which included his conquests and trusting him with a second agreement, were rejected.

>And your narrative falls apart when you notice that Poland was handed over to the USSR after the war anyway.
Ignoring context as to why that happened.
>>
>>17437089
>Not the same Poland as existed in 1939.
>A smaller and weaker Poland.
Yes obviously, that's what happens when Poland -- a minor power -- loses a war they provoked via being unwilling to negotiate on an issue that their great power neighbor were in the right in. It would be a truncated Polish state, Like the truncated Polish state after the war.
>And he pinky promised to respect the independence of a smaller and weaker Czechia.
Maybe? Pinky promises don't hold much weight.
>The allies made it very clear: attempt to conquer ANY of Poland and we will declare war
Yes. Hitler's to blame to gambling on this. He figured with the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact the West wouldn't declare war on Germany as the reasoning would be flimsy (Danzig), and with Germany's flank secured for the time being, Britain and France could not hope to defeat Germany or protect Poland. I cut him a bit of slack since he could not have known France and specially Britain were willing to completely destroy themselves and their position in the world just for the sake of Danzig and now parts of Western Poland.
>Ignoring context as to why that happened.
The war was apparently over Poland. The American military was mobilized fully in 1945, and much of it on the European continent. It would be a brutal war but they might be able to "liberate" Poland from the USSR, specially since the US would soon have atomic bombs. Either the result of the war was a failure (giving not just Poland but all of Eastern Euorpe to Stalin), or that was never the point of the war at all.
>>
>>17437099
>Like the truncated Polish state after the war.
and the truncated German state after the war*
>>
>>17437099
>Yes obviously, that's what happens when Poland -- a minor power -- loses a war
Ok so you admit that >>17436800 is correct.

>Maybe? Pinky promises don't hold much weight.
Good, so you admit that this explains why they, the western powers, didnt rush to Hitlers offers.

>Yes. Hitler's to blame to gambling on this.
I would blame Ribbentrop more than Hitler personally, since even Hitler had doubts and were worried the western powers werent bluffing, hence why he cancelled the invasion on 25th of August, but Ribbentrop kept telling him to go ahead because he had "expert analysis" on Britain.

>The war was apparently over Poland.
The war was over Germany.
But even with that narrative you're still wrong.
Britain declared war over Poland, USA didnt.
By 1945, the overwhelming majoirty of allied resources and manpower were American. Thus America got the final say whether the war continues or not.

In fact, the British literally had a full on plan to continue the war but they couldnt proceed without America.
It is also the fact that Britain specifically pushed for Overlord to be directed to the Balkans, speicifically to block the USSR from Eastern Europe. USA said no.

So when you are ignoring these contexts:
1. America held the vast majority of allied power in 1945
2. America did not join ww2 over Poland
3. Britain wanted to continue the war in 1945 but couldnt.
4. Britain wanted allied effort to be concentrated in the Balkans

THEN my "narrative" falls apart because I 'failed to notice' that Poland ended up in the USSR.
>>
>>17437099
>Either the result of the war was a failure (giving not just Poland but all of Eastern Euorpe to Stalin
They were at war with Germany, dum-dum, not Russia. Considering Hitler ended up offing himself and his nation got carved to pieces I'd say ww2 was a pretty resounding success
>>
>>17436800
>Ok so you admit that >>17436800 is correct.
No and I already explained why that is incorrect.
>Good, so you admit that this explains why they, the western powers, didnt rush to Hitlers offers.
No, it doesn't. A pinky promise is worthless.
>I would blame Ribbentrop more than Hitler personally, since even Hitler had doubts and were worried the western powers werent bluffing, hence why he cancelled the invasion on 25th of August, but Ribbentrop kept telling him to go ahead because he had "expert analysis" on Britain.
Possibly? But ultimately it was Hitler that made the decision. This might be a reason to cut him slightly more slack in addition to what I said earlier, but responsibility still falls on him. He misread the situation, and made the wrong move. Part of his own political thinking was the Fuhrer principle, wherein responsibility is not diffused like in a 'democracy' but where it lies squarely on the leader's shoulders.
>Britain declared war over Poland, USA didnt.
For America the war was a resounding success (in the short term). European world power destroyed, establishing a global empire. Huge economic recovery. So at the least one could say that the war was a failure from the alleged British perspective.
>>
>>17437331
>No and I already explained why that is incorrect.
No you have admitted it.
You have admitted that:
A: Germany invaded Poland
B: Germany reduced the Polish state upon victory
C: France and Britain opposed this

>No, it doesn't. A pinky promise is worthless.
The Munich agreement was such. Czechia was reduced with conditions of a documents. The Germans violated this document.
Specifically Article 6: "The final determination of the frontiers will be carried out by the international commission".
Germany never called for any international commission when they took Czechia in 1939, regardless of what Hitler claims Hacha said. He violated the treaty by not consulting the action with Britain, France and Italy.

Yet you're puzzled why they did not rush to Hitlers peace offers on Poland which would essentially be a treaty of the same weight where Hitler would "promise" not to subjugate the now much weaker Poland whenever he sees fit.

>Possibly?
No it's literally what happened. That's why we got the famout anecdote when Hitler recieves the news of Britains declaration of war, Hitler turns angrily to Ribbentrop and says "Well? What now?!"
Hitler recalled the invasion on August 25 because witnesses says he was worried Britain wasnt bluffing but Ribbentrop kept assuring him.
But you are also right that in the end the ultimate responsibility will be on him.


>For America the war was a resounding success
This wasnt your point tho.
Your point in >>17436829 was that Britain and France simply gave Poland away, insinuating that it affected their refusal to accept Hitlers peace offers, hence as you said; my "narrative" falls apart.

Now you refuse to address the context of the situation and simply wants to point out how America was the real victor, which is true, but still wasnt your point. It's incoherent to the debate we were having about Hitlers peace offers.
>>
>>17437358
>C: France and Britain opposed this
The problem is I don't even know if they did. Britain never responded to negotiation attempts by Germany.
And after the war, the 'allies' happily partitioned Germany and ethnically cleansed Germans in the East. Leaving behind a greatly truncated Germany.
>The Munich agreement was such. Czechia was reduced with conditions of a documents. The Germans violated this document.
It's very easy to make the technical argument that the Munich Agreement wasn't violated. We have probably gone over this before. The argument I like to latch on to is two-fold: France and Britain never provided the territorial guarantee to Czecho-Slovakia, technically breaking the terms of Munich. In addition, using the same logic Chamberlain used to absolve Britain of responsibility of not guaranteeing the state, the dissolution of the Czecho-Slovak state after Slovakia declared independence rendered the Munich agreement null.
>"The final determination of the frontiers will be carried out by the international commission".
That state had ceased to exist. And Poland and Hungary had already taken their land via "unprovoked aggression". With no arbitration from France and Britain. Violating the terms.
>as that Britain and France simply gave Poland away,
'failed to defend the sovereignty of Poland' if you prefer.
>>
>>17437413
>It's very easy to make the technical argument that the Munich Agreement wasn't violated. We have probably gone over this before. The argument I like to latch on to is two-fold: France and Britain never provided the territorial guarantee to Czecho-Slovakia, technically breaking the terms of Munich. In addition, using the same logic Chamberlain used to absolve Britain of responsibility of not guaranteeing the state, the dissolution of the Czecho-Slovak state after Slovakia declared independence rendered the Munich agreement null.

Sure you can use this little " well technically" argument to justify Hitler taking Czechia.
It would only reinforce the allied fears that Hitler couldnt be trusted with a second treaty of a second country because he could just pull another "well technically" wording like you just did.
I hope you understand this logic even if you dont agree with it.

>'failed to defend the sovereignty of Poland' if you prefer.
lol again this wasnt even your original point in >>17436829 and im starting to get frustrated. This is why no one will ever buy your version and redeem Hitler. You just cannot stay coherent to the debate because you keep jumping between talking-points from Britain refusing Hitlers offers because they didnt care about Poland, to America being the real winners (which wasnt even relevant to the subject even if true) to Britain failure to defend Poland. It's just one argument after the other without actually standing by the original argument and rationalize it.

I dont even know what your argument is right now. Britain refusing Hitlers peace offers because they failed to ultimately defend Polnd in 1945? It's so fucking incoherent.
>>
>>17436861
>ask for ethnic Germans who want to rejoin Germany to be allowed to rejoin Germany is too much
Why?
Why not give Hitler everything he asked for when he only asked for one simple thing that would cost England literally nothing to concede and cost them everything to deny?

Why even couch the statement like that "Everything he asked for" as if Hitler is asking for the sun and the moon?

>jeet
cope, White, Aryan, already posted and still waiting for that full face shot.
>>
>>17436517
>Hitler should have won to fix our present problems
nope. It is that WWII could have turned out any number of different ways that would have been beneficial to everyone involved, we got the worst timeline just short of Operation Vegetarian not going off.
>you want to suck a foreign cock because you dont like NATO imposing American liberalism on non-Americans
????????
>The British were always hostile to Nazis
no such thing as Nazis, do you mean National Socialists?
The British had an entire political party friendly to the National Socialists trying to imitate what they did for Germany for Britain.
The British king told the German ambassador that if he had retained his power he would ensure nothing but good relations between the British and the German states.

Obviously you are wrong and pushing a political narrative meant to justify the current status quo otherwise you wouldnt have ignored these inconvenient facts.
>cuck opinion
nope. Had Britain lost the war to Germany the Americans wouldnt have become British Empire 2.0 but gayer and half of Europe wouldnt have become communist.
There also wouldnt be jews in Britain telling ethnic Britons to be ashamed of being ethnic Britons.
>Napoleon
The British have agency, are jews forcing them to go to war or something?
>>
>>17436798
Danzig did not violate the rights of Poland actually, also violating the rights of Poland is not against the LoN or Versailles in the Polish violations were EXPLICITLY against the LoN and Versailles.
Danzig did not violate the treaties signed, Poland did, simple as.
>Germany had nothing to do with Danzig
Hey retard, Germany left the LoN in November, Poland broke the LoN stipulation in March.
now which month comes first, March or November?
>lie
nope.

Also yes Germany had made a guarantee with Danzig AFTER they left the LoN.
Not only did Poland violate the LoN guarantee they violated Germany and Danzig's independent guarantee when they built fortifications and moved soldiers into the Westerplatte in 1939.
>>17436815
as I said before, the argument is no longer did Germany have a legitimate reason, they did, the contention is now was Germany's response too much.
I said you would backpedal exactly in this way, and look, you did LOL.
>>
>>17436800
>Germany makes peace offers based on Germany keeping Poland
actually no they offered to restore the Polish state.
So why didnt Britain and France approve?
Also why didnt they approve solely on behalf France and the Low Countries which Germany also offered to withdraw from?
Western Europe being occupied for half a decade and bombed by the British and Americans is worth it because Poland couldnt keep Danzig in a peace negotiation?
I dont know, smells (((strange))).
>>
>>17437482
>Sure you can use this little " well technically" argument to justify Hitler taking Czechia.
The real crux here is not lawyer-ing, but closer to what Chamberlain referred to with 'the spirit of Munich'. In which case I agree. Hitler lost the moral high ground with the quasi-annexation of Czechia. Czechia was not ethnically German. Undermining his own arguments about self-determination. And gave endless ammunition for those who did want war for whatever reason.
>I dont even know what your argument is right now. Britain refusing Hitlers peace offers because they failed to ultimately defend Polnd in 1945? It's so fucking incoherent.
The reply you're referring to was aimed at countering these points
>Germany makes peace offers based on Germany keeping Poland
>Britain and France doesnt approve
>This is now supposed to a mindblowing fact that completely redeem Hitler
Germany did offer the reestablishment of a Polish state. France wasn't really involved anymore; it was all on Britain.
Hitler's sins are for me Czechia and the plans for Russian colonization.
>>
>>17437579
>actually no they offered to restore the Polish state
source plz
>>
>>17437585
Infinity sources. For example 1940/41 : die Eskalation des Zweiten Weltkriegs by Stefan Scheil, page 173
>"Hitler feels responsible for the future of the 'white race' and, for that reason alone, wishes to continue friendship with England. Against this background, the economic conditions for the life of this race must be evaluated, whereby two economic units would emerge. A European economic unity centered on Germany and the entire rest of the world economy focused on the centers of America and the British Empire. Militarily, it was and should remain the case that the United States and England possess the largest fleets and dominance over the seas."

>In detail Hitler’s peace proposals:
>1. To retain the [British] Empire in all its parts.
>2. To recognize Germany’s continental supremacy
>3. To leave open discussions about the Mediterranean, as well as French and Belgian colonies.
>4. To create a Polish state.
>5. To consider [Czechia] as belonging to Germany.
>All other European states currently occupied by German troops due to the war would be evacuated and restored. Italy was not considered a problem; it was tersely noted that Mussolini would do as Hitler instructed. The USSR was seen as a potential opponent to this “white” constellation, though apparently not a current issue. The dangers posed by threats to the “white race” could be countered together, subtly hinting at the possibility of abandoning the alliance with Japan.
These peace proposals were then made known to England, from Harold Nicolson’s Diaries and Letters, 2 vols, p.104
>Diary 22nd July, 1940 Philip Lothian telephones wildly from Washington in the evening begging Halifax not to say anything in his broadcast tonight which might close the door to peace. Lothian claims that he knows the German peace-terms and that they are most satisfactory. I am glad to say that Halifax pays no attention to this and makes an extremely bad broadcast but one which is perfectly firm as far as it goes.
>>
>>17437089
>NOOOOO POLAND DESERVES TO RULE THE GERMANS IN POLAND OR ELSE MILLIONS MUST DIE
Why are they like this?
>he promised to respect the independence of a smaller and weaker Czech state
which he literally did.
>The allies made it clear, we will only attack Germany over Poland despite stating we guarantee Poland against any aggression
>which included his conquests
no actually, Hitler offered to restore the Polish state and even revisit the Munich agreement.
Was Danzig really worth a million dead Anglo Saxons globally and untold numbers more of Europeans dead?
Your only cope for this is "well Hitler would have started another war anyway and everything would be the same"
speculation is your final cope because it is so blatantly obvious the British were fucking retarded for not taking Hitler's peace offers which gave a status quo of 1939 save for Danzig being restored to Germany.
>ignoring the context
The context? The context is Britain and France wanted a war with Germany, they did not actually care about restoring Poland.
>restoring Poland would bring us into a war we dont want, nah youre on your own Poland
this discredits the defense of "we HAD to fight Germany over Poland it was a MORAL DUTY
>>
>>17437572
>It is that WWII could have turned out any number of different ways that would have been beneficial to everyone involved
Yeah, like Hitler not chimping out on half of Europe. But surprisingly this thread isn't about it in the slightest.
>NATO imposing American liberalism on non-Americans
Where's the NATO headquarters and who was the first secretary general of NATO?
>do you mean National Socialists?
Yes
>The British had an entire political party friendly to the National Socialists trying to imitate what they did for Germany for Britain.
That lost all its relevancy even before WWII
>The British king
The one who got ousted? Lol
>pushing a political narrative meant to justify the current status quo
Lies. I'm very much interested in the British getting their shit together, but that doesn't involve stupid Hitler worship
>the Americans wouldnt have become British Empire 2.0 but gayer and half of Europe wouldnt have become communist
What does any of it have to do with Britain?
>There also wouldnt be jews in Britain
Tell me exactly how Jews would disappear from Britain
>The British have agency
Yes
>are jews forcing them to go to war or something?
Why is it so hard for you to imagine that the British wanted to go to war themselves?
>>
>>17437593
>Create a Polish state
>Create
>to make something new, or invent something
>Restore
>to return something or someone to an earlier good condition or position
Interesting choice of word
>To recognize Germany’s continental supremacy
>3. To leave open discussions about the Mediterranean, as well as French and Belgian colonies.
>5. To consider [Czechia] as belonging to Germany
There you go, the reasons why Britain didn't accept the peace
>Phillip Lothian
The personal opinions of a man who was not a member of the British government. Both Halifax and Harold Nicolson oppose him.
>>
>>17437641
>Interesting choice of word
I wouldn't harp on individual words when it's a German to English Chatgpt translation that I gave you.
>>17437641
>There you go, the reasons why Britain didn't accept the peace
Then they should have said so...as part of negotiations.
>>
>>17437118
its not correct because Hitler did offer to restore Poland. Furthermore they didnt actually care about the restoration of Poland, they wanted a war with Germany, once the war with Germany was underway the Poles were left hanging.
>you admit
There wasnt an admission in his post.
The Western powers stood to lose exactly nothing by accepting Hitler's peace offers, the absolute worst case scenario is the RAF stops their war of attrition for three days and the British wait to see if the Germans make good on their promise to withdraw from Western Europe.
Did the war really come down to three days of RAF raids in 1940?
no obviously not, they stood to lose nothing at all if they accepted peace, absolute worst case scenario, the Germans lied, unconditional surrender is something unanimously agreed upon, and they just resume doing what they were already doing.
>Ribbentrop
actually it was Manstein who told Hitler to pull the trigger.
If nothing else this proves Hitler didnt actually want a war but was pressed into it because his generals told him they couldnt defeat a fully mobilized Poland and his ambassadors didnt realize the British were willing to commit national suicide to prosecute the war.
>actually Britain lost their agency in 1945
its good Hitler made the peace overtures as early as September of 1939 and his most generous offers in 1940, before America had any serious investment.
>>
>>17437358
>The Munich agreement was such. Czechia was reduced with conditions of a documents. The Germans violated this document.
>Specifically Article 6: "The final determination of the frontiers will be carried out by the international commission".
Hacha called for an international commission, the British ambassador Basil Newton told him to speak with Germany. That is 3 of the 5 powers apart of the international commission laid out in point 3 at Munich coming to an agreement.
That's a majority.
Furthermore, "the frontiers" does not refer to ALL borders of Germany and Czechoslovakia, it refers to the borders of the Sudetenland which were never modified.
>he violated the treaty by not consulting Britain
Britain was consulted, also this was specifically about the Sudetenland, the Munich agreement NEVER EVER said it governs ALL German-Czech negotiations.
Italy was also notified by Hacha but like Britain they abrogated their involvement.

You're just wrong, the Munich agreement was never actually violated.
>promise not to subjugate weaker Poland
Hitler wanted an independent Poland as a tripwire against the USSR.

The entire point of this debate is to show Britain's foreign policy was not done in the interest of the British people, blatantly so, and we can look at whom was directing it, it was international jews like Samuel Untermeyer and Henry Strakosh who held outsized influence over British government figures and had connections in the United States with American jews, all of whom had a personal quarrel with Hitler because Hitler was overtly against Communists and jews and these were communists and jews.
>youre just le pol anti semite
I actually like Irgun and am glad Israel has destroyed the retarded kibbutzim commiekikes.
Britain lost the peace, British jews lost the peace (twice) American jews lost the peace, and the jews who made overtures to Himmler, Hitler, and Mussolini won as of 2025.
>>
>>17437643
>Chatgpt
Really? Is that the best you can do?
Just give me the damn thing in German
>>
>>17437482
>Hitler wasnt actually wrong he just outplayed us diplomatically so we are vindicated in firebombing Europe, allying with the bolsheviks and committing national suicide because we took a foreign policy L due to our own stupdity.
>jumping between talking points
The status quo narrative is a network of self reinforcing lies that must be attacked all at once, which is why attacks on the prevailing narrative seem sporadic, you need a highly informed view of the events of the times to grasp adequately why the common narrative is wrong, trying to explain it to someone who lacks the academic depth is like trying to explain a jet engine to a child by going "and then this happens, and then this happens and then this happens" you cant explain complex network systems by one-off singular points, they must be understood by cardinality and inter-related sets.
This is why it seems schizophrenic to explain to someone who's knowledge comes from 6th grade social studies why the founding myth of the American Empire is actually nothing more than a founding myth.
>>
>>17437632
>Poland is half of Europe
It was Britain and France that chimped out over a single city state and refused peace offers when the question of said city state was settled.
France is always ignored in these threads because they are a lesser people due to their inherent medbugness, however France had it as their state goal to reduce Germany to nothing from the end of the HRE to this very day because France can not stand on their own merits, they correctly recognize that Germany will eventually overtake them, either in 100 years or 1000 years, assuming they live that long, France was obviously a war-monger and Britain sided with them.
Are we going to pretend NATO isnt a front for the United States?
>lost all its relevancy
They were still relevant even post war.
>the one who got ousted
Yes, the King, who was still a King, said he would have normalized relations with Hitler to the German ambassador.
It doesnt matter if he was ousted, he wasnt ousted by the mob, he was ousted in a political hit by the government.

The wholistic body of the British Nation had a lot more in common with Hitler's aims and goals than with Churchill's.
>stupid Hitler worship
There is no Hitler worship in this unbiased re-assessment of British history.
>what does that have to do with Britain
Britian's assisted suicide was assisted by Americans, Communists, and Jews, all correctly identified as threats to Britain (and Europeans broadly) by Hitler in the 1920s.
>>
>>17437719
>chimped out over a single city state
If Germany had wanted just Danzig they'd have taken just Danzig, not launched an all-out invasion and taken half of Poland.
>Are we going to pretend NATO isnt a front for the United States?
>Source: dude trust me
>They were still relevant even post war
Then show how many seats in the Parliament they won
>Yes, the King, who was still a King
He was a king for less than a year. Not relevant.
>There is no Hitler worship
It literally is because you can't even accept the idea that Hitler did something wrong
>Britian's assisted suicide was assisted by Americans, Communists, and Jews
You still haven't answered me how Jews would have disappeared from Britain, let alone Americans and Communists. Britain isn't continental Europe
>>
>>17437632
>how would jews disappear
They would be given to israel like Hitler, Himmler, Stern, Begin, and Shamir all wanted, 3 of the 5 of those found their deaths resisting the British and the Bolsheviks and 5 of the 5 of them fought the British and the Bolsheviks.
jews wanted to leave Europe for israel but the British actually stopped them and put them into concentration camps.
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyprus_internment_camps
Wikipedia doesnt have a page for it but the British put those fleeing Europe in 1939 into camps on the island of Ceylon.
>why is it hard to imagine the British wanted to go to war themselves
because no one actually wants to go to war, they have to be lied to, coerced, deceived, gaslit, or forced into it.
Which is exactly what happened in Britain, the war was pushed by the State onto the people, at the expense of the people.
No one in 1934 wanted to invade Germany despite this being the year the primary elements responsible for the war in Britain committed to war.
for example the cross-party opposition to the peace movement established by Churchill was drawn up in 1934 and pushed in 1935.

There is simply a much more parsimonious explanation which is British foreign policy wasnt done for the interest of the British people but their State elite which was heavily influenced by organized jewry.
>>
>>17437734
>They would be given to israel
Israel exists for almost 80 years now, have Jews all left Britain by now?
>because no one actually wants to go to war
Does that mean Germans also didn't want to go to war with Poland and the USSR? That's not the win you you think it is
>>
>>17437731
>if Germany wanted Danzig they would have just taken Danzig
If America wanted Texas they wouldnt have launched the invasion of Mexico City.
oh wait...

Its almost like you dont understand how wars are fought.
>how many seats in parliament they won
how many seats in Parliament do British ethnic nationalists hold?
Zero, yet a plurality (if not a serious majority) of Britons are ethnic nationalists.
Seats in Parliament is nonsense, we can see the British people align more with a Hitler victory than a Churchill victory and absolutely more with a Hitler peace than a Churchill victory.
>not relevant
He was a British cultural figurehead still beloved by the British people and held that normalizing relations with Germany would have been his position had he been leader of his country.
You not liking something is not an argument against it.
>Hitler did something wrong
yes he didnt fully grasp the depth to which the British people had fallen and the level of influence foreigners held over the levers of power of the British state, he literally believed the whole "protect our democracy" nonsense Britian was spewing, he wasnt aware the strongest faction in British politics was willing to, and carried out, a national suicide of Britain to murder Germany.
>how jews would dissapear
I did answer you, you are just impatient.
>>
>>17437572
>The British had an entire political party friendly to the National Socialists trying to imitate what they did for Germany for Britain.
If you mean the BUF then no. Moseley was a Mussolini simp, not a Hitler simp
Also they were irrelevant, they never won even a single seat in parliament
>>
>STILL no hand

Fucking pussy.
>>
>>17437737
>have jews all left britain by now
How long has Britian had normalized relations with Adolf Hitler?
oh right he's still at mythological evil status in their national myth.
>Germans also didnt want to go to war
Yes, this is correct.
Hitler didnt want war, the German people didnt want war, they were forced into war to achieve their very limited political aims which belligerent states were quarreling with them over.
Germany didnt want to fight the USSR, they wanted to contain them, Hitler only invaded the USSR as a means of acquiring the resources to sustain a cold war with the Western hemisphere.
I know what you're thinking
>but muh lebensraum
do a Ctrl F of everything Hitler said and wrote, France and Czechoslovakia show up more often than "Lebensraum".
Everytime Hitler mentions Lebensraum its either after the war started or speaking centuries into the future where the German people need to have numbers to rival the eventual Sino-Western clash, something Germans for centuries recognized was on the horizon but Anglos have chosen to ignore until like 1990.

It is the win I think it is.

If nothing else, Hitler winning would achieve Germany's limited political goals of restoration.
Britain's victory as we can see lead to nothing more than an ever more degraded Britain, without influence, empire, or even hope for a future.
>>
>>17437741
>If America wanted Texas they wouldnt have launched the invasion of Mexico City
Do you know when Texas was annexed to the US, retard?
>yet a plurality (if not a serious majority) of Britons are ethnic nationalists
Which is completely irrelevant as we can see by Britain being invaded by browns. You've just proved my point - without seats in the Parliament you're nobody
>He was a British cultural figurehead still beloved by the British people
No he wasn't, he was always seen as a Nazi sympathiser
>he didnt fully grasp the depth to which the British people had fallen
And what he would have done then? Firebombed London? Starved the island with his u-boats? Oh wait...
>>17437761
>How long has Britian had normalized relations with Adolf Hitler?
That's not an answer
>Germany didnt want to fight the USSR
And yet they did. "Muh containment" isn't an argument
>>
>>17437743
If they were irrelevant they wouldnt have even been recorded.
instead they were attacked through the usual means of antyr where the antifa dregs fight them in the streets and the media and statesment slander them in broader and higher society.
The fact their party exceeded 10 people is evidence they stood on their own merits.
Now imagine if they had been uninhibited by the State and non-State actors.
>>
>>17437593
>>1. To retain the [British] Empire in all its parts.
>>2. To recognize Germany’s continental supremacy
Shit deal.
Britain should not get to lord over people's and neither should Germany.
>>
>>17437769
>If they were irrelevant they wouldnt have even been recorded
The smallest dogs bark the loudest. The fact they remain well known, yet achieved nothing, showcases their unpopularity even better
>The fact their party exceeded 10 people
A truly staggering size
>Now imagine if they had been uninhibited by the State and non-State actors.
What such factors existed prior to 1940?
>>
>being a European makes me Aryan regardless of my pigmentation
>>
>>17437593
>To consider [Czechia] as belonging to Germany.
Why should it.
>>
>>17437755
still waiting on that full face shot.
>>17437764
The Mexican-American war is what forced Mexico to recognize Texas as apart of the United States.
If the US did not want all of Mexico, why did they invade all of Mexico? Why did they invade Mexico city which is literally a thousand miles or more from the Mexican Cession and Texas?
The answer is obvious, you force your opponent to capitulate in war, Poland would not have capitulated if the Germans took only Danzig.
The Poles didnt even capitulate when the Germans took 100% of Poland with the USSR.
You might say "how can anyone trust Hitler's peace" the Poles literally waged an illegal war for half a decade with the Armija Krajowa.
>which is completely irrelevant
??????????
It is completely RELEVANT because it means British Policy is not being run by people who value the interests of the British people.
>without seats in Parliament youre nobody
no, without seats in Parliament you have no power, not you no longer exist.
Parliament is MEANT to serve the British people, not the other way around.
>he wasnt
he was beloved.
>always seen as a nazi sympathizer
he predates the NSDAP.
he was slandered by the Media and State yet was always seen as a man more in touch with the common people than Parliament.
>what would he have done then
I dont know. Bided his time probably.
No one firebombed London and Britain never starved so....
>thats not an answer
It is an answer relevant to your question.
Jews have no left Britain because Britian has not become resistant to parasitism.
>yet they did
good.
>muh containment isnt an argument
what does this even mean? The biggest question of the last 80 years has been containment of the USSR.
>>
>>17437811
You claimed you had already seen it, so, post hand. Post hand in the next post or it'll be an admission you're the brownest of street shitters
>>
>>17437787
Firstly, larger darks bark louder.
Secondly it doesnt matter what they achieved, that wasnt the question, the question was did they exist, yes they did, and they numbered in the tens of thousands.
The fact they were successfully contained by the British State does not mean they did not exist.
>their unpopularity
Their popularity was immense given they were attacked from all sides by every level of the British State.
had the sitting government supported Mosely, how large do you think his party would have gotten? What if the government had just not opposed Mosely? What if it actually was a popularity contest and not who's currently pulling the levers of power?
>a truly staggering size
30-50,000 people is rather large given how they had to combat an imperial state.
>what such factors existed
The British were torpedoing rival parties within parliament itself, their gatekeeping had become a science in the 1600s.
It was effortless for them to mobilize the usual avenues of media, police, and state officials to attack/contain the British Fascists.
>>
>>17437821
no I claimed you had obscured part of your face, so we are still waiting for that full face.

or you could, you know, debate the actual thread topic...
very basal coded to pivot towards haggling.
>>
>>17437832
>brownest of street shitters confirmed
>>
>>17437834
>the brown has convinced itself their opposition has been dragged down to its level, now it is declaring victory over a darker shade of brown

You hate to see it. We Europeans do not have this problem so common among jews, Moroccans, and slavs.
>>
>>17437811
>If the US did not want all of Mexico, why did they invade all of Mexico?
So by using this analogy you claim Germany wanted all of Poland?
>Poland would not have capitulated if the Germans took only Danzig
You miss the point where the US first took Texas and then declared war on Mexico. Germany invaded all of Poland at once
>illegal war
No such thing
>British Policy is not being run by people who value the interests of the British people
And? If policies are successfully enforced then whoever opposes them is irrelevant since they can't even prevent it from happening
>without seats in Parliament you have no power
That's what means being irrelevant
>he was beloved
He wasn't
>he predates the NSDAP
What does it even mean?
>Bided his time probably
So you do accept that invading Poland was a mistake? Wow, that's some progress
>Britian has not become resistant to parasitism
That was never up to Hitler it was and still is up to the British people themselves
>what does this even mean?
It means Hitler sent his people to die in frozen wastes of Russia against their will - something the West never did in its containment of the USSR
>>
>>17437832
What is this Jewish bargaining? You're either posting your hands or you're a brownoid, it's that simple
>>
>>17437828
>Firstly, larger darks bark louder.
You've never met any small darks I suppose
>They were popular I swear!!! The government just restricted them
You can cope if you want but this isn't want to evidence suggests
>The British were torpedoing rival parties within parliament
A political party trying to steal votes from opposing parties! Truly evil!
So in the 1935 General elections, commies (anti-war) got seats, Irish nationalists got seats, the SNP (anti-war) got seats, social credit got seats, and a number of independents got seats. All despite these evil measures.
>>
>>17437887
>Want to
What the
>>
File: 1706937481531091.png (834 KB, 1001x740)
834 KB
834 KB PNG
>>17437679
Here you go
>>
>>17437643
>>17437679
>Still hasn't provided the original German
Faggot coward
>>
>>17437893
>Schaffen
Create
>>
>>17437840
>WE

You have admitted to being the brownest of street shitters.
>>
>>17437854
no, by using this analogy I am explaining why you would invade an entire country even if you only wanted small concessions or recognitions.
America didnt want the entirety of Mexico, they didnt even want most of Mexico, they wanted Mexico to recognize the Anglo parts of the Western reaches of North America belonged to the United States, to accomplish this task they invaded Mexico city, among other cities in Mexico proper, to force a Mexican capitulation.

What this means for Germany is, Germany only wanting Danzig justifies a German invasion of all of Poland to force Poland to capitulate.
If America invaded only what they wanted, There is no reason for Mexico to accept peace.
If Germany took only Danzig there is no reason for Poland to accept peace.
>the US took Texas first
Texas was the only border with Mexico the US shared, the US attacked Mexico along their entire shared border with them.
Also the US attacked Alta California during the Texas Campaign. so they didnt even "took Texas first" they took whatever they were closest to and continued on, like Germany.
>no such thing
League of Nations members were required to sign the Geneva Convention, this signing did not expire upon leaving the League of Nations, both Germany and Poland were signatories, Poland waged an illegal war according to the Geneva convention, thus making the war illegal.
Stop this weird appeal to nature.
>irrelevant
Its not irrelevant because Mosely and friends represented a faction which achieved a level of popularity (in spite of the opposition) you said did not exist.
Simple as.
>irrelevant is when you have no power
we arent talking about political relevance you mongoloid, you said there wasnt support for the BUF or for Germany, this was wrong.
>invading Poland was a mistake
no, underestimating the level of jewish control over Britain was a mistake.
>this was never up to Hitler
Had Hitler won it would have been.
>its up to the British people
they are irrelevant-they have no power.
>>
>>17437854
>Hitler sent people to die in the Frozen wastes of Russia against their will
no, the German people wanted to win the war they found themselves in.
Its not the fault of the Germans or of Hitler the British were run by foreign interests.
>>17437855
>I make the rules goyim
go back.
>>17437887
>insert typo smuggie here

Are you implying the British government wasnt suppressing the British Fascist Party?
>evil
evil???
Why the dishonesty? Why cant you admit the British Fascists were kept out of power because they presented a unique threat to the status quo in the way communists and irish nationalists did not?
>>17437924
>the brown Europeans
cope, moishe.
>>
>>17437933
>Are you implying the British government wasnt suppressing the British Fascist Party?
Implying? I thought I was quite being clear
Prior to 1940, yes.
>Why cant you admit the British Fascists were kept out of power because they presented a unique threat to the status quo in the way communists and irish nationalists did not?
In what way did the BUF present a threat to the status quo in a way the communists did not?
>>
>>17437582
>The real crux here is not lawyer-ing
It is actually the real crux.
Because you understand that Hitler treated the Munich agreement with an "well technically" attitude, while you simultaniously ask yourself why didnt Britain and France just sign a treaty with Germany to respect a much weaker Polish state while Germany keeps its conquests.
You pretty much have your answer right there.

>And gave endless ammunition for those who did want war for whatever reason.
This is the truth, whether you believe in a jew conspiracy or not. Hitler taking Czechia was a fundemental cataclysm and perfectly explains why Britain was relucant to sign a second treaty.

>the reply you're referring to was aimed at countering these points
No, I dont even think you could summarize your point even you tried.
Your point in>>17436829 was that Britain did not care about Poland because they sold Poland out to the Soviets anyway. I provided context in >>17437118 as to why Britain couldnt bail out Poland in 1945, that being:
1. America held the vast majority of allied power in 1945
2. America did not join ww2 over Poland
3. Britain wanted to continue the war in 1945 but couldnt.
4. Britain wanted allied effort to be concentrated in the Balkans
and you've so far never addressed that context. You pretty much ignored your original point which was that Britain didnt care because they "allowed" the Soviets to take Poland.

THATS what's bothering me. You cannot stay corehent, you just want to talk about something else. You immediately jumped to "well USA profited from ww2". Like wtf? Even if true, that wasnt even relevant to the fucking point you made. Its frucking frustrating to have a debate when you do this.

>Germany did offer the reestablishment of a Polish state.
A much smaller Polish state that would be completely subservient to Germany. We already addressed this in >>17437089 that it wasnt Britain interest to have Germany force itself anything from Poland through war
>>
>>17438116
There is nothing actually against the British interests about Poland not existing let alone a smaller polish state existing.
What master plan did Britain have which required a large and belligerent Poland?
>>
>>17438280
They want to prevent a continental hegemony.
Being the current hegemony, Britain also want to maintain peace and stability because it benefits their own position.
Germany was expanding its influence aggressively.
In just 1938 and 1939, Germany had absorbed 3 nations, Austria, Czechoslovakia and Poland. It had gravitated 3 others being Italy, Hungary, USSR. These in turn had absorbed other nations. Italy annexed Albania in early 1939.

To the people at the time, this was a very rapid and alarming development in Europe, it led to several war-scares that Netherlands and Romania would be next. The guarantee to Poland was reactionary but it wasnt irrational from the British and French perspective. Hitler showed signs of treating agrements like a 'scrap of paper' as seen with Munich, so the question became whether he should be trusted with further geopolitical power.

I dont know why this situation seems so complex for some people. It's been the way of the world since ancient Greece, and it's how the world function still in 2025. Just see how Britain and France reacted to the Russian invasion of Ukraine. They've both called for military intervention far more than USA has ever done, and there likely would have been a military intervention if nuclear weapons did not exist. In 1939, they did not exist.
>>
>>17437585
It was common knowledge. The media reported on it extensively.
It's only stormfags who treats this like some sort of newsflash because their zoomer youtuber made a video.

Britain and France essentially just saw it as an attempted repeat of the Munich Agreement, where they cede vital parts of a country to Germany in exchange Germany will pinky-promise not to strongarm this now-smaller country any time in the future and subjugate it into Germanys will (like they did with Czechia on March 15 1939).

Germany annexed the corridor and much of western Poland, including major cities like Lodz and Poznan, while the Soviets took at least half of the country, so the Polish state would be very small and absolutely at the mercy of Germany to not trying to lawyer-dodge any signed treaty like they did with Czechia by saying "well technically we never violated the treaty because X Y Z, so we're just gonna seize the entire Polish state".


Whether Germany would do this or not, we dont know. But it's completely logical that Britain and France didnt rush to sign a second treaty with Hitler given how the last one turned out.



[Advertise on 4chan]

Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.