We tend to have very little tolerance for Nazis, Holocaust deniers, War Crime Apologists, Overt racists and other sorts of bigots.
Even then in many cases we will give folks a few chances before they get Banned.
In the specific case of the OP of this thread he was a 4th Generation sockpuppet.
I was going to tag the moderators with my next post. Suffice it to say that I have seen this poster keep reappeared by with his talk of the injustices of Oder-Neisse and imagining what if Germany did not recognize this border.
I am in doubt about wether it would be a pariah. There are many more states in the world than the US, the UK, France and Russia.
The latter might probably even welcome a Germany not aligned with the West and try to cooperate with it in a quest to regain its lost influence in eastern Europe.
I have to be very skeptical about the plausibility of any Russian government, post-Soviet or otherwise, allying again with Germany to partitioning central Europe. Operation Barbarossa is remembered. This might especially be the case in the context of a geopolitical scenario where not just a broad sphere of Russian influence but the Russian state and economy itself are collapsing.
That would be the case if Russia still was the Superpower of the 1960s-80s.
By 1990 Russia was in a position of weakness themselves.
Thus to settle the differences and reach a compromise might be seen as beneficial.
At least temporarily.
Why? What could Germany provide Russia that would not be wiped out by losses? Ignoring the spectre of another German attack on Russia, if these two states are again involved in a project to partition the weaker and smaller states between their eastern borders I doubt Moscow will get integrated into the world economy.
Because that worked so well in 1939?
Aligning with a Germany that want its eastern territories back means Poland aligns with the rest of the West faster than the speed of sound. The good news for Russia is that it might lead to NATO and the EC dissolving. The bad news is that if they are, they're replaced with new treaties where Poland and Czechoslovakia are included.
Anything is open now.
I think you misunderstood me.
I meant how are they going to prevent Germany from unifying if it refuses to formally recognize the eastern border.
I actually did not misunderstand you. As Russia has been demonstrating, a refusal to recognize the integrity of an interstate border can very easily be the first stage of a project of trying to revise the border. In the case of the German-Polish border, particularly charged because of the Second World War and the psychic legacy of the Nazis, this non-recognition of the established Polish border would be taken as the first stage of a German project to revise its border with Poland against Polish wishes.
Not how are they going to prevent Germany from actually reconquering these territories, because the pidea of them trying that would be nonsense.
Not formally recollgnizing the status of a territory doesn't mean you will automatically go to war about alit.
Japan still hasn't recognized the Kuril Islands as part of Russia either for example.
The Kurils are distant and remote. They are not, say, territories where millions of people live, and have not seen (say) horrific atrocities committed against local populations by invaders. Germany, in this case, will be actively laying claim to territories under Polish control for almost two generations, with large and well-established Polish populations. The difference is huge and, frankly, obvious.
A war (if there would be one) about that thus would be a war (over a formality)
Not a formality at all. Even OTL, most of the western European allies of West Germany were initially skeptical about German reunification, and had to be persuaded to support it by assurances that a reunified Germany would not be revisionist. In this case, Germany would actually be explicitly establishing itself as revisionist, again. No one would be under any illusions that the refusal to recognize the post-1945 German-Polish border was anything but the first stage in a new campaign against Poland, this one perhaps less rational than the earlier ones since there would be scarcely any ethnic Germans on the Polish side.
in which the allies try to prevent the Germany from reunifying, in which case the Germans defensive equipment would actually come in quite handy (which is why I cited Vietnam and Afghanistan).
This very idea is ridiculous. Is an essentially bourgeois democratic Germany, one where militarism has been discredited and German society largely depoliticized, actually going to fight a costly war with potentially hundreds of thousands or millions of dead? I would note that Germany, unlike either Vietnam or Afghanistan, would not only have any nearby supportive neighbours, it would be hard-pressed to find any allies at all. What would be the point of this war, more, outside of a desire to keep a casus belli for another war with Poland, less than a lifetime after the previous war that ended up shattering Germany?
The Germany that we know would simply not be interested in this. You are arguing that the Germans would be willing to blow up everything in exchange for retaining a right to claim some Polish territories with an increasingly distant German past. This is not plausible, especially not given the post-1945 history of our Germanies which moved by the 1970s towards a FRG acceptance of the current frontier with the only asterick being that a final settlement of Germany was required for a final settlement of the eastern border.
Now, I can imagine scenarios where Germany evolved differently. Maybe, with a different political settlement, German irredentism was legitimized. I can imagine the Soviets supporting at least the initial stages as a way to break up the Western alliance system. Even this, though, would require Germany to be very different, to be a society where imperialism and militarism and revanchism were OK.
news.stanford.edu
