Im confused.
There are several folks opposing the idea that Britain enabled the Nazis.
Didn't Britain pursue a policy of appeasement? And doesn't appeasing a bully (when you are the only agency able or likely to successfully oppose him) enable him, by encouring him in his behavior, letting him consolidate his clique, and make others feel helpless in the face of his aggression?
The case seems clear: France wanted Britain's backing in opposing Hitler, since France was in no financial shape to do it alone. Britain refused, somewhat sympathizing with the remilitarizarion of the Rhineland, refusing to take action against the Anschluss, and approving Hitler's annexations in Czechoslovakia.
Looks like enabling, to me.
So what am I missing? Is the appeasement thing just a lie?
There are several folks opposing the idea that Britain enabled the Nazis.
Didn't Britain pursue a policy of appeasement? And doesn't appeasing a bully (when you are the only agency able or likely to successfully oppose him) enable him, by encouring him in his behavior, letting him consolidate his clique, and make others feel helpless in the face of his aggression?
The case seems clear: France wanted Britain's backing in opposing Hitler, since France was in no financial shape to do it alone. Britain refused, somewhat sympathizing with the remilitarizarion of the Rhineland, refusing to take action against the Anschluss, and approving Hitler's annexations in Czechoslovakia.
Looks like enabling, to me.
So what am I missing? Is the appeasement thing just a lie?