If Chamberlain had ceded Poland to Hitler?

CaliGuy

Banned
Well Pat Buchanan and the rest of idiot fringe peacenik America seem to think that he should have.

So what will likely happen is Hitler will have more demands and they will escalate until war actually does break out. He will demand Danzig, and then Upper Silesia, and then maybe after that, Riga and other areas of the Baltics that once had a lot of Germans (he already took Memel at this point), or maybe just split Poland with USSR anyways. War with the west was a distraction for his real objective.
Please take a look at my posts above in this thread. :)

Also, Yes, Hitler always appears to have been preoccupied with the East; indeed, I think that this had to do with his desire to resume and continue the Medieval Ostsiedlung--which in turn explains these two quotes by Hitler (the first one from Mein Kampf in 1925, the second one from February 1945):

https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Mein_Kampf#Chapter_14_-_Eastern_Orientation_or_Eastern_Policy

"And so we National Socialists consciously draw a line beneath the foreign policy tendency of our pre-War period. We take up where we broke off six hundred years ago. We stop the endless German movement to the south and west, and turn our gaze toward the land in the east. At long last we break of the colonial and commercial policy of the pre-War period and shift to the soil policy of the future. If we speak of soil in Europe today, we can primarily have in mind only Russia and her vassal border states."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drang_nach_Osten

"It is eastwards, only and always eastwards, that the veins of our race must expand. It is the direction which Nature herself has decreed for the expansion of the German peoples."

In other words, according to Hitler, the decision to the expand (in)to the East wasn't really up to him; rather, it was up to "Nature herself"! :(
 
However, what about giving Danzig to Germany but giving Poland special economic rights there?

It would be worthless, Poland had enough trouble enforcing their rights in FCD. Poland could live without Danzig, of course, but everyone knew it was just the first step in grabbing whole Polish Pomerania, which would be in turn first step in dismembering or at best puppetizing Poland.
 

shiftygiant

Gone Fishin'
If they cared about Poland they'd have done something to protect Poland. Was the BEF sent to Poland? Did Britain protest when the USSR invaded Poland? Did Britain demand as a condition of assistance or at Yalta that Poland be restored after the war? Did Britain shelter the Polish government in exile? No, no... Britain didn't give a fig for Poland beyond serving as a convenient line in the sand they'd hoped Hitler would have the sense not to cross. Now, imagine after Munich in 1938, Hitler's reaction had a combined British-French battlefleet arrived at Poland to with a hundred thousand or more troops, tanks, aircraft, etc. Of course the British and French would be insane to do so, since if the Germans (and Russians) do attack, there is no Dunkirk to run to. Which is exactly why Britain didn't help Poland, because it wasn't worth the risk.

Poland's biggest mistake was assuming the British and French security guarantees meant anything. Poland should have allied itself with Germany or Russia. History suggests the latter is the better or two bad choices.
Both France and Britain declared War on Germany, with the French sheltering the Polish Government-in-exile whilst the Polish Navy fled to Britain and the airforce/army to France, where they stayed until the fall of France and everything was evacuated to London.

There wasn't much that could actually be done beyond sheltering the Polish Government and the declaration of war; the BEF wasn't sent because of a combination of logistics and the fact there was nothing that could realistically have been done by the time the BEF could have arrived. On the home island's they had 3,700 men who were ready to fight, two armoured divisions, an Airforce and Navy stretched thin across the world and not much readily available material aid. France, whilst having a larger armed forces at their immediate disposal, lacked the will to fight and suffered the same issues as Britain, where they had a large force on paper but very little was actually prepared or ready. Germany and the USSR (and Slovakia), on the other hand, had some 2 million men on the ground. This notion that Britain and France should have gone into Poland or done the bolded is a fantasy burgeoning on Sealion, as it fails to take into consideration that there was little that could actually have been done.

The point of siding with Poland was to contain Germany was because no-one really expected that Germany would send a million and a half men across the border. There are legitimate issues, such as how the plan was to use the pact as leverage to ensure Germany was brought to the negotiating table, had little actually muscle to back it up, and how the Wallies treated Poland at Yalta, but this idea that buddying up with the Nazis- people who thought of the Poles as subhumans and would eventually enslave and annihilate them- would have been the better of the two choices is one that I'm struggling to make sense of.
 

Towelie

Banned
They aren't peaceniks, they are isolationists; they have no problem fighting over specific American interests, they just don't want to fight Facists in their backyard for issues that they consider not American. Also I frankly think they are Fascist-favorable and want them to fight the Communists so America can stand back and profit off of war trade.

I think you are mostly right, except for the T word. God forbid we trade with anyone!! I have never taken the PaleoRight seriously and because of Trump's friendliness with some of those ideas, it was the first time I think I contemplated not voting for the Republican candidate for President this year. The Supreme Court was literally the only reason I ended up doing so.

But I think that in regards to Poland, I'm not sure how the idea of a puppet Poland bodes with Hitler's living space concept. If the ultimate goal was an autarkic agricultural German east, Poland kind of gets in the way of that if still a nation. Perhaps he wanted a nation with a large army for the inevitable clash with the Russians on his side, no matter how poor that army's condition was, and then simply would backstab them later.
 

CaliGuy

Banned
You got it.

OK.

That was the plan in the deal, but you think the Nazis would honor that?

Perhaps ... as long as Poland will remain a useful ally to them; however, this would still mean that Poland would always be at Nazi Germany's mercy--a position that Poland certainly didn't want to find itself in! :(

They aren't peaceniks, they are isolationists; they have no problem fighting over specific American interests, they just don't want to fight Facists in their backyard for issues that they consider not American. Also I frankly think they are Fascist-favorable and want them to fight the Communists so America can stand back and profit off of war trade.

The interesting thing, though, is that most of WWII did end up being a Nazi-Communist fight; indeed, the U.S.'s and Britain's sacrifices (at least in terms of lives; the financial sacrifices were compensated by post-WWII economic growth and prosperity) in WWII were actually pretty minimal in comparison to the Soviet Union's sacrifices in WWII. :)

From what I gather the plan was to leverage Polish trade via Danzig to economically subordinate them or use the resulting unrest from the economic downturn to overthrow the Polish government or use the instability to puppetize them like Czechoslovakia.

OK; understood. :( Frankly, all of this certainly makes sense! :(
 

CaliGuy

Banned
I think you are mostly right, except for the T word. God forbid we trade with anyone!! I have never taken the PaleoRight seriously and because of Trump's friendliness with some of those ideas, it was the first time I think I contemplated not voting for the Republican candidate for President this year. The Supreme Court was literally the only reason I ended up doing so.

But I think that in regards to Poland, I'm not sure how the idea of a puppet Poland bodes with Hitler's living space concept. If the ultimate goal was an autarkic agricultural German east, Poland kind of gets in the way of that if still a nation. Perhaps he wanted a nation with a large army for the inevitable clash with the Russians on his side, no matter how poor that army's condition was, and then simply would backstab them later.
Technically speaking, though, one can have Lebensraum in the Baltics and in northern Russia while still having an independent Poland.

However, Hitler's Lebensraum concept was flawed in the sense that he wanted Germany to return to its agricultural past; indeed, a smarter move would have been to turn the industrialized Czechia into German Lebensraum!
 

Deleted member 1487

But I think that in regards to Poland, I'm not sure how the idea of a puppet Poland bodes with Hitler's living space concept. If the ultimate goal was an autarkic agricultural German east, Poland kind of gets in the way of that if still a nation. Perhaps he wanted a nation with a large army for the inevitable clash with the Russians on his side, no matter how poor that army's condition was, and then simply would backstab them later.
Ready to really get confused? Hitler tried to ally with Poland because they were anti-Soviet. He wanted them as an ally like Romania, not a puppet or destroyed state for settlement initially, but they rebuffed his alliance offers so he went on the war path and turned them into yet another state to be destroyed. A Czechoslovak option for them would be to economically subordinate them first and at a minimum put a puppet government in charge that would do work for the Germans, restore the 1914 border by agreement, prove raw materials on credit if not sell them to the German state, and maybe even has them provide troops to fight for Germany in the East like Slovakia. Hitler's plans for Poland evolved over time (like other states, he initially expected to puppetize Austria not annex it), so if he goes the half way option they aren't a settlement state for a while, rather a tool state that is forced to accept Berlin's fiats.

The interesting thing, though, is that most of WWII did end up being a Nazi-Communist fight; indeed, the U.S.'s and Britain's sacrifices (at least in terms of lives; the financial sacrifices were compensated by post-WWII economic growth and prosperity) in WWII were actually pretty minimal in comparison to the Soviet Union's sacrifices in WWII. :)
They would have the two fight without US interference other than to sell to both sides and watch the carnage.
 

CaliGuy

Banned
They would have the two fight without US interference other than to sell to both sides and watch the carnage.

Given the relatively small U.S. sacrifice(s) in WWII, though, this essentially seems to be a back-door way of saying: "We want Hitler and Stalin to fight, but we want Hitler to win this fight!"
 

CaliGuy

Banned
It would be worthless, Poland had enough trouble enforcing their rights in FCD. Poland could live without Danzig, of course, but everyone knew it was just the first step in grabbing whole Polish Pomerania, which would be in turn first step in dismembering or at best puppetizing Poland.
Completely agreed with this.
 
IMO some people read too much into Chamberlain's desperate hopes for a last-minute peaceful solution to the Polish crisis in 1939. British (and French) public opinion by then would not tolerate a second Munich.
 
Britain had Guaranteed Poland's Independence before this. Chamberlain would immediately be arrested for incompetence after showing the world that Britain's Word and Treaties were worthless, the next government would declare war.

France of Course would have declared war regardless.
 

CaliGuy

Banned
IMO some people read too much into Chamberlain's desperate hopes for a last-minute peaceful solution to the Polish crisis in 1939. British (and French) public opinion by then would not tolerate a second Munich.
You're probably correct here; after all, a Second Munich could be followed by a Third Munich, and so on.
 
Both France and Britain declared War on Germany, with the French sheltering the Polish Government-in-exile whilst the Polish Navy fled to Britain and the airforce/army to France, where they stayed until the fall of France and everything was evacuated to London.

There wasn't much that could actually be done beyond sheltering the Polish Government and the declaration of war; the BEF wasn't sent because of a combination of logistics and the fact there was nothing that could realistically have been done by the time the BEF could have arrived. On the home island's they had 3,700 men who were ready to fight, two armoured divisions, an Airforce and Navy stretched thin across the world and not much readily available material aid. France, whilst having a larger armed forces at their immediate disposal, lacked the will to fight and suffered the same issues as Britain, where they had a large force on paper but very little was actually prepared or ready. Germany and the USSR (and Slovakia), on the other hand, had some 2 million men on the ground. This notion that Britain and France should have gone into Poland or done the bolded is a fantasy burgeoning on Sealion, as it fails to take into consideration that there was little that could actually have been done.

The point of siding with Poland was to contain Germany was because no-one really expected that Germany would send a million and a half men across the border. There are legitimate issues, such as how the plan was to use the pact as leverage to ensure Germany was brought to the negotiating table, had little actually muscle to back it up, and how the Wallies treated Poland at Yalta, but this idea that buddying up with the Nazis- people who thought of the Poles as subhumans and would eventually enslave and annihilate them- would have been the better of the two choices is one that I'm struggling to make sense of.
IMO you've pretty much summed up the ridiculousness of the British guarantee. British was both unable and unwilling to do anything proactive to demonstrate its guarantee. If you can't back up a guarantee, don't make one. I have to wonder what Britain would have done had Russia invaded first.

And the time for Poland to ally with Germany is before 1933. Instead the Poles acted like asses to the German population, blocking the corridor, and Poland threatening to invade German territory if there's any talk of returning the corridor back to Germany, etc. Had the Poles parked their bravado and instead been a little pragmatic and looked at the Soviet monster on their border, they would have seen than working with the Weimar Republic was in their interest.

Just read some of the Polish activities to take German territory below. It's no wonder Germany wanted to smash the sh#t out of Poland once they got their game back.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polish_Corridor#Incorporation_into_the_Second_Polish_Republic
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polish_Corridor#Exodus_of_the_German_population

Looking at Poland's behaviour in the past two decades, if you were Chamberlain in 1939 would you want to spill British blood for these guys? I wonder how Britain would have reacted had Germany used force to protect its citizens and property during the uprising https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greater_Poland_Uprising_(1918–19)
 
Last edited:

shiftygiant

Gone Fishin'
IMO you've pretty much summed up the ridiculousness of the British guarantee. British was both unable and unwilling to do anything proactive to demonstrate its guarantee. If you can't back up a guarantee, don't make one.
They weren't unwilling, the issue was that they were unable. If they were unwilling, both Britain and France would have cut their losses there and then, and you wouldn't have seen Operation Peking, nor the naval engagements and (minor) border skirmishes of the Phoney War. They were unable because no one actually anticipated the events as they unfolded, and as such were overtaken by them, expecting they'd have more time to actually prepare.
I have to wonder what Britain would have done had Russia invaded first.
They would have protested the embassy and funnelled arms to opposition group in the USSR, but an invasion by Russia wouldn't have violated the Alliance. Had Germany marched in, Britain would have still issued a DOW to Germany as that's what the Alliance covered.
 

CaliGuy

Banned
IMO you've pretty much summed up the ridiculousness of the British guarantee. British was both unable and unwilling to do anything proactive to demonstrate its guarantee. If you can't back up a guarantee, don't make one. I have to wonder what Britain would have done had Russia invaded first.

And the time for Poland to ally with Germany is before 1933. Instead the Poles acted like asses to the German population, blocking the corridor, and Poland threatening to invade German territory if there's any talk of returning the corridor back to Germany, etc. Had the Poles parked their bravado and instead been a little pragmatic and looked at the Soviet monster on their border, they would have seen than working with the Weimar Republic was in their interest.

Just read some of the Polish activities to take German territory below. It's no wonder Germany wanted to smash the sh#t out of Poland once they got their game back.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polish_Corridor#Incorporation_into_the_Second_Polish_Republic
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polish_Corridor#Exodus_of_the_German_population

Looking at Poland's behaviour in the past two decades, if you were Chamberlain in 1939 would you want to spill British blood for these guys? I wonder how Britain would have reacted had Germany used force to protect its citizens and property during the uprising https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greater_Poland_Uprising_(1918–19)
In Poland's defense, though, even "moderates" such as Stresemann were unwilling to compromise over the Polish Corridor.
 

CaliGuy

Banned
Both France and Britain declared War on Germany, with the French sheltering the Polish Government-in-exile whilst the Polish Navy fled to Britain and the airforce/army to France, where they stayed until the fall of France and everything was evacuated to London.

There wasn't much that could actually be done beyond sheltering the Polish Government and the declaration of war; the BEF wasn't sent because of a combination of logistics and the fact there was nothing that could realistically have been done by the time the BEF could have arrived. On the home island's they had 3,700 men who were ready to fight, two armoured divisions, an Airforce and Navy stretched thin across the world and not much readily available material aid. France, whilst having a larger armed forces at their immediate disposal, lacked the will to fight and suffered the same issues as Britain, where they had a large force on paper but very little was actually prepared or ready. Germany and the USSR (and Slovakia), on the other hand, had some 2 million men on the ground. This notion that Britain and France should have gone into Poland or done the bolded is a fantasy burgeoning on Sealion, as it fails to take into consideration that there was little that could actually have been done.

The point of siding with Poland was to contain Germany was because no-one really expected that Germany would send a million and a half men across the border. There are legitimate issues, such as how the plan was to use the pact as leverage to ensure Germany was brought to the negotiating table, had little actually muscle to back it up, and how the Wallies treated Poland at Yalta, but this idea that buddying up with the Nazis- people who thought of the Poles as subhumans and would eventually enslave and annihilate them- would have been the better of the two choices is one that I'm struggling to make sense of.
So, in other words, Britain's alliance with Poland and even declaration of war against Nazi Germany was merely intended as a ploy to get Nazi Germany to the negotiating table?
 

CaliGuy

Banned
Ready to really get confused? Hitler tried to ally with Poland because they were anti-Soviet. He wanted them as an ally like Romania, not a puppet or destroyed state for settlement initially, but they rebuffed his alliance offers so he went on the war path and turned them into yet another state to be destroyed. A Czechoslovak option for them would be to economically subordinate them first and at a minimum put a puppet government in charge that would do work for the Germans, restore the 1914 border by agreement, prove raw materials on credit if not sell them to the German state, and maybe even has them provide troops to fight for Germany in the East like Slovakia. Hitler's plans for Poland evolved over time (like other states, he initially expected to puppetize Austria not annex it), so if he goes the half way option they aren't a settlement state for a while, rather a tool state that is forced to accept Berlin's fiats.

Didn't Hitler annex Austria once he realized how badly many Austrians want to be a part of the German Reich?
 
Top