World War II, The anti-US version Options

Of course it's easier to obsess about Allied bombings and to social network and so forth, rather than correct factual errors.

That's why it falls to you, O Emperor, to correct them for us.

Say, I only realized now that you and Hirohito share a first name.

As an interesting note, the US Veterans Association a few years ago managed to stop the Smithsonian from presenting an exhibition on the Hiroshima/Nagasaki bombings, for fear that displaying the true carnage that was unleashed by the bombings would sully their good name. I haven't looked at the WP article on the bombings, but I wouldn't be surprised if similar movements were afoot there too.

Go to Hiroshima one day and have a look around. I highly recommend it.

I plan to.

There is a small museum in the town of Los Alamos New Mexico that few people know about or visit. It includes a history section that features photographs of the devastation at Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Berlin was almost 900 miles (1,400 km) from the Western Front; no Allied soldier had ever set foot on German soil in anger, and the Kaiser's armies retreated from the battlefield in good order. Thus many Germans, including Adolf Hitler, were convinced their armies had not really been defeated.

source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=218411348 (bold emphasis is mine)

For those unfamiliar with WWI, angry Allied soldiers actually did invade parts of Germany during the war.

Of course it's easier to obsess about Allied bombings and to social network and so forth, rather than correct factual errors.

Got the point about the misstatement of fact, but....

What's with the "anger" comment? Since when and where and how is soldier-mood-reading a part of war history?


This post has been edited by Disillusioned Lackey: Sat 14th June 2008, 6:18pm

What's with the "anger" comment? Since when and where and how is soldier-mood-reading a part of war history?

Their words, not mine.

By they way, Wikipedians are really rough on Groener. See also: Ebert-Groener Pact.

Groener, who was second-in-command of the German Army and who had known Ebert from the soldier's days in charge of war production, contacted the socialist leader that evening. The two men concluded the so-called Ebert-Groener pact, which was to remain secret for a number of years. For his part of the pact, Ebert agreed to suppress the Bolshevik-led revolution and maintain the defeated Army's role as one of the pillars of the German state; Groener in turn agreed to throw the weight of the still-considerable Army behind the new government. For this act, Groener earned the enmity of much of the military leadership, much of whom sought the retention of the monarchy.

If my memory serves, Kaiser Wilhelm actually travelled to meet with a group of "military leadership" to see if he had any support. They had their chance to seek the retention of the monarchy, but no one spoke up. Groener must be a Nazi scapegoat or something.

Now look at the intro:

World War II or the Second World War[1] was a global military conflict, the joining of what had initially been two separate conflicts. It first began in Asia in 1937 as the Second Sino-Japanese War; the other began in Europe in 1939 with the German invasion of Poland.

Putting aside all content disputes for a second, how about the writing quality?

The best part: the owners have frozen the intro while mediation about the start date is underway. Could be changed tomorrow, could be never.

In March 1939 Germany invaded the rump of Czechoslovakia...

source

In March 1939 Germany invaded the rump of Czechoslovakia...

source

That's the way I remember it. "Rump" meaning what was leftover, after the Sudetenland was annexed in Oct. 1938 under the Sept. 1938 Munich Agreement "Peace in our time" thing. When Germany took the rest the next Spring, a little-mentioned event in history, the cards for WW II were on the table. England knew for sure from that date it would inevitably be war with the breaking of the agreement, but no war was declared at the time for England simply couldn't believe events, and wasn't ready. It took 6 months for reality to sink in, so that with the invasion of Poland, reaction was immediate.

That's the way I remember it. "Rump" meaning what was leftover, after the Sudetenland was annexed in Oct. 1938 under the Sept. 1938 Munich Agreement "Peace in our time" thing. When Germany took the rest the next Spring, a little-mentioned event in history, the cards for WW II were on the table. England knew for sure from that date it would inevitably be war with the breaking of the agreement, but no war was declared at the time for England simply couldn't believe events, and wasn't ready. It took 6 months for reality to sink in, so that with the invasion of Poland, reaction was immediate.

"invaded the rump"? Come on!

I remember the very first time I looked at WP I read a heated discussion on Hitler's homosexuality on a talk page which went on for ages and ages. Laughed myself silly....must find that again one day....

This post has been edited by Casliber: Sun 22nd February 2009, 10:39am

England knew for sure from that date it would inevitably be war with the breaking of the agreement, but no war was declared at the time for England simply couldn't believe events, and wasn't ready.

Ahem. That's "Britain". Or the "UK". Or even the "United Kingdom of Great Britain" for those who love to type. {Sniff}.

"invaded the rump"? Come on!

No no no. You're being selective in your quoting. That's "Germany invaded the rump of Czechoslovakia". See WWII rump states. Yes, "rump" is an immensely funny word, but dirty people see dirty things, I'm told.

No no no. You're being selective in your quoting. That's "Germany invaded the rump of Czechoslovakia". See WWII rump states. Yes, "rump" is an immensely funny word, but dirty people see dirty things, I'm told.

No, you're being selective. Read this thread back to yesterday.

That's the way I remember it. "Rump" meaning what was leftover, after the Sudetenland was annexed in Oct. 1938 under the Sept. 1938 Munich Agreement "Peace in our time" thing. When Germany took the rest the next Spring, a little-mentioned event in history, the cards for WW II were on the table. England knew for sure from that date it would inevitably be war with the breaking of the agreement, but no war was declared at the time for England simply couldn't believe events, and wasn't ready. It took 6 months for reality to sink in, so that with the invasion of Poland, reaction was immediate.

"invaded the rump"? Come on!

I advise you never to go looking for history on England's Rump Parliament. Your vulgar head will explode also.

And since this was 17th century and pre-Queen Anne, it really was just the parliament of "England" then.

"This blessed plot, this earth, this realm, this England."

In March 1939 Germany invaded the rump of Czechoslovakia...

source

That's the way I remember it. "Rump" meaning what was leftover, after the Sudetenland was annexed in Oct. 1938 under the Sept. 1938 Munich Agreement "Peace in our time" thing. When Germany took the rest the next Spring, a little-mentioned event in history, the cards for WW II were on the table. England knew for sure from that date it would inevitably be war with the breaking of the agreement, but no war was declared at the time for England simply couldn't believe events, and wasn't ready. It took 6 months for reality to sink in, so that with the invasion of Poland, reaction was immediate. (LHvU underlining.)

Great Britain (as it was then) went onto a war footing upon the Czech invasion, see the production figures for the Hawker Hurrican - started in October 1937, 500 planes built by start of September 1939 (remembering they were building Spitfires, Defiants, Wellingtons, Battles, Blenheims, and a few other types at the same time), the navy was being refitted and keels laid down, and the army was being re-equipped. France attempted to do the same, but their more fractured infrastructure meant they were not as effective in getting new equipment into production (the Dewoitine D.520 was a contemporary of the Spitfire and 109E in performance more than the Hurri was). War within Europe was inevitable because the French were not going to tolerate an emergent Germany on the mainland, and Britain didn't need another naval power (along with France and the US) in the North Atlantic.

The Poland ultimatium might be considered a gambit by the British/French to hold off the declaration of war by which time their respective industries would have been producing in quantity the quality materials needed to negate German weaponary (Germany didn't go into war production mode until 1940, when it was realised that Britain was going to stay in, and might have had difficulty compensating for losses against a resilient French military backed by Great Britain with its factories not threatened by an enemy off its southern coast.) Hitler likely gambled that the ultimatium could be called in the short term because he was aware that his borders to the west would remain secure, but waiting would have placed the allies in a position to build up resources sufficiently to turn defensive strategy into offensive.

It has to be remembered that France had fallen, the Italians had entered on the side of Germany, North Africa was a theatre of war, the Norwegian campaigns had ended, the Battle of Britain won, and invasion of Russia by the Axis being put into action before the Japanese started their attacks - a delay by Hitler in invading Poland would have placed Britain and France in a far stronger position within Europe.

Um, that is my on the fly take on the situation anyway.

Oh dear. Be careful talking about "Great Britain". Swarms of Wikipedian schoolchildren are out there right now trying to eliminate it. They're burning every copy of Winston Churchill's book so that the term never appears again.

In March 1939 Germany invaded the rump of Czechoslovakia...

source

That's the way I remember it. "Rump" meaning what was leftover, after the Sudetenland was annexed in Oct. 1938 under the Sept. 1938 Munich Agreement "Peace in our time" thing. When Germany took the rest the next Spring, a little-mentioned event in history, the cards for WW II were on the table. England knew for sure from that date it would inevitably be war with the breaking of the agreement, but no war was declared at the time for England simply couldn't believe events, and wasn't ready. It took 6 months for reality to sink in, so that with the invasion of Poland, reaction was immediate. (LHvU underlining.)

Great Britain (as it was then) went onto a war footing upon the Czech invasion, see the production figures for the Hawker Hurrican - started in October 1937, 500 planes built by start of September 1939 (remembering they were building Spitfires, Defiants, Wellingtons, Battles, Blenheims, and a few other types at the same time), the navy was being refitted and keels laid down, and the army was being re-equipped. France attempted to do the same, but their more fractured infrastructure meant they were not as effective in getting new equipment into production (the Dewoitine D.520 was a contemporary of the Spitfire and 109E in performance more than the Hurri was). War within Europe was inevitable because the French were not going to tolerate an emergent Germany on the mainland, and Britain didn't need another naval power (along with France and the US) in the North Atlantic.

Yes, I didn't mean to suggest that Great Britain sat around paralyzed. They certainly went on more of a war footing after the rest of Czechoslovakia went down. But the curious thing to me is that the Chamberlain government didn't fall in March 1939, or even in September 1939. Despite that fact that Chamberlain and the Munich pact had made it perfectly clear that it was predicated on the Nazis leaving the rest of the country alone, and Churchill's prediction that they wouldn't (which nobody listened to). Even more incredibly, when Great Britain gave Germany the final ultimatum about Poland, the Chamberlain government didn't fall even after Hitler broke THAT, and war had to be declared. That's rather what I mean about reality not sinking in. You don't go to war with the same people whose bad judgement led you into it unprepared. It took Great Britain until the (essential) loss of France, and the scramble and miracle/disaster at Dunkirk, to finally figure that out. That was a year late.

In March 1939 Germany invaded the rump of Czechoslovakia...

source

That's the way I remember it. "Rump" meaning what was leftover, after the Sudetenland was annexed in Oct. 1938 under the Sept. 1938 Munich Agreement "Peace in our time" thing. When Germany took the rest the next Spring, a little-mentioned event in history, the cards for WW II were on the table. England knew for sure from that date it would inevitably be war with the breaking of the agreement, but no war was declared at the time for England simply couldn't believe events, and wasn't ready. It took 6 months for reality to sink in, so that with the invasion of Poland, reaction was immediate. (LHvU underlining.)

Great Britain (as it was then) went onto a war footing upon the Czech invasion, see the production figures for the Hawker Hurrican - started in October 1937, 500 planes built by start of September 1939 (remembering they were building Spitfires, Defiants, Wellingtons, Battles, Blenheims, and a few other types at the same time), the navy was being refitted and keels laid down, and the army was being re-equipped. France attempted to do the same, but their more fractured infrastructure meant they were not as effective in getting new equipment into production (the Dewoitine D.520 was a contemporary of the Spitfire and 109E in performance more than the Hurri was). War within Europe was inevitable because the French were not going to tolerate an emergent Germany on the mainland, and Britain didn't need another naval power (along with France and the US) in the North Atlantic.

Yes, I didn't mean to suggest that Great Britain sat around paralyzed. They certainly went on more of a war footing after the rest of Czechoslovakia went down. But the curious thing to me is that the Chamberlain government didn't fall in March 1939, or even in September 1939. Despite that fact that Chamberlain and the Munich pact had made it perfectly clear that it was predicated on the Nazis leaving the rest of the country alone, and Churchill's prediction that they wouldn't (which nobody listened to). Even more incredibly, when Great Britain gave Germany the final ultimatum about Poland, the Chamberlain government didn't fall even after Hitler broke THAT, and war had to be declared. That's rather what I mean about reality not sinking in. You don't go to war with the same people whose bad judgement led you into it unprepared. It took Great Britain until the (essential) loss of France, and the scramble and miracle/disaster at Dunkirk, to finally figure that out. That was a year late.

Winston was not liked in his own party let alone parliament, and I believe the French were not keen on the imperialist gentleman either. It was only when there was no "civilised" alternative did he get the nod - and a fantastic job he did, too. However, he lost the immediate election after the war as well. Chamberlain was liked within his party, Parliament and the population - it was realised that Hitler had abused the trust he was given. Chamberlain was ever the realist and stepped down for the better war leader (of a nationalist coalition - not Conservative - government).

To Emperor - that is how the nation styled itself in those days, when not referring to itself as an Empire.

To Emperor - that is how the nation styled itself in those days, when not referring to itself as an Empire.

I agree with your statement. Now could you please point me to where in the Great Britain article I can find this piece of the sum of human knowledge? If not, why don't you add it?

Winston was not liked in his own party let alone parliament, and I believe the French were not keen on the imperialist gentleman either. It was only when there was no "civilised" alternative did he get the nod - and a fantastic job he did, too. However, he lost the immediate election after the war as well. Chamberlain was liked within his party, Parliament and the population - it was realised that Hitler had abused the trust he was given. Chamberlain was ever the realist and stepped down for the better war leader (of a nationalist coalition - not Conservative - government).

To Emperor - that is how the nation styled itself in those days, when not referring to itself as an Empire.

For an eye opener, go to his bunker in London from which he ran the war seemingly from his bed. He had breakfast in bed, afternoon naps, but it seems he did know a thing or two about fighting a world war. Hopelessly out of touch for peacetime as far as my skimpy knowledge of modern British history allows me to believe.

Winston was not liked in his own party let alone parliament, and I believe the French were not keen on the imperialist gentleman either. It was only when there was no "civilised" alternative did he get the nod - and a fantastic job he did, too. However, he lost the immediate election after the war as well. Chamberlain was liked within his party, Parliament and the population - it was realised that Hitler had abused the trust he was given. Chamberlain was ever the realist and stepped down for the better war leader (of a nationalist coalition - not Conservative - government).

More than that. The guy was only 6 months away from dying of colon cancer, so he can't have been feeling too well, whether he knew anything was formally wrong with him at the time, or not.

Life is not fair. Winston's son Randolf, an alcoholic that nobody liked, also had a colon tumor, but when it was removed it was found not to be cancer. Somebody said: "What a shame they have cut out the only part of Randolf which is NOT malignant." In Chamberlain's case, as you say, everybody liked the man. His problem was that he was so sweet he apparently could not recognize evil when it stared him in the face.

Winston Churchill had no difficulty recognizing evil immediately in Hitler. Or Stalin. I don't think this was particularly due to any evil in Winston's character-- rather his deep knowledge of history.

For an eye opener, go to his bunker in London from which he ran the war seemingly from his bed. He had breakfast in bed, afternoon naps, but it seems he did know a thing or two about fighting a world war. Hopelessly out of touch for peacetime as far as my skimpy knowledge of modern British history allows me to believe.

Winston was an awful Chancellor of the Exchequer, and during his second term as PM late in life, he was getting pretty old and worn out. But otherwise, everybody needs somebody to run its defense dept even in peacetime, and Great Britain kept Churchill out for many years, even though they needed him pretty much all the time he was an MP. That was dumb. He got blamed for Galipoli in WW I, which wasn't really his fault (had the plan been executed by people as physically fearless as Churchill, it would have worked brilliantly. But they hesitated due to fear of mines long enough to let the Turks get in place, and then got slaughtered).

Yes, Winston often ran things from his bed, often with a liberal amount of alcohol to keep him out of withdrawal (as I read it!). But wars at the top are won by tactical thinking and it hardly matters where a person does that. Nor did historical wisdom in those times need be on display anywhere but in what a man wrote. And occasionally said on the radio (but Winston even had a reader for THAT, when he got too busy).