Did Poland Provoke Germany into a War?
Hitler started the war in 1939. Nobody, be they random Jewish private citizens or the Major World powers, provoked Hitler. Deal with it and stop making things up.
I call bullshit. Poland provoked Hitler. Hate to get involved in this sort of discussion, because the Poland issue is a very muddled one. But at the very least it’s established that Hitler was provoked. The issue is how badly. Skip to Part 2.
– Poland Provoked Hitler – Lmao, no. Poland signed a Non aggression pact with Hitler, and even took part in the fall of Czechoslovakia by seizing Formerly Polish territory from them. As mentioned earlier, their main enemy before Hitler invaded was Stalin, who invaded them in 20s
That was before Józef Klemens Piłsudski died.
That was their consistent Policy, regardless of who died. By the way, Polsudski’s death also resulted in the return of persecution and discrimination against Jews in Poland. But sure, genius, fantasize about how the Poles worked with the Jews to provoke poor Adolf.
It also resulted in Marshal Edward Rydz-Śmigły coming into power. Poland became aggressive towards Czech and Lithuania, making maneuvers similar to what others claim Germany did. Plus FDR told Edward not to have any peace deals with Germany.
Also, Stalin and the USSR stopped being their enemy after Pilsudski died? The 1939 invasion from Stalin never happened, then? Okay, dummy
Ad hoc, rhetorical question.
Kinda funny that Britain wouldn’t declare war on USSR amidst that even with the Polish-British Common Defense Pact. Granted, it was geographically more viable to hit Germany first, but it’s peculiar how quickly the USSR is forgotten amidst all this.
Because the defense pact was intended as a deterrent against Hitler, nothing more. They didn’t wage war on Hitler until 1940 when Hitler invaded France, and they didn’t declare War on the USSR because again, the defence pact was a bluff/deterrent against Hitler.
As proof that the Guarantee was a bluff, it contained the explicit term that UK and France would only attack if Polish Sovereignty was threatened. If Hitler did the same thing to CZ and swallowed Poland whole. They gave themselves a way out if Hitler “only” seized parts of Poland
As Poland’s main Enemy was Stalin, they acted accordingly. Before Sept. of 1939, their military was concentrated in the east, anticipating an attack from Stalin (which only came after Hitler invaded with Stalin). Poor Adolf was so “provoked” he needed a false flag (Gleiwitz) Lol
“Before Sept. of 1939, their military was concentrated in the east”
Right, after Poland decided to invade and annex Czechoslovakia in 1938.
Yeah. As I said earlier, they did so in concert with Hitler and took the opportunity to seize territory they deemed formerly Polish. Thanks for reinforcing my point. No one provoked poor Adolf. Even the Poles collaborated with him when they thought appropriate.
Oh, so it’s ok for Poland then, but not for Germany? Czech asked for help from Germany amidst this, Germany gave it. Thanks for proving MY point about the Polish Corridor (which Hitler tried to resolve peacefully by the way, prior to FDR’s involvement).
– prior to FDR’s involvement –
FDR was trying to Placate Hitler, too. Contrary to popular belief, the US’s war effort was concentrated in the Pacific, against Japan. It wasn’t until much later that the US got more involved in the European Front.
Lol, illiterate fool missed my point. Where did I say this was “okay”? Again, my point was that at the time, the other World Powers did not provoke Hitler and had no problem working with him when it suited their agenda. Nobody provoked poor Adolf.
Gleiwitz. Allegedly a false flag conducted by the Germans to make an excuse for attacking Poland. Perhaps not.
Any further responses from me will only be given on my site. Just state you’ll take the discussion there, and I’ll make a page.
Page made. This discussion was getting too complex (and going across too many tweets) for it to be dealt with adequately on Twitter. I couldn’t make adequate responses that could hope to appease their points (assuming they were capable of being appeased).
So, we’ll see.
Germany didn’t go to war over a boycott and I doubt it was even part of the consideration. Hitler was expansionist in his outlook.
Because the boycott ultimately failed.
Expansionist beyond retaking territory lost over Versailles? Doubtful.
Austria was never part of Imperial Germany (obviously). Neither was the Sudetenland. Nor was Czechoslovakia, that territory was Austro-Hungarian. Never read Mein Kampf, have you?
I must confess, in spite of owning a copy, I haven’t. Currently reading Babylon 5 books. Might get to that afterwards.
Was under the impression the majority of Austria didn’t mind this annexation happening. Many ethnic Germans in Sudetenland (voluntary annexation).
And Czech asked for help from Germany in response to Poland’s aggressive stance against them.
You really should. It’s rather pointless unless you understand what Hitler’s mindset was. Yet those were not Imperial German territories. Neither was the rest of Czechoslovakia including the Sudetenland. Now, you could argue that the Austrians didn’t mind joining Germany. But the Sudetenland was Czechoslovakian territory. It didn’t matter what the ethnic makeup was. However the British and French betrayed Czechoslovakia and simply handed it over. But the rest of Czechoslovakia was not part of the Munich Agreement.
Oh, bullshit. Germany allowed Poland and Hungary to take a slice.
I failed to respond to this, aside from just stating, “If you want to really debate this, transfer the discussion over to a website better suited for it.” A discussion like this demands more research and fact-checking. Regardless, aggression were being made against smaller countries from a few of the larger countries. Poland, USSR, Germany. Things were heating up, and Germany wasn’t solely to blame.
Czechoslovakia had a strong military and one of the most well trained forces in the world, so much that Hitler’s generals were afraid that Hitler’s invasion would fail and were eager to do a coup when it did. No, mate.
Sigh. Ok, we’ve discussed this before but the Polish didn’t massacre Germans before the invasion on September 1st. Did they suffer some persecution? Sure. So did Polish Jews, Ukrainians and Belorussians. Which you haven’t bothered to say anything about because your outrage is very selective. Nothing required Poland to negotiate over territory that was theirs.
The reason for being selective is the attempt to keep this focused on the original topic we’ve branched out from. That the 6 million numbers were bullshit, and what numbers there were weren’t done without cause independent of racism. Now we’ve expanded to reasons for WWII.
6 million? Nothing more than an estimate. Even the WJC didn’t give that number at the IMT.
Alright, 5 million. Either way, if that number was based in-part on the Russian numbers of those who died at Auschwitz, then it would still be at least 2 million lower than that. And even then we have to consider if they died by execution, or if they treat it like COVID-19.
Your calculations don’t make much sense… The estimates range from 5-6 million. The estimated number of Jewish deaths ranges from 900,000-1,000,000 for Auschwitz About 200,000 for Sobibor About 500,000 for Belzec About 900,000 for Treblinka About 152,000 for Chelmno
The Germans and their proxies shot about 1.5 million Jews on the Eastern Front with other mass shootings occurring at different times. The rest died from starvation, disease, maltreatment…
All of these numbers are estimates.
Right, and those numbers don’t amount to what the Final Solution is cracked up to be by non-revisionists, let alone the reasons for those deaths. Don’t get me wrong, I’m sure a portion of them were killed just for being Jewish. I don’t believe that for the majority.
The other point being that if the 6 million number was based on the USSR numbers, then even if we were to drop it to 5 million, that would still be overshooting it just based on Auschwitz alone. The Auschwitz numbers go from 4 million to 1 million (give or take a hundred thousand). That’s 6 million to 3 million. So even if we’re to go with 5 million, it must be asked of 2 million of that 5 million is based on the old Auschwitz numbers. If not, then where are all these numbers coming from that add to such a high death count? And even if those numbers are to be trusted, what type of casualties are we talking about? Killed in military action (as in they had weapons and were firing at the Germans)? Died of disease or starvation? How many were actual executions?
“those numbers don’t amount to what the Final Solution is cracked up to be by non-revisionists, let alone the reasons for those deaths.” Clarify this statement. About half of the Jews that died did so in camps, the other half by mass shootings and other causes.
Those who died in camps primarily did so of disease (typhus) and starvation (Allied bombings of supplies left camps without a food). The shootings also amounted to Jews KIA who were fighting for the Soviets/communists. Questionable the # of innocent Jews killed in shootings.
Lol no. Einsatzgruppen shooting reports listed Jews seperately from “Communists” and explicitly stated that they were killed for “belonging to the Jewish race”. The Soviets didn’t like that Jews- not Soviet citizens or communists – were the main targets and censored it postwar.
Well, it’s about time you finally got around to some honest denial.
Naturally you are wrong. Now, how is this going to go?
Could start by citing Adam Tooze’s work The Wages of Destruction which mentions how Germans suffered/starved due to Allied bombings, which led to the inevitable domino effect of starvation at the camps. Simple logic.
I couldn’t find this somehow, but he basically stated that I was misrepresenting Tooze’s work because Tooze never stated that the bombings led to this. My counter-response would be, he didn’t have to.
Regarding the Einsatzgruppen, they are discussed more in-depth here:
And that whole argument of, “but the Einsatzgruppen reports distinguished Jews from Communists” is bullshit. They could be both a Communist and a Jew, and be executed for being Communist. Hell, by that logic, you mine as well as argue you must be either a Communist, or a Jew, or do seditious/provocative activity, or do partisan activity, or do sabotage; but there’s no way you can do or be two or more all at the same time. That’s just not possible. Commies would never be Jewish or be seditious, provocative, partisan, or saboteurs. Give me a fucking break.
And that ended the Twitter Wars. Got humbled on some points, increased by understanding and foundations/defense of other points. As for them, they were mostly being incredulous. Which didn’t offer much reason for it to continue when I was starting to get responses like, “Naturally you are wrong,” as opposed to stating how I was wrong.