. Hitler would have created Nazism regardless of the treaty, as he was very nationalistic. But anyway iirc it was the depression what was the main reason why Hitler actually got control of germany in the first place.

 

Hitler hated the Treaty, that was obvious, it was his main inspiration for doing what he did, to make those who humiliated Germany pay, he blamed the Jews in particular... The Treaty created the resentment and the anger which he was able to tap into. Germany was forced to pay 132 million Marks and lost key economic territories. Hitler and his followers blamed this loss on "international Jewry", and it was here where his anti-semitic policies began. The Great Depression came along, and hit Germany especially hard because of the loss of those territories and having to pay reparations, it made it very easy for Hitler to get in with his apparently attractive policies of national pride and antisemitism....

 

There's a good chance that without the harshness of the treaty and the loss of those key economic territories, conditions would not have been so hard on Germans and perhaps they would not have turned to someone like Hitler as a "quick fix"... Of course, we'll never know for sure, but the humiliation the Germans suffered at the hands of the allies after WW1 certainly made things a lot easier for Hitler to get control...

 

with less then 6 hours of war left generals still sent men into the meat grinder. The last American died at 10:59.... Even with the fact that they would be able to cross the land infront of them safely they were still forced to fight for it. FUKKING MADNESS.

 

Yeah, it was as if these fukkin' "Generals" were just saying "right, how many of them can we send to die before this bally 'treaty' thing kicks in. Jolly inconvienient this peace lark, stops a chap from having a good old war....TALLY HO CHAPS, off to the front, still a few hours to go, pip pip......". B'astards..... <_<

 

I can just see you chanting "If it wasn't for the English you'd be krauts" at football matches. You are assuming fascism in Europe would have lasted 20 years longer than communism did. Maybe it would have done, maybe not.

 

indeed, thats something ive often thought.... theres no saying any invasion would have lasted.

I didn't know the peace was all that bad. I mean the Versailles treaty was quite harsh, but Hitler still led his troops into Rhineland, Sudtenland, the rest of Czech Republic, breaking the treaty and no action was taken. It was only until Poland was invaded that war was declared. That was what i was taught at school.

 

Yup, and the annexation of Austria. It was Chamberlain's appeasement strategy and Poland was the final straw. Hitler knew this and the SS tried to make it look like Poland were attacking them (Gleiwitz incident) by dressing up in Polish uniforms, attacking a radio station on the border and delivering an anti-German message in Polish.

 

Course it didn't work and Britain had to go through with the war. It was an inevitablility. Recent wars have not been I feel.

 

 

Hitler would have created Nazism regardless of the treaty, as he was very nationalistic.

 

If he was very nationalistic, why didn't he do it in Austria?

If he was very nationalistic, why didn't he do it in Austria?

 

That's a good question. I've no idea. But i'm pretty sure Hitler thought of himself as German. Austria aren't quite the same power as Germany either... thus making it easy for him to aquire world domination in theory.

If he was very nationalistic, why didn't he do it in Austria?

 

Because Austria was part of the Heiliges Römisches Reich Deutscher Nation (Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation) that existed between 906 - 1806.

 

The Empire's territorial extent varied over its history, but at its peak it encompassed the Kingdom of Germany, the Kingdom of Italy and the Kingdom of Burgundy; territories embracing the present-day Germany (except Southern Schleswig), Austria (except Burgenland), Liechtenstein, Switzerland, Belgium, the Netherlands, Luxembourg, the Czech Republic, Slovenia (except Prekmurje), as well as significant parts of modern France (mainly Artois, Alsace, Franche-Comté, Savoie and Lorraine), Northern Italy (mainly Lombardy, Piedmont, Emilia-Romagna, Tuscany, and Alto Adige-South Tyrol), and Poland (mainly Silesia, Pomerania, and Neumark). For much of its history the Empire consisted of hundreds of smaller sub-units, principalities, duchies, counties, Free Imperial Cities, as well as other domains. Despite its name, for much of its history the Empire did not include Rome within its borders.

 

This was what Adolf Hitler was initially trying to recreate.

 

 

Hitler did NOT get into power because of the Treaty of Versailles. By the late 1920s, most Germans had actually grudgingly accepted the Versailles terms... it was only when the economy collapsed that Hitler started gaining power (the Nazis only ever got like three seats in elections before 1929), and he or someone equally extreme would've probably done it regardless of Versailles.

 

indeed, thats something ive often thought.... theres no saying any invasion would have lasted.

Yeah, and it also should be pointed out that the British armed forces don't deserve any credit for Hitler's failure to invade Britain. In the original stage of the Battle of Britain, the German forces had almost completely wiped out air forces, which would've left them to invade us easily... but Hitler made a major strategic error by instead switching to bombing cities instead of air fields (most think he probably didn't realise how much success he was having by bombing air fields).

Hitler did NOT get into power because of the Treaty of Versailles. By the late 1920s, most Germans had actually grudgingly accepted the Versailles terms... it was only when the economy collapsed that Hitler started gaining power (the Nazis only ever got like three seats in elections before 1929), and he or someone equally extreme would've probably done it regardless of Versailles.

 

You miss the point totally, Germany was hit especially hard because it lost territories to the French after WW1, due to, funnily enough, the Treaty of Versailles.... :rolleyes: It matters NOT whether the Germans "grudgingly" accepted the terms (and you say it yourself, they accepted it GRUDGINGLY, they certainly did not like it...), what matters is that the unfair Treaty and antisemitism (he saw European Jews as being the beneficiaries and the architects of the Treaty, not to mention the profiteers of Germany's humiliation..) was Hitler's driving force for getting into politics in the first place.... The Treaty absolutely informed and influenced all his future actions, so to try and claim it was not a factor in Hitler's ideology is utter nonsense.....

 

You miss the point totally, Germany was hit especially hard because it lost territories to the French after WW1, due to, funnily enough, the Treaty of Versailles.... :rolleyes: It matters NOT whether the Germans "grudgingly" accepted the terms (and you say it yourself, they accepted it GRUDGINGLY, they certainly did not like it...), what matters is that the unfair Treaty and antisemitism (he saw European Jews as being the beneficiaries and the architects of the Treaty, not to mention the profiteers of Germany's humiliation..) was Hitler's driving force for getting into politics in the first place.... The Treaty absolutely informed and influenced all his future actions, so to try and claim it was not a factor in Hitler's ideology is utter nonsense.....

A hate of Versailles is what formed most of the Nazis' original policy in the early 1920s. But Germans rejected that, and the Nazis' attempted revolution about it flamed out... so after that, they completely dropped all references to the Treaty of Versailles, and they barely mentioned it at all in the years that led up to them taking power. It just wasn't a factor.

A hate of Versailles is what formed most of the Nazis' original policy in the early 1920s. But Germans rejected that, and the Nazis' attempted revolution about it flamed out... so after that, they completely dropped all references to the Treaty of Versailles, and they barely mentioned it at all in the years that led up to them taking power. It just wasn't a factor.

 

Having watched BBC4's excellent Armistice Series by historian David Reynolds I would have to refer to his conclusion that your opinion is wrong.

 

His conclusion was that The Treaty of Versaille was the "catalyst" for World War II due to its outcome towards the German Economic depression & resentment that eventually found a voice under Adolf Hitler's Nazi Germany.

 

Here are some facts:

 

1. The German's expected an honourable outcome from the talks to end the Great War and initially negotiations looked promising for them in the summer of 1918.

 

2. What changes things was the personal intervention by US President Woodrow Wilson upon the negotiations where he called for a German surrender, and for their Kaiser to step down to allow a democracy to become the voice of Germany. By the way Woodrow Wilson was Jewish! This was an issue that Adolf wrote at length and with some bitterness about in "Mein Kampf".

 

3. In the years after the end of the War & the Nazi's coming to power the Weimar Republic was the powderkeg. There was much internal conflict in these 14 years which meant that there was several radical (Socialist, Communist, Fascist, Anarchist) movements/parties but none had a significant enough power base of the German population until Hitler's National Socialist German Workers' Party took power with a minority 33% of the vote in 1933.

 

4. In 1923 the Weimar Republic defaulted on reparations payments required by the Versailles treaty. In response, French and Belgian troops occupied the Ruhr region, Germany's most productive industrial region at the time, taking control of most mining and manufacturing companies in January 1923. Strikes were called, and passive resistance was encouraged. These strikes lasted eight months, further damaging the economy and increasing the expense of imports. The strike meant no goods were being produced. This infuriated the French, who began to kill and exile protesters in the region. Needless to say this caused much resentment amongst the German population, as to continue the reparation payments Germany had to print much more money which lead to hyper inflation meaning that many nationals wealth was eroded over a very short period of time.

 

5. Add the Global Depression into the mix of 1929 and you have all the ingredients for Adolf Hitler's rise to power and the overthrow of 14 years democracy of the Weimar Republic.

 

Having watched BBC4's excellent Armistice Series by historian David Reynolds I would have to refer to his conclusion that your opinion is wrong.

 

His conclusion was that The Treaty of Versaille was the "catalyst" for World War II due to its outcome towards the German Economic depression & resentment that eventually found a voice under Adolf Hitler's Nazi Germany.

 

Here are some facts:

 

1. The German's expected an honourable outcome from the talks to end the Great War and initially negotiations looked promising for them in the summer of 1918.

 

2. What changes things was the personal intervention by US President Woodrow Wilson upon the negotiations where he called for a German surrender, and for their Kaiser to step down to allow a democracy to become the voice of Germany. By the way Woodrow Wilson was Jewish! This was an issue that Adolf wrote at length and with some bitterness about in "Mein Kampf".

 

3. In the years after the end of the War & the Nazi's coming to power the Weimar Republic was the powderkeg. There was much internal conflict in these 14 years which meant that there was several radical (Socialist, Communist, Fascist, Anarchist) movements/parties but none had a significant enough power base of the German population until Hitler's National Socialist German Workers' Party took power with a minority 33% of the vote in 1933.

 

4. In 1923 the Weimar Republic defaulted on reparations payments required by the Versailles treaty. In response, French and Belgian troops occupied the Ruhr region, Germany's most productive industrial region at the time, taking control of most mining and manufacturing companies in January 1923. Strikes were called, and passive resistance was encouraged. These strikes lasted eight months, further damaging the economy and increasing the expense of imports. The strike meant no goods were being produced. This infuriated the French, who began to kill and exile protesters in the region. Needless to say this caused much resentment amongst the German population, as to continue the reparation payments Germany had to print much more money which lead to hyper inflation meaning that many nationals wealth was eroded over a very short period of time.

 

5. Add the Global Depression into the mix of 1929 and you have all the ingredients for Adolf Hitler's rise to power and the overthrow of 14 years democracy of the Weimar Republic.

 

Excellent post Rich, and the final proof that it was indeed this 14 year period after the Versailles Treaty that led up to the Nazis gaining power.... Just about everything that went wrong in Germany in economic terms in this period CAN be linked to Versailles.. The Great Depression was the straw that broke the camel's back, it seriously hit Germany far more BECAUSE of the conditions laid down in Versailles and the loss of important economic territories, also due to the conditions of the Versailles Treaty.... The Treaty humiliated the Germans, and it caused great anger and resentment....

I think it needs to stay relevant, for the sake of the country at least. the day we forget the horrors which passed is the day that we allow ourselves to repat history.

 

Though my university didn't even have a silence, we just carried on with grammar. [although my teacher is Japanese, maybe she doesn't want to celebrate :lol: ]

Edited November 16, 200816 yr by Kiseki

I think it needs to stay relevant, for the sake of the country at least. the day we forget the horrors which passed is the day that we allow ourselves to repat history.

 

Though my university didn't even have a silence, we just carried on with grammar. [although my teacher is Japanese, maybe she doesn't want to celebrate :lol: ]

 

The Japanese have real issues trying to reconcile the horrors they perpetrated, particularly upon the Chinese and Koreans... Some years back there were even revisionist history books issued in Japanese schools which completely downplayed such atrocities as the Nanking Massacre... Pretty damned fukked up.... The Germans, by total contrast, have never even attempted to hide what Hitler did, and it is a fact that in Germany and Austria, if you write something which denies the Holocaust happened you could be sent to prison, as happened to British "academic" Dr David Irvine when he tried to publish a work denying the Holocaust in Austria.....

 

Japanese society since the Post-War period is admirable in many ways, but still one or two aspects, such as this, and the still deep-rooted mysoginy which exists within Japan really need sorting out....

The Japanese have real issues trying to reconcile the horrors they perpetrated, particularly upon the Chinese and Koreans... Some years back there were even revisionist history books issued in Japanese schools which completely downplayed such atrocities as the Nanking Massacre... Pretty damned fukked up.... The Germans, by total contrast, have never even attempted to hide what Hitler did, and it is a fact that in Germany and Austria, if you write something which denies the Holocaust happened you could be sent to prison, as happened to British "academic" Dr David Irvine when he tried to publish a work denying the Holocaust in Austria.....

 

Japanese society since the Post-War period is admirable in many ways, but still one or two aspects, such as this, and the still deep-rooted mysoginy which exists within Japan really need sorting out....

 

It's because of two reasons. One is that they don't want to look weak as a country, as that would severely harm national moral. Secondly is that they don't want to risk the consequences that come with owning up to the truth. They still refuse to admit that during their domination of Korea during the war, many Korean women were used as military prostitutes, for fear of being sued by a lot of families. The thing is though, that the "union" standing up for these women has claimed that nothing more is wanted than an apology, yet they still refuse to admit it.

 

I think their attempt to dominate various territories is admirable. Korea wouldn't be the country that it is today without the protectorate [before 1910 their were no roads, the upper classes refused to move away from the Hanja to the Hangul writing system, Confucianism dominated all matters etc.] of course the Japanese changed all this for their own benefit, and obviously it was not in many ways good for the peninsula, but the Japanese domination over it set it up for a brief takeover by both Russia and the U.S, who initially took up the responsiblity of looking after Korea since they believed that without the guidance of Japan after the war, it would easily fall back into its backward ways. Though I don't by any means completely believe that what the Japanese was right. they destroyed the 900 year Choson dynasty and basically destroyed all aspects of Korean culture.

 

Though enough with history and back to your original point, it's just the Japanese way really. I doubt they'll ever admit to their wartime atrocities.

Edited November 21, 200816 yr by Kiseki

It's because of two reasons. One is that they don't want to look weak as a country, as that would severely harm national moral. Secondly is that they don't want to risk the consequences that come with owning up to the truth. They still refuse to admit that during their domination of Korea during the war, many Korean women were used as military prostitutes, for fear of being sued by a lot of families. The thing is though, that the "union" standing up for these women has claimed that nothing more is wanted than an apology, yet they still refuse to admit it.

 

and they think the path they chose made them look better ? :lol:

It's because of two reasons. One is that they don't want to look weak as a country, as that would severely harm national moral. Secondly is that they don't want to risk the consequences that come with owning up to the truth. They still refuse to admit that during their domination of Korea during the war, many Korean women were used as military prostitutes, for fear of being sued by a lot of families. The thing is though, that the "union" standing up for these women has claimed that nothing more is wanted than an apology, yet they still refuse to admit it.

 

I think their attempt to dominate various territories is admirable. Korea wouldn't be the country that it is today without the protectorate [before 1910 their were no roads, the upper classes refused to move away from the Hanja to the Hangul writing system, Confucianism dominated all matters etc.] of course the Japanese changed all this for their own benefit, and obviously it was not in many ways good for the peninsula, but the Japanese domination over it set it up for a brief takeover by both Russia and the U.S, who initially took up the responsiblity of looking after Korea since they believed that without the guidance of Japan after the war, it would easily fall back into its backward ways. Though I don't by any means completely believe that what the Japanese was right. they destroyed the 900 year Choson dynasty and basically destroyed all aspects of Korean culture.

 

I have to agree with Rob over this... Denial and revisionism hardly makes the Japanese appear better... And, well, your justification for what Japan did in Korea sounds awfully like the same sort of thing that Britain was doing in India or Africa (and Ireland too really), the questionable benefits doesn't exactly justify imperialism and subjugation, you certainly will find very few people in Britain who would describe the British Empire as "admirable", so, I'm a bit "errrrrr" about one or two of your comments on this matter...

 

As for military prostitutes, the Germans did a similar thing with Jewish women, and they also took "aryan" children and young girls from families in countries like Poland, Czechoslovakia and Hungary and put them into breeding programmes, but like with everything else, the Germans, post-war, never sought to hide the truth of these facts... Germany wanted to draw a line under things in order to ensure that someone like Hitler could never, ever dominate again...

 

Like I said, there's many things to admire about the Japanese, but in this one area, I feel that they are wrong and they should admit their crimes and the atrocities they committed... It would perhaps be easier for the Chinese and Koreans to forgive and move on if they did....

 

Oh I wasn't justifying the Japanese control of Korea by any means, I just meant that they did bring the country into the modern era. Without it, Korea may well have ended up becomcing an annex of China after the war was over. Though of course it was all for the benefit of the Japanese and they ruined Korean culture, and still today there are bitter relations between the two countries.

 

Also, i'm not condoning the Japanese refusal to admit to using military prostitutes, however, I understand why they don't want to. Japan is a very different country to Germany in all aspects, i don't think it should be expected for them to act the same way post-war. Whether that's right or wrong though is for each individual to make their own decision.

Japan is a very different country to Germany in all aspects, i don't think it should be expected for them to act the same way post-war. Whether that's right or wrong though is for each individual to make their own decision.

 

With all due respect, that's a bit of a cop-out.... Japan may be a different country, but it shouldn't preclude them from apologising and making amends for what happened during war time... At the end of the day, all the Koreans and Chinese are expecting of them is some kind of acknowledgement and admission of wrong-doing, this is not too much to ask surely... Also, stopping the attempts at lying, revisionism and covering things up to future generations of Japanese is surely not much to ask either....

 

If I were Japanese, I certainly would not be thanking my Govt for lying to me about what happened during the war...

If I were Japanese, I certainly would not be thanking my Govt for lying to me about what happened during the war...

Don't they even ban schools teaching crises of the war, like Manchuria for instance?..

 

You miss the point totally, Germany was hit especially hard because it lost territories to the French after WW1, due to, funnily enough, the Treaty of Versailles.... :rolleyes: It matters NOT whether the Germans "grudgingly" accepted the terms (and you say it yourself, they accepted it GRUDGINGLY, they certainly did not like it...), what matters is that the unfair Treaty and antisemitism (he saw European Jews as being the beneficiaries and the architects of the Treaty, not to mention the profiteers of Germany's humiliation..) was Hitler's driving force for getting into politics in the first place.... The Treaty absolutely informed and influenced all his future actions, so to try and claim it was not a factor in Hitler's ideology is utter nonsense.....

Grudgingly? It was more like forced. The treaty crippled Germany's economy, destroyed nations pride and put it in a more worst state than what it was in during the war. It shouldn't come as no surprise when people say that in retrospect, countries such as Britain & France could be to blame for Hitlers actions (not his anti-Semitism views, that's a different matter), but for one man wanting to rebuild a broken empire and get revenge?

 

So yeah, Remembrance Sunday shouldn't be forgotten. Although from my point of view, it's a 'dying event'. Not many people commit to it as much or buy as much poppies as they use to.