Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
France was defeated ''quickly''France lost 350,000 men (almost as many as the US lost in all of WW2) in the battle for France.Oh, and FRANCE was just trying to prepare themselves for war by Surrendering to THE Nazis.
And they were militarily defeated, their army was surrounded, and their government was captured.
Chamberlain oversaw the largest buildup of military in UK history. Ismay, the supreme commander of Imperial defence stated that Chamberlain should give Germany Chechoslovakia, that war was coming, but that time was on Britain's side and that Britain needed at least 6 more months to get her air force ready for war, but that they needed maybe a whole year at the very least.
Chamberlain and Hitler - source 3 - The National Archives
I'm sorry to destroy conservative beliefs, but they need to be destroyed.
The entire purpose of what now Conservatives say was "appeasement" was to ensure that the UK wasn't wiped out in the opening salvo of the war by fighting a war too prematurely.
Chamberlain oversaw the largest buildup of military in UK history. Ismay, the supreme commander of Imperial defence stated that Chamberlain should give Germany Chechoslovakia, that war was coming, but that time was on Britain's side and that Britain needed at least 6 more months to get her air force ready for war, but that they needed maybe a whole year at the very least.
Chamberlain and Hitler - source 3 - The National Archives
I'm sorry to destroy conservative beliefs, but they need to be destroyed.
The entire purpose of what now Conservatives say was "appeasement" was to ensure that the UK wasn't wiped out in the opening salvo of the war by fighting a war too prematurely.
And it's odd that nobody says Russia or Stalin were appeasers when Stalin did exactly the same thing. He made a peace treaty with Hitler where Germany and Russia divided up Poland between them (secretly). Stalin also was buying time (and annexing half of another sovereign nation as well). It was absolutely appeasement if you look at it from that perspecitve.
Or both were pragmatic. Neither was ready to fight Germany head on, especially if they had to fight alone. Germany invaded Russia in June of 1941, nearly two years after WW2 started. Russia had all that time to build up and Germany still beat the Russians senseless for a year, with 20 million Russians dying.
In the end if Chamberlain had refused to sign a treaty with Hitler it really wouldn't have mattered as far as 'standing up to blah blah blah'. It did matter greatly that England had that extra year from September 1938 until September 1939 to build up it's airforce, which was the rock the Luftwaffe was smashed against.
On the face of it Chamberlain appears weak after the fact. But in that moment there was nothing anyone, not even the US who's military was about 100,000, could do. Buying time was the best option for all of the futures 'allies'.
Did France depend too much on the wall? Both Germany and France had walls to prevent invasion, France's wall was the Maginot Line.
Chamberlain oversaw the largest buildup of military in UK history. Ismay, the supreme commander of Imperial defence stated that Chamberlain should give Germany Chechoslovakia, that war was coming, but that time was on Britain's side and that Britain needed at least 6 more months to get her air force ready for war, but that they needed maybe a whole year at the very least.
Chamberlain and Hitler - source 3 - The National Archives
I'm sorry to destroy conservative beliefs, but they need to be destroyed.
The entire purpose of what now Conservatives say was "appeasement" was to ensure that the UK wasn't wiped out in the opening salvo of the war by fighting a war too prematurely.
And it's odd that nobody says Russia or Stalin were appeasers when Stalin did exactly the same thing. He made a peace treaty with Hitler where Germany and Russia divided up Poland between them (secretly). Stalin also was buying time (and annexing half of another sovereign nation as well). It was absolutely appeasement if you look at it from that perspecitve.
Or both were pragmatic. Neither was ready to fight Germany head on, especially if they had to fight alone. Germany invaded Russia in June of 1941, nearly two years after WW2 started. Russia had all that time to build up and Germany still beat the Russians senseless for a year, with 20 million Russians dying.
In the end if Chamberlain had refused to sign a treaty with Hitler it really wouldn't have mattered as far as 'standing up to blah blah blah'. It did matter greatly that England had that extra year from September 1938 until September 1939 to build up it's airforce, which was the rock the Luftwaffe was smashed against.
On the face of it Chamberlain appears weak after the fact. But in that moment there was nothing anyone, not even the US who's military was about 100,000, could do. Buying time was the best option for all of the futures 'allies'.
Stalin was less an appeaser and more a collaborator when it came to Poland and the Baltic Countries.
And then he got stabbed in back when it suited Germany.
And if they would have invaded when he re-entered the Rhineland they would have crushed him, so waiting only became the only strategy after 2-3 years of doing NOTHING.
Chamberlain oversaw the largest buildup of military in UK history. Ismay, the supreme commander of Imperial defence stated that Chamberlain should give Germany Chechoslovakia, that war was coming, but that time was on Britain's side and that Britain needed at least 6 more months to get her air force ready for war, but that they needed maybe a whole year at the very least.
Chamberlain and Hitler - source 3 - The National Archives
I'm sorry to destroy conservative beliefs, but they need to be destroyed.
The entire purpose of what now Conservatives say was "appeasement" was to ensure that the UK wasn't wiped out in the opening salvo of the war by fighting a war too prematurely.
And it's odd that nobody says Russia or Stalin were appeasers when Stalin did exactly the same thing. He made a peace treaty with Hitler where Germany and Russia divided up Poland between them (secretly). Stalin also was buying time (and annexing half of another sovereign nation as well). It was absolutely appeasement if you look at it from that perspecitve.
Or both were pragmatic. Neither was ready to fight Germany head on, especially if they had to fight alone. Germany invaded Russia in June of 1941, nearly two years after WW2 started. Russia had all that time to build up and Germany still beat the Russians senseless for a year, with 20 million Russians dying.
In the end if Chamberlain had refused to sign a treaty with Hitler it really wouldn't have mattered as far as 'standing up to blah blah blah'. It did matter greatly that England had that extra year from September 1938 until September 1939 to build up it's airforce, which was the rock the Luftwaffe was smashed against.
On the face of it Chamberlain appears weak after the fact. But in that moment there was nothing anyone, not even the US who's military was about 100,000, could do. Buying time was the best option for all of the futures 'allies'.
Stalin was less an appeaser and more a collaborator when it came to Poland and the Baltic Countries.
And then he got stabbed in back when it suited Germany.
And if they would have invaded when he re-entered the Rhineland they would have crushed him, so waiting only became the only strategy after 2-3 years of doing NOTHING.
Stalin knew what was up. He was buying time. Like Chamberlain and Roosevelt who also knew war was coming. Nobody was 'blindsided' by what Hitler did. If North Korea invaded the South, then Japan, the world would know what was up.
they went around itDid France depend too much on the wall? Both Germany and France had walls to prevent invasion, France's wall was the Maginot Line.