Neville Chamberlain- unfairly condemned?

Chamberlain did what the British government authorized him to do. If nazi Germany had stopped it's expansion after Chamberlain's Munich agreement he would have gone down in history as a hero.
 
The totality of your tone in your posts give you away.

JoeB, you are in error about Romney. Time will prove it. When he is nominated, get on board and row, or jump overboard because the party is not going to permit any dissent after the nomination without serious consequence.

Ooooh, Consequences. Really, Bizarro World?

Romney is scum and he'll lose. And he'll go down with Dole and McCain as people that the GOP just kind of looks embarrassed about.

JoeB-izarro keeps on stroking his fantasy.
 
The biggest fear of war at the time came from an exagerated fear of airpower

True DAT.

England did not feel (and they wre right, I guess) that they had the air defences. They were still working on the spitfire and I don't think they had it in production, yet.

But there was a big problem with those fortifications. They were build in GERMAN areas. The Sudetenland was ethnically German, and these Germans wanted nothing to do with the Czechs, whom they considered their inferiors. Under the old Hapsburg Regime, they were dominant, but now they were the minority, and they didn't like it much.

That's true enough about the SudentenLand but those defences were formitable and manned by people LOYAL to the Czechoslovak nation.

Germany probably didn't at that time have enough power to take on those forifications. It would have bogged them down and perhaps, France and England cou;d have mobilized in time to mount a second front.

But Germany could have destroyed Prague, anyway. I'm informed that even though CZ was developing a modern air force, they could not have protected Praha from the kind of asswhipping that Warsaw later recieved.

FWIW, two of my distant surnamed relatives stole a CZ military fighter and made it to England where they both fought with the RAF in the battle of Britian.

Had it not been for the Poles flying with the RAF (also people who got out as their nation was falling) and to a lesser extent the Czechs, who flew for the RAF or served on their ground crews, it is highly unlikely that the Britian would have won the battle for airspace over the Channel.

And had THAT happened, Germany would have invaded and probably beaten the English on the ground.

Never before have so many owed so much to do few.

Winston Churchill​

While Germany inflicted damage over England in 1940, there was no danger in 1938 since the bombers were outside the range of fighter escort. The air danger was exagerated at the time of Munich.

As far as the Battle of Britain went, pilots were at a far greater premium than aircraft and Britain should be grateful for the Polish and Czech pilots. Even so, had Germany concentrated on the radar stations and the air fields, the Battle of Britain might have tilted towards the Nazis. If Germany had gained control of the air, Britain was doomed.
 
[
But there was a big problem with those fortifications. They were build in GERMAN areas. The Sudetenland was ethnically German, and these Germans wanted nothing to do with the Czechs, whom they considered their inferiors. Under the old Hapsburg Regime, they were dominant, but now they were the minority, and they didn't like it much.

That's true enough about the SudentenLand but those defences were formitable and manned by people LOYAL to the Czechoslovak nation.

Germany probably didn't at that time have enough power to take on those forifications. It would have bogged them down and perhaps, France and England cou;d have mobilized in time to mount a second front.

But Germany could have destroyed Prague, anyway. I'm informed that even though CZ was developing a modern air force, they could not have protected Praha from the kind of asswhipping that Warsaw later recieved.

.]

The problem with fixed fortifications are (Patton called them monuments to human stupidity) is that you don't have to defeat the whole line. All you have to do is find a weak point. And Sudeten Germans probably already told the Abwehr (German Military Intelligence) where all the weak points were.

Fixed fortifications like the Sudenten defense or the Maginot Line were designed at a time when people hadn't gotten their heads out of WWI yet. Fixed lines battling long wars of attitrion for months. Armor and Air power made that impractical, as it made battle lines a lot more fluid.

For instance, the SUdenten line was not particularly strong on the Southern border. No reason to. Austria was weak and not really hostile until Germany annexed it in 1937.

I doubt the Nazis could have overwhelmed Czech defenses before the French parade marched into Germany and curtailed Germany's capacity to make war. This is an opinion shared by the leading German Generals at the time. In any event, Britain and France were in a better position in October 1938 than in September 1939. Since this thread is about statemanship of Chamberlain, what about the guarantee to Poland, thus placing the fate of England in the hands of the politically incompetent Poles?

Chamberlain failed to size up Hitler and when he did, instead of building an alliance with Stalin to thwart Germany aggression, he vouched for Poland.
 
GEE,Reading some of this prose you would think the Brits.,did little.....well whilst you are all lauding the Czechs and Poles.......Australian and New Zealand were of more help to the Brits,in number of AIR CREW and PILOTS and KILLS against the Krouts.

You all need to sharpen up on your factual history,its enough to make a sane man:(

The Brits and others did a brilliant job in the Battle of Britian....America came in later(as usual)

hitler was a one bollock war monger and thanks to him 25 million Russians perished,8 million Jews....a million or three gypsies,gays and the disabled both phyisical and mental.

Yep there is merit in your comment,regarding the War Reparation exacted by the French after WW1(NOT THE BRITISH,as Lloyd George WAS NOT IN AGREEMENT).It was also the reason hitler made the French use the same railway carriage),when they surrendered during WW2 as it was this carriage that the Germans were humiliated in 1918.

hitler was a total tnuc and the German population after the WAR,got away with Murder as they knew what was happening(well most,admittedly if you spoke up....off to the gas chambers)but there is NO excuse they were complicit with hitler(you will note here,I never put a capital H when referring to hitler,for obvious reasons.)

My Uncle was a reconasence (sic) photographer,he and his pilot went all through the war during these very dangerous operations(when the average life span was 7 weeks)he was a very fortunate man.

America,was dilly-dallying at this time.(that's another story)

Britain suffered greatly during this time,and it was their and Australian,New Zealand with a few Poles and Czechs Airmen that saved the day......IN THAT ORDER.

:cool: and All because one nation thought they were superior to everyone else.......sound familiar today ???????



The biggest fear of war at the time came from an exagerated fear of airpower

True DAT.

England did not feel (and they wre right, I guess) that they had the air defences. They were still working on the spitfire and I don't think they had it in production, yet.

But there was a big problem with those fortifications. They were build in GERMAN areas. The Sudetenland was ethnically German, and these Germans wanted nothing to do with the Czechs, whom they considered their inferiors. Under the old Hapsburg Regime, they were dominant, but now they were the minority, and they didn't like it much.

That's true enough about the SudentenLand but those defences were formitable and manned by people LOYAL to the Czechoslovak nation.

Germany probably didn't at that time have enough power to take on those forifications. It would have bogged them down and perhaps, France and England cou;d have mobilized in time to mount a second front.

But Germany could have destroyed Prague, anyway. I'm informed that even though CZ was developing a modern air force, they could not have protected Praha from the kind of asswhipping that Warsaw later recieved.

FWIW, two of my distant surnamed relatives stole a CZ military fighter and made it to England where they both fought with the RAF in the battle of Britian.

Had it not been for the Poles flying with the RAF (also people who got out as their nation was falling) and to a lesser extent the Czechs, who flew for the RAF or served on their ground crews, it is highly unlikely that the Britian would have won the battle for airspace over the Channel.

And had THAT happened, Germany would have invaded and probably beaten the English on the ground.

Never before have so many owed so much to do few.

Winston Churchill​

While Germany inflicted damage over England in 1940, there was no danger in 1938 since the bombers were outside the range of fighter escort. The air danger was exagerated at the time of Munich.

As far as the Battle of Britain went, pilots were at a far greater premium than aircraft and Britain should be grateful for the Polish and Czech pilots. Even so, had Germany concentrated on the radar stations and the air fields, the Battle of Britain might have tilted towards the Nazis. If Germany had gained control of the air, Britain was doomed.
 
Last edited:
The LIQ protests:

GEE,Reading some of this prose you would think the Brits.,did little.....well whilst you are all lauding the Czechs and Poles.......Australian and New Zealand were of more help to the Brits,in number of AIR CREW and PILOTS and KILLS against the Krouts.

You all need to sharpen up on your factual history,its enough to make a sane man:(

I'm afraid that you've been somewhat misinfomed about the BoB participants and their contributions to the Battle of Britian.

You want factual history? No problem. I'll let you do the math

POLISH
Following the German invasion of Poland, many Polish pilots escaped and made their way to France and Britain. During the German invasion of France in May 1940, of the 1,600 Polish pilots available to the Armee de l'Air it is estimated that only about 150 took an active part in combat

New Zealand

The RAF recognises 135 Fighter Command aircrew from New Zealand as having served in the Battle. Several New Zealanders became high scorers, including Plt Off Colin Gray (No. 54 Squadron RAF) with 14 claims, Fg Off Brian Carbury (No. 603 Squadron RAF) 14 claims and Plt Off Alan "Al" Deere (54 Squadron), 12 claims. Carbury shot down the first German aircraft over British territory since 1918 and was also one of two aces in a day in the Battle.[12][N 2]

Canada

In fact, although the RAF only recognises 83 Canadian pilots as flying on fighter operations during the Battle of Britain, the RCAF claims the actual figure was over 100, and that of those 23 died and 30 were killed later in the war.[13][14] Another 200 Canadian pilots fought with RAF Bomber Command and RAF Coastal Command during the period and approx 2,000 Canadians served as ground crew

Czech and Slovak

Almost 90 Czechoslovakian pilots flew in the Battle of Britain, with 310 Squadron and 312 Squadron became operational during the Battle.[15] Together with Czechoslovakian pilots serving in other RAF units, a total of 88 Czechoslovakians (86 Czechs and 2 Slovak) served claiming almost 60 air kills. Nine pilots were killed. The top Czech scorer was Sgt. Josef František, flying with 303 Polish Squadron who claimed 17 confirmed kills which made him the highest scoring Allied pilot in the Battle of Britain.

Australian

Nevertheless, more than 30 Australians served in RAF Fighter Command during the Battle.[18] The highest scoring Australian ace of the Battle was Flight Lieutenant Pat Hughes, of No. 234 Squadron RAF, who claimed 14 kills before his death in September 1940.

South Africa

One of the RAF's leading aces, and one of the highest scoring pilots during the Battle of Britain was Adolph "Sailor" Malan DFC, an RAF pilot since 1936, who led No. 74 Squadron RAF during the height of the Battle of Britain.

Other notable pilots included P/O Albert "Zulu" Lewis, who opened his account over France in May with No. 85 Squadron, shooting down three Messerschmitt Bf 109s in one action. With No. 85 in August, and then in September with No. 249 Squadron under Squadron Leader (later Air Chief Marshal) Sir John Grandy, at North Weald.

USA

The RAF recognises seven aircrew personnel who were from the United States of America as having taken part in the Battle of Britain.

Irish

Among the about 15 Southern Irishmen who played key roles in the Battle[21] was Dubliner Brendan "Paddy" Finucane,[22] an air ace who went on to claim a total of 32 enemy aircraft before being shot down and killed in 1942.
 
[


That's true enough about the SudentenLand but those defences were formitable and manned by people LOYAL to the Czechoslovak nation.

Germany probably didn't at that time have enough power to take on those forifications. It would have bogged them down and perhaps, France and England cou;d have mobilized in time to mount a second front.

But Germany could have destroyed Prague, anyway. I'm informed that even though CZ was developing a modern air force, they could not have protected Praha from the kind of asswhipping that Warsaw later recieved.

.]

The problem with fixed fortifications are (Patton called them monuments to human stupidity) is that you don't have to defeat the whole line. All you have to do is find a weak point. And Sudeten Germans probably already told the Abwehr (German Military Intelligence) where all the weak points were.

Fixed fortifications like the Sudenten defense or the Maginot Line were designed at a time when people hadn't gotten their heads out of WWI yet. Fixed lines battling long wars of attitrion for months. Armor and Air power made that impractical, as it made battle lines a lot more fluid.

For instance, the SUdenten line was not particularly strong on the Southern border. No reason to. Austria was weak and not really hostile until Germany annexed it in 1937.

I doubt the Nazis could have overwhelmed Czech defenses before the French parade marched into Germany and curtailed Germany's capacity to make war. This is an opinion shared by the leading German Generals at the time. In any event, Britain and France were in a better position in October 1938 than in September 1939. Since this thread is about statemanship of Chamberlain, what about the guarantee to Poland, thus placing the fate of England in the hands of the politically incompetent Poles?

Chamberlain failed to size up Hitler and when he did, instead of building an alliance with Stalin to thwart Germany aggression, he vouched for Poland.

Most failed to size up Hitler properly and yes the Czechs might have been able to stop or considerably slow down the Germans but not because of the French marching into Germany because of they (the French) were in a complete state of defense only mindset. The Czechs still would have lost because of the number and territory acquisition desires of a few of their neighbors and other internal factions who probably would have seized the moment to 'present' their claims.
The pact Chamberlain made with Poland was a hasty result of the non-aggression pact between Germany and the Soviet Union which took England by surprise since they thought Stalin was ready to sign an agreement with them instead.
 
Chamberlain made his guarantee to Poland after Germany broke the Munich agreement by gobbling up the remainder of Czechoslovaki in March 1939. Germany and the Soviet Union signed their non-agression pact less than one week before Germany attacked Poland, after Chamberlain had given Stalin the cold shoulder.
 
Chamberlain made his guarantee to Poland after Germany broke the Munich agreement by gobbling up the remainder of Czechoslovaki in March 1939. Germany and the Soviet Union signed their non-agression pact less than one week before Germany attacked Poland, after Chamberlain had given Stalin the cold shoulder.

Yes, Chamberlain was luke warm about the Russians but many in England and France were pushing for an alliance to encircle Germany and thought they were getting close to an agreement and except for Chamberlain and a few others unaware the talks had broken down. Despite that no one could have comprehended a pact between Russia and Germany at that moment in time.
Then on August 25, two days after the Nazi-Soviet Pact, the Polish-British Common Defense Pact was signed.
 
Chamberlain made his guarantee to Poland after Germany broke the Munich agreement by gobbling up the remainder of Czechoslovaki in March 1939. Germany and the Soviet Union signed their non-agression pact less than one week before Germany attacked Poland, after Chamberlain had given Stalin the cold shoulder.

Yes, Chamberlain was luke warm about the Russians but many in England and France were pushing for an alliance to encircle Germany and thought they were getting close to an agreement and except for Chamberlain and a few others unaware the talks had broken down. Despite that no one could have comprehended a pact between Russia and Germany at that moment in time.
Then on August 25, two days after the Nazi-Soviet Pact, the Polish-British Common Defense Pact was signed.

Chamberlain's guarantee was given on March 29,1939, then formalized on 8/25/1939. The guarantee given in March placed Britain in a poor military position and made the Polish leadership less flexible to Hitler's territorial demands (wouldn't have mattered). The formalized guarantee after the Soviet-Nazi pact was somewhat useless, just a warning to Germany that an attack on Poland meant war. Hitler didn't believe it.
 
The formalized guarantee after the Soviet-Nazi pact was somewhat useless, just a warning to Germany that an attack on Poland meant war. Hitler didn't believe it.

I don't think he cared.

He knew that England and France weren't mobilized for war.
 
Both Hitler and his Foreign Minister, Von Ribbentrop, were incensed that Chamberlain had acquiesced to their demands and deprived them of "Their War". They both agreed, after Chamberlain had departed the room, that they would not be so cheated out of that goal again.
You can't negotiate with Mad Men. The only possible way for any good to have come out of Munich was for Chamberlain to have snuck an M1911 into the room with him and provided both Hitler and Von Ribentrop with a tap to the head, thus saving the lives of 50 million people. Alas, fate intervened otherwise. Chamberlain had been kept waiting in an anteroom after his arrival in Munich, for some eight hours, while Hitler went over the plans for the invasion of Czechoslovokia with his Generals. The English Prime Minister was probably in serious need of a privy and in no mood to negotiate.
 
We all got this lesson in history class. Neville Chamberlain went to Munich, and cravenly sold out Czechoslovakia to Hitler. In hindsight, since war inevitably came anyway, it seems that his actions were cowardly.

However, I offer a different view. Chamberlain played the hand he was dealt, and made the only calls he could.

First, it was impossible for the United Kingdom and France to do much of anything to help Prague in case of a war. After the union of Austria and Germany, the western half of the country was surrounded on three sides. France had invested most of its infrastructure into fixed defenses like the ones that got it through World War I, and not tanks and planes. Hungary and Italy's alliances with Germany made it impossible to help Czechoslovakia from the South.

Second, Czechoslovakia itself was a polite fiction. The country was made up of 6 million Czechs, 3 million Germans in the Sudetenland, who really wanted to be part of Germany, and 1.5 million Slovaks who would have preferred independence. There were also large amounts of Hungarians who wanted to be part of Hungary again.

Finally, the united Kingdom wasn't ready for a war. Not yet. They were in the midst of a rearmorment program and the political classes hadn't accepted another war might be needed.

So really, all Neville could do at Munich was keep the peace... because war was an impossible situation.

Uh huh. And I'm sure the Czechs have gotten over it by now who no doubt agree the Sudetenland was the UK's to give away. It was very real people who ended up enslaved by Germany as a result -with the express permission of Chamberlain.

This is the real problem with your analysis. Chamberlain gave Hitler part of what he wanted and it didn't cost Hitler a thing. Hitler never made it a secret what he was really after and it wasn't just the Sudetenland. (I see a lot of people doing the exact same thing with regard to Iran today -NO SECRET what their long term intentions are, it won't be a surprise to the world what they will do with a nuke once they have it either. Yet you watch the reactions of politicians when it happens about how they just never saw it coming! BULLSHIT)

Having been essentially given a GIFT of the Sudetenland that cost him zero precious resources made it that much easier to go ahead and take the rest by force with all the unspent resources he didn't need to spend to get the Sudetenland. There WERE people who knew what would happen, there WERE warnings this would NOT keep the peace but would feed the monster. There were people who were fully aware of what Hitler was really after and insisted giving him PART of what he was really after was in reality an invitation to TAKE the rest.

Apologists for Chamberlain serve no purpose unless they have a real need to believe that trying to pacify someone intent on war by giving him part of what he wants without a fight is actually going to make that enemy give up on wanting the rest. That idea sounds ridiculous because it is -it defies common sense and it totally contradicts human nature. Whether it is a school yard bully or a dictator intent on conquering the world, giving him part of what he wants with no fight will never make him go away and leave you alone. It is giving him the very strong message you are weak and likely to give up the rest without much of a fight either.

Military historians have concluded that had the world stood up to Hitler when he first started violating the Treaty of Versailles by re-militarizing Germany instead of waiting until Hitler was ready to confront the world on HIS terms -an estimated 7-12 million soldiers and civilians would have likely died. It still would have been a very deadly, costly war. But since Hitler correctly read the REAL message Chamberlain sent Hitler by trying to pacify him by giving him some of what he wanted in this way, and nations made it clear they were giving the lack of war greater value over all else -it resulted in more than 60 million dead instead. As many as 8 times more dead. This should have served a stern warning to all nations to stop confusing peace with the absence of war -and that NEITHER of them should ever be valued above all else. Because the MANY more very real people who lose their lives as a result will never thank you for giving the value of their lives such short shrift.

The real history lesson here is when your opponent is allowed to determine when the confrontation takes place and on what terms - he already has you at the greatest possible disadvantage and is 2/3 of the way to victory. The world allowed Hitler to dictate the terms of the confrontation, allowed HIM to wait until HE was ready for it -and it was SUCH a huge advantage that he would have won that war had he not made an error in judgment about when to turn on the Soviet Union. That error made the difference, not anything the Allied powers did. Hitler had the world at a huge and LETHAL disadvantage -because Hitler correctly realized he had been made a gift of that too along with the Sudetenland.
 

Forum List

Back
Top