Chamberlain appeasement policy was caused not only by fear of the great German Army, but because their fear of the strong continental alliance - France-Czechoslovakia-Soviet Union.
???
The Soviet-union announced its willingness to come to Czechoslovakia's assistance, provided that it's would be able to cross Polish and Romanian territory. Both countries refused to allow the Soviet army to use their territories.
On 30 September, Czechoslovakia submitted to the combination of military pressure by Germany, Poland, and Hungary, and diplomatic pressure by Britain
and France, and agreed to surrender territory to Germany following the Munich terms.
Really? And if Germany and the USSR together attacked Poland, why the UK and France declared war only onto Germany, and not only onto the USSR? And the answer is simple. No one (including Poland) in 1939, seen Soviet liberation of the West Ukraine and West Belarus - lands eastward of Kerzon line, temporarily occupied by Poland, as an act of war - first of all, because Poland de facto didn't exist at the start of the Russian operation, and second - because it was Poland, who cancelled Soviet-Polish non-aggression pact by attacking (allied with Germany and Hungary) Czechoslovakia.
You lack substantial information in regards to this topic.
The UK had signed the Anglo-Polish Alliance in 1939 - for mutual assistance in case of a military invasion from
Nazi-Germany.
On 31 March 1939, in response to Hitlers defiance of the Munich agreement (occupation of rest-Czechoslovak) the UK pledged the support of itself and France pledged as well to assure Polish independence. - solely in regards to an attack by Nazi-Germany.
Poland de facto didn't exist at the start of the Russian operation!! - what books have you read, or where did you study history ???
And they didn't do it, because of what?
It is well known that the Nazi-Bluff in regards to it's supposed Luftwaffe capabilities worked extremely well - onto France and the UK. And both France and the UK had no interest to get into a second WWI mess. Therefore appeasement policy - giving Hitler back the Rhineland, allowing for a unification with Austria (factually an occupation) and getting Sudetenland into his hands. - to AVOID a second WW1.
It would mean only start of WWIII ten years earlier - in 2014, instead of 2024.
Again - the conventional Russian military got nothing to show for - stationing NATO troops in Ukraine would definitely have placed Putin's ambition down to zero. And Putin is not going to risk an annihilation of Russia and the world, just to regain Ukraine.
He very well is
And regional war is, by definition, nuclear war.
According to who's definition?? - yours?
And your tactical nukes have nothing to show.
"My" tactical nukes??? - and NATO doesn't need to use tactical or whatever nukes to kick the shit out of Russia's conventional forces.
They are already directly involved in the combating Russian forces within Russian pre-war territory.
Got any proof??? - even Putin hasn't got one. Those troops engaging Russian troops in Russia -aka Kursk are solely from the UDF.
If it is/was a good/wise decision by Ukraine do do so, would be a different topic.
And in this combat Russia would use, for starters, tactical nukes. And as NATO forces, in fact, don't have tactical nukes worth mentioning (B61 can't be seriously counted) those NATO forces would be definitely defeated.
No - since Putin has no reasons that would justify using nukes onto NATO troops assisting the UDF within Ukraine.
Did the USA nuke China and Russia for supporting (even via supplying personal) to N-Vietnam?
BTW - NATO respectively the USA can deploy smaller nuke warheads onto Cruise-missiles/Tomahawks at any time, and the US-Navy itself has around 350 gravity nuke bombs (B61 Mod 12) in it's present arsenal that could be mounted any time onto it's F-18 fleet. Not to mention France and the UK's own nukes. Additionally NATO's conventional forces have a huge precision strike capability - something Russia totally lacks - factually replacing tactical nukes with precision ammo. Since Russia can't match this capability in any way, Putin keeps referencing old Soviet-era military doctrines. aka babbling about nuke weapons.
Also NATO's ultimate deterrent during the Cold-war, thus keeping it cold, was the STRATEGIC nuclear arsenal of the USA and not some 200 Pershing's stationed in Europe.
