Why did Britain go to War over Poland in 1939?

[jwoodie]

History has shown that Britain made a huge mistake by going to war with Germany for a second time in the 20th Century, losing its empire and reducing it to a third rate economic power. With WW1, it had to dust off a 100 year old international treaty recognizing Belgium's independence as an excuse to declare war and ruin its economy.

With WW2, Britain hastily put together a mutual defense treaty with Poland only a week before Poland was invaded by Germany (and the USSR), It then used this treaty as an excuse to declare war, even though Germany posed absolutely no threat to it. Once again, Britain claimed a pyrrhic victory over Germany while losing the rest of its empire and condemning Eastern Europe to Soviet domination for decades. Why did this happen? What was Britain's national interest in Poland?

German pre-war territory in Western Europe had already been restored, and Austria had willingly joined with Germany. The only German territory remaining in dispute was in the newly created states of Czechoslovakia and Poland. Czechoslovakia had never been a recognized entity prior to WW1, and it was already starting to break apart by the time Germany reclaimed the German areas of that country. As with the other territorial reacquisitions, Britain lodged some formal protests but did nothing to prevent them. British PM Neville Chamberlain claimed to have negotiated a big "peace" deal in Munich with Hitler, but it ended up being a feeble attempt at appeasement..

Then came Poland, which had been recreated after WW1 as an obstacle to German and Russian hegemony in Eastern Europe. Not only did it invalidate the borders agreed to by both countries the war, it also cut off Germany's largest and most important province (East Prussia) from the rest of the country. Germany wanted to restore a secure road and rail connection between them, as well as the formerly German city of Danzig which was along this route. Still smarting from public disparagement of his peace deal, Chamberlain urged Poland to reject any German proposals and then pledged that Britain would prevent any German incursions into its territory. When this happened in September 1939, his hollow assurances were exposed and he had to declare war on Germany to save face. Notably, he did not feel there was any reason to declare war on the Soviet Union, which invaded Poland from the east two weeks later! The Soviets also invaded Finland, and Chamberlain still felt there was no reason to declare war on them.

Other than some skirmishes involving British and German naval units, nothing much happened for the next six months. By then, Chamberlain was under increasing pressure to resign for getting Britain into another war with Germany. Yet in March 1940 he started bombing German naval facilities and laying plans to occupy Norway. The Germans got wind of these plans and acted first to protect their iron ore shipments from that country, also gaining permission to protect its shipping lanes around Denmark.

After futile attempts to arrange a peace agreement with Britain and France, who had deployed a huge standing army on its border, Germany invaded the latter in May 1940. Faced with this unfolding debacle, Chamberlain finally resigned and was replaced as Prime Minister by Winston Churchill. Churchill had maintained a hatred of Germany ever since he was removed as First Lord of the Admiralty because of his poor performance during WW1. Upon his appointment as PM, he began a campaign of bombing German cities and killing their inhabitants.

By the end of WW2 Britain was no longer "Great" and was already losing its influence in world affairs. As the ensuing 80 years have shown, it is no longer dominant even in European affairs. It seems that the decline of the British Empire weighs heavily on the shoulders of its two wartime Prime Ministers: The first motivated by spite, and the second motivated by malice against Germany.*

*It should be noted that subsequent German atrocities during WW2 were not known and played no part in Britain's declaration and prosecution of war against Germany.

 

[Dante]

Boy, not sure what you have been ingesting but this thread OP is a doozie.

"History has shown that Britain made a huge mistake by going to war with Germany for a second time in the 20th Century, losing its empire and reducing it to a third rate economic power?"

Great Britain's "Empire was on it's way out as geopolitics and more were changing the landscape, norms, etc.

Third rate economic power?

You should be asking why Germany chose to go to war again. It was devastated. There was no pre idea or guarantee that the USA would come to it's rescue.

 

[Dante]

History has shown that Britain made a huge mistake by going to war with Germany for a second time in the 20th Century, losing its empire and reducing it to a third rate economic power. With WW1, it had to dust off a 100 year old international treaty recognizing Belgium's independence as an excuse to declare war and ruin its economy. (Belgium was at least near to Britain and France.)

With WW2, Britain hastily put together a mutual defense treaty with Poland only a month before Poland was invaded by Germany (and the USSR), It then used this treaty as an excuse to declare war, even though Germany posed absolutely no threat to it. Once again, Britain claimed a pyrrhic victory over Germany while losing the rest of its empire and condemning Eastern Europe to Soviet domination for decades. Why did this happen? What was Britain's national interest in Poland?

German pre-war territory in Western Europe had already been restored, and Austria had willingly joined with Germany. The only German territory remaining in dispute was in the newly created states of Czechoslovakia and Poland. Czechoslovakia had never been a recognized entity prior to WW1, and it was already starting to break apart by the time Germany reclaimed the German areas of that country. As with the other territorial reacquisitions, Britain lodged some formal protests but did nothing to prevent them. British PM Neville Chamberlain claimed to have negotiated a big "peace" deal in Munich with Hitler, but it ended up being a feeble attempt at appeasement..

Then came Poland, which had been recreated after WW1 as an obstacle to German and Russian hegemony in Eastern Europe. Not only did it invalidate the borders agreed to by both countries the war, it also cut off Germany's largest and most important province (East Prussia) from the rest of the country. Germany wanted to restore a secure road and rail connection between them, as well as the formerly German city of Danzig which was along this route. Still smarting from public disparagement of his peace deal, Chamberlain urged Poland to reject any German proposals and then pledged that Britain would prevent any German incursions into its territory. When this happened in September 1939, his hollow assurances were exposed and he had to declare war on Germany to save face. Notably, he did not feel there was any reason to declare war on the Soviet Union, which invaded Poland from the east two weeks later! The Soviets also invaded Finland, and Chamberlain still felt there was no reason to declare war on them.

Other than some skirmishes involving British and German naval units, nothing much happened for the next six months. By then, Chamberlain was under increasing pressure to resign for getting Britain into another war with Germany. Yet in March 1940 he started bombing German naval facilities and laying plans to occupy Norway. The Germans got wind of these plans and acted first to protect their iron ore shipments from that country, also gaining permission to protect Denmark from British invasion.

After futile attempts to arrange a peace agreement with Britain and France, Germany invaded the latter in May 1940. Faced with this unfolding debacle, Chamberlain finally resigned and was replaced as Prime Minister by Winston Churchill. Churchill had maintained a hatred of Germany ever since he was removed as First Lord of the Admiralty because of his poor performance during WW1. Upon his appointment as PM, he began a campaign of bombing German cities and killing their inhabitants.

By the end of WW2 Britain was no longer "Great" and was already losing its influence in world affairs. As the ensuing 80 years has shown, it is no longer dominant even in European affairs. It seems that the decline of the British Empire weighs heavily on the shoulders of its two wartime Prime Ministers: The first motivated by spite, and the second motivated by malice.

are you a German/Nazi lover?

 

[Donald H]

History has shown that Britain made a huge mistake by going to war with Germany for a second time in the 20th Century, losing its empire and reducing it to a third rate economic power. With WW1, it had to dust off a 100 year old international treaty recognizing Belgium's independence as an excuse to declare war and ruin its economy. (Belgium was at least near to Britain and France.)

With WW2, Britain hastily put together a mutual defense treaty with Poland only a month before Poland was invaded by Germany (and the USSR), It then used this treaty as an excuse to declare war, even though Germany posed absolutely no threat to it. Once again, Britain claimed a pyrrhic victory over Germany while losing the rest of its empire and condemning Eastern Europe to Soviet domination for decades. Why did this happen? What was Britain's national interest in Poland?

German pre-war territory in Western Europe had already been restored, and Austria had willingly joined with Germany. The only German territory remaining in dispute was in the newly created states of Czechoslovakia and Poland. Czechoslovakia had never been a recognized entity prior to WW1, and it was already starting to break apart by the time Germany reclaimed the German areas of that country. As with the other territorial reacquisitions, Britain lodged some formal protests but did nothing to prevent them. British PM Neville Chamberlain claimed to have negotiated a big "peace" deal in Munich with Hitler, but it ended up being a feeble attempt at appeasement..

Then came Poland, which had been recreated after WW1 as an obstacle to German and Russian hegemony in Eastern Europe. Not only did it invalidate the borders agreed to by both countries the war, it also cut off Germany's largest and most important province (East Prussia) from the rest of the country. Germany wanted to restore a secure road and rail connection between them, as well as the formerly German city of Danzig which was along this route. Still smarting from public disparagement of his peace deal, Chamberlain urged Poland to reject any German proposals and then pledged that Britain would prevent any German incursions into its territory. When this happened in September 1939, his hollow assurances were exposed and he had to declare war on Germany to save face. Notably, he did not feel there was any reason to declare war on the Soviet Union, which invaded Poland from the east two weeks later! The Soviets also invaded Finland, and Chamberlain still felt there was no reason to declare war on them.

Other than some skirmishes involving British and German naval units, nothing much happened for the next six months. By then, Chamberlain was under increasing pressure to resign for getting Britain into another war with Germany. Yet in March 1940 he started bombing German naval facilities and laying plans to occupy Norway. The Germans got wind of these plans and acted first to protect their iron ore shipments from that country, also gaining permission to protect Denmark from British invasion.

After futile attempts to arrange a peace agreement with Britain and France, Germany invaded the latter in May 1940. Faced with this unfolding debacle, Chamberlain finally resigned and was replaced as Prime Minister by Winston Churchill. Churchill had maintained a hatred of Germany ever since he was removed as First Lord of the Admiralty because of his poor performance during WW1. Upon his appointment as PM, he began a campaign of bombing German cities and killing their inhabitants.

By the end of WW2 Britain was no longer "Great" and was already losing its influence in world affairs. As the ensuing 80 years has shown, it is no longer dominant even in European affairs. It seems that the decline of the British Empire weighs heavily on the shoulders of its two wartime Prime Ministers: The first motivated by spite, and the second motivated by malice.

Did you write that, or is it plagiarized from an unmentioned source?

With WW2, Britain hastily put together a mutual defense treaty with Poland only a month before Poland was invaded by Germany (and the USSR), It then used this treaty as an excuse to declare war, even though Germany posed absolutely no threat to it.

That's new and interesting perspective.

 

[Votto]

History has shown that Britain made a huge mistake by going to war with Germany for a second time in the 20th Century, losing its empire and reducing it to a third rate economic power. With WW1, it had to dust off a 100 year old international treaty recognizing Belgium's independence as an excuse to declare war and ruin its economy.

With WW2, Britain hastily put together a mutual defense treaty with Poland only a week before Poland was invaded by Germany (and the USSR), It then used this treaty as an excuse to declare war, even though Germany posed absolutely no threat to it. Once again, Britain claimed a pyrrhic victory over Germany while losing the rest of its empire and condemning Eastern Europe to Soviet domination for decades. Why did this happen? What was Britain's national interest in Poland?

German pre-war territory in Western Europe had already been restored, and Austria had willingly joined with Germany. The only German territory remaining in dispute was in the newly created states of Czechoslovakia and Poland. Czechoslovakia had never been a recognized entity prior to WW1, and it was already starting to break apart by the time Germany reclaimed the German areas of that country. As with the other territorial reacquisitions, Britain lodged some formal protests but did nothing to prevent them. British PM Neville Chamberlain claimed to have negotiated a big "peace" deal in Munich with Hitler, but it ended up being a feeble attempt at appeasement..

Then came Poland, which had been recreated after WW1 as an obstacle to German and Russian hegemony in Eastern Europe. Not only did it invalidate the borders agreed to by both countries the war, it also cut off Germany's largest and most important province (East Prussia) from the rest of the country. Germany wanted to restore a secure road and rail connection between them, as well as the formerly German city of Danzig which was along this route. Still smarting from public disparagement of his peace deal, Chamberlain urged Poland to reject any German proposals and then pledged that Britain would prevent any German incursions into its territory. When this happened in September 1939, his hollow assurances were exposed and he had to declare war on Germany to save face. Notably, he did not feel there was any reason to declare war on the Soviet Union, which invaded Poland from the east two weeks later! The Soviets also invaded Finland, and Chamberlain still felt there was no reason to declare war on them.

Other than some skirmishes involving British and German naval units, nothing much happened for the next six months. By then, Chamberlain was under increasing pressure to resign for getting Britain into another war with Germany. Yet in March 1940 he started bombing German naval facilities and laying plans to occupy Norway. The Germans got wind of these plans and acted first to protect their iron ore shipments from that country, also gaining permission to protect its shipping lanes around Denmark.

After futile attempts to arrange a peace agreement with Britain and France, who had deployed a huge standing army on its border, Germany invaded the latter in May 1940. Faced with this unfolding debacle, Chamberlain finally resigned and was replaced as Prime Minister by Winston Churchill. Churchill had maintained a hatred of Germany ever since he was removed as First Lord of the Admiralty because of his poor performance during WW1. Upon his appointment as PM, he began a campaign of bombing German cities and killing their inhabitants.

By the end of WW2 Britain was no longer "Great" and was already losing its influence in world affairs. As the ensuing 80 years have shown, it is no longer dominant even in European affairs. It seems that the decline of the British Empire weighs heavily on the shoulders of its two wartime Prime Ministers: The first motivated by spite, and the second motivated by malice against Germany.*

*It should be noted that subsequent German atrocities during WW2 were not known and played no part in Britain's declaration and prosecution of war against Germany.

If they had not gone to war with Germany what do you think happens to them as Hitler proceeds to take over the world country by country?

Just curious.

 

[mikegriffith1]

History has shown that Britain made a huge mistake by going to war with Germany for a second time in the 20th Century, losing its empire and reducing it to a third rate economic power. With WW1, it had to dust off a 100 year old international treaty recognizing Belgium's independence as an excuse to declare war and ruin its economy.

With WW2, Britain hastily put together a mutual defense treaty with Poland only a week before Poland was invaded by Germany (and the USSR), It then used this treaty as an excuse to declare war, even though Germany posed absolutely no threat to it. Once again, Britain claimed a pyrrhic victory over Germany while losing the rest of its empire and condemning Eastern Europe to Soviet domination for decades. Why did this happen? What was Britain's national interest in Poland?

German pre-war territory in Western Europe had already been restored, and Austria had willingly joined with Germany. The only German territory remaining in dispute was in the newly created states of Czechoslovakia and Poland. Czechoslovakia had never been a recognized entity prior to WW1, and it was already starting to break apart by the time Germany reclaimed the German areas of that country. As with the other territorial reacquisitions, Britain lodged some formal protests but did nothing to prevent them. British PM Neville Chamberlain claimed to have negotiated a big "peace" deal in Munich with Hitler, but it ended up being a feeble attempt at appeasement..

Then came Poland, which had been recreated after WW1 as an obstacle to German and Russian hegemony in Eastern Europe. Not only did it invalidate the borders agreed to by both countries the war, it also cut off Germany's largest and most important province (East Prussia) from the rest of the country. Germany wanted to restore a secure road and rail connection between them, as well as the formerly German city of Danzig which was along this route. Still smarting from public disparagement of his peace deal, Chamberlain urged Poland to reject any German proposals and then pledged that Britain would prevent any German incursions into its territory. When this happened in September 1939, his hollow assurances were exposed and he had to declare war on Germany to save face. Notably, he did not feel there was any reason to declare war on the Soviet Union, which invaded Poland from the east two weeks later! The Soviets also invaded Finland, and Chamberlain still felt there was no reason to declare war on them.

Other than some skirmishes involving British and German naval units, nothing much happened for the next six months. By then, Chamberlain was under increasing pressure to resign for getting Britain into another war with Germany. Yet in March 1940 he started bombing German naval facilities and laying plans to occupy Norway. The Germans got wind of these plans and acted first to protect their iron ore shipments from that country, also gaining permission to protect its shipping lanes around Denmark.

After futile attempts to arrange a peace agreement with Britain and France, who had deployed a huge standing army on its border, Germany invaded the latter in May 1940. Faced with this unfolding debacle, Chamberlain finally resigned and was replaced as Prime Minister by Winston Churchill. Churchill had maintained a hatred of Germany ever since he was removed as First Lord of the Admiralty because of his poor performance during WW1. Upon his appointment as PM, he began a campaign of bombing German cities and killing their inhabitants.

By the end of WW2 Britain was no longer "Great" and was already losing its influence in world affairs. As the ensuing 80 years have shown, it is no longer dominant even in European affairs. It seems that the decline of the British Empire weighs heavily on the shoulders of its two wartime Prime Ministers: The first motivated by spite, and the second motivated by malice against Germany.*

*It should be noted that subsequent German atrocities during WW2 were not known and played no part in Britain's declaration and prosecution of war against Germany.

Well, this is complicated. Germany actually had a valid point about the Danzig Corridor. And, yes, Chamberlain's security guarantee to Poland was a disaster (1) because it was worthless, (2) because it encouraged the Poles to reject what was actually a reasonable German offer on the corridor, and (3) because it prematurely, and perhaps needlessly, dragged Western Europe into what may have remained an Eastern European war.

England and France could and should have reacted swiftly and harshly when Hitler marched troops into the Rhineland in March 1936, especially France. France alone had a much bigger army than did Germany at the time. Plus, we've known for years that Hitler was terrified that the French would launch a punitive attack if he marched troops into the Rhineland. When Hitler merely heard an unconfirmed report that the French had moved into German territory just after the first German troops entered the Rhineland, he nearly called off the incursion but was talked out of it by Neurath.

Another thing: Just before Chamberlain kowtowed to Hitler at Munich, there was a massive German resistance conspiracy to kill Hitler. The plot involved numerous high-ranking officers and civilian officials. It had an excellent chance of succeeding. But, when Chamberlain spinelessly handed over Czechoslovakia to Hitler at Munich, Hitler's popularity sky-rocketed and many members of the resistance dropped out and stopped opposing Hitler.

 

[jwoodie]

Well, this is complicated. Germany actually had a valid point about the Danzig Corridor. And, yes, Chamberlain's security guarantee to Poland was a disaster (1) because it was worthless, (2) because it encouraged the Poles to reject what was actually a reasonable German offer on the corridor, and (3) because it prematurely, and perhaps needlessly, dragged Western Europe into what may have remained an Eastern European war.

England and France could and should have reacted swiftly and harshly when Hitler marched troops into the Rhineland in March 1936, especially France. France alone had a much bigger army than did Germany at the time. Plus, we've known for years that Hitler was terrified that the French would launch a punitive attack if he marched troops into the Rhineland. When Hitler merely heard an unconfirmed report that the French had moved into German territory just after the first German troops entered the Rhineland, he nearly called off the incursion but was talked out of it by Neurath.

Another thing: Just before Chamberlain kowtowed to Hitler at Munich, there was a massive German resistance conspiracy to kill Hitler. The plot involved numerous high-ranking officers and civilian officials. It had an excellent chance of succeeding. But, when Chamberlain spinelessly handed over Czechoslovakia to Hitler at Munich, Hitler's popularity sky-rocketed and many members of the resistance dropped out and stopped opposing Hitler.

I think there is an obvious parallel the Polish and Ukraine conflicts. The U.S. is fortunate to have President Trump, but the Europeans (especially Britain) seem not to have learned a thing. If they insist on another war, let them fight it out.

 

[eagle7-31]

Well, this is complicated. Germany actually had a valid point about the Danzig Corridor. And, yes, Chamberlain's security guarantee to Poland was a disaster (1) because it was worthless, (2) because it encouraged the Poles to reject what was actually a reasonable German offer on the corridor, and (3) because it prematurely, and perhaps needlessly, dragged Western Europe into what may have remained an Eastern European war.

England and France could and should have reacted swiftly and harshly when Hitler marched troops into the Rhineland in March 1936, especially France. France alone had a much bigger army than did Germany at the time. Plus, we've known for years that Hitler was terrified that the French would launch a punitive attack if he marched troops into the Rhineland. When Hitler merely heard an unconfirmed report that the French had moved into German territory just after the first German troops entered the Rhineland, he nearly called off the incursion but was talked out of it by Neurath.

Another thing: Just before Chamberlain kowtowed to Hitler at Munich, there was a massive German resistance conspiracy to kill Hitler. The plot involved numerous high-ranking officers and civilian officials. It had an excellent chance of succeeding. But, when Chamberlain spinelessly handed over Czechoslovakia to Hitler at Munich, Hitler's popularity sky-rocketed and many members of the resistance dropped out and stopped opposing Hitler.

Quite correct about the plot to remove Hitler. There were around 60 men who were supposed to storm Hitler's residence in Berlin led by a Major Frederick Heinz if memory serves. But Chamberlin folding up changed that.

 

[fncceo]

“The British Recording Industry started World War II to promote Vera Lynn’s new single. Don’t you believe all that Poland nonsense.”

— Billy Connelly.

 

[AZrailwhale]

I think there is an obvious parallel the Polish and Ukraine conflicts. The U.S. is fortunate to have President Trump, but the Europeans (especially Britain) seem not to have learned a thing. If they insist on another war, let them fight it out.

Unlike the USA, Europe has a long history of inconclusive wars that result in some territory gained or lost. Rinse and repeat every decade or so.

 

[mikegriffith1]

I think there is an obvious parallel the Polish and Ukraine conflicts. The U.S. is fortunate to have President Trump, but the Europeans (especially Britain) seem not to have learned a thing. If they insist on another war, let them fight it out.

I don't think there's much of a parallel at all. Russia had no valid complaint regarding Ukraine, whereas Germany had a valid complaint regarding Poland (the Danzig Corridor). Plus, Poland was ruled by a virulently anti-Semitic military junta, whereas Ukraine was a thriving and growing pro-Western democracy. Two very different situations.

 

[braalian]

Because it wears fulfilling a legally binding promise made to Poland as an ally

 

[mikegriffith1]

Because it wears fulfilling a legally binding promise made to Poland as an ally

But England had no compelling reason to make such a promise and was in no position to keep that promise, as the Poles sadly and quickly realized after German tanks started rolling across the border and England did nothing. Plus, England's worthless promise led the Polish junta to reject a reasonable deal with Germany over the Danzig Corridor, a deal that may have kept Poland independent or at least bought her some time. Remember that we're talking about the lead-up to September 1, 1939.

 

[braalian]

But England had no compelling reason to make such a promise and was in no position to keep that promise, as the Poles sadly and quickly realized after German tanks started rolling across the border and England did nothing. Plus, England's worthless promise led the Polish junta to reject a reasonable deal with Germany over the Danzig Corridor, a deal that may have kept Poland independent or at least bought her some time. Remember that we're talking about the lead-up to September 1, 1939.

Poland had no obligation to make any deals whatsoever about the Danzig corridor, and not one single demand made by Nazi Germany can ever be called “reasonable”

 

[mikegriffith1]

Poland had no obligation to make any deals whatsoever about the Danzig corridor, and not one single demand made by Nazi Germany can ever be called “reasonable”

Even liberal and moderate Germans agreed that Germany deserved access to the Danzig Corridor. This was a long-standing German complaint, one that predated Hitler.

Nations are rarely "obligated" to make a deal, but it would have been in Poland's interest to accept the German deal. Of course, we know what happened after they rejected it, and they rejected it because England gave them a worthless security guarantee.

And, well, it's not like Poland was some bastion of democracy. Poland was governed by a virulently anti-Semitic military junta that had taken power in 1935. Recall that Poland helped Nazi Germany slice up Czechoslovakia. I'm still not clear what Chamberlain was thinking when he decided to guarantee the security of Poland's repressive regime.

 

[braalian]

I'm still not clear what Chamberlain was thinking when he decided to guarantee the security of Poland's repressive regime.

I think he realized that to keep appeasing Germany by giving Hitler chunks of neighboring countries would not stop him from seeking more.

It’s not as if had Britain and France let Hitler take the corridor, he would have stopped there.

He didn’t stop with the sudentenland, even though he said he would. He didn’t stop with the Anschluss, even though he said he would.

Only a fool would’ve believed he’d then stop with Danzig.

 

[jwoodie]

England had no compelling reason to make such a promise

And neither did the US regarding Ukraine.

 

[mikegriffith1]

I think he realized that to keep appeasing Germany by giving Hitler chunks of neighboring countries would not stop him from seeking more.

The time to stop Hitler was when he sent troops into the Rhineland in 1936. France alone could have smashed Hitler's army at that point and easily deposed Hitler.

It’s not as if had Britain and France let Hitler take the corridor, he would have stopped there.

Maybe. Maybe not. Hitler was very hesitant about invading Poland. He got cold feet once and cancelled it. If the Poles had accepted his offer on the Danzig Corridor, he may have at least held off on invading for several months or a bit longer. Poland's acceptance of Germany's Danzig offer would have put political pressure on Hitler to leave Poland alone, at least for a while.

He didn’t stop with the sudentenland, even though he said he would. He didn’t stop with the Anschluss, even though he said he would.

Agreed.

Only a fool would’ve believed he’d then stop with Danzig.

Well, I don't know. Poland was a different situation than the Sudentenland and the Anschluss.

On the other hand, it is entirely possible that Hitler's Danzig offer was just posturing to give him an excuse to invade Poland. Hitler had already made a pact with Stalin (August 1939), and Stalin swooped in and took half of Poland 16 days after Germany invaded.

Would Hitler have told Stalin to stay out of Poland if Poland had agreed to Hitler's Danzig Corridor offer? Maybe. Maybe not. Hitler told Stalin to stay out of Hungary and Romania while they were allies, and he did.

 

[Dante]

The time to stop Hitler was when he sent troops into the Rhineland in 1936. France alone could have smashed Hitler's army at that point and easily deposed Hitler.

Wow! Not sure where you get THAT analysis, but...

I bet like myself, others would love to see some credible academic sources that inform your views.

You must've been a star student at the military college.

Incredible. You're here as an ace in history, geography, military affairs...

Here you have Dante's full attention and amazement at your ...

 

[eagle7-31]

The time to stop Hitler was when he sent troops into the Rhineland in 1936. France alone could have smashed Hitler's army at that point and easily deposed Hitler.


Maybe. Maybe not. Hitler was very hesitant about invading Poland. He got cold feet once and cancelled it. If the Poles had accepted his offer on the Danzig Corridor, he may have at least held off on invading for several months or a bit longer. Poland's acceptance of Germany's Danzig offer would have put political pressure on Hitler to leave Poland alone, at least for a while.


Agreed.


Well, I don't know. Poland was a different situation than the Sudentenland and the Anschluss.

On the other hand, it is entirely possible that Hitler's Danzig offer was just posturing to give him an excuse to invade Poland. Hitler had already made a pact with Stalin (August 1939), and Stalin swooped in and took half of Poland 16 days after Germany invaded.

Would Hitler have told Stalin to stay out of Poland if Poland had agreed to Hitler's Danzig Corridor offer? Maybe. Maybe not. Hitler told Stalin to stay out of Hungary and Romania while they were allies, and he did.

IF Stalin would have stuck with Britian and France and not Germany Hitler would not have gone to war in Sept 1939.