Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

What territories would the Germans want if given rational leadership prior to WWII?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by PatBC View Post
    A rational government would want no territory. The last attempt cost them millions of dead.
    Ok, and what territories were annexed in WW1 by Germany? Sorry, just found that silly. It has always been my belief that WW1 was started by the Hapsburgs. Germany's involvement was a mixture of honoring her alliances, and the need to improve economic standing against the west.
    If you had said "A rational government would want no war. The last attempt cost them millions of dead." I would comletely agree with you.
    "In the absence of orders...find something and kill it!" Lt. General Erwin Rommel, 1942

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by smallvillekalel View Post
      Ok, and what territories were annexed in WW1 by Germany? Sorry, just found that silly. It has always been my belief that WW1 was started by the Hapsburgs. Germany's involvement was a mixture of honoring her alliances, and the need to improve economic standing against the west.
      If you had said "A rational government would want no war. The last attempt cost them millions of dead." I would comletely agree with you.
      Germany (Prussia) seizing terriitory in the Franco-Prussian war lead to WW1 and the french desire for revenge.
      FoxNEWS "The World is unfair and we are running scared"

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by PatBC View Post
        Germany (Prussia) seizing terriitory in the Franco-Prussian war lead to WW1 and the french desire for revenge.
        LOL! France started that war by declaring war on Prussia. I dont think territory seizing was on anyones mind except maybe Napoleon the 3rd's. But he was captured by the Prussians weeks into the conflict anyway, so it didnt do him any good.
        "In the absence of orders...find something and kill it!" Lt. General Erwin Rommel, 1942

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by smallvillekalel
          LOL! France started that war by declaring war on Prussia. I dont think territory seizing was on anyones mind except maybe Napoleon the 3rd's. But he was captured by the Prussians weeks into the conflict anyway, so it didnt do him any good.
          Too simplistic a view. Iirc, Bismarck did a masterful job in maneuvering the French into a position where they felt they had little choice but war. The war with France was set in motion by Prussia as part of the drive to unify Germany. It worked very well. Germany won and took Alsace-Lorraine as part of the peace deal.
          The Purist

          Words ought to be a little wild, for they are the assault of thoughts on the unthinking - John Maynard Keynes.

          Comment


          • #20
            but did it cost them millions of dead? Or lead to ww1? I would say no.
            "In the absence of orders...find something and kill it!" Lt. General Erwin Rommel, 1942

            Comment


            • #21
              Regaining lost territories was an excuse not a reason. Germany had NO claims to any of the above, because Germany as a united nation was only sixty or so years old in 1933. It's like Mexico trying to reclaim the southwest US. Mexico could only claim that area for about 25 years, why not give it back to Spain who had the claim for three hundred.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by LtCol View Post
                Regaining lost territories was an excuse not a reason. Germany had NO claims to any of the above, because Germany as a united nation was only sixty or so years old in 1933. It's like Mexico trying to reclaim the southwest US. Mexico could only claim that area for about 25 years, why not give it back to Spain who had the claim for three hundred.
                The German ethnic group did not emerge in 1870. The German Kingdom, AKA the Holy Roman Empire was 1000 years old at it's dissolution by Nappy boy. It was reconstituted in a much more stable and controlling way January of 1871, but the parts Hitler CLAIMED to want had been occupied by ethnic Germans for hundreds of years. If I recall correctly, the Sudetenland wanted to join Austria after WWI but were denied this by the Czechs. It anybody else but Hitler do it, I'd say the Czechs had it coming.

                But here's the difference: annexing a place that WANTS to be a part of Germany based on ethnic breakdown (Austria, Sudetenland, Danzig) is one thing, occupying Bohemia with Czechs who don't is another. If Hitler had not gone after Bohemia, Danzig would have followed because the British wanted to think the best of Hitler cause they were in financial straits and knew a fight would ruin them. But Hitler wanted a fight, and he got one.

                And look at what happened to the Sudetenland Germans after the war: they were ethnically cleansed. The details are pointless except to say, as an unwilling part of Czechoslovakia, Germany, a state founded to protect Germans, could not protect them. Generally speaking a people are only safe in a country they themselves rule, which is why I am an ardent Zionist.
                How many Allied tanks it would take to destroy a Maus?
                275. Because that's how many shells there are in the Maus. Then it could probably crush some more until it ran out of gas. - Surfinbird

                Comment


                • #23
                  Come on, the idea of a German was the outgrowth of the Wars of the mid-1800s. Even in WWII many "Germans" thought of themselves as natives of their home provinces.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Martin Luther in his appeals to both the German nobility and the German laity would think differently. Let's not forget the tune Duetchland Uber Alles predates Nappy Boy.
                    How many Allied tanks it would take to destroy a Maus?
                    275. Because that's how many shells there are in the Maus. Then it could probably crush some more until it ran out of gas. - Surfinbird

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Rational?
                      Talk about an Alternate Reality....

                      Forget Alsace, the Germans treated it like a Colony until 1913.

                      What about overseas colonies? I think a magor sticking point to negotiations with Churchill in 1940 was Hitler's demand for the African colonies like Tanganyika.
                      "Why is the Rum gone?"

                      -Captain Jack

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by Exorcist View Post
                        Rational?
                        Talk about an Alternate Reality....

                        Forget Alsace, the Germans treated it like a Colony until 1913.

                        What about overseas colonies? I think a magor sticking point to negotiations with Churchill in 1940 was Hitler's demand for the African colonies like Tanganyika.
                        Alsace-Lorraine I can see see no interest in except the Strasbourg strip which IS ethnically German. IIRC the Germans made A-L an Imperial province because no other German state wanted Prussia to annex it. It is unfair to call it a colony though.

                        But colonies are an interesting point. Germany got very little out of the colonies it did have back in La Bella Europe. If Germany's leadership was rational, I would argue the thing Germany needed was access to foreign markets and resources. The cheapest way to do this, and probably the most effective, is make the Brits happy. They have the big fleet, and America and Japan won't challenge the British to get little old Germany, the first because they too believe in free trade and the second because any bone they pick will be painful and entirely in the Pacific. The USSR is a potential naval power, given 50 years or so, but really, the last Czar (red or otherwise) to really take interest in the sea was Peter the Great. As long as Britain is not too ticked at the Fatherland, Germany can buy anything it wishes and has the money to do so. It needs those colonies like a hole in the head.
                        How many Allied tanks it would take to destroy a Maus?
                        275. Because that's how many shells there are in the Maus. Then it could probably crush some more until it ran out of gas. - Surfinbird

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          This story, is a very good prediction of what would happen if rational leadership prevailed and Wiemar Germany survived.
                          It's not that I should win, but that others should loose.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by Legosim View Post
                            This story, is a very good prediction of what would happen if rational leadership prevailed and Wiemar Germany survived.
                            Good link.
                            Signing out.

                            Comment

                            Latest Topics

                            Collapse

                            Working...
                            X