View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
Smithington
Joined: 14 Dec 2011
|
Posted: Tue Jun 04, 2013 10:59 pm Post subject: Britain should have kept out of World War II. |
|
|
Recently I've been thinking about major wars that the West should not have fought. The Vietnam and Iraq wars are classic examples. But I'm increasingly convinced that the UK should have kept out of WWII. What did it gain? Nothing at all. The war devastated the British economy and cost Britain its empire. For what? To honor a rediculous treaty with far-off Poland? How did that work out in the end? Poland ended up as a Soviet satellite state. Churchill for the fail!
And let's remember that the Wehrmacht was going east. In short, it was heading away from the UK. Who in their right mind sees a hungry tiger walking away from their village, then throws stones at it, effectively directing its attention back to one's own village? That's effectively what happened. Britain and France declared war on Germany, not the other way around. And it did so as Hitler was looking to expand into the East....The Brits should have let the two totalitarian regimes knock each other out.
Winston Churchill, in my opinion, was a failed prime minister. WWII was a war Britain should have kept out of. And Churchill should be condemned for dragging the UK into it. Instead he's lionized as a great leader.
Do you think the afore-mentioned village lionized the retard who threw stones at that tiger? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
rollo
Joined: 10 May 2006 Location: China
|
Posted: Wed Jun 05, 2013 12:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
Oh well. do you really think Britain would have stayed independent if the Germans controlled the entire continenet. Only a matter of time until they fell. There was no choice. None what so ever. the tiger was loose and they were next. Have you read any european history. do you know the difference between Iraq, vietnam and WWII. Big differences between all three. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
dairyairy
Joined: 17 May 2012 Location: South Korea
|
Posted: Wed Jun 05, 2013 1:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
Chamberlain was the one who declared war. Churchill didn't take over until later and he certainly led a successful war effort.
If anything the argument could be made that if England had intervened earlier, say when the Rhineland was remilitarized by Germany in 1936, then the war could have been postponed. Handing over Czechoslovakia was the biggest blunder. But Chamberlain didn't have the balls to stand up to Hitler. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
young_clinton
Joined: 09 Sep 2009
|
Posted: Wed Jun 05, 2013 6:15 am Post subject: Re: Britain should have kept out of World War II. |
|
|
Smithington wrote: |
Recently I've been thinking about major wars that the West should not have fought. The Vietnam and Iraq wars are classic examples. But I'm increasingly convinced that the UK should have kept out of WWII. What did it gain? Nothing at all. The war devastated the British economy and cost Britain its empire. |
The British lost it's empire to nationalism. The empire was a drain on Britain anyway and they would have been a lot better off losing it a long time before. Humanity gained by Britain remaining in the war. World War II was a war to save humanity. Even the Dalai Lama said it was a necessary war.
Smithington wrote: |
And let's remember that the Wehrmacht was going east. In short, it was heading away from the UK. Who in their right mind sees a hungry tiger walking away from their village, then throws stones at it, effectively directing its attention back to one's own village? That's effectively what happened. Britain and France declared war on Germany, not the other way around. And it did so as Hitler was looking to expand into the East....The Brits should have let the two totalitarian regimes knock each other out. |
Hitler wanted to liquidate the Polish and turn the Russians into agrarian slaves. The Soviet Union actually saved Poland. Britain and France declared war after it was determined that Hitler was a dangerous liar. He would have invaded the UK eventually. Because of the declaration of war he was unable to. The UK started to remilitarize with fighter planes at a much greater rate than the Germans and possibly saved the British. Also the British declaration of war brought in the USA in terms of supplying materials to both the British and the Soviets. The US in no way wanted the British to surrender to the Nazis.
Smithington wrote: |
Winston Churchill, in my opinion, was a failed prime minister. WWII was a war Britain should have kept out of. And Churchill should be condemned for dragging the UK into it. Instead he's lionized as a great leader.
Do you think the afore-mentioned village lionized the retard who threw stones at that tiger? |
You have a very odd revisionist aspect in how you view World War II. I kind of suspect you have been reading Neo Nazi literature, maybe on the internet. Churchill in fact was sacked in favor of Anthony Eden after the war, but it is clear that actions did a lot to bring defeat on the Nazis and Japanese. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
alistaircandlin
Joined: 24 Sep 2004 Location: Seoul
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
rollo
Joined: 10 May 2006 Location: China
|
Posted: Wed Jun 05, 2013 6:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
Churchills remark to Chamberlain" You had a choice between peace or war, you choice peace and guaranteed war' Chamberlain gave Cheksloslovakia away without a fight. That gave Hitler the Skoda works to build his Panzer army. It also put his armies closer to Russia.
Yes they threw Churchhill out when the war ended installed Eden who had been churchill's partner in running Britain. Churchill had ran the war and Eden had run the domestic side. Churchill was seen as a warior and not a peactime leader. If Britain does not join in. russia would have fallen then those 100 tank divisions come after England. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
cabeza
Joined: 29 Sep 2012
|
Posted: Wed Jun 05, 2013 7:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
Debating "what ifs" in history is fun, but pointless.
Who knows what would have happened.
Would Hitler have stopped at Poland? I doubt it.
Would he have moved against the USSR pre June 1941? Who Knows. Maybe.
Would a Wehrmacht that didn't have to worry about it's Western flank, have been able to defeat the USSR? There's a subject for about 50 books.
Would Hitler turn west eventually anyway? Most probably.
Would Japan have still attacked the US, thus bringing the US into the war against Nazi Germany. ...?
Would an unmatched and unimpeded Nazi Germany have rolled into Russia, taken Moscow and Stalingrad, continued eastward and swept across the great steppe until they saw the Pacific Ocean, thus ushering a period of German hegomny across the Eurasian continent, changing history forever, threatening the US mainland itself, thereby accelerating the US's nuclear ambitions, stopping at nothing to halt the evil Germanic wave that sat just across the Bearing strait, ensuring a future of nuclear winter for us all? Yes. By which I mean, no.
Remember that movie/book "Fatherland"? The movie was pretty rubbish, but it offered a pretty good idea of what may have happened if the British were defeated or never entered the war. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
ombeach
Joined: 10 Aug 2009
|
Posted: Wed Jun 05, 2013 7:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
Ignore the invasion of Poland - and turn a blind eye to the aftermath of genocide?
I'm glad Britain didn't do that. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Died By Bear
Joined: 13 Jul 2010 Location: On the big lake they call Gitche Gumee
|
Posted: Wed Jun 05, 2013 8:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
If the Germans ran the world, we wouldn't have all this terrorism now. We'd have much better infrastructure too. German and Jap cars would RULE! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Newbie
Joined: 07 Feb 2003
|
Posted: Wed Jun 05, 2013 11:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
OP was a joke right?
A kind of "I'm going to post the stupidest thing I could think of and see how people react", right? I hope! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Steelrails
Joined: 12 Mar 2009 Location: Earth, Solar System
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
northway
Joined: 05 Jul 2010
|
Posted: Wed Jun 05, 2013 6:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
All war is unnecessary. This should go without saying. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Steelrails
Joined: 12 Mar 2009 Location: Earth, Solar System
|
Posted: Wed Jun 05, 2013 11:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
northway wrote: |
All war is unnecessary. This should go without saying. |
This is based on the premise that outside actors are rational and benevolent. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
northway
Joined: 05 Jul 2010
|
Posted: Thu Jun 06, 2013 3:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
Steelrails wrote: |
northway wrote: |
All war is unnecessary. This should go without saying. |
This is based on the premise that outside actors are rational and benevolent. |
This is based on the premise that nation states should have little grounding in reality and that wars re pretty much always fought for elite interests. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Steelrails
Joined: 12 Mar 2009 Location: Earth, Solar System
|
Posted: Thu Jun 06, 2013 6:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
northway wrote: |
Steelrails wrote: |
northway wrote: |
All war is unnecessary. This should go without saying. |
This is based on the premise that outside actors are rational and benevolent. |
This is based on the premise that nation states should have little grounding in reality and that wars re pretty much always fought for elite interests. |
But given that there is massive amounts of ethnic cleansing in history, which affects people of all social strata, which means that wars may start for elite interests, but affect all levels. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|