Comments by "AFGuidesHD" (@AFGuidesHD) on "TIKhistory" channel.

  1. "If I'm told that some countries want to remain democrats — very well, they must remain democrats at all costs" is this paradoxical quote in German accurate ?
    1
  2.  @tyronebiggums285  I mean, that's basically the same sentence as the English version. Perhaps with less correct grammar or phrasing e.g. "When one says, the others are remaining democrats after all, good," is like something from google translate .
    1
  3. he was clearly being diplomatic, a soviet offensive, never mind victory, would have been impossible without lend lease
    1
  4. "The Foreign Secretary said that he had been reflecting on the anxieties which had been voiced by the Minister for Co-ordination of Defence. He agreed that there was probably no way in which France and ourselves could prevent Poland from being overrun. We were faced with the dilemma of doing nothing, or entering into a devastating war. If we did nothing, this would mean a great accession to Germany's strength and a great loss to ourselves of sympathy and support in the United States, and in other parts of the world. If we had to choose between two great evils, he favoured our going to war." - Cabinet Meeting, 27th March. In all these cabinet meetings, Poland was explicitly a pretext to start a war against Germany.
    1
  5.  @Raphael4722  >Versailles wasn't harsh that's not the argument, the argument is that certain points of it i.e. territory was badly handled and caused future conflicts between nations. Germany also surrendered on the basis of the 14 points which were ignored at the paris peace conference
    1
  6.  @Edax_Royeaux  the problem is geopolitics, it would have been idiocy of the highest magnitude for Germany to just hope france doesn't invade Germany whilst Germany fights a war against France's ally in Russia.
    1
  7. The commies were dependant upon western aid however, this is the key problem for them. On the other hand the allies were reliant on ports and it would have been difficult to fight over war torn landscapes. Overall though it probably would have been an allied success pushing the commies back to at least the 1941 borders.
    1
  8. @ The thing is, for Britain, WW2 could not have gone any worse. It was not in Britain's interest to go to war in 1939, before we were prepared for it. Chamberlain said America (and the Churchillian idiots) forced him into the war, and there is certainly ample evidence for that opinion. So what if Germany defeats Russia ? Well, in the American interests, that posed the risk of Britain choosing peace over war, and Germany potentially expanding into their patch in South America.
    1
  9. Because Britain wanted and got itself into war with Germany, not Russia. Despite the British arguments of "alliance" and "legal obligations" when it comes to official reasons for war, because as you note. This "alliance" with Poland wasn't anywhere to be seen just 2 weeks after the German invasion.
    1
  10. y-yes it was 4d chess all along!
    1
  11.  @RAWRManic  "so which is it?" I'm not TIK
    1
  12. No, not at all, not even remotely comparable. Ukraine never threatened to bomb Russia, nor did Ukraine mobilize its armies and generally Ukraine wasn't belligerent towards Russia. So no Ukraine =/= Poland.
    1
  13.  @andoapata2216  Yes and I'm explaining it's wrong to compare the Polish situation with the Ukrainian situation
    1
  14.  @Saeronor  Facts are: Germany cooperated with Poland before March 1939, high level talks between German and Polish leadership both seemingly desiring an agreement between themselves however Britain comes in on March 31st, fearing Germany and Poland are about to make an agreement, and gives a military guarantee as part of it's "peace front" encirclement policy, Poland then feels emboldened to act against Danzig issuing threats and ultimatums all the while refusing to return to negotiations with Germany, Britain seemingly realizes they've made a fatal mistake in giving Poland the guarantee but also don't want to "appease" Germany, then Poland mobilizes it's army and Germany intervenes militarily. I think an agreement between Germany and Poland would have happened if it were not for British military guarantee. Yes there's various quotes and telegrams from certain German leaders saying how they want war as is there are quotes and telegrams saying they want peace. That's just the nature of international relations and foreign politics.
    1
  15.  @Rgr262  with its foreign and economic policy controlled by poland, so it was ironically anything but free
    1
  16.  @janek8935  the reason Danzig was made into such a mess is because the allies knew that the people there wouldn't want to be under the jackboot of the Poles, so they didn't even bother holding a plebiscite as they knew what the result would be.
    1
  17.  @janek8935  yeah haha germany should have been smashed into 800 different principalities again xD haha
    1
  18.  @Nathan-jh1ho  0/2 correct points made.
    1
  19.  @walterbailey2950  "Leftism is based on eliminating all economic classes on principle. Nazism is based on defending them on principle." What on gods earth have you read to come up with this idea? Wikipedia? If you read any NSDAP propaganda, literally none of them defend social class structures, all of them are against social classes. I'm not entirely sure how you achieve or measure this objective though, all states fundamentally have rich and poor people.
    1
  20.  @walterbailey2950  Yes, hitler is defending private property. That is known. But your definition of Socialism seems to be more like communism.
    1
  21. Except it's not. Germany was far more justified in intervening in Poland than Russia was in invading Ukraine. Far more.
    1
  22.  @Hamzat22  just sayin'. Poland did send ultimatums, threaten to bomb Danzig, sanctioned Danzig factories, mobilize its armies etc. Ukraine did not do any of that to Russia.
    1
  23.  @Hamzat22  epic refute xD
    1
  24. I think his point might be there's no such thing as "revisionist history" because history is constantly being revised. It's like any other science. Problem with "history" is that it is not an exact science, it's more of a social science even. e.g. one historian might say Germany started WW2, Hitler wanted war and invaded Poland for fame and conquest, pointing to a certain OKW meeting. Whilst another historian would say Hitler didn't actually want to invade Poland but didn't have a choice in the face of Polish intransigence, British confrontationism and even had a mental breakdown on August 30th because he didn't want this situation.
    1
  25.  @Pullapitko  I know
    1
  26. Hungary invaded Slovakia and its not even a distant thought in anyone's memories.
    1
  27. its almost like a policy of extreme selfishness will get you no friends
    1
  28.  @tsaoh5572  I think it just exists in name only. You don't usually threaten allies with war like Britain did in WW2.
    1
  29. Hitler blundered into war, Chamberlain blundered into it even more so. And yet I and most people have grown up on propaganda that paints it as a unique war that was solely caused by some German master plan.
    1
  30. by "national socialism" I think you just mean "controlled economies"
    1
  31.  @AdrianDeer  Have a read of Simon Newman's "march 1939 the british guarantee to poland" for some more 'truth', particularly when we look at the British side of the story. TIK and most other popular historians only ever look at the story from the German conspiracy side.
    1
  32. this is the hilarious and obvious contradiction in the "germany started ww2" narrative. It is entirely based on the interests of America, less so Britain's. "Britain couldn't just let Germany go east... b-but Germany declared war on Britain when they invaded Poland" - TIK
    1
  33.  @georgedrake1501  >they didn't choose to go to war with Germany except they did. >there wouldn't have been a war if Germany didn't invade Poland, that's literally it. Except there could well have been. Read this for an earth shattering bit of info https://history.state.gov/historicaldocuments/frus1939v01/d82 >good thing they did plan and didn't just trust Hitler and let him do what he wants like you suggest. yeah good thing they plunged europe into war, got millions killed and destroyed europe haha >Hitler have to invade these sovereign nations? In order to get back Danzig and defend their right to self determination - yes. Poland refused to give back Danzig and instead said "fight me" throughout 1939, and its Germany's fault for saying "ok" ? >treaties he honored treaties as much as any other nation did respect them when they wanted to and came up with dumb legal arguments for not following them. Just look at the blatant American violations of international treaties since WW2 but "oh they were just defending themselves under article 52 of the UN charter paragraph c" yeah, sure.
    1
  34. Only if you're ignorant of everything else that happened (which Anglo-American historiography naturally wants you to be). Many diplomats at the time did in fact blame Poland for escalating the tensions, they also blamed the British guarantee for hardening Polish policy towards Danzig. Just a few quotes to demonstrate this: "The Polish Commissioner to Danzig telephoned the President of the Senate at 1 o'clock in the morning, and half an hour later sent him an ultimatum. That same morning he had risked a panic by sending away women and children, and at the same time the polish press had talked of bombing Danzig." - Gerald Shepard, recounting the events of August 4th. "Guns, which stand guard over Poland's honor, are trained on Danzig. If the Danzig authorities intend to face Poland with a fait accompli these guns will roar." - Marshall Rydz-Smigly, 6th August "After Rydz-Smigly's speech yesterday, thousands of Poles joined in, shouting 'we demand Danzig'" - Daily Mirror, 7th August "The League of Nations negotiator is greatly disappointed that efforts towards a detente have been definitely shattered by the Polish ultimatum of August 4th. He is distrustful of Beck and pessimistic about Polish intentions which he considers unduly warlike." - Gerald Shepard, 11th August. "It still seems to me that the detente might have been achieved had it not been for the actions of the Polish government in sending what amounted to an ultimatum on the night of August 4th." - Gerald Shepard, 4th September. And then what is the story behind the British guarantee? Why did they guarantee Poland, a country that Germany was negotiating with to amicably remove issues between the two ? "We should attack Germany, not in order to save a particular victim, but in order to pull down the bully" - Neville Chamberlain, 20th March. "England is advising France that they should both go to war regardless of Poland." - Joseph Kennedy, 22nd March. "Halifax felt that the inevitability of war sooner or later should be met right now" - Joseph Kennedy, 24th March. "War, and war now with a near eastern front. Without war the desired results may never be achieved." - Noel Mason-MacFarlane, 28th March. "The Prime Minister said that he was somewhat uneasy at the fact that our Ambassador in Warsaw could obtain no information as to the progress of the negotiations between Germany and Poland. One possible, but very distasteful, explanation of this was that Polish negotiators were, in fact, giving way to Germany." - Cabinet Meeting, 30th March.
    1
  35. The Poles cut off negotiations with Germany after receiving the guarantee, since that date they took more aggressive actions against Danzig with the major escalation being the ultimatum of August 4th. Literally not a single western "documentary" would ever tell you about these things, Its only ever "one day Hitler invaded Poland cus he wanted to take over the world and stuff"
    1
  36.  @EdgarStyles1234  No, do tell me why America isn't "the greatest evil of all time" despite murdering millions of native americans in order to gain their own living space ?
    1
  37. As Joseph Kennedy reported in Late August "quite frankly Chamberlain is more worried about getting the Poles to be reasonable than the Germans" I think Chamberlain kinda regretted the guarantee after the false reports he got about 'an imminent german invasion of poland, switzerland, holland or france' turned out to be false.
    1
  38. and how much of it is simply by not being bombed into oblivion, being in a major land war or not defeating the USSR in 1941/42 ?
    1
  39. some chap who really annoyed Wall Street.
    1
  40. "if the British and French hadn't backed Poland, they would have negotiated over Danzig and been more pragmatic" It's not necessarily true but it is highly more likely that Poland would have continued negotiations with Germany without the British giving the military guarantee. There's countless evidence for this I cba to find them all but here's a couple. "he is more than happy to have England’s support given in the way that it was, i. e., that Poland is the one to determine when England is to come to her rescue." - Kennedy "In Beck's opinion the best chance of maintaining peace is for us to remain calm and firm without any compromise to negotiate" - Adrian Holman There's alot more from diplomats that clearly show the Poles were alot more assertive with the British guarantee than without it, it's why British politicians also tried to lightly remind Poland that it wasn't a blanque check to be aggressive. And in fact I get the sense from some of them, such as Chamberlain, as to how much they had messed up by giving Poland the guarantee.
    1
  41. I'd like to bet Starkey merely just repeats the 500 hagiographies about Churchill though.
    1
  42. To me it's about who invents the technology first, regardless of weather they were perfected and mass produced. In that case Germany wins. Alliedboos then talk about these technologies being perfected, which, when you're not fighting for survival like America in the 1940s. You can easily allocate 100,000+ men to the projects to develop technology fully. As I mention, had the USSR been defeated in 1941 then Germany too would have been able to allocate 100,000 men for the proper development of cruise missiles, space craft, Surface to Air missiles and so on.
    1
  43. The difference between being a madman and a genius is the result. Churchill was equally at odds with his Generals, undoubtedly had Britain lost we would have a "madman Churchill" narrative for mainstream historians to blame everything on.
    1
  44.  @brandaonb4249  "wouldn't the Soviets still have surrounded them " No, because instead of being faced by Romanians with pea shooters, the Soviets would have faced German tanks and heavy equipment. See Operation Mars for the results.
    1
  45.  @Dougthebug-e6m  the supply was terrible with army group A because they were travelling hundreds of miles into the caucuses. Varonezh and the area around the Don was hundreds of miles nearer to their supply lines, they could have had divisions there if they wanted to, just like how they had divisions in Stalingrad to begin with as well as these "terrible supplies" delivering the expenditure of more ammunition in a few months than the entire of barbarossa.
    1
  46. Poland is mentioned about 3 times in MK. And those 3 times it is in a positive light. No one is arguing he didn't want war with Russia, but then again he was far, far from the only man in Europe that wanted war with Russia. Unsurprisingly as you can see even today.
    1
  47.  @Saeronor  And it would also depend if the USSR "honored its obligations" to Czechia, I think this would pre-occupy Poland from launching any attack on Germany in a WW2-1938 scenario. And even if Poland did attack i'm fairly sure the Polish army was so out of date that the few defensive divisions in Germany would have handled it like Hindenburg handled the Russians in 1914
    1
  48. People don't even know where Poland is today, and despite ubiquitous propaganda, they don't even know what year the Battle of Britain occurred in. Boomers who love the war, go to WW2 events and the likes, gave me the answer of "uhh 1944 ?". I wasn't particularly shocked but its still sensational that even commoners who involve themselves in WW2 events so much don't even know the most basic facts about the war. Never mind things like the discussions Bullitt and Kennedy had with their respective leaders in January and March 1939.
    1
  49.  @doctorpepsi8486  and thus indeed it is much easier and simplistic to just go with "Germany invaded poland so they started it"
    1
  50.  @МихаилЧерников-п2т  yeah, ww2 sucked for everyone apart from america
    1