Youtube comments of AFGuidesHD (@AFGuidesHD).

  1. When you see a cassette go into a cassette player you just know the video is going to be longer than the movie or game the video is supposed to be about
    112000
  2. If only you could do this on GTA 5
    21000
  3. "they only got a little and they felt cheated" that's a smooth way to say "Britain and France violated their treaty obligations and refused to let Italy take the territory they promised"
    15000
  4. The test screening did so poorly they relegated Flip Flop to a YouTube mini series on the channel "Man Carrying Disney".
    12000
  5. "Ant man tries cocaine" lmao, that's probably what he's been doing for the last few movies.
    8300
  6. 4D chess move when MCT comments on his own vid
    7900
  7. 1:58 that's an 18+ rated joker laugh right there
    5400
  8. "customer skills of the gestapo" 😂
    5000
  9. from Lance-Corporal to Fuhrer and Reich Chancellor, that's one heck of a story. Imagine if some corporal Tommy told his mates in 1914 that he'd be King of England by 1935.
    4600
  10. Germans: Relying on paratroopers for strategic objectives isn't a good idea Allies: Hold my beer
    4400
  11. because "fascist" these days is used as a synonym for "baddie", "authoritarian" or "person i don't like"
    3800
  12. Capitalism is like eating a cookie.
    3100
  13. too bad no one reuploaded this piece of history
    2800
  14. "we've designed unbreakable glass" glass breaks
    2500
  15. 'muting the thread because I don't want to be corrected'
    2500
  16. Quality original content as always MCT!
    2400
  17. "definitely wouldn't wanna be outside right now" definitely wouldn't wanna be inside either
    2400
  18. Vegetarian, Dog lover, Man of the year and Nobel peace prize nominee.
    2200
  19. Is Hugo Boss the only fashion designer in the galaxy ?
    2100
  20. "Have you seen the new MCT video" "I did watch that yeah" end of conversation.
    2000
  21. They might have been slightly more effective if they didn't invade Greece and Egypt at the same time, therefore weakening both attacks.
    1800
  22. How do you feel about your role in destroying TV ?
    1800
  23. "Why didn't Poland just ally with the commies" has the same answer as to "Why didn't Poland ally with Germany against the commies".
    1700
  24. What about the third: "THIS SATURDAY, 11AM PST livestream celebrating 250k subscribers. be there or be square"
    1600
  25. So we have black holes, smaller than an atom yet heavier than mountains? Sounds like science fiction. Maybe science fiction isn't really science fiction lol
    1400
  26. what a hot take that wikipedia page is "fascists mobilize the nation to prepare it for war" because Italy was famous for spending its 20+ years preparing and trying its best to start a war.
    1300
  27. MCT is the only guy who can say "YouTube is art" and be absolutely correct.
    1300
  28. The Jackie Weaver insurrection
    1200
  29. "The Germans viewed private property as conditional" I mean you could argue that is the case for every country in the world. How often do plutocrat governments seize private property for their own uses? In fact Britain did it quite a lot in 1939. There's no such thing as "fundamental rights" especially not given by a government.
    1200
  30. i loved the part where he said "it's commenting time" and destroyed the comments
    1200
  31. "You're gambling with world war 2" Churchill, smiling: "Yes."
    1200
  32. United States speedrun basically. Whereas it took the USA about 200 years to colonize the West, Germany planned on colonizing the East in about 50.
    1100
  33. but can it play solitaire ?
    1000
  34. As a channel who mostly plays call of duty and violent adult video games I can relate
    1000
  35. Where was the "without evidence" in your reports about "Russian interference" and then you wonder why no one trusts the MSM anymore
    901
  36. Exposing fraudulent votes is not being a "sore loser" you wouldn't say fraud on ebay is just "buyers remorse"
    874
  37. You can't call yourself an MCT fan if you weren't subbed before July 15, 2011
    798
  38. "protesting achieves nothing" also the BBC on the very same day "Bangladesh government flees in face of protests"
    774
  39. I like how these documentaries always talk about Hitler's rise to power yet never talk about Chamberlain or Daladier's rise to power.
    739
  40. They used a Zack Hemsey track for Inception lol
    710
  41. Somehow I don't think the British wanted Versailles to bankrupt them and make them lose their empire.
    701
  42. The good ol' British tactic of "can't beat 'em, try murdering them"
    563
  43. Man Carrying Legal Obligations
    561
  44. Hitler: Gives orders explaining the strategic value of the city and that the name has nothing to do with the objectives. Revisionist Historians: Hitler was obsessed with the name.
    553
  45. the first 20 seconds you can clearly see he thinks something is wrong and is looking for help, so you can't blame Beatty imo
    527
  46. "Is American democracy in crisis?" Why weren't you asking this 4 years ago when there were riots and RESIST movements ?
    515
  47.  @TheImperatorKnight  Compare Starmer and co. passionately calling British people "far right thugs" to Hitler's "There shall come a time when you can proudly state that you are German". I can't ever think why people might appreciate passionate promotion of one's nation vs passionate hatred of it.
    505
  48. But i thought the EU was a great place to live?
    503
  49. "conservatism is in crisis" says "conservative" party that has been in power for 12 years and has done nothing with it's 80 seat majority. Just sickening.
    497
  50.  @NickB1967  "King and Prime Minister" to be exact
    475
  51. Premier Stalin to Prime Minister Churchill: "Without these two forms of help the USSR will either suffer defeat or be weakened to such an extent that it will lose for a long time any capacity to render assistance to its allies" About 4 years later: "The glorious and mighty USSR could have reached Berlin on it's own haha.
    465
  52. Well its not like the USA hasn't vetoed resolutions that criticised the US lol
    437
  53. "even with video evidence people don't accept it" well yes there's still the matter of perspective, look at that recent shooting Some people see a cop shooting a black man in the back Other people see a known criminal refusing to surrender and potentially get a weapon from his car
    437
  54. Why didn't Germany just continue to fight the RAF instead of giving up during BoB ?
    432
  55. and now the video is just him doing an awkward dance
    411
  56. 4:34 - Why yes we're americans how could you tell?"
    404
  57. The best table slam on youtube, the way the hair flicks up 😂
    401
  58. NOOOOO REDDIT TOLD ME THIS WOULD NEVER HAPPEN
    370
  59. Miscalculation is essentially what started both WW1 and 2.
    351
  60. MCT so dedicated he would be making these videos even if no one watched them.
    347
  61. "we're trying guys, please give us one more chance" 🤣😂
    337
  62. It is interesting how much worse WW2 could have been, one such case is "what if they actually used Sarin". Perhaps unleashing it on D-Day, arming V2 rockets with it, perhaps even going the full hog and employing it en-masse on the eastern front.
    334
  63. Its so traditionally classical for Polly to open with the "but who will clean the toilets and serve my pret" argument.
    325
  64. Don't they hate it when the people have just a tiny bit of power and influence ?
    319
  65. "If you want peace you must prepare for war" Germany: Prepares for war. Britain: N-no not like that.
    307
  66.  @TyAshton  no, only the leader gets to do it
    299
  67. How not to prepare for a war: Signing a naval limitation with the Anglos
    292
  68. "11 million is a lot to deport" yeah and 11 million is a lot to import.
    290
  69. This guy massively gives off the "has been the most intelligent guy in the room all his life and is only used to everyone just agreeing with everything he says" energy.
    288
  70. Pretty important, the USA might have built thousands of Shermans but these were not submersible.
    286
  71. "He saw them as untermensch and only useful as cannon fodder against the enemy" So not unlike Churchill's opinions of the French then.
    271
  72. Allies: Germany started WW2 because of its collapsing economy Germany: no u Allies: no u
    266
  73. The amount of people that have any faith the tories wouldn't sell the country out is depressing and sad tbh
    265
  74. Its interesting how Americans see Germany winning WW2 by taking over the world yet for Germany winning WW2 was simply regaining the pre-Versailles territories and a better trade deal with England. That is of course assuming war ends in 1940/41 as this video also presumes.
    239
  75. What are the implications of a economic collapse ? All the soldiers just pack their bags and go home? What would it actually look like ?
    210
  76. Have you read Otto Wagner's "memoirs of a confidant". Quite interesting how in 1936 Hitler was talking abut setting up a Greater European Union with a customs union with Poland, Czechoslovakia and everyone else in Europe. Obviously 3 years later there'd be war, so basically I think Hitler's "plans" for the future changed every week. This video is a nice compilation, though probably far from definitive of all the various writings German leaders made about possible future configurations.
    204
  77. Hmm, 2016 hasn't gone off to a good start.
    203
  78. "socialism becomes fascism" except the majority of "socialists" these days are of the internationalist type and therefore would never be fascists, no ?
    203
  79.  @TheImperatorKnight  and yet also Hitler in his speeches says "we are determined to tear down the hinderances that are placed on the individual striving to fulfil his potential". So, this is the rhetoric he gives, both collectivist as well as individualist at times. As you point out that National Socialism promotes collectivism, but also respects private property.
    203
  80. Looks like there won't be four more years pause.
    200
  81. 26:08 "Life as slave labourers in Germany had been better than life in Commie Russia" lmao
    194
  82.  @Ismael_Malikshahi  Like most people i'm not right or left. mix of both.
    186
  83. Next up "how effective was the English resistance"
    183
  84. To be fair the exit poll wasn't right, they lost 2 more than it predicted.
    181
  85. Rocket boosted tanks? damn if ww2 went on for a bit longer i'm sure the germans would have graced the world with such engineering
    178
  86. Pretty much propaganda, for the Germans, lines on the map not moving was nothing to celebrate, whilst for the Soviets the idea of never ending fascist assaults and finally stopping them in Stalingrad is far better than "we've launched 100s of offensives and they all failed miserably"
    173
  87. >Be Estonian >seek refuge in Sweden >get blown up on transport ship >seek refuge in Germany >yay, end of war, allies can't be worse than Germans right? >get repatriated at gunpoint to gulag
    169
  88. 33:27 so basically Romania started WW2
    167
  89. 5:05 big oof, that chap just outed himself as a National Socialist
    164
  90. Starmer and Cooper's reactions to the 2020 riots were wildly different to these ones. It's their double standards which is creating the problem.
    153
  91.  @marlonporsche3354  yeah but its kinda dumb to use zack hemsey music in a video about hanz zimmers soundtracks
    150
  92. the story about asking a girl out at school is so on the mark for old school youtube stereotype 😂
    144
  93. A disappointing end for popcorn enjoyers but from Proggers perspective he probably didn't have enough supplies or even a plan, even if the moscow riot police surrendered.
    141
  94. 16:35 I understand interrupting politicians when they aren't giving any answers but this guy was actually giving some sort of explanation and this was too "journalistic" of an interview.
    140
  95. I like when Elon said it's X'ing time and X'd all over Twitter
    134
  96. These "fact checks" are honestly pathetic "Icke claimed Wuhan was the first to roll out 5G, wrong, it was actually the 3rd" as if that matters. Its like that NBC "fact check" on trump "trump said that clinton acid washed her emails, wrong, she actually used an app called bleachbit"
    132
  97.  @catswithguitars6195  No its just hypocrisy, because we all know if Germany did something of that calibre OS would mention it but since its the good guys(tm) doing it, it's glossed over
    130
  98. Noticeably these 'far right thugs' are all from constituencies that overwhelmingly voted for your party, Kier.
    121
  99. 0:22 - Beattys face lmao "well shit she's gone and done it now, best look happy about it"
    120
  100. I like how groups go from being "nazis" or "terrorists" to just "very right wing" when they align with American interests lol
    119
  101.  @danii-wz9dh  Pretty much the same way the Americans cleared out the natives and rounded them up into reservations after a military defeat.
    111
  102. 1:06 love that image "Germany wants to take over the world" says the British and French Empires .
    110
  103. "Every single second is a turning point in history" - Me.
    110
  104. its always ironic to see the BBC go to NK and complain about its "propaganda"
    107
  105. Look at that healthy goodness 0:37 
    105
  106. Things also "analogous with the positions of Hitler" include workers rights, the NHS, animal welfare, public smoking bans, welfare programs and the calling of war to be made upon Russia.
    105
  107. No but really, who is Martin Scorsese ?
    104
  108. Peace in 1941: Germany "lol why?" Peace in 1943: Germany free to defend its European hegemony but NS state takes big political hit in failing to destroy communism Peace in 1944: Soviets "lol why?"
    101
  109. Man Carrying Object nails the American accent tho
    100
  110. "No terror under me" I specifically remember 2017 being the year of the truck of peace.
    95
  111. Bolsonaro: "write that down"
    91
  112. Yeah this video and this channel is just repeating the old outdated propagandistic version of history we've been hearing for decades now.. "Hitler invading the Rhineland" somehow was a cause of WW2, but not Chamberlain's Peace Front Policy or Versailles dictate ? It's rather silly.
    90
  113. "Whose decision to send troops to Suez brought national humiliation" Uh no, it was the appeasement of America that brought national humiliation. Surrendering to threats of war is what brought humiliation.
    90
  114. "Incredible" Immigrant spotting is such a lovley middle class past time lol
    87
  115. "who was to blame?" The brave and stoic resistance of the defenders ?
    87
  116. So like with everything in the Universe there is a chance that the forewarned engineers turn off the grid and we just have a power cut for a few hours/ days. But there is also a chance the engineers forget to do this/ aren't informed and civilization collapses.
    87
  117. "Germany had to go to war because of the economy" Funnily enough this is also why Britain went to war, I believe in one of the Cabinet meetings the treasury minister basically said "go to war in 1939 or not at all" because the British rearmament campaign would have broken the British economy in 1940.
    85
  118. Interesting how giving a military guarantee to a disputed territory whilst both parties were in talks to solve the dispute peacefully wasn't a key cause of WW2.
    85
  119. Scientists say water is wet, astronauts say space is big and experts say being trapped in a small space 2 miles underwater may lead to mild panicking.
    85
  120. 4M votes = 1 Seat, 1.5M votes = 56 seats. Go 'Democracy'! Douglass Carswell representing 4M people, no pressure Doug. Poor sod all on his tod.
    84
  121. If she's deaf then how does she talk and have a strong accent
    83
  122. 20:29 imagine the outrage if someone made a movie with this scene.
    83
  123. "England is advising France that they should both go along regardless of Poland " - Joseph Kennedy telegram to Washington after a conversation with Halifax. I believe this is the war plan Hoggan could be referring to. I also like another quote from Halifax: "the alternative policy of assisting Germany in developing Eastern Europe is not feasible so long as the current economic system is maintained". Was changing the economic system of Germany a factor in Britain going to war?
    82
  124. so are there any problems if you don't overclock ?
    77
  125. "Qatar has better free speech" I don't really know what anyone else expected from 'Doha Debates a Production of Qatar Foundation' tbqh
    75
  126. MCT should consider a career in acting.
    71
  127. "Normal non biased history, back to Dr Felton I guess" lmfao
    71
  128. Felix Karl Poland was the only "common interest" there was going to be a war no later than 1943 anyway as Stalin was preparing for war and Hitler just invaded before Stalin did. They could not co-exist due to the fundamental rivalry between national socialism and communism.
    70
  129. Wasn't it Manstein that won the war against France ? I know, allied centric history likes to ignore the first half of the war but it was a tide turner none the less.
    69
  130. Crimea is russian just as much as Königsberg is german. me thinks. Fair trade.
    66
  131. Neither were the riots we've had every other year. Only the government and Labour's response was 'sympathies' and 'hope for justice and change'. But when it's Brits that riot; it's 'full force of the law', 'army of police' and 'thugs'. Why the double standards ?
    66
  132. Indeed the great myth is that "Britain won WW2" we went broke in 1941, military occupied in 43, surrendered the Pound Sterling in 1944 and ultimately the Empire in 45. But lets all celebrate how Churchill refused to give Germany a slightly better trade deal in 1940.
    64
  133. Franz Halder was pretty treasonous lol
    63
  134.  @Ismael_Malikshahi  should have added an /s then because alot of people take words seriously.
    62
  135. Easily the most cinematic production MCT has produced
    62
  136. [insert quote that literally everyone agrees with]
    58
  137. "Halifax was an appeaser".... yeah, that's not the impression Joseph Kennedy got when he reported "England is advising France that they should both go to war regardless of Poland" after a conversation with him
    57
  138. +S.Rolphsen yea just think if oil and water could mix
    54
  139. meanwhile the Indy Neidell team "trust us bro we're the experts - YOU VILL NOT KWESTION ZE SOURCE"
    54
  140. 56:06 - GOLD
    54
  141. "in relation to the general cause of British victory to which we are committed" - Ambassador in Spain to the Secretary of State, Jan .29 1941 B-but why would Germany attack the neutral, benevolent and peace loving US of A ?
    54
  142.  @adam_p99  equally there may be plenty of evidence for this fraudulent votes case yet the BBC not once said "despite no evidence" even in the early days and how they say "despite no evidence trump has ordered an investigation" like no shit, the whole point of investigating is to find evidence
    50
  143. Who wasn't well informed? It's interesting when you read first hand documents and see the actual history that somehow people are today "just discovering" and are shocked to find that people back then weren't total idiots.
    50
  144. lol i agree with everyone else, 50 years ago fine, being a chap and handing it to the authorities, but current year when the government couldn't give too shits about the people handing it over is just... unbelievable. What would be wrong with keeping it anyway? you acquired the tank in good faith legally i presume, so whatever is in the tank is rightfully yours i would argue, if you sell a car you can't then claim that the brake springs weren't part of the deal. If you sold them and got investigated for randomly getting £2m in your bank, how would the police find anything to know where it came from?
    49
  145. "When an economic system is incapable of feeding and clothing a people, then it is bad, regardless of whether rich people say it is good 'the stock market is doing excellent' " - Adolf Corbyn
    49
  146. Wikipedia try not to be incorrect challenge (impossible)
    47
  147. The problem is that WW2 is presented as a single war and not simply an encapsulating concept for a collection of wars. On Wikipedia it says "World War II or the Second World War (1 September 1939 – 2 September 1945) was a global conflict".
    47
  148.  @tisFrancesfault  Yes revisionism is good. But these "historians" regularly use "revisionist" as an insult. I am merely using their own insults against them.
    46
  149. I like how after this segment he goes onto explain how Putin/ Russia didn't start the Ukraine war, as if Germany didn't have any "legitimate security concerns" in Czechia and Poland, the same way that he says Russia does in Ukraine.
    46
  150. "Australia always stands up to bullies" Oh and I'm sure Australia was the first in line to condemn the US attack on Iraq, right ? Edit: Australia participated in the aggression lmao.
    45
  151. So what exactly does cheering and shouting around london do? "look at me i kissed a man hehehe"
    43
  152. "I can help deter our enemies" The Reichstag erupts in laughter.
    43
  153. "It brings back the concerns of interference" I mean yeah, if Russia just lobbed a few missiles into Poland it would be absolutely illegal. But for some reason it's totally legal for western "totally not imperialist" powers to just lob bombs into Iraq, Syria, Yemen etc. ? It even turns out that those navy SEALS went missing on a mission to intercept trade between Iran and Yemmen like can you actually imagine the outrage if Russia intercepted trade between Ukraine and the US ?
    42
  154. Whilst America was spending 3 trillion on corruption and the arms industry, China was building cities, expanding trade agreements and infrastructure.
    42
  155. Quoting mein kampf isn't ballsy, however if he made a video titles "the british 'peace front' and why britain started ww2" now that would be ballsy
    41
  156. I for one, am shocked that a tourist attraction in a popular tourist city was busy.
    41
  157. George "Stalin did nothing wrong" Galloway
    40
  158. It's tragic have many people comment before even watching the video lol Schmider absolutely spells it out hat Hitler was not "insane" nor was he "stupid and underestimated America".
    39
  159. equally being against mass immigration doesn't make you a "far right fascist"
    37
  160. calling everyone "criminals" isn't any better than calling everyone "far right" lol
    37
  161. Corbyn actually got more votes than Blair if I recall
    37
  162. 0:39 was so hilarious the fact she shouted so loud the mic quality was terrible, then being told off like a naughty child for shouting from Dimbleby
    35
  163.  @MK_ULTRA420  correct. Trump was talking about "everything in the world blowing up", so the subject was clearly not just about America
    35
  164. "I'm a good actor" - Dwight Schrute
    35
  165.  @nonomnismoriar9051  supplying a belligerent state with weapons, certainly is an act of war, certainly removes the laws on neutrality. The USA declared war on Germany in WW1 over a mere offer of supplying weapons to Mexico lol
    35
  166. "and i will consider weather to put myeself forward again" Ohhhh... lulsies, alot of kippers would really (x100) want him to be leader again unlike leadership of libdem or lab
    34
  167. "We're so jealous of them" speak for yourself lol
    34
  168.  @Gooseplan  Do tell which slum prospered by having more people in it ?
    34
  169. we're going to talk about sponsorships on this video, but first let's talk about our sponsor - nordvpn
    33
  170. "We're nothing like those fascist countries who brainwash their kids" also plutocrats: 1:10
    33
  171.  @marcokite  there's no "plus" when the reason the greeks trounced them is because they had half their forces in egypt lol
    33
  172. With that logic you're saying anyone that has a big army is instantly an aggressor
    33
  173. "Japan had provoked the US" By signing an agreement with France ? This is like saying Poland provoked Germany by signing an agreement with Britain lol.
    33
  174. 58:40 "nobodies thought about it" or perhaps, nobody wants to air their solutions in the face of twitter or the MSM
    32
  175. I wonder what their reaction would be to the Ratte.
    32
  176. 40:09 - Can confirm, my patriotic boomer parents didn't even know when the Battle of Britain was, like honestly the only thing you'd expect them to know at a pub quiz and only my dad said "1944". lol
    31
  177. "racism for me but not for thee"
    31
  178.  @anttif.  only people you agree with should be heard, right ?
    31
  179. "refugees refuse to go to refugee camp" well then, they aren't refugees are they?
    29
  180. you need to educate yourself. Hitler never wanted war with France, Britain or even Poland. Perhaps he wanted a war with Czechia, but then again Bush wanted war with Iraq and yet no one calls him an insane evil madman who brought war and destruction to America.
    29
  181. If he was hiding in Germany he'd name himself Hans Himmler 😂
    29
  182. What's the significance of 1894 ? Is that when John Smithsonian first drew a talking sponge ?
    28
  183.  @TheLastSliceOfPie  Except the original italian fascists used to be socialists and mostly come from working class backgrounds, I don't think they suddenly became aristocrats
    28
  184. Outrageous that social housing doesn't get the chauffeurs and gold plated doors for the same price!!!
    28
  185. "It's not recognized universally as an independent state" and if say; Russia was supporting the independence of a breakaway region Sky News would say "Taiwan is overwhelmingly recognized as part of China"
    28
  186. How can it be argued that British intentions were wholesome and pure when Chamberlain said to his cabinet on 20th March "we should attack Germany" and on the 30th March "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" if more evidence is needed for such a British conspiracy for war, Joseph Kennedy reported to Washington after his conversation with the foreign minister; "England is advising France that they should both go to war regardless of Poland." on 22nd March and; "Halifax felt that the inevitability of war sooner or later should be met right now" on 24th March. If their intentions were so wholesome to merely defend Poland from big bad Germany that clearly was planning to invade them, why did Georges Bonnet feel the need to say "We should go to the utmost limit including the use of threats to bring in Poland" ? After actually looking at all the evidence from the British side, Simon Newman concluded: What finally convinced the British Government that this policy had to be adopted was the fear that Poland might give in to pressure from Germany to remain neutral in return for some acceptable solution of the Danzig problem. The British had to prevent this eventuality because they considered that it would be detrimental to their interests; so detrimental, in fact, that they were prepared to risk a war to prevent it. Such an agreement, coming in the wake of a long string of German successes culminating in the occupation of Prague, the annexation of Memel, and treaties with Slovakia and Romania, would represent a further blow to Britain's prestige and influence and seriously undermine her power to organize resistance against Germany in the future. Furthermore, it would mean the loss of the eastern front which strategically was essential in a war with Germany. These were the options which the Foreign Office had all along been trying to keep open. Rather than accept their foreclosure, the British preferred to go to war. Robert Vansittart was somewhat more open and honest about the outbreak of war, rather than any "n-nooo Germany started it" mythology nonsense. He was indeed honest and said "yes we started it to prevent Germany from becoming a hegemon" that means, even if they were to become a hegemon peacefully through treaties with Romania, Slovakia, Hungary, Italy, Finland, Poland and so on.
    28
  187. 13:06 that's one for the Triggernometry cringe compilation
    28
  188. "I have held from the very beginning that the poles were utterly foolish and unwise" "I can only urge the importance of Poland accepting the proposal for direct negotiations and thereby putting herself right in the eyes of the world" "The Poles must put themselves in the right by making a gesture of some kind, or else we must all fight" "Heaven knows what Poland will cost us" "In old days British statesmen were not handicapped by a propagandist press" luv me some quotes from are Nevile Henderson.
    28
  189. "Some German official vaguely mentioning that they should annex Iceland" is not proof that they "would have". Similarly ,look at the countless ideas written by the leaders of the Allies about what they should do with a conquered Germany and pretty much none of them were realized.
    27
  190.  @greatcoldemptiness  >and
    27
  191. "Difficult topic" lol, talking about German war crimes is an easy topic. A difficult topic would be Anglo-American war crimes.
    26
  192. The joke about laugh track probably does actually have some weight to it. These people have grown up on American TV shows like Friends, Comedy talk shows that all have laugh tracks, so they actually can't tell what a joke is without them.
    26
  193.  @therealspeedwagon1451  I wasn't talking about the concentration camps.
    26
  194. "So I won't bother with one" lol that's funny, as normally whenever presenters say that they then do give an introduction.
    26
  195. Not too impossible when you're subsidized by the biggest industrial economy on earth
    25
  196.  @KidoKoin  well thanks for the detailed reply
    25
  197. Turning points are a nonsense theory in my opinion. You could say that lend-lease in march 1941 was the "turning point" yet if the germans actually captured leningrad and encircled moscow, or whatever else they could have done militarily to defeat the USSR then it wouldn't have been a turning point. The debacle that was Stalingrad is argued to be a turning point because it totally prevented a german victory, yet there was still the prospect of the war becoming a stalemate.
    25
  198. TLDW documentaries lol
    25
  199. Question is why wasn't the manufacturing brought back from 16-20 ?
    25
  200. People say they were overstretched and needed rest etc. yet how does 2 days change anything in the grand scheme of things, especially that the panzers and infantry still had weeks more combat and distance to travel after dunkirk
    25
  201.  @zxbzxbzxb1  They weren't. They may have been able to float in really shallow water but were not submersible.
    24
  202. "Don't vote for populists because they say they want to control immigration" And Rory's high IQ solution to this is of course vote for the parties that openly don't want to and haven't control immigration.
    24
  203. Peace in such a war just wasn't possible as one side had to admit defeat and after such losses how could Hitler have defended going back to 1941 borders? Nor could the soviet union afford to give away ukraine or the caucuses but since they just kicked the germans out of the caucuses i don't think they were ever on the table.
    24
  204. OMFG A DRONE GOT SHOT DOWN HOW COULD YOU 😭😭😭😭😭😭
    24
  205.  @therealspeedwagon1451  I suspect a lot of these slave labourers were accommodated quite well, living with normal civilians in a first world country. But then again I'm only basing that on a photo I saw of well dressed Polish labourers in a German city after Allied conquest and the quote TIK used in this video.
    24
  206.  @fredoctober292  >Fascism; industry controls government That's just wrong though. Pretty sure the whole point of fascism was to have a strong government and therefore country, having industry work in the interests of the state and therefore the people rather than the people working for industry and industry working for capital
    23
  207.  @robert48044  For the Americans, General MacArthur was a true madman. Not many people know but his mad plan in the Korean War was to nuke China so much that the fallout would create a radioactive barrier to Chinese troops.
    23
  208. have you done a BATTLESTORM Barbarossa ?
    22
  209. 9:38 except it was a German tactic, who performed multiple very large encirclements... and it didn't win them the war.
    22
  210. Minecraft is eternal
    22
  211. "You gotta die sometime" and this is why you're an inspiration to us all Jake.
    22
  212.  @dragosstanciu9866  same reason why every other countries still negotiate with other countries despite the odd, interpretable to one party, "bad faith" action. With this logic, no one today should make agreements with the United States because they could just pull out of them unilaterally (e.g. paris climate agreement, Iran nuclear deal etc.). Why did Poland trust Britain, despite Britain in the 1860s making a similar guarantee to Denmark ? Why should Italy make agreements with Britain after 1919 ? The list is endless. "Painter man couldn't be trusted" is a poor excuse.
    22
  213. Then there's the food supply, then there's the logistics supply, then there's the raw materials supply. Hence why people come to the conclusion that the USSR had "no chance" against Germany without western aid.
    21
  214.  @ryanunderwood1798  Yes, it's just a tiny minority of people who dislike children being murdered in nurseries.
    21
  215.  @aintnoslice3422  >irght-wing people are so easily inclined towards (if they aren't already) racism, sexism etc. so explain why racial hierarchies are now predominantly peddled by self proclaimed left wing activists now whilst those on the right are open to conservative blacks ? you're whole post as you say is based on white countries, this does not work if you go to say, india, if a right wing white person was to go to india would they suddenly be far left for demanding white rights ? your whole post was based on social aspects explain how the national socialists were far right despite also believing in the eradication of class hierarchies? because there is also the third way >The desperation or shamelessness you have to resort to blatantly lie like this. No I don't lie but you sir, shamelessly insult constantly, its not good for you at all.
    21
  216.  @TheBrettarcher  your worthless input doesn't even make sense
    21
  217. 11:16 because everything was going so well until the Germans were a bit rude in not responding to his counter proposal of joining the Axis
    21
  218.  @Edax_Royeaux  yeah, Wikipedia. Just compare the articles on Hitler and Stalin. Hitler is the greatest evil of all time, whilst Stalin championed workers rights and is simply "a figure of controversy" lmao
    20
  219. "Scandalous" or as the courts would say "perfectly reasonable conduct in a plutocracy".
    20
  220. Using WW2 analogies whilst at the same time wanting Europe to unite against Russia is somewhat ironic, ngl.
    20
  221. "A left-liberal hegemony" Yes Andy, that's what we've had for at least 30 years and look at the state of the country.
    20
  222. When you watch this series, it really seems that victory in Stalingrad would have been guaranteed if they didn't split AGS. A few extra divisions would have seen the Germans push the Soviets in all these areas. Whilst the other armies secure Astrakhan.
    20
  223. unlike the trickle down economics of capitalism course.
    19
  224. Yes and think of how well regarded anyone who deposed Churchill would be.
    19
  225. The difference between Chamberlain and Johnson is that Chamberlain resigned.
    19
  226.  @Punisher9419  You never noticed how it's basically a lecture about what you should think ? How they usually end the videos with a massive rant ? They come across massively as redditors in the comments and "behind the scenes" pictures. They are the experts so they are right. Do not discuss else you will be banned.
    19
  227.  @axios76  Pretty sure they used the same flag they use today. Same as Latvians, Estonians and Lithuanians or any other foreign legion that fought against Russia and alongside the European Allies (Germany, Italy, Hungary, Finland, Romania, Croatia).
    19
  228. Axis did it: Not Justified Allies did it: Justified Simple as. /s
    19
  229.  @aintnoslice3422  literally every country could be called fascist for invading countries or using military force. Would you call the United States fascist ?
    19
  230.  @aintnoslice3422  >is your understanding really that limited Its not my understanding it was your implication. >fascist Italy didn't spend its existence preparing to and fighting wars of invasion and conquest. again with this definition, the British Empire was fascist, or any other empire was fascist. I can't think of many who consider the British Empire to be fascist. and again, I don't think Italy spent it's entire existence building up armies, how could it have with its poor performance in WW2 ? imperialist ambitions, perhaps. but it did not spend its whole existence "preparing to and fighting wars". The wars against Albania and Greece were mostly opportunistic. Had WW2 not occurred who knows what would have happened. In any case i'm obviously not arguing that Fascist Italy wasn't fascist. Just the dumb "they invaded countries so they were fascist" argument.
    19
  231. and seven years war
    19
  232. "A farcical pretext" oh that's funny, I thought self determination was an important democratic principle worth fighting for, no ?
    18
  233. And that's the best bit. "oh but we couldn't fight a war against both Germany and the USSR".... we obviously couldn't fight against Germany on its own. The idealistic moral arguments go out the window in favour of grand strategy.
    18
  234. Interesting, when it's the US that violates international treaties and agreements it's simply "the US ignored Russia's concerns".
    18
  235.  @TheAngelobarker  as well as the four power pact which also could have avoided war
    18
  236. We did it Stalin! We saved Poland!
    17
  237. well it was all under pressure and passed in seconds, i don't think he or anyone would want to just stop the show and say "hold on whilst i ask someone about this" especially if it turned out to be correct
    16
  238. lol lefties jumping up and down about this "U-turn" ignoring the fact he did hand in resignation and it was overwhelmingly rejected by UKIP suporters
    16
  239. So uh, what where his comments? "welcome to the news. Man says things we disagree with, companies disagree with him, and everyone should disagree with him. In other news..."
    16
  240.  @theunknownatheist3815  How exactly is listing things introduced by the Hitler regime "dishonest" ? What Niall implies here is that if you agree with anything Hitler did then you're "essentially a fascist".
    16
  241.  @awitcher5303  Except they would still have had oil from their trade deal with USSR. So the whole "defeat Britain before invading USSR" seems like much better strategy for the Axis in hindsight.
    16
  242.  @aintnoslice3422  yeah but those are a bunch of buzzwords with extra qualities that can be attributed to most states like imperialism and authotarianism. You say I don't know what i'm talking about, you use "most historians" yet you call Franco a fascist despite most historians not considering him to be one.
    16
  243. "Who speaks english... one person" Fantastic, future workforce right there.
    15
  244.  @banik7414  not really meant to be funny, if tons of games aren't compatible with the card because its "too advanced" its a bit of a drawback
    15
  245.  @tammyforbes2101  Except it was Pakistan and Saudi Arabia not Iraq that supported the terrorists
    15
  246.  @Josep_Hernandez_Lujan  what assassination attempts that the Germans did ?
    15
  247.  @aintnoslice3422  >Franco was labelled a fascist from even before he seized power. By commies, yeah, or his political opponents. Plenty of moderate right wing people are called nazis. Are you actually taking them as fact ? Fascism is probably I would describe as TIK did in his video on fascism. No I wouldn't just describe fascism as authotarian and people who want war. Because such a label can be applied to anyone. >right-wing' and 'left-wing' politics. Right wing economics favour less government control, left wing favors government control. Right wing socials favour the nation and its people whilst left wing are more open to multiculturalism. etc. >And of course, none of this justifies the faslehood of your first comment. Except it does because Fascism does not mean preparing for war.
    15
  248. Then they should petition the American government to withdraw their military bases.
    15
  249. the entente cordial was the biggest mistake in history, we should have allied with Germany when there was talk of such in 1890s/1900s
    15
  250. Can someone explain to me why China controlling Taiwan is some big threat to America that's worth risking nuclear war over? I just don't get it. Guess I should have mentioned semiconductors. China owning Taiwan doesn't automatically mean they shut down trade with America. Nor does it stop America producing its own.
    15
  251. And do you ever ask about politicians "relationship with America as a conflict of interest" ?
    15
  252.  @horatio8213  "just read mein kampf" says someone who's never read it and only believes what they're told. Mein kampf mentions Poland only twice and both times it's only as part of an alliance/ agreement.
    15
  253. 1 Million people on mars by 2050 lmao
    15
  254. I wish farage defended himself a bit more against these "UKIP hate immigrants" "fearmongering" remarks he got
    14
  255. "Atrocities in the past don't justify atrocities in the future" - Bassem Youssef. huh. 11:55
    14
  256. Honestly what is the difference between this report and a North Korean state broadcaster saying how the economy is great and there's never been so much freedom
    14
  257.  @michaelrowsell1160  the obvious and simple logic is "its only ok when the US does it"
    14
  258.  @executivedirector7467  Well nor does the "USSR would have reached berlin anyway". It's basically down to beliefs.
    14
  259.  @jussim.konttinen4981  Yep, I like how people automatically assume the resistance "against the Germans/ Europeans" and not the resistance "against the British/ Americans". Which would make for an interesting video since no one knows anything about it. Though I'm sure there would have been such individuals acting against their governments as much as there was in Germany.
    14
  260. “Nations that went down fighting rose again, but those who surrendered tamely were finished.” - Winston Churchill
    14
  261. You either die a Langsdorff or live long enough to become a Model (only if your side totally loses though)
    14
  262. Why imprison? just A) don't let them in in the first place B) deport them. No need to make them a burden on the Uk taxpayer at all what so ever.
    14
  263.  @Molandria  "if you want peace, you must prepare for war" Unless you're called Germany right ?
    14
  264.  @n00bcreeper45  stick to Minecraft friend.
    14
  265.  @torquetheprisoner  the last straw for Britain.
    14
  266. 37:02 "We should attack Germany" - Neville Chamberlain, Prime Minister "The choice was between doing nothing and entering into a devastating war, if I were to chose, I would choose war" - Lord Halifax, Foreign Secretary "We must have a war, we cannot lose it" - Henry Pownall, Chief of Staff "War and war now with a near Eastern Front" - Noel Mason-Macfarlane, Military attache to Berlin embassy and we all know where Churchill, Eden, Vansittart stood on the matter
    14
  267. ​ @aleksanderwielopolski8205  Did you miss the whole "Germany wanted to ally with Poland and even recognize the previously Prussian territory as Polish" bit ? So what you said was somewhat incorrect. It was only after Britain intervened in the negotiations with its "guarantee" that changed the situation quite alot, leading to Poland to refuse negotiations with Germany and be more assertive over Danzig. Much to the horror of diplomats on the scene such as Burckhardt, Henderson, Shepard and so on.
    14
  268.  @horatio8213  "every diplomatic deal you made with him?" As NATO leaders would also argue; a pinky promise written on the back of an envelope isn't a real agreement.
    14
  269. Yes those examples she gave forgot one thing but Bennette couldn't answer a single thing in that LBC interview
    13
  270. Man Carrying Schizophrenia
    13
  271.  @zxbzxbzxb1  Oh no, I fell for a joke without an /s. silly me 😁
    13
  272. This was true of American politics until Trump also. It's almost as if there's no difference between them or something.
    13
  273.  @Maperator  and yet they had an equal role in outbreak of WW2
    13
  274.  @aintnoslice3422  > So Monarchists are left-wing are they? No because I don't really use the left-right spectrum, its daft. >who is using buzzwords you >Dozens of historians a And I quote "he Nazis were disappointed with Franco's resistance to installing fascism. Historian James S. Corum states" Plenty of historians also point out how Franco was not in fact a fascist but a conservative authotarian. >fascist yeah i'm a fascist for wanting to be correct and not just throw buzzwords around or are you content with calling Donald Trump a Nazi ? >Not to mention, your comment is literally false literally false in the sense that Italy was soley preparing for war as you would imply. They developed an army like any nation develops an army. >No one ever has or does defines fascism simply as 'expansionist authoritarianism except you
    13
  275. The biggest geopolitical catastrophe in history.
    13
  276. 37:50 "British outrage over two states pledging not to go to war with each other" but why, isn't avoiding war not what Britain wanted ?
    13
  277.  @ImJustJ.  It's not me at all actually, its just the world we live in. I personally would have preferred good Anglo-German relations instead of 2 world wars but that didn't happen did it and there's not much I can do about that.
    13
  278. A better question would be "does Sir Kier Starmer intend to use British troops to defend Trump's Mineral deal ?"
    13
  279. Split ukraine, east new country called crimea and west just Ukraine and gets its EU membership. World peace acquired 
    12
  280. Sky News really can produce some terrible 'presenters'
    12
  281. I mean it's not like ideas change over time is it ? Especially one of a scientific or academic nature like racial classifications. Common example people refer to these days is that Irish people in America weren't considered "White" for a long period of time.
    12
  282. BREAKING NEWS: Biden is still alive.
    12
  283. TLDR: no
    12
  284. I don't know why Peter thinks that the population being mostly uneducated and programmed to do what they're told is something new. This has always been the case.
    12
  285. Yeah, Germany should pay reparations as soon as Poland gives back Pomerania, Prussia and all the other territories it took from Germany.
    12
  286.  @ritarocha7280  yes
    12
  287. "It is a mistake to look too far ahead. Only one link of the chain of destiny can be handled at a time." - Churchill The amount of extraordinary events that gave the allies victory cannot simply be attributed to "haha oil and industry", one out of millions of events is the capture of the U-559 enigma machine. What if she was never boarded and enigma cracked, allowing the U-boat campaign to continually sink large amounts of allied shipping ?
    12
  288. Imagine calling a young lad who fought to defend his country from the communists in hellish conditions "a coward". They didn't fight for Berlin, they fought for Europe alongside their German, Italian, Romanian, Slovakian, Danish, Belgian, Croatian, Finnish, Norwegian brothers. None of them would have known what secretive agreements the Allies would make with the communists, for all they knew the Soviets were coming for their country too.
    12
  289.  @gratefulguy4130  Medium difficulty, at least in "the west". Hard difficulty in Russia. Easy in Poland.
    12
  290. and as we've seen with the recent pandemic stuff, what is today's "conspiracy" is tomorrow's undeniable fact.
    12
  291. Its funny how Farage explains Russia's POV about the NATO encirclement. Is he aware that this is the same view Germany in 1939 took of the British encirclement against Germany.
    12
  292. Lord Palmerstone also gave a similar worded guarantee to Denmark, and yet somehow Prussia didn't start WW1 when it invaded Denmark in 1864.
    12
  293. Difference is Angry mustache man 1 wanted to ally with Poland against Angry mustache man 2 who didn't even want a small polish state to exist
    12
  294. "Romanians were Anglophiles" is that why the Anglos were constantly threatening Romania and generally seething hard when Romania said they wouldn't join Britain's war against Germany throughout 1939 ?
    12
  295.  @DaliborPerkovic-sw8mh  Indeed, it's another thorn in Anglo-American mythology when they say WW2 was "Germany vs the world". When at the time eastern European states where basically like "why tf are you trying to start shit against Germany? Russia is the enemy".
    12
  296.  @W4RHead000  imagine defending the tories.
    12
  297. "i believe Natalie wanted to come in David" xDxD not shit Ed
    11
  298. +edd wolf we do... otherwise you wouldn't have know that would you?
    11
  299. yes, instead it is "few brave Germans against WARMACHINE"
    11
  300. It's hardly "absurd" given that the German colonisation of the East was influenced by the American colonisation of the West. The so-called "forever war" was merely a predicted state of conflict between Germans and the natives similar to the conflicts between the Americans and Native Indians from 1600-1900
    11
  301.  @MK_ULTRA420  Trump was boasting about how peaceful the world was under his presidency, particularly with quoting "there was no terror under me". I pointed out that this was in fact, incorrect. How hard is that to understand? or are you being obtuse on purpose ?
    11
  302.  @freethinker9480  Didn't the USA sell Iraq chemical weapons to use against Iran ? Kinda defeats the whole moral argument you're trying to make.
    11
  303. On first viewing this scene made little sense, yet it's brilliant when you know the background e.g. Snape saying he could kill Sirius as he was a friend of James Potter who bullied him.
    11
  304.  @DollaDollaBillYall  In this "documentary" they probably do mean that, as if Japan just one day attacked the US for no reason whatsoever. In reality the US was an opponent of Japan at every corner. They did the oil embargo due to Japan "invading" Vietnam. When actually they had permission from the French government to do such a thing.
    11
  305. It's more like Alaska, Texas or some other breakaway region of the US. Cuba has full international recognition as an independent state, Taiwan is recognized by 180 of 193 UN member states as being part of China.
    11
  306. Chamberlain started the war for not starting it earlier, also Chamberlain started it for not having a backbone and saying no to the warmongers in his party. Chamberlain simply cannot win.
    11
  307. There's hardly any disagreement between these two lol
    11
  308. Because they were fighting a brutal foe who had shown themselves to be total monsters and refused every attempt by Germany to make peace ?
    11
  309. Afghanistan claims the life of another imperialist power. Next up: China
    11
  310. When was the last time you even did a tank video ? 😂
    11
  311. In the west, investors and shareholders have most control over a company. This isn't much different when it comes to wars. Yes a company could technically do something against the interests of the shareholders, but then usually the CEO goes to jail in that case. Similarly Ukraine could technically just stop fighting. But the US wouldn't be very happy about it.
    11
  312.  @BitterClinger1947  what do you mean?
    11
  313. Were the pyramids built by aliens ?
    11
  314. Depends what you mean by "did" because given the situation, it's not too surprising that Ukrainians would be saluting the resistance of Russian aggression.
    11
  315. I don't think there's ever a real answer to such a debate. The allies pioneered certain technologies whilst the Germans pioneered others. Had Germany not been in a major land war, or defeated the USSR early on. Then they would have been able to spare the 100,000 men that scientific projects required to be mass produced and effective. Instead of just a handful of dodgy but impressive prototypes.
    11
  316. +Connor D ironically the same bunch of tosspots who shout "hope not hate".
    10
  317. U5K0 The FPTP is highly undemocratic and so is the EU, yes the election of MEPs are PR and democratic but the way the EU works and how laws are made are highly undemocratic, it's like the house of lords being the chamber which makes legislation in the UK
    10
  318. +jarquontre but you don't challenge those on the "extreme right" because if you heard them out they'd get lots of support and of course we don't want that, so we just shout them down constantly.
    10
  319. oldfishi and when russia can give Ukraine 1000s dead too, sure.
    10
  320. "Debating with idiots is a bad idea" - Mark Twain
    10
  321. Well that's one off of the PR bucket list, what next? Looking sad around burnt out cars ? I would say destroyed buildings but they are only found in Gaza.
    10
  322.  @derrickstorm6976  "Just surrender bro" You know what would have actually saved a lot more lives and prevented a lot of destruction? The Brits 'surrendering' in June 1940 when the French asked them to enter peace negotiations with them. Madman Churchill ranted and raved in his bunker against surrender and decided to fight on until Europe was ruined and millions were dead.
    10
  323.  @robert48044  that wasn't a mad idea though.
    10
  324.  @microusb42069  I'm sure Russia could name some Ukrainian terrorists if that's your justification for invading countries lol
    10
  325.  @aintnoslice3422  ok so what is your definition of fascism ?
    10
  326.  @thekinginyellow1744  "the Military Tribunal agreed with the prosecution" is one of the most ridiculous sentences you can read on Wikipedia.
    10
  327. The real history is very fascinating "Hitler was torn between war and an off ramp". Could he have chosen war due to all his previous off-ramps being rejected by the British ? It would have been quite interesting and also damaging for Germany, if they tried to offer an off-ramp with the Anglo-Americans just as Japan attacked Pearl Harbor. Though as it turned out, it actually wouldn't have mattered. The German-Japanese alliance didn't seem to do all that much.
    10
  328.  @Treblaine  Even with the enigma cracked Britain went down to 6 weeks of supplies in 1943. How do you think it would have fared if the pre-enigma crack campaign continued ? >asinine assumptions The asinine assumption is the utterly childish thought that "it was impossible for Germany to win". It should have been "impossible" for Germany to beat France, for France had a bigger army and better tanks, yet unique events on the ground gave Germany a victory.
    10
  329.  @torquetheprisoner  or rather had he somehow avoided the war like he wanted to and came to either an entente with britain or an agreement with Poland.
    10
  330. Absolutely not. Its crazy how many alternate scenarios there could be based on any number of diplomatic movements. Due to the result of the war the masses have been told that it was some unique Hitler war of conquest, when actually he never even wanted to invade Poland and even offered to protect Polish rights in Danzig. Meanwhile from 1795-1918 Britain couldn't care less weather Poland was on a map or not.
    10
  331.  @christianlibertarian5488  Germany was at war with Britain but not America and therefore restrained itself to not attacking American ships that were supplying Britain, this frustrated the Kriegsmarine. In declaring war, it was open season for the Kriegsmarine which is today referred to as "the second happy time" I believe.
    10
  332.  @ImJustJ.  Not in this timeline sadly.
    10
  333. Yeah just like the cabinet meetings of march 1939 PROVE that england wanted war with germany
    10
  334.  @meathandsmans  I got a spam comment a few weeks ago "Does anyone remember when this guy made Frozen videos" or something lol
    10
  335. Maybe if the white ladies were in full traditional Slav or Bavarian dress whilst attending an international party/ gala then the question would be somewhat understandable. Bonus points if the white ladies weren't actually Slav or Bavarian.
    10
  336. "Sunak moves Britain to war footing" I'm glad he's taking the boatmen seriously then.
    10
  337. lolugbenga Because the BBC and Guardain say so... so he must be, right?
    9
  338. aran9901 4 Million
    9
  339. Well under the current pro-American plutocratic configuration the strategy is to make things and make money. Appease America whilst also trying to not lose China as an economic partner.
    9
  340. Hence the derogatory term "NPC". These NPCs just clap along, not even knowing what they're clapping for.
    9
  341. Britain: Defeats America's invasion of Canada, burns down Washington DC and retains its maritime rights. Americans: Oh-okay it was a draw.
    9
  342. I like how glewitz comes up in alot of internet debate yet it is used almost nowhere in german justifications for the invasion. The primary immediate instigation was polish mobilization.
    9
  343. Treason implies loyalty to begin with
    9
  344.  @AndyTernay  not relevant to ww2
    9
  345. It's funny how Russia has lost most major wars they've ever been involved in since 1815. Yet somehow people are made to believe that they could have made it to Berlin without food, ammunition and trucks from the USA ?
    9
  346. turns out real life people aren't comic strip caricatures
    9
  347. Did we stand up to the USA when they bullied Iraq ? Panama ? Cuba ? Grenada ? Vietnam ? and so on.
    9
  348. "we can't have yobbos like MPs making decisions Bernard!"
    9
  349. 26:39 - this same paragraph could be said of Churchill in 1940 when he wanted women to use kitchen knives to fight hardened German soldiers, ordered anthrax, ordered fire bombs to be used on Kent and said such things as "let it only end when each one of us lies upon the ground choking on his blood."
    9
  350.  @Tom-ez7pp  I'm not rioting.
    9
  351. absolutely nothing happened between 1945 and 1950 according to western historiography. It's quite interesting lol.
    9
  352. Churchill voted to start WW1 when no other cabinet member did, urged Poland to refuse negotiations with Germany and then planned for WW3. Lovely chap, we should build a statue to him or something.
    9
  353. "ABSOLUTLEY NO EVIDENCE" yeah just like there was absolutely no evidence for "Russian interference" but you never emphasized that did you?
    9
  354.  @nazmul_khan_  "just lose the transportation and communication hub of your country, 70% of your population, 80% of your grain and 90% of your oil bro, its easy."
    9
  355. "There is no doubt that Danzig is suffering heavy losses by diminution of traffic and continued idleness of margarine factory. Every additional day of these conditions will strengthen the German argument that Danzig should be less exposed to Polish pressure and should enjoy Reich protection and assistance." - Gerald Shepherd, British consul general to Danzig
    9
  356.  @Treblaine  >england can fight without food and weapons ok
    9
  357. ​ @Treblaine  >Bullshit No, it's literally from Churchill himself who said he was most worried about the U-boat campaign. >massive wishful thinking, Is U-559 enigma machine not being captured really that much wishful thinking? Is the Generals following Hitler's orders really wishful thinking? >unique events such as French generals not taking advantage of the bottleneck at Sedan bridgeheads for one. But by unique events i also mean the millions of individual actions that you can hardly name. e.g. "What if Hans didn't get into a certain position and destroy these 10 French tanks" Real life is more than meta "they had more tanks therefore they win" or as in your assumption "they had more ships", which despite the British theft of Norwegian and Polish shipping, still say that the Atlantic battle was far from certain. "Never say never" have you not heard of that quote? Sure it was impossible for Germany to conquer the moon but defeating USSR and Britain was less than "impossible". Heck, what if Churchill didn't attend the labour cabinet meeting? What if Halifax did resign in May 1940 ? These things could defiantly have affected the war.
    9
  358.  @petersouthernboy6327  Allied soldiers fought to "liberate Europe from German tyranny" whilst SS men volunteered to liberate Europe from communist tyranny. Why is one to be frowned upon and not the other ? Almost every year a cliché movie comes out with American soldiers saving French civilians (and not shooting or bombing them) yet you would be horrified if someone portrayed the SS as defenders of civilians despite their actions in Narva allowing 80,000 Estonians flee to Germany and Sweden.
    9
  359. "The outbreak of war in 1939 must be solely blamed on Germany for obvious reasons" I recommend you read Simon Newman's "March 1939: The British Guarantee to Poland". A good read on how it's so illogical to say that the country which declared war had nothing to do with starting the war.
    9
  360.  @No-pf8vu  >He would for sure enforce his ideology on these countries as well Not really and I quote the man himself "I don't want to force National Socialism on anybody. If I'm told that some countries want to remain democrats — very well, they must remain democrats at all costs. The French, for example, ought to retain their parties. The more social-revolutionary parties they have in their midst, the better it will be for us."
    9
  361. No doubt they too would be describing how the allies would go onto genocide Europeans and Germans through their elaborate plans such as the Morgenthau Plan
    9
  362.  @janys6502  Documents on German Foreign Policy dated January 5th 1939. A conversation between Hitler and Beck. Excerpt: "There might conceivably be a settlement by which this city would be brought into the German political community, again in accordance with the will of its population; naturally the Polish interests, especially in the economic field, would have to be fully protected. This was after all in the interest of Danzig as well, for Danzig could not live economically without Poland either, and so he, the Fuhrer, was thinking of a formula by which Danzig would come into the German community politically but remain with Poland economically." A shocking document to read by someone brought up on Anglo-American propaganda that paints Hitler as some pathological Pole hater and had planned to invade Poland since 1919. However Beck also said after September 1939 that he didn't think Hitler wanted to invade Poland; that he was pressured by Ribbentrop into it.
    9
  363.  @Paciat  It did however invade Czechoslovakia in the 1960s. But suddenly moral arguments are out the window and "we couldn't have done anything about it" despite the fact we knew we couldn't and didn't do anything about Poland.
    9
  364. there'd be riots.
    9
  365. not a netflix movie if there isn't at least 5 sex scenes
    9
  366. "when you've lost the argument you resort to insults" and even in comment sections all i see against UKIPs polices and arguments are insults and generalizations and of course comparisons to hitler -_-
    8
  367. except austrians are german
    8
  368. Tony Hind fairly obvious isn't it?
    8
  369. Thank god just what we need, a true leader to mobilize true internationalsundverdepressure
    8
  370.  @stephenobrien5909  Perhaps you should read "March 1939: The British Guarantee to Poland" by Simon Newman, because yes, their actions clearly did regardless of intent. Whilst Poland and Germany were in talks over settling their issues amicably one such Noel Mason-Macfarlane wrote a long winded letter to the Cabinet urging for war, days letter when Chamberlain issued the blank cheque to Poland, Alexander Cadogan the permanent under secretary to the foreign office would note "I gather Mason-Macfarlane will approve our action today".
    8
  371. "enough propaganda" says the propagandist lol
    8
  372. The amount of people who think history began in 1900 is staggering. Alliances are never meant to last, especially during wars.
    8
  373. they make them themselves
    8
  374.  @gandydancer9710  Was accommodating Russia's and America's hegemony over Europe at the expense of the British Empire justified ?
    8
  375. I like how these same people call Russia a kleptocracy. Pot. Kettle.
    8
  376.  @ghostrider.49  you just justified the german invasion of poland lol
    8
  377. Exactly, plenty of geopolitical experts and, really anyone with common sense, point out that had Hitler possessed nuclear weapons in 1939, then Chamberlain wouldn't have declared war on Germany. Precisely like how the USA hasn't gone to war with Russia, ostensibly "to defend Ukraine" .
    8
  378.  @yevua5049  Did I say I could ? I don't think most Americans could name the 911 attackers either.
    8
  379.  @Josep_Hernandez_Lujan  except Hitler never authorized it
    8
  380. I mean they could have published a map including historical territory like Korea, Mongolia, central Asia and Vietnam lol
    8
  381. So Germany building a big navy whilst sandwiched between France and Russia is an obvious non-starter which is why it historically didn't happen. I think a more interesting debate would be about whether the Axis, now controlling Europe, could compete with the USA after defeating France, the USSR and for arguments sake, also Britain. This was after all the main idea behind Germany's ideals, that Europe as a continent needs to unite in order to compete with the American continent.
    8
  382.  @thetruth495  I love how at Nuremberg the allied prosecution said how in a democracy people have a choice when they go to war, when of course that was not the case at all. The people never got a vote on weather to plunge europe into war. I wonder why that may be. Though I disagree with you on brexit. The whole "the establishment wanted brexit" would make sense if in fact the whole establishment wasn't against brexit and that Cameron only called a referendum because he thought it would shut down UKIP and the anti-EU wing of his party.
    8
  383. Could have just said "Britain is a plutocracy" like any other plutocracy
    8
  384. too bad he only does them in non public settings i.e. Sandhurst and MOD. This channel should bring him on more if possible.
    8
  385.  @suigeneris3909  It didn't even have enough land to sustain 40 million during WW2.
    8
  386. Indeed. No one could have predicted the horrors Chamberlain would unleash on Europe.
    8
  387. Calling Barbarossa a "failure" is like calling Overlord or Neptune a "failure". Sure the USSR survived Barbarossa, and sure the Allies failed to capture their objectives within their timeframe by several weeks, but it was the decisions made after Barbarossa that made things go downhill. The rather large one of course being the declaration of war on the USA (plus without an agreement from Japan to invade the USSR).
    8
  388. @MrPorhtnasim Yes the Mueller report which lefties thought would be the end of the trump presidency, then it came out and we never heard about it again. Why was that ?
    8
  389.  @paullangton-rogers2390  my point is clearly the double standards in language when reporting on similar issues and that language is distinctly different when applying it to other countries e.g. China "dominates" whilst the US simply "controls".
    8
  390.  @Coldglaze  If they're so proud to be Albanian then why are they leaving it in droves ?
    8
  391. And when they say "Poland was a British ally", we can ask "but for how long were they an ally before Germany invaded ?". The answer is 6 days.
    8
  392. And during all this the Germans probably had like 40 divisions sat around doing nothing in France and Norway
    8
  393. NO DON'T YOU GET IT! CHAMBERLAIN WAS FORCED BY GERMANY, HE HAS NO AGENCY, HE HAS NO BACKBONE, THERE WAS NOTHING HE COULD HAVE DONE (apart from say 'woops, sorry Poland, you weren't meant to cut off negotiations and act all aggressive when I gave you the guarantee but at the same time I didn't want to be slandered of creating a second munich either')
    8
  394. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Germans
    7
  395. Adam Murphy The only bigots are people like you who have quite frankly been brainwashed by the media, of course portraying that UKIP hate immigrants which is a compete fallacy. Even after 4M people vote UKIP yous till continue to call them bigots and i presume racists?
    7
  396. As well as the stupidity of Beck to refuse the German offer and then fight the Germans. That's also an interesting part of Polish historical discussion. Completely unknown to us in the west though.
    7
  397.  @sovietheart3883  It's not false, it's a direct quote from "Documents on British Foreign Policy". Which is a collection of telegrams by foreign ministers, diplomats and leaders. Document is dated 4th September 1941.
    7
  398. a plan is only smart if it works, or is only stupid if it fails
    7
  399.  @chtabarddumultien6075  if you go onto wikipedia page "invasion of poland" in the talk section you'll find a link to a Turkish website explaining the history of this alleged quote and basically it comes from some random press article in 1942 and that even the Nuremberg kangaroo court rejected its use as "evidence".
    7
  400. Hitler hated trade unions apart from the one that set high wages, guaranteed employments, working hours, made sackings more difficult, started social security and leisure programmes and paid for holiday trips.
    7
  401. For anyone saying "Rommel", he might have been good at a local level, however his decision to bumrush Egypt instead of supporting an invasion of Malta in July 1942, IMO single handily caused his downfall. Had Rommel understood the logistical and military importance of Malta then the Axis would have captured Egypt.
    7
  402.  @shawnkennedy855  and how were they going to win without oil, food and natural resources ?
    7
  403.  @jamesginty6684  literally everything owen jones ever says is wrong lol
    7
  404.  @xchen3079  yeah and alot of people like to claim German war policies are somehow representative of national socialism/ ordinary life. Yet naturally they would not agree that plutocracy is oppressive due to banning household lights in the war years.
    7
  405.  @Josep_Hernandez_Lujan  I'm not "defending nazis" by pointing out that whatever they did years before the war was not relevant to assassinating military leaders
    7
  406. "He was a kind man and fatherly boss" - Traudl Junge, his secretary. Even after they lost and she had no reason to defend him.
    7
  407. WW2 was indeed the bang of the British Empire
    7
  408. 8:28 wrong. The Japanese were actually willing to withdraw from China in 1941 to lift the oil embargo, instead the USA demanded that Japan essentially made itself a vassal of America to lift the embargo. Which Japan, understandably, refused.
    7
  409. nah factory workers didn't need food nor aluminium in order to build tanks, at least that's according to tankies.
    7
  410.  @PeamThePanda  its pretty ironic that such an unoriginal comment is complaining about originality
    7
  411. He wasn't trying to read a teleprompter
    7
  412.  @manoz6194  Chamberlain was the one who started the peace front initiative, urged Poland to refuse negotiations with Germany and ultimately declared war. Churchill was a well known warmonger but it was Chamberlain and Halifax who chose war.
    7
  413. Well I agree with his remarks about WW1 but on WW2, the reason there wasn't war in 1938 is because the French military told their government they would lose the war if it broke out that year. Britain too would also be several months unprepared, as Lord Halifax said of Munich; it bought time for many aeroplanes to be built each month. The USSR could not have intervened either, without itself starting a war with Hungary and/or Poland. Had the USSR barged through Poland, this would have ironically made the German-Polish alliance possible, the very alliance AH failed to attain in 1939. On the other side of course Germany is less prepared, the German generals as you mention, threaten a coup and the Germans do not have access to Czech industry. I think wargaming war in 1938 is nigh on impossible. Even if France went to war they would still likely have taken a defensive posture as they did in 1939. And AH himself in 1945 said that Munich was a mistake, if he instead invaded Czechia then he could have traded Slovakia for Danzig with Poland and avoided war with the west. So it's pretty funny how all sides regret Munich.
    7
  414.  @marionapoleoni4502  Yeah they didn't care at all. I think Vansittart was probably the most honest about wanting to fight Germany to prevent them from being too powerful. Britain and certain hawkish figures only wanted Poland to fight Germany as an Eastern Front. Noel Mason-MacFarlane exquisitely says as much in his letter to the British Cabinet in March where he says "war, and war now with a near eastern front". Due to this the Brits had to prevent Poland from making a deal with Germany otherwise there'd be no Eastern Front.
    7
  415. "Germany started WW2" .... "there are many other dimensions to international politics". Like Britain giving Poland a military guarantee at a time when Germany was trying to peacefully resolve the Danzig issue and British leadership fearful that Poland could settle its issues with Germany amicably ?
    7
  416. "European Union" that openly hates Europe, how contemptable.
    7
  417. "At present we will still pursue a policy of nonalignment and neutrality toward both sides. As events seem to illustrate that maintenance of this balance may soon be untenable, we cannot repeat the same fundamental mistakes of the period just before the partitions in which we chose to maintain isolation from a whole host of developments throughout Europe…If we are forced to favor one side over the other, that it certainly would not be with the Bolsheviks." - Rydz It's interesting how history could have been so different, yet so few know about it. Quite simply because of western propaganda that doesn't want people to know that Germany actually never planned to go to war with Poland, nor did Hitler "hate all poles". As with most wars I believe WW2 again was largely mistakes made on all sides.
    7
  418.  @Alvi410  I think the idea was that the US was already using its main weapons against Germany aka mass supplying Britain. They never expected America to mobilize troops as fast as they did.
    7
  419. Because there's no political opposition in the plutocratic police state of Britain lol
    7
  420.  @pickleman40  if you don't subscribe to the founding myths of the current civilization then you're [insert bad guy]
    7
  421.  @Saeronor  Oh there's plenty more, reading actual quotes from diplomats is so interesting, you never hear of any of this stuff from these so-called "documentaries". "It still seems in retrospect that the detente [with Danzig] 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" - Shepherd, 4th September "Poland today on war footing" - Biddle, March 26th 1939 "Buckhardt is distrustful of Beck and pessimistic about Polish intentions which he considers unduly warlike" - Shepherd "If the President is contemplating any action for peace, it seems to me the place to work is on Beck in Poland" - Kennedy "Polish mentality causes me to feel considerable foreboding" - Pierrepont Moffatt "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 "Frankly he [Chamberlain] is more worried about getting the Poles to be reasonable than the Germans." - Kennedy
    7
  422.  @RichardEnglander  it doesn't actually assume the position of the other at all
    6
  423.  @jasonjason6525  because apparently morality and law goes out the window "for strategic reasons" which is fucking laughable because starting the war in the first place was a bad strategic decision
    6
  424.  @amysoucy451  "or have an abortion" its so interesting how people want to kill women who murder their kids yet are then perfectly fine and supportive of women who have abortions which is essentially the same thing.
    6
  425.  @svenlittlecross  > germans wanted to erase poland of the map the germans had no pre-determined plan as any decent historian would recognize, had Poland allied with Germany, no doubt Poland would be declared an Aryan nation like all the other Slav allies of Germany. The many attempts by Germany to gain an alliance with Poland contradict the narrative that Hitler hated Poles from the beginning, even in Mein Kampf Poland is only mentioned about 4 times and only in a geopolitical context. Source: Martin Winstone, The Dark Heart of Hitler's Europe:
    6
  426. the footage is ok, but there are other companies that remaster the footage in much higher quality i.e. kronos media. the commentary is pretty standard for propaganda films, missing out on a hell of a lot of details.
    6
  427.  @hunterwatkins714  when you're a plutocratic state obviously
    6
  428. Will the American Empire end peacefully like the Soviet Empire ? Or will it end in nuclear hellfire. Honestly as much as we can say the Soviets were evil, they actually declined peacefully unlike the British Empire and probably the American Empire.
    6
  429. Would the allies have noticed and even able to do anything if the Germans used even half of the divisions sat around in France ?
    6
  430. 2 more weeks!
    6
  431. Cos I like to read books as well. And I highly recommend Simon Newman's "march 1939 the british guarantee to poland" for a look at British policy of the time.
    6
  432. fight harder
    6
  433. "Patriotism is actually hating the country" that's some Tory tier spin lol
    6
  434.  @gandydancer9710  It was actually Britain that declared war on Germany.
    6
  435. 60,000,000 didn't
    6
  436. >guarantee >memorandum pick one
    6
  437.  @TheIceman567  because the only people claiming it was an american vicotry are americans against all the obvious facts. Its not a draw if you failed miserably in your war of aggression, it's like saying France won the Franco-Prussian war
    6
  438. Why not just Germany ? Instead of messing around with the N word attached. You wouldn't describe the US pavilion as the "Plutocrat America pavilion" would you ?
    6
  439. "A quote everyone can agree on regardless of what ideology they have" - Human.
    6
  440.  Tom Musial  perhaps he was a warmonger towards the communists, but then, i'm sure you'd be an apologist for the warmongers against Germany
    6
  441. We defeated the old white man with... an even older white man.
    6
  442.  @michaelmalinovsky9499  but there was private property in germany
    6
  443.  @freethinker9480  If invading independent sovereign nations is aggression, then yes.
    6
  444.  @JohnnyWad309  yeah im picking and choosing my morals, just like the allies in ww2
    6
  445.  @Purlictor  yes, the soviets treated their POWs humanely, just ask the 10 Germans that survived Soviet camps
    6
  446. kids cheering sound effect
    6
  447. Because they're not "fleeing" they're colonizing.
    6
  448. They had 25 divisions in France when they could have used them to capture Leningrad or Moscow in 1941. I think this channel has already done such a video on it, they had so many division in France doing nothing, or maybe I read it in a book somewhere.
    6
  449. Because its pretty irrelevant at the moment, in the same way that the BBC ignores 90% of the parties
    6
  450.  @BaronsHistoryTimes  >Nazism was the same as was Japan militarist fascism Japan was a traditional imperial monarchist state, nothing fascist about them.
    6
  451.  @BaronsHistoryTimes  I don't think authoritarianism means fascism, or did the Japanese junta enact proportional representation, universal suffrage and votes for women ?
    6
  452.  @BaronsHistoryTimes  Fascism is fascism and Japanese imperialism is Japanese imperialism. I don't know much about Japan but I doubt they advocated for anything in the fascist manifesto.
    6
  453. Yes he made countless peace offers before Poland was defeated, after Poland was defeated, before the invasion of France, after it, and so on. It was the British who wanted war, not Germany.
    6
  454.  @dreamdiction  I don't know what happened to his comment. It may be because I replied to his reply. Youtube blocks comments, the longer you write the more chance of it getting blocked which is annoying AF and if it gets blocked then no one else can see it apart from the people already in the thread/ comment chain. Anyway he just said something about people being against the war and then ranted about Brexit in the typical far left remainer way.
    6
  455.  @Reiman33  "Winston Churchill was not going to negotiate with the Germans. Period. The end." Which is likely why Hitler veered towards war instead of making yet another peace offer.
    6
  456. On one hand you have nukes but on the other you have modern warfare with SAMs, jet aircraft, space rockets, assault rifles, cruise missiles, electric submarines, helicopters and more.
    6
  457. ​ @AndreLuis-gw5ox  TIK and "military history visualized" has the best video IMO which shows all the reasons laid out logically. People forget Germany declared war on the USA when German tanks were about 10 miles away from the Kremlin.
    6
  458. I don't think we will ever get conclusive evidence about thought processes tbh
    6
  459. The British mined Norwegian waters (hurr durr violated international laws and agreements), planned for an aggressive war (Plan R4) and was about to execute that plan hours before the Germans did. There's a quote from some British officer about "beating the Germans for once".
    6
  460. 99.9% of people have never gone through the primary sources, namely "Documents on British Foreign Policy, German Foreign Policy and US foreign policy" So they have utterly no idea of what actually went on. It's astonishing to read telegrams such as: "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. "Chamberlain 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. "The existence of a threat of economic measures from the 19th July onwards, however, clearly made the atmosphere somewhat unfriendly" - Gerald Shepard, 10th August. "The Poles had threatened severe economic reprisals and were privatley making threats of military action. Beck thought that Danzig had climbed down and published his success in the press." - Roger Makins, 14th 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. Among many others, to today's narrative that never even mentions Danzig let alone the Polish ultimatum of August 4th. It's just "one day Germany invaded Poland" or perhaps "they used a false flag attack to justify their otherwise unjustified invasion".
    6
  461. Republican New York 2028 😂
    6
  462. Did Hitler think about an "aggressive" war against the USSR or Czechia? yes. Did Hitler want a war against anyone else? No.
    6
  463. it's almost entirely the FPTP system, I don't think countries with fair and representative systems have little faith in democracy. In those countries they at least have the chance for radical change whereas countries with FPTP the choice is "plutocrats that say nice things about immigrants" or "plutocrats that say mean things about immigrants"
    6
  464.  @ilyatsukanov8707  its a bit strange to call them "traitors" when the commies themselves were traitors
    6
  465.  @sahrazad8213  despite the general incompetence of the British team and government the Prime Minister David Lloyd George is known to argue that the whole point of Versailles was not to start another war, as he said "what is the use in setting up alot of Alsace-Lorraines?" in relation to the dividing of Germany, and rightly predicted conflict would arise from these areas i.e Danzig.
    6
  466.  @cinesonicvibes  "it’s an oversimplification to suggest Britain "started" the war." No, the oversimplification is that Germany started it 'because they invaded Poland' and totally ignore everything the Brits and Poles did from March-September. "how do you disregard for other countries' sovereignty" The same way we do when USA invades Iraq, Russia invades Ukraine, Hungary invades Slovakia and, you know, every other 'aggressive war' in history. "Hitler’s Public Statements, In Mein Kamp" As for your last post, a complete regurgitation of the usual 'justification' for starting war against Germany, even using MK as an excuse which clearly shows you don't know what you're talking about. As Poland is mentioned only in a positive light in MK. And I doubt you would accept that Polish aggressive diplomacy on Lithuania and Czechoslovakia would give justification to Germany declaring war on Poland, would you ? There is no evidence that Germany had plans on Poland, before say, May 39, after Hitler ordered the Wehrmacht to at least plan for the contingency (yes that's right, TIK would tell you Germany had planned it since 1937, but the Wehrmacht actually didn't have a plan until Hitler ordered the Wehrmacht to formulate one in April 39) and after the British intervened in German-Polish negotiations, fearing a possible German-Polish agreement settling their outstanding issues.
    6
  467. yes we are revisionists and yes we are revising propagandistic trash passed down as "history"
    6
  468. Yes the real history is totally different from the trash you see in propaganda films.
    6
  469. Its a nice touch but it defeats his own argument when Chamberlain literally says "a state of war would exist between us", meaning a state of war didn't exist between us on 1st and 2nd September, contrary to TIK's argument that Germany triggered an automatic war between Britain and Germany on 1st September.
    6
  470. Name a more iconic duo than Plutocrats and Hypocrisy ? Cameron would not be weeping any tears if Nick Griffin died in British prison, nor would he for Julian Assange.
    6
  471.  @georgedrake1501  >from the outset define "from the outset". I don't think anyone claims britain wanted war before march 1939 but its clear they were working for one afterwards
    6
  472. What good is economics without the culture ? and where does culture come from ?
    6
  473. Guardian 'journalist' speaking a sentence without using the term "far right" challenge (impossible)
    6
  474.  @Paciat  No, USSR invading Czechoslovakia. And the moral argument is that 'Britain was standing up to bullies'.
    6
  475.  @kyliereed200  Because the choice in an election is only unlimited immigration or even more unlimited immigration right ?
    6
  476. Remember that time when the UK turned a fishing dispute with Iceland into nuclear war? No, me neither. Stop apologizing for American plutocrat warmongers
    6
  477. "UKIP refuses to rule out pact with Labour" is that supposed to be a bad thing? Can't tell lol. Certainly defeats the whole "UKIP are tories" sentiment.
    5
  478. It's entirely plausible. Noel Mason-MacFarlane wrote a letter demanding Britain declare war on Germany in March, quote "without war our desired aims will never be achieved", the aim namely being the thwarting of increasing German dominance in European affairs and economy. However Chamberlain and everyone else knew, you can't just randomly declare war without looking silly. Promising to 'defend' the one country that had outstanding tension with Germany was a perfect cover. Ask yourself, why didn't Chamberlain promise to defend France, Switzerland, Denmark or anyone else ? Why the one country that Germany was currently negotiating with on the return of Danzig ?
    5
  479. "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." - March 27th
    5
  480.  @looinrims  Well sadly its just a bunch of commie blocks, not much left of Konigsberg today
    5
  481. @beatonthedonis47 >but later allowed the Polish state to exist. Only when the communists occupied the whole country. When Hitler talked about setting up a smaller Polish state in October 1939, Stalin vetoed the idea.
    5
  482.  @zexal4217  "alteast not on the same scale" this morality by numbers has always fascinated me
    5
  483. 2:35 no my dear and honourable labour MP, it's not just "the tories, the tories, the tories" that think they are above the law and that people are sick of.
    5
  484.  @uncleadi  "how French and British were "morally wrong" from declaring war on Germany meanwhile German pilots were bombing and strafing Polish civilians." Would you say Germany was morally wrong for not declaring war on Britain when they were bombing African tribes or slaughtering Boers ?
    5
  485.  @hunterwatkins714  You can't justify contemporaries with something in the future. Do you think general plan ost would have even been thought about if Poland gave back Danzig? Im not so sure. I'm sure, had Germany military guaranteed Ireland and then actively told them to fight Britain and had such a war broke out would it all be Britains fault ?. Of course it wouldn't. Yet that's what happened with Poland and Germany.
    5
  486. Exactly, popular, dare I say 'revisionist' history says WW2 started on 1st September, but Chamberlain literally states in his speech "a state of war would exist between us" meaning war between the UK and Germany did not automatically start on the 1st. The war was still a choice made mostly by Chamberlain under pressure from parliament. The French, were less enthusiastic about going to war.
    5
  487.  @jonasastrom7422  and why was it Poland that Britain decided to guarantee, and not Denmark, Switzerland, France or anyone else ? Tip: "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.
    5
  488. "but the USSR made more trucks than they got in lend-lease" Perhaps, but they wouldn't have made any trucks without the few hundred tanks delivered in November 1941. Targeted statistics are key here, like 40% of Soviet tanks during the defence of Moscow were from lend-lease.
    5
  489. No.
    5
  490. An interesting book to read is "Otto Wagner's Memoirs of a Confidant" particularly the chapter that recalls Hitler's conversations about the creation of a European Union and Customs Union.
    5
  491.  @Sean-p3o  As Joe Kennedy put it "The facility with which the British can play power politics while talking in terms of philanthropy is triumphing."
    5
  492.  @Outlier999  Indeed it was, Halifax, Chamberlain and the pro-war faction thought Germany was a paper tiger and would economically collapse within a few months, if the Wehrmacht didn't rebel against the NS leadership. The British military Chief of Staff wrote to the cabinet writing "if the war were to go so badly that Romania and Poland were overrun" which is hilarious to me. Had the British military Chief instead wrote "if the war were to go so badly that Europe was overrun and the entire British Empire to collapse" I'm not so sure Chamberlain would have been as eager to give Poland the Guarantee on March 31st and declaring war even less so.
    5
  493. The guarantee given to Poland was a huge mistake, everyone in the Cabinet knew this a few weeks later lol. After doing so however, and the war breaking out, even then Chamberlain, like Palmerston in 1866, could have said "woops sorry mate". Luckily for the Commies and American businesses Daladier was PM of France and Chamberlain had no spine to back down from starting the most pointless and destructive war in British history.
    5
  494.  @TheIceman567  No it was the americans that declared war on Britain, taking advantage of the napoleanic war in europe. Since the declaration Britain probably would have preferred independent Indian nations but failed to achieve them. Look dude, it was fundamentally an American war of aggression against the British in which they not only failed epically but also had their capital burned. That is indeed a loss.
    5
  495. Definitely a man we should all listen to.
    5
  496. 3:37 sorry kid, there'll be more box houses than ever.
    5
  497.  @commando4481  thanks ;)
    5
  498.  @informationyes  "whats to stop hitner wanting to invade the US next" Yeah and then after invading america he'll invade the moon, and then venus...
    5
  499. Except it was Churchill that handed England to the enemy in 1941.
    5
  500.  @kaptainkaos1202  Yes but mainstream historians and certain unacademic folk like to use the term as if it's a bad thing.
    5
  501.  @axios76  "no they don't" yes they do. The Ukrainian flag is still blue and yellow.
    5
  502.  @gordonstrong5232  "So what exactly are you trying to say here? " I'm saying that Australian guy is a liar or a hypocrite "Are you saying America invading Iraq makes Russia invading Ukraine okay somehow?" Yes, lets make wild assumptions based on totally unrelated points.
    5
  503. And the best part is had the British stayed out of it, there wouldn't have even been a German-Polish war. Germany was having negotiations with Poland on creating a Treaty of Friendship and here's what Chamberlain said to his cabinet the day before issuing a unilateral military guarantee to Poland, a country vital to creating the "eastern front" in a potential war with Germany: "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.
    5
  504. "Adam Tooze said so" so the truth is based on whatever a certain "expert" says ?
    5
  505.  @HistoryGameV  no you.
    5
  506.  @Ohlalatay13  Give that logic a 2 second thought. Moustache man considered Russian culture to be as inferior as Native American culture is to you and Anglos. Having said that he still wanted to conquer Russia for it's resources that would give Europe economic independence.
    5
  507.  @EdgarStyles1234  You only have to look at the 1931 Weimar attempt at a customs union with Austria to sympathise with the idea of having a military. Germany and Austria wanted to form a customs union, France said no and that was the end of it. Without an army, Germany could not pursue even a peaceful foreign policy.
    5
  508. Farage's comments were almost as morally repugnant as Starmer's when he said Israel has the right to starve Gaza of food and water.
    5
  509. "America has dreams of becoming an international superpower but its not delusional - it knows its a regional power at best" What year would you attribute this quote? I'd say perhaps the 1920s or 30s. China is a big country with lots of cities and lots of ports. It's position is pretty similar to that of America in the 1920s in the shadow of the mighty British Empire. Though of course the events of WW2 are quite spectacular. The only way China could eclipse America is if America was as idiotic as Britain was in 1939 and decided to start a nuclear war against Russia or something.
    5
  510.  @rambonatorrrr6694  I don't care mate. Once again you've fallen into the trap of "if you point out my hypocrisy then you must support the other side"
    5
  511.  @BaronsHistoryTimes  Was that anything to do with fascism or just Italian geopolitics?
    5
  512.  @johnnybrave7443  At the cost of millions of British lives and heavy financial burdens.
    5
  513. Even with armor it just sounds like you'll be creating a pocket for the enemy to easily encircle.
    5
  514.  @asasas9146  Plus the Germans didn't have the manpower to allocate the 100,000 men that the scientists requested. The German war machine instead diverted these men to other areas. The Allies on the other hand had the luxury of not fighting a major land war and being able to allocate 100k+ men to these projects.
    5
  515. "I enquired of Herr Weismann whether he knew the source from which the National Socialists had drawn the funds for their election campaign. He replied that these funds must come from Russia..." - Sir H. Rumbold to Mr A. Henderson (Received September 22 1930) There we have it kids, the "Russian interference" meme has been around for longer than you think, like everything else really.
    5
  516. imagine judging what people want to watch by what they say and not what they actually watch
    5
  517. Why do you synonymize Germans with their political class but not Ukrainians or Poles ?
    5
  518.  @SubZero-kb1ir  I mean sure, there has been plenty of Austrians in high ranking German/ Prussian positions just like the most famous British heroes were Irish such as the Duke of Wellington
    5
  519. "when he invaded the Rhineland" how does one invade ones own country ?
    5
  520. oh boy, you'll be shocked and stunned at what i'm going to publish in march
    5
  521. So they get arrested by the SBS and handed to the Police for a telling off.
    5
  522.  @Intreductor  "lesser known historic stories" like... the nazi death camps or evil nazi scientists. Meanwhile TIK: Operation Keelhaul
    5
  523.  @cinesonicvibes  "Germany justified it under false pretexts, such as the Gleiwitz incident," How about the British Ambassador to Danzig, who reported to London "The existence of a threat of economic measures from the 19th July onwards, however, clearly made the atmosphere somewhat unfriendly"; "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." and brilliantly on September 4th: "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."
    5
  524. What if Danzig wasn't given to Poland by Versailles? What if Poland gave Danzig back? What if Poland made any attempt to avoid war?
    5
  525.  @tonyb9735  Yes print media first appeared in 2016 when the EU referendum went the way you didn't like
    5
  526. if only we had years of far left cencorship and personal attacks for having the "wrong opinion" this would never have happened
    5
  527. We'd probably see the EU formed in 1930 instead of 1950 if Germany won ww1
    5
  528. More trusted sources like Al Beeb ? Don't think so.
    5
  529. Nuremberg wasn't exactly a fair and impartial court was it now ? These officers are basically the judges of Nuremberg.
    5
  530. Indeed the population is centre-left economically and centre-right socially and what do we repeatedly get ? Far right economically and far left socially governments.
    5
  531.  @jamesmurtha2923  Anglo-Saxons, though no doubt you're about to tell us King Alfred was black and mass immigration is similar to Anglo invasions but calling mass immigration an "invasion" is racist.
    5
  532. and by "Socialism" you mean communism.
    5
  533. it is the democrats fault for not being a better option though. If the Dems acknowledged working class people's existence, if they didn't rely so much on B list celebrity endorsements, if they had a leader that could actually articulate thoughts and that didn't avoid talking about anything - they might have done better
    5
  534. "Under no circumstances would Poland become involved in protecting French satellites in central Europe", to add to the French military's warning of "Guys we'll lose if war breaks out now", and of course Britain's non-existent air force or air defence. The Munich Agreement was perhaps Germany's first major blunder.
    5
  535. its almost as if plutocracy won ww2 or something
    5
  536. >the world isn't likley to forget to be honest no one even knows about gallipoli without coming across it on Wikipedia
    5
  537.  @botanozsan7843  What kind of 10 year old logic makes you think Germany wanted to invade every single country in europe ?
    5
  538.  @janys6502  Not quite the same given that NATO has existed for 70 years. The 'alliance' between britain and poland existed or 6 days.
    5
  539.  @janys6502  its not simply my opinion thought, its the opinions of diplomats as documented in "documents on british foreign policy" and "documents on german foreign policy" and "documents on united states foreign policy". The recurring point made by diplomats is that polish attitude towards danzig became more aggressive and intransigent upon receiving the british guarantee.
    5
  540.  @connoc5078  except Farage has yet to be proven in any public office. inb4 muh irrelevant fishing committees in the EU
    5
  541.  @graveperil2169  allied apologists: "They did it first" is not a valid justification for war crimes. also allied apologists:
    5
  542. Well giving commitments to disputed territories was a sure down terrible way to avoid war.
    5
  543.  @AndrewMcLay274  Problem with "turning points" is that there are many in history. Was the defeat of France a turning point ?
    5
  544. "lasting harm" like.... preventing ww2
    5
  545. Andrew Bustard she only says what crap is given to her, i'm sure half the time she thinks to herself "what bollocks am i saying"
    4
  546. 14:50 labour's exact problem, they seem to be so blind by their own propaganda they're forgetting that white van men are still around
    4
  547. ***** So its fair that 1.5M are more "important" than 4m?
    4
  548. we're also talking about the tory government here too. the military is the last of their concerns ironically as they go around the world warmongering
    4
  549. Ahh yes the amazing tactic of "we're shit at everything" for the yes campaign, keep up the good work you guys at giving the no vote more votes
    4
  550. how many "controversial" doners do the liblabcon have
    4
  551. This is just hypothesis and would never ever happen, a union with France is more likley than war. And if it did happen the US would just try to broker peace, they wouldn't join either side. And no one won the Hundred year war.
    4
  552. Turns out popular history is radically different from the truth. Next subject, a 6 hour look at how WW2 began. These formats are great because most people have only been educated by the 'documentaries' that literally spend about 2 minutes on how these wars start, and swiftly move onto "Germany invades Belgium" or something.
    4
  553. @ It wasn't quite that simple though was it? Danzig was a German city, so it wasn't like they were giving away their own territory.
    4
  554.  @bolivar2153  He was in fact correct that the British were militarily weak. He just didn't believe that they would declare a war they had little chance of winning. As a dictator he perhaps wasn't used to being shouted and jeered at in a parliament, which is what Chamberlain had to face.
    4
  555.  @MarkoFTW  they added alot actually. In fact in some ways they were decisive, if they allied with Germany then the Germans would have won instead. Remaining neutral then Austria would have crushed Serbia and held off Russia on its own freeing German armies to remain in France.
    4
  556. "DAF, etc. was not a factor in decisions like invading Poland." Bro what? The DAF was important to improving working standards and production. The entire point of National Socialism was to improve the lives of Germans, not "to invade Poland". I might point out, since you highly likely don't know, that Hitler never intended on war with Poland, in fact he wanted them as allies against Commie Russia. Even up until April 1939 (and arguably late August though the Poles never responded) he was trying to make a deal with them.
    4
  557.  @daboyz6106  ideology had nothing to do with it, Poland feared losing independence to either of the two powers if they allied with either one.
    4
  558. As always war is a lot of luck, this could well have been a pearl harbour type situation if Spee sent the whole squad to attack Stanley.
    4
  559. Imagine a timeline where people say "Oh yeah, if you like Socialism so much why don't you go live in Germany" instead of "why don't you go live in North Korea" ... it wouldn't quite have the same rhetorical effect would it ?
    4
  560. yeah its weird how we've never been in this situation but can 100% imagine and know that this is how it would be if we did get into this situation
    4
  561. Looking forward to Dominic going into this much detail about how WW2 started with the British having the 'melancholy belligerency' during their March cabinet meetings, Chamberlain's fear of a German-Polish agreement, the Peace Front policy, Polish bellicosity during the Danzig Crisis, the Polish ultimatum to Danzig of August 4th, Hitler's mental breakdown at the prospect of war with Britain, the Franco-Italian attempts to save peace in early September and ultimately Chamberlain's ultimatum made under pressure from Churchill's parliamentary pressure group.
    4
  562. Mark Felton is pure rage bait half the time.
    4
  563.  @bolivar2153  It was mostly the allies who failed to partition the Austro-Hungarian Empire on ethnic lines. Leaving Poles, Germans, Slovaks, Hungarians in a single state. I've read various things about the Czechs failing to honour agreements, and centralize power into Prague, and not decentralizing power to autonomous regions. Even if that were the case I wouldn't particularly blame them for the problem to begin with.
    4
  564.  @ewanmackenzie5097  When? Literally since planes were invented until the 1960s As David Lloyd George said "At Geneva other countries would have agreed not to use aeroplanes for bombing purposes, but we insisted on reserving the right, to bomb [N-word]"
    4
  565.  @silverhost9782  It's a very simple and basic point. Without these tanks being operated by professionals who have been trained on them for years if not decades, and not supported by a full NATO logistics train, then these tanks are alot less effective and more likely to be destroyed or captured. If Ukrainians are to use them then they'd need years of training before using them.
    4
  566. except it really was mostly mopping up. The whole Wallied armies against less than 25% of the Wehrmacht after 4 years of war against the commies. The big famous battles of the 2nd western front had like 10k casualties at most, whilst the average battle in Russia 1941 had 100k
    4
  567. you missed the crucial and important bit where France and Britain said "no, we want to fight". Hitler wasn't going to sit around and wait for the French to invade first.
    4
  568. Manstein could have won the war if he became Fuhrer in July 1944 lol /s for our American friends
    4
  569. Anglo centric history likes to forget Russia's role prior to June 22 1941, given that Russia played a critical role in destroying Germany after Germany defeated Anglo-French forces in 1940.
    4
  570.  @AndyJarman  Even when military occupied in the 50s most Germans still said "yeah it was great under him" lol, lmao even
    4
  571.  @suzannehaigh4281  Germany absolutely did not come out better than the victors lol. The victors of course was the United States, Britain was defeated as much as Germany was.
    4
  572.  @jonasastrom7422  Because Germany was looking like they were going to invade Poland? Except it wasn't, that was a false report from a man called Ian Colvin. As Chamberlain implied here, the opposite is true, it looked like Germany WASN'T going to invade. The British didn't fear Germany invading, they feared Poland would make an agreement with Germany.
    4
  573.  @jonasastrom7422  Did you even read anything I said ? The context is that Germany and Poland were in fact having discussions to come to an agreement over the issues outstanding between the two, Chamberlain got wind of these and issued the military guarantee. Deduct that from the previous quote.
    4
  574. Its amazing how the fate of history came close in numerous regards. Peace offers close to being accepted, Hitler close to being killed at numerous times, Churchill also had numerous scrapes such as being hit by a taxi, on a ship attacked by a U-Boat and nearly flying over German flak guns in France.
    4
  575. Germany: How about we be friends but you give me back Danzig? Poland: No. Germany: How about you just give back Danzig ? Poland: Fight me Germany: Ok Everyone else: WTF Poland? Post 1945 Western Historiography: Poland was the totally innocent victim of a long planned war for world domination by Hitler
    4
  576.  @lukew6725  sieges are different to encirclements but yes, i'm sure it's been used on an operational level since organized warfare began
    4
  577. Little did they know a couple decades later that they would have a half-american PM that would completely sell Britain out to them.
    4
  578. Except the Germans actually did work with Slav allies and other Conservative/ fascist / authautarian governments. Had Poland allied with Germany, this would have been no different to Germany's alliance with Finland, Romania, Croatia, Slovakia, Hungary etc.
    4
  579. because witness statements vary wildly from soap factories to holiday camps depending on your narrative you're going to go with the witness statements that fit your narrative. Few historians are as impartial as TIK is.
    4
  580.  @gandydancer9710  So your statement of "Hitler started the war" is incorrect.
    4
  581.  @chriscarlone527  >expansionism, imperialism literally every country does that >war time economy neither germany or italy had a constant war time economy
    4
  582.  @chriscarlone527  well then by that definition fascism has never been tried before
    4
  583. 4:29 yeah sure, lmao
    4
  584.  @TheIceman567  >What invasion was defeated? literally in my comment "America's invasion of Canada," >The British Invasion if America was also defeated. Hardly it was a small incursion, pretty sure it was never meant to be anything more. >Britain also loses her native allies. Because America sued for peace in the war they started after failing miserably to fulfil any of their goals and Britain said "okay".
    4
  585.  @TheIceman567  So you're saying its an american victory because they won fishing rights?
    4
  586.  @TheIceman567  >What does the Franco-Prussian war have to do with anything? Its a comparison, the French accept they lost but Americans don't lol >Not what historians are saying. Not some american historians obviously but more say it was a british victory
    4
  587.  @TheIceman567  which they failed to achieve
    4
  588.  @TheIceman567  lol sure. keep deluding yourself
    4
  589. TLDW: Poland is a total nuisance to map painting
    4
  590.  ger du  "In the history of humanity" Pax Americana isn't the history of humanity tbh.
    4
  591.  @michaelmalinovsky9499  but private property did exist in germany
    4
  592. "you should just accept colonialism because you had a chinese takeaway" This argument always falls flat, especially coming from someone who otherwise would be against colonialism if it were white people colonising africa or india.
    4
  593.  @steveparker8065  I mean your own argument was erroneous to begin with. Curry is a British invention, not Indian.
    4
  594. fun part is hitler's original plan was to take leningrad and the caucuses but the generals messed about by insisting they lunge towards moscow
    4
  595. Cos we didn't have much of an army. The better question is "why did we lead the Poles on to their certain death?"
    4
  596.  @chriscarlone527  Perhaps I should have added "against allied generals/leaders during ww2" You talk about the night of the long knives as if it was a bad thing, yet most normal or moderate and even conservative people supported it. Even Churchill and the British probably supported it lol
    4
  597. No it started because Britain wanted to keep a disunited Europe, was fearful that if they didn't start the war in 1939 then they would never be able to because Germany would be too strong and influential and they wanted to retain the idea that Britain was a Great Power by launching a quick war against Germany. At the time they did this they thought the German economy would collapse within months of the war starting.
    4
  598.  @commonwealthrealm  try asking Russia for reparations lol
    4
  599. She has white phenotypes so she's not really black. I am of course being sarcastic but we're not far off from lefties unironically saying that are we?
    4
  600.  @AIJimmybad  it makes complete sense, Churchill is a hero to America, for his every decision was in the interest of America, and not of Britain's.
    4
  601.  @genericpersonx333  " let's declare war on the Americans, because the top American politicians made no secret to Germany that they wanted war with Germany" you should probably view MHV's video on why funny mustache man declared war on USA and it was mostly because he thought that for all intents and purposes the USA was already fully involved in the war in its most impactful sense (i.e. supplying Germany's enemies with impunity).
    4
  602. because they didn't have any tractors for farm work ?
    4
  603. Chap called Oppenheimer, funnily enough.
    4
  604.  @UnfairEnforcer  it wasn't a supply issue for AGN in 1941, they didn't have the panzer divisions to continue an assault on Leningrad.
    4
  605. also Americans "don't go to Saudi Arabia because you'll get arrested"
    4
  606.  MrNorthernSol  difference is blair wasn't hated by the establishment and didn't have numerous concerted campaigns against him.
    4
  607. Britain declaring war on Germany was #1 cause of WW2. Had Britain not declared war on Germany then there'd be no WW2 and no "10 key causes of WW2" videos.
    4
  608.  @dergutehut3961  Yeah I just don't buy these super generic descriptions of fascism. Most countries back then felt "superior" to others, especially africans, yet no serious academic would describe Churchill as a fascist despite his warmongering, seizure of power and racist views on the superiority of anglo-saxons.
    4
  609.  @TheImperatorKnight  The Red Ensign is commonly used to represent Canada before 1965. But it wasn't an official flag either tbf.
    4
  610. Oh, it wasn't a laughing stock during the last 100 conflicts since 1946 ?
    4
  611. Oh no, I'm sure every Briton would be holding Britain responsible for WW2 had Germany been the one to 'guarantee' Ireland from British aggression whilst Ireland and Britain were having amicable negotiations on solving their issues.
    4
  612. Charlie Chaplin didn't destroy cinema and nor did every other dumb movie since.
    4
  613.  @theteochewtower  wikipedia articles on "hull note" "harry dexter white" etc. and you can find sources in the sources section such as "Charles A. Beard, President Roosevelt and the Coming of the War 1941" or "Steil, Benn (2013), The Battle of Bretton Woods"
    4
  614. The foreign policy only failed due to external strategic decisions. Namely the declaration of war on the USA. Otherwise the whole 'imperialism' bit would have been a success.
    4
  615.  @Jinke888  He either didn't respond or the only response I've read in a newspaper, probably one of the very early ones, was obviously something ridiculous like "we'd only negotiate if Germany withdraws all its forces from Poland". They obviously didn't want to negotiate.
    4
  616. Slurs in a video game ? Ok so what's the drama ?
    4
  617.  @henrikhilskov  The transportation thing is the major point. The Red Army wasn't forced marched everywhere, they took the train. When the Germans struck south towards Stalingrad, the Soviets used the trains to get their armies to that sector. Without Moscow they cannot do this, there are no rail lines that simply go around Moscow, the Soviet frontline would be cut into two.
    4
  618. These people also say that the National Socialists were one big group of liars who lied about everything they did apart from when they said things that made them look bad.
    4
  619.  @andresilvaguitarr  Yeah Germany and Poland were trying to resolve the Danizg issue via negotiations, fearful of an agreement between the two, Britain stepped in and gave Poland a military guarantee. Apologia from Alexander Cadogan says it was simply meant to strengthen Poland's hand in negotiations but the warmongering by the chief of staff and numerous conversations at the foreign office says otherwise.
    4
  620.  @Treblaine  Pretty sure there's a lot of points where German victory could have achieved such as Dunkirk, Operation Crusader where Rommel ignore the report on British supply dump a few miles away. "Geoffrey Cox wrote that Sidi Rezegh was the "forgotten battle" of the Desert War. Crusader was "won by a hair’s breadth" by the Eighth Army but "had we lost it, we would have had to fight the battle of Alamein six months or a year earlier, without the decisive weapon of the Sherman tank" Or some quotes on the Atlantic Battle: "A Royal Navy report later concluded "The Germans never came so near to disrupting communications between the New World and the Old as in the first twenty days of March 1943" I mean if I had the effort to write a book on this I'm sure you could find countless quotes on how close WW2 actually was, pretty sure Glantz also says the Germans could have won in 1941, 1942 decided them not achieving total victory and 1943 decided how quickly they would lose it. Or I'm sure you'd dismiss these quotes as "allied propaganda" like some sort of Schrodinger's German war machine: A war machine that had no chance of winning but at the same time was invincible and unstoppable.
    4
  621. 2:37 plutocrat propagandists try to be historically accurate challenge (impossible)
    4
  622.  @morstyrannis1951  If you didn't want to fight for the communists then you had to fight for the fascist powers, sadly there was no third "swiss democratic" faction that was fighting the communists at that time. Similar themes can be found in the Spanish Civil War, George Orwell was against both fascists and communists yet decided to fight for the communist side, despite his repulsion of it.
    4
  623.  @markphilipp224  the "joke" here is the notion that all wars should end like how WW2 ended, it is quite an extraordinary war which completely warps everyone's perception of war.
    4
  624.  @jj-uy6qs  No but neither can you justify the massacre of Ukrainians either. The Disney-fication of history has been a disaster for humanity there are no "goodies" and "baddies" all sides were equally evil and equally good.
    4
  625. Exactly, I like this analogy also. Instead of "look mate, I know you really want that toy, but it did belong to the other guy 20 years ago and its universally accepted as a German city" Chamberlain said, by implication "don't give it to them, if the other kid tries to get it back, we'll fight them with you (wink wink)". Alexander Cadogan in his diaries however, says the guarantee was only meant to help the negotiations with Germany, not totally cut them off (oops). So either maliciously or simply stupidly, the British intervention in German-Polish relations did lead to catastrophe, as we all know, but few know these finer details.
    4
  626. "Yeah the US has bases in most countries in the world but look at these small rocks in the China Sea that China militarized" American whataboutism is rather quite cringe. Not even a leg to stand on really.
    4
  627. Operation Torch was launched and commanded from Gibraltar though. Plus it was an invasion of nearly undefended French Colonies lol
    4
  628. Was oil discovered in Lybia at that time? Turns out the Netherlands and Germany itself had all the oil the Germans needed, except these oil fields weren't discovered at the time.
    4
  629.  @mutanthybrid3466  "it has definable territorial lines and its own government controlling that territory" With that basis you'd support the breakaway territories of Eastern Ukraine then ?
    4
  630. "There might conceivably be a settlement by which this city would be brought into the German political community, again in accordance with the will of its population; naturally the Polish interests, especially in the economic field, would have to be fully protected. This was after all in the interest of Danzig as well, for Danzig could not live economically without Poland either, and so he, the Fuhrer, was thinking of a formula by which Danzig would come into the German community politically but remain with Poland economically." Quite the far cry from the claim "Germany wanted Poland to be erased form existence". And even then, so what ? Poland was erased from existence from 1795 to 1918, and did Britain care at all during this period ? Did the Partition of Poland in 1795 start WW1 ? Did Britain raise any objections to Prussian settlement programs ? No.
    4
  631.  @anton2192  Except the Soviets did all that as well did they not? When your entire argument is moralism, it is not "whataboutism" to point out massive flaws in your moral argument.
    4
  632. RESIST!
    4
  633. Much easier to applause "tax the rich", much less applause for "control yourself and stop eating so much" lol.
    4
  634. the problem is that the accepted history that is being "revised" is literally the victors story that went unquestioned from 1945-1960s and books written after that time, particularly using British primary sources becomes the "revisionist" history. Revisionism is a fundamental part of any academic study, it's absurd that somehow it should be a sin in Historiography.
    4
  635. "That Hitler's decisions were all rational, intelligent and considered based on a full analysis of reasoned arguments for and against" Because they were. Of course they would become less and less so the more Germany's situation became dire but in 1941 he was of sound mind and not the "irrational, mentally ill, crackhead" that popular western historians paint him as. "made a simple, quick, choice" yes but Schmider mentioned, this was after an agreement with the Japanese and a year of increasing tensions with the US, had he not declared war then the US probably would have done so a few months later anyway and Germany would have lost capital with the Japanese.
    4
  636.  @oussamaelbaz5932  I did, its the most generic no detailed nonsense compared to his explanations of "NATO expansion led Putin to invade Ukraine". If John was a bit more knowledgeable he could say the exact same thing for Germany "Chamberlain's 'Peace Front' encirclement policy led to Germany invading Poland".
    4
  637.  @chandima339  Americans would hand over tens of thousands of eastern refugees at gunpoint, an episode that the righteous west likes to forget
    4
  638. So you're saying Britain would have been right to start a war against the USA when it decided to expand westward ? Or when it attacked Mexico, or when it attacked Spain ?
    4
  639. And what if France or Britain didn't declare war on Germany ? Then there's no WW2, just like how there's no WW3 since February 2022.
    4
  640.  @Intreductor  I mean his videos are exceptionally traditional and not at all about "lesser known stories".
    4
  641. "Bonnet declared emphatically that Mr Chamberlain had literally saved both our countries from supreme catastrophe last September. If we had gone to war then France would have had only two aeroplanes capable of flying 450 kilometres per hour. It seems that General Georges, who would command the French land forces in case of war, declared recently to Bressy and to Chastenet, that if France had gone to war on that occasion the French Army would have been beaten. And yet, said Bonnet, certain unscrupulous people on the left in France and Britain continued to talk about "les Munichois" as though that were a term of contempt!"
    4
  642. If, upon receiving Russian guarantees, Cuba threatened to bomb Guantanamo, Cuban press ran stories like "guns trained on Guantanamo", with Cuban ambassadors entering Russian embassies boasting of war, if Cuba embargoed Guantanamo etc. etc. would you blame the US for 'starting WW3' if it resorted to military action against Cuba ? Very few Americans would.
    4
  643.  @patmacken5130  And Germany didn't need a "false flag attack" that's why it's so hotly disputed. What majorly pushed the Germans to military action was what happened in early august, the Polish ultimatum to Danzig of August 4th. Yet interestingly no where are you ever told about these events. You'd have to go through the primary sources yourself to find out about them in "Documents on british foreign policy"
    4
  644.  @patmacken5130  "very clearly the aggressor" only to an ignorant. The situation between Danzig and Poland was far from rosy and wholesome. If you need someone else to tell you what to think, perhaps you'll find such information in "Germany, Poland, and the Danzig Question" by Rashid A Holloway.
    4
  645. "claim it back" Taiwan is internationally recognized as part of China and um....the Taiwanese themselves also consider Taiwan to be part of China.
    4
  646. Did the colonists wage a war of aggression against the native americans? yeah but we don't talk about how evil america is do we.
    4
  647. "no one wanted a war, but Hitler." apart from the majority of the British military leadership and British politicians such as the Eden Group
    4
  648. And when you read the primary sources you get brilliant telegrams, like the one from the British commissioner to Danzig on September 4th "it still seems in retrospect that the dentente 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"
    4
  649. Yes, imagine if some history youtuber were to say "alleged holocaust", yet when it comes to crimes against Germans its "alleged" or "exaggerated"
    4
  650. yeah and one of them was pure unthinkable evil whilst the other was "The epic story of America" on History channel.
    4
  651. Would have been able to avoid the whole war if "public opinion". through social media, was alot more educated on German desires for friendship and understanding with the UK.
    4
  652.  @Glasgow_kiss  Well it's certainly not "Syrians" or Nigerians is it ?
    4
  653.  @Smiff1066  Yep. Here in the west some people would say "Versailles caused WW2" in various senses it did. However critically, Hitler actually offered to renounce German claims on Polish territory if Poland gave back Danzig. Very few people know of this fact. Very interesting to think what would have happened if it did.
    4
  654. "liberated"
    4
  655.  @stischer47  As the Russians are currently finding out, war against a peer is not so easy. To pretend America wouldn't take casualties or even potentially devastating casualties in a war with China is just blind American patriotism (or whatever).
    4
  656.  @ЕгорШель-ъ6м  turns out different people have different experiences
    4
  657.  @КонстантинКругляков-г1у  who doesn't hate soviets apart from commies?
    4
  658.  @janys6502  If Finland and Russia were previously having amicable negotiations that the Brits wanted to prevent an agreement between them, then yeah.
    4
  659.  @scotthinzman7698  you should read the book for the full facts. The summary is Germany never planned to invade Poland, Chamberlain heard Germany and Poland were having negotiations about solving their disputes and decided to issue the guarantee to prevent this from happening. But the book I mentioned goes into a lot of detail on the British side of planning and starting war against Germany.
    4
  660.  @TheImperatorKnight  It's pretty ironic when you see Hitler talk and write about social justice plenty of times.
    4
  661. Exactly, Leningrad had far more powerful propaganda reasons to be taken being the birth place of bolshevism than Stalingrad did.
    4
  662. The Times spelling is untenable.
    4
  663. My Favourite one was tommorow never dies, so catchy
    3
  664. They took the wrong train, bless em
    3
  665. ThoseTolerableNoobs ukip isn't anti-immigration just to let you know, no matter what the guardian or channel 4 likes to say
    3
  666. 5:07 "LGBT Need Decent Education" - Haha I couldn't agree more
    3
  667. A man attends a party meeting "proof the tories are running scared" xD
    3
  668. +Jeremy Mine how about the 304 year war?
    3
  669. David Smith tisn't 
    3
  670. No.
    3
  671. Yeah because "celebrating diversity and LGBT" is totally a far right thing to do every week
    3
  672. Surce Riol EU elections are PR 
    3
  673. ***** .... FPTP is a highly undemocratic system even the greens should get more seats with 1M votes, people want electoral reform and it's clearly not just UKIP or its 4M voters.
    3
  674. +K3KCT lol yeah Krishan a professional? I think you should see the comments of his interviews, "tabloid journalism" etc. etc.
    3
  675. racistbullshitspotte Its fairly obvious he's an ignorant lefty, starting off by listing all the common ukip insults to start with
    3
  676. ***** Yep but true to form lefties don't learn.
    3
  677. @ Go ahead and educate yourself my friend. The video is titled "Beck w Berchtesgaden - ostatnie spotkanie", and have a look at the discussions in the comments sections. They're not 'socialist propagandists' they're Poles debating the choices their historical leaders made.
    3
  678. because demanding the self determination of people, at least for America when it goes to war, is not "aggressive" yet Germany was aggressive for demanding the self determination of Danziger's ? Heck, pretty sure every time the British Empire colonised a country it was for "liberty and freedom"
    3
  679. People doubt the traditional narrative of how "Hitler started WW2" because the official narrative omits the British encirclement attempt (which is why Germany sought to neutralize Russia with the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact), the Polish threats of war over Danzig (even if Danzig voted to re-join Germany themselves), the détente with Poland which Danzig sought in July 1939, the Polish ultimatum of August 4th, the Polish military mobilizations or even Hitler's numerous offers of an agreement with Poland from 1938-1939 and the fact that it was Poland that refused to return to negotiations in the very last week before the outbreak of war (apart from a vague response from Lipski in literally the last hours before the intervention in Poland).
    3
  680.  @WAL_DC-6B  and they're all incompetent
    3
  681.  @splifstar85  >Russian Education
    3
  682. Historians seem to repeat themselves probably because "Adolf Hitler's Evil Henchmen and How Germany Started WW2" is more likely to be published and sell well compared to "Edward Halifax's Evil Plot and How Britain Started WW2", given the result of said conflict.
    3
  683.  @paulb9769  and the so-called Conservatives ripped the doors off.
    3
  684.  @-Zevin-  Except actually they would turn it away if they didn't need it. They turned away Marshall aid.
    3
  685.  @MAP1-234  The Soviets were literally using children by 1945. Contrary to popular myth, the Soviets did not have unlimited manpower. Without the western fronts, even in 1944, they would have been even more stretched.
    3
  686.  @MAP1-234  Kids? Yes. Chuikov said that 16 year olds were his best troops in the battles of 1945. Do you also know how many casualties they incurred ? A lot.
    3
  687. Saying people voted to murder jews in Germany is like saying people voted for the lockdown under Boris Johnson. No one voted for either of those things.
    3
  688. the redeeming qualities from his fans, usually Americans, are basically "he liked jews and destroyed europe and gave the british empire to america". Unsurprising really, as to why Americans view him as a hero.
    3
  689. ikr, imagine calling pluto-, I mean, democracy "a cult".
    3
  690. Slovaks, Poles and Hungarians too. The Leaders biggest mistake was not inviting Poland and Hungary to the Munich Conference and thereby clearly make the Czechoslovak issue a multilateral issue, instead of allowing the Brits to dress it up as purely "German aggression against small country".
    3
  691. only fascists would want such a thing. Oh dear, looks like I forgot the /s
    3
  692.  @ewanmackenzie5097  Its not a random quote. It happened numerous times for example the bombing of Nizwa Stronghold.
    3
  693.  @ewanmackenzie5097  Planes were used to bomb African tribes also considering Britain had alot more colonies and rebellions to crush in Africa
    3
  694. they didn't want to give their own party members a vote, they ain't gonna give the country one lol
    3
  695. "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. We should do our best to produce a situation that will lead to war" - Noel Mason-MacFarlane, 28th March. "The Foreign Secretary said that it was clear that if action was to be undertaken in circumstances at all favourable to us, or if the threat of action was to be an effective deterrent, Germany must be faced with war on two fronts simultaneously. Poland was therefore key to the situation." - Cabinet Meeting, 29th 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. "No doubt it would be impossible to prevent Poland from being overrun. The Chiefs of Staff, indeed, thought that Poland would likely be overrun by Germany within two or three months." - Cabinet Meeting, 30th March. "I gather Mason-MacFarlane will approve our action today." - Alexander Cadogan, 31st March. Explanation: Chamberlain feared that Poland would make an agreement with Germany, settling issues between Germany and Poland. Chamberlain also knew that Britain could do nothing to help Poland in case of a war. As for the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact, it was a response to Chamberlain's encirclement policy known as "the peace front", the British were negotiating with the USSR to have their own version of such a pact, only difference is that Russia would be directed against Germany instead of remaining neutral in Germany's favour.
    3
  696. yeah nothing of history matters so why bother talking about it ?
    3
  697. for 90% of boomers it is "the ukraine", most boomers still think Czechoslovakia exists.
    3
  698. Exactly, If some white woman went to a party in South Africa dressed in traditional Bavarian dress then they too would likely be asked about where they're from.
    3
  699. Probably, that is if they interpret the "socialist" bit to mean more like "international communism/ Marxism". Hitler never sought to export National Socialism to other countries unlike the Communist plague.
    3
  700. I've never understood the "arghh spoilers" culture. Knowing a character dies shouldn't take away enjoyment of the other 90+ minutes of a film. Or in video games literally everything else.
    3
  701.  @derantikommunist8500  he forgot alot of countries that were defeated in less than 4 weeks
    3
  702. Behind the forcefully conscripted Estonian Soviet soldiers was the hammer and sickle. Behind the Estonian soldiers alongside the Germans was the sinimustvalge. Nor were the Germans sinking Estonian refugee ships, the Soviets were.
    3
  703. Exactly, I utterly hate bullies. I witnessed a kid get totally harassed by the types of teachers TIK even mentions in this video. And when I see everyone uniquely blaming Germany for WW2, I look into it, and see as TIK would say "but is that really the case". No. It wasn't. Had Hitler had his evil ways then there wouldn't have even been a German-Polish war. It was the british that needed a war to prevent German influence/ power from coalescing further.
    3
  704.  @gandydancer9710  and for Britain it started when they declared it
    3
  705.  @gandydancer9710  I don't know how you fail to understand that it was Britain that chose to go to war with Germany, not the other way around.
    3
  706.  @ssgus3682  That's mostly because the Germans barely even tried. The allies were in total war mode since 1939 whilst Germany didn't enter total war until 1943. Even in 1944 the Germans built 10s of thousands of aircraft. The LW performance in 1943 against the combined RAF and USAAF tells me that the LW could easily have defeated the RAF on its own had Germany not declared war on USA and entered total war in 1939 instead of 1943. BoB was a small skirmish compared to the defence of the reich.
    3
  707. do something in british interests? history dictates that a british government will never do this
    3
  708. "he saved us" from an utterly ridiculous conflict we should never have been in and THAT HE WANTED AND ARGUED FOR.
    3
  709. its pretty grim. "lets send millions of men to die in a war because I gave a private promise to some ambassador and don't want to embarrass myself".
    3
  710. indeed, perhaps strong benevolent states are infact needed to preserve liberty.
    3
  711.  @TheIceman567  just read the wikipedia talk page you're still purposefully ignoring the point that the USA failed its war aims.
    3
  712.  @TheIceman567  I have, and you even included it in your quotation "Historians now generally agree that an invasion and seizure of Canada was the central American military strategy once the war began."
    3
  713.  @TheIceman567  American war of aggression. result: status quo ante bellium. thus an american loss
    3
  714.  @lukeueda-sarson6732  " There is no such thing as "purely military matters";" there is if the discussion is framed as "in military terms", which is usually the case when it comes to "best x of ww2". Whether a general supported the politics of a particular character, shouldn't detract from their military capabilities. Unless of course the debate is "who is the best general from a moralist perspective".
    3
  715.  @lukeueda-sarson6732  you're a bit dense aren't you ? On a debate about "the best ww2 tank", do you take into considerations the political opinions of a tank designer in deciding on what tank was the best during the war ?
    3
  716. broke: britain started ww2 because it declared war on germany woke: britain started ww2 because it didn't declare war on germany earlier
    3
  717.  @Saeronor  yes that henderson, i just said war was directly ordered after polish mobilization which was the final "they're obviously not going to negotiate" nail in the coffin. If it did start on 26th i don't know what their line would be. Probably not much different.
    3
  718.  @Saeronor  Fuhrer directive 1. was ordered on the 31st no? Or do you know if it was created before the 26th ? We simply will never know how Hitler would have justified if he attacked on the 26th as it didn't happen, though as I say i doubt it would be much different to the German reply on the 3rd september. So why was Ribbentrop full of it and what went wron with German-Polish relations? It seemed that the Polish would not budge on Danzig and Hitler clearly couldn't concede on that, the Polish aggression would be press threats on shelling Danzig, local ethnic conflicts in Poland and a polish threat to bomb Danzig that was mentioned. Poland threatened numerous times to the diplomats of all nations that they'd go to war if Danzig either unilaterally voted to rejoin Germany or Germany launched a coup d'etait in Danzig. Could Hitler have just risked a coup ?
    3
  719. The fire bombing of undefended civilians full stop, not just dresden. Allied apologists like to say that Dresden was used by the military but there are plenty of towns that had zero use militarily that were bombed.
    3
  720. "nonsense like the invasion of Poland was the result of a border dispute" If you actually read books about the foreign policy of Germany and the outbreak of war, yes, the German-Polish war was majorly a border and sovereignty dispute over Danzig.
    3
  721.  @officeofpeaceinformation5094  I'm not sure what "death camps" have to do with the Danzig Crisis tbh
    3
  722. It's a dumb statement though. The US wouldn't like it if Mexico or Cuba was given 12 aircraft carriers, thousands of tanks, hundreds of nukes and so on
    3
  723. it is to the belligerents
    3
  724. 56:48 unless Australia/America are the invaders, of course 56:52 unless Australia/America is the bully, of course
    3
  725. Difference is Eastern Ukraine and Taiwan don't have a 95% support for the invading force (Russia or China). Danzig did. But modern discussion around the German-Polish war wholly ignores this for some reason. Probably because it gives actual legitimacy to German intervention, unlike in the case of, say, the US invasion of Iraq 2003.
    3
  726. free health care, workers rights, a happy and prosperous society ? Really ? I don't think so.
    3
  727. It probably doesn't motivate you either that you probably made more money on this video than a Battlestorm video lol
    3
  728. It is not a conspiracy that on the 7th June 2020 Cooper tweeted "This is really important. The strength & depth of response here in UK (& across the world) to the awful murder of #GeorgeFloyd should show us all this is not just about the US - and it’s why we need to do so much more to challenge racism & injustice here & everywhere" which was a retweet of Lammy's "People in this country are not only showing solidarity with George Floyd and other African Americans. We must turn this moment into one of change and justice in the UK too." So why then when Brits show their solidarity with murdered children in Southport is the response to call them "violent far right thugs", deploy "army of police officers" and claim there are now plenty of prison spaces despite claiming the prisons were full just 2 weeks ago.
    3
  729. indeed, as British foreign secretary Edward Halifax said "the alternative policy of assisting Germany to develop eastern Europe is impossible as long as the present financial system remains in Germany"
    3
  730. Indeed, there's a reason why Hitler felt comfortable driving down every street in Germany in an open top Mercedes. Unlike the plutocrats who need "The Beast" to travel in their own dominions.
    3
  731. Germany is clearly the aggressor... when you remove all context and details that may make Britain or Poland look bad. Unlike say, the US invasion of Iraq where there the aggressor literally had no reason other than "I don't like their leader".
    3
  732. Exactly. Love how Germany had no right to defend Danzig from Polish economic and military pressure, but the good guys had every right to wage war against China when it refused British opium, when the USA made war on Spain because their ship accidentally blew up, or made war against Mexico when they outlawed slavery, or invaded Iraq because.... but Germany had no moral right to defend Danzig from Polish threats.
    3
  733.  @steveparker8065  " I'm not defending colonialism" Your original comment, heavily implies you support colonialism.
    3
  734.  @peterstaiff2211  Im on about the curry that was invented by a white english woman in the 1700s
    3
  735. "criminal violence has no place on Britain's streets" huh, didn't you kneel when a different community committed criminal violence in our streets ?
    3
  736.  @Bingo_Bango_  Head on down to your university library and tell me otherwise. Even in the 1960s Conservatives wrote books literally saying as much "yeah we started WW2 because otherwise Germany would become too powerful". Countless quotes from politicians at the time such as Vansittart who said quite plainly "We entered the war in 1939, like in 1914, not to defeat Fascism but to prevent a German hegemony".
    3
  737.  @Ohlalatay13  Yeah and Native Americans gave the world potatoes and uh... probably some other stuff.
    3
  738. forcibly taxing people's excess capital is like the opposite of capitalism
    3
  739. Because contrary to Anglo-American propaganda Hitler wasn't this evil madman unconstrained by public opinion or international diplomatic norms. He only wanted to attack Gibraltar if he got permission from the Spanish government. Similarly "why didn't he just invade the caucuses from Turkey", again because he wasn't successful in getting an agreement from Turkey to do such an operation. He failed to get agreement from the Spanish in part because he didn't want to upset the French by giving the Spanish Morocco which was then part of the French empire. In hindsight it would have been better for him to just give Spain Morocco, invade Turkey and weaponize WMDs like the victors did.
    3
  740. No, Al is right, Austria is part of Germany as much as Crimea is part of Ukraine.
    3
  741.  @SoMuchFacepalm  Indeed, you ask a good question "did we fear that Panama and America would come to an agreement and went out of our way to provide Panama with military guarantees and 'warned America not to invade' " ? No, we didn't. We did however fear that Poland and Germany would come to an agreement.
    3
  742. "No one knew Ukraine was the world's bread basket" If we're talking about "people" as in literally everyone, Then no one knows anything.
    3
  743. First 10 minutes be like "October 7th" "Yeah but Israel has been killing Palestinians long before October 7th" "Yeah but people don't know about it so..." repeat.
    3
  744.  @dss6838  you see, shooting civilians is evil but bombing them is just "strategic"
    3
  745. What even is this "credible" shite ? Do you need someone to tell you what to think? Can you not form your own opinion from multiple sources ?
    3
  746.  @SM87692  this is why England and Europe can never get on well, they take everything we say literally in the most negative sense.
    3
  747. 34:49 except the Guarantee to Poland was designed not to avoid war or cause one but to frustrate German influence, had there been no guarantee and perhaps even a Treaty of Friendship between Germany and Poland. What then would happen? Germany would continue to "aggressively" peruse favourable economic deals with European countries such as the one it struck with Romania in March 1939. Had this happened then no one would listen to Britain in Europe anymore and that is what Britain feared.
    3
  748.  @benitolazio8193 Yep Ghandi's friend. From one peace lover to another.
    3
  749.  @LiamTate-b1v  Nope, not saying its "good or bad" at all. But I do like facts and consistency. As I point out, American propaganda would never claim that Poland provoked Germany by signing an agreement with Britain. Yet it is the agreement that France signed with Japan that deteriorated US-Japanese relations, from the American view of course.
    3
  750. and they know Article 5 of NATO, isn't all its cracked up to be, it's less solid than Chamberlain's guarantee of 1939, and we all know how solid that was.
    3
  751.  @rambonatorrrr6694  you for one, don't need to imagine.
    3
  752. December just wasn't a good month for the axis was it ? 1939: Graf Spee sunk 1940: Operation Compass 1941: Winter counteroffensive and war with USA 1942: This 1943: Dnieper offensives 1944: everything
    3
  753.  @aleksanderwielopolski8205  turns out influential MPs such as Churchill are involved in affairs regardless of weather they are currently a minister. Churchill had plenty of meetings and luncheons with Polish diplomats and important folk.
    3
  754.  @NoPrivateProperty  As Stalin and Zhukov admit, the USA had everything to do with it.
    3
  755. I don't know what logic you are on about but 'WW2', commonly a misnomer for the Second Anglo-German war literally did not start until 3rd September 1939. Contrary to revisionist history, there was no state of war between Germany and Britain on 1st or 2nd September.
    3
  756.  @tylerbozinovski427  I see what you mean. However he's still basing his logic on Anglo-Centric history which likes to say it started on 1st September because it relinquishes culpability of the conflict from themselves, even though Chamberlain points out in his speech of 3rd September "a state of war would exist between us" meaning there was indeed no state of war between us on 1st and 2nd.
    3
  757.  @castlerock58  Germany may at most, have chosen war with Poland after the Polish ultimatum of August 4th. But including war time strategic countries just doesn't count. Otherwise we could well say that "Britain needed to be stopped, they chose war when they invaded Norway, Portugal, Iran, Iceland etc. etc."
    3
  758.  @schwartzy65  Because it's just blatant whitewashing of history. Yes they fought Germany for like 1 week. However they spent about 400 more fighting Commie Russia. It's just political pandering to the victors. Imagine if Germany won WW2 and there were movies about how Brits were ackshually an antagonist of a Frenchman. Just daft. It's misleading to the average uneducated viewer. Unless there's some text at the beginning of the movie which explains how Finland killed 300,000 commies and partook in the siege of leningrad that killed 2 million civilians before surrendering to the commies
    3
  759.  @richardvernon317  You're wrong with the helicopter bit, the first helicopter was the Focke-Wulf Fw 61
    3
  760.  @richardvernon317  Sure but it seems to be a stretch to add more conditions on what qualifies as a first lol
    3
  761. we've somehow left the EU but we're still part of it and its laws still apply until december
    3
  762.  @andresilvaguitarr  the conclusion is it was a key part of how ww2 started
    3
  763. Being defeated and occupied by foreign powers for 70 years is what secured peace, not the EU.
    3
  764. Some do actually, I witnessed this myself. And as many point out in the comments, we could say that Poland was the one bullying Danzig. So TIK's whole argument is entirely biased from the British perspective and therefore flawed.
    3
  765.  @petersouthernboy6327  >the fact that you sincerely believe that Fascism was the only alternative to Communism please quote where I said that ?
    3
  766.  @ThrowawayModeller  >Your comments here are disgusting as how you openly support the SS Yes and I presume you support the US army? So that no doubt means you support the murder of French civilians at Point du Hoc right ?
    3
  767.  @jimmyseaver3647  >which likely would've made Manifest Destiny look quaint. glad you pointed that out.
    3
  768.  @morstyrannis1951  even if it may be so, it does not negate the fact that men didn't leave their homes in Oslo or Brussels intending to fill the coffers of German Generals, rather they wanted to defend Europe from communism. I'd be happy to change my opinion if anyone can quote an author who argues most SS volunteers actually wanted to be subservient to Germany and did not join the SS for nationalist idealistic reasons
    3
  769.  @morstyrannis1951  you may be aware that it was France that declared war on Germany. So on that count, everyone knew or had their own opinions on that war, however the much larger and more important war which they joined and many specifically joined for was the one against the communists. Many would be disappointed if they were stationed on the western front.
    3
  770.  @HistoryGameV  Not if the old government was ousted as the Netherlands then had a new government. This is where it is entirely politics. Look at France, France surrendered and a new government was formed under Petain, De Gaulle and "free france" were the traitors in that scenario, yet since the rebel group "free france" was on the side of the conquering Americans, somehow it all gets turned upside down and the "other France" was actually the traitors ?
    3
  771.  @johnjuiceshipper4963  > it’s impressive how historically illiterate you are. shitty insult #234321 >During the late 40’s most Europeans considered the USSR to be liberators see you call me a "Goebbels propagandist" but you clearly are a commie, only commies considered commies to be liberators lol >The ‘threat of Communism’ wasn’t a thing in The Netherlands It was though, if Germany lost the war then the communists would be a big threat to everyone else in Europe, again, no one at that time would know where the Soviets would stop. It was only in 1944 that the Allies and Communists agreed on the dividing lines that they did.
    3
  772. "Justification to the outside world" Germany didn't need any justification other than what they had been voicing their concerns about for months and years previously, that is the treatment of ethnic Germans in Poland as well as the Polish threats towards Danzig they had issued, notably since receiving the British guarantee of March 31st. No "false flag" operation was needed, which is why its existence is disputed. No country invading another has ever bothered with such "false flags" since. The USA didn't bother in 2003, nor did Russia in 2022.
    3
  773. "How X lengthened WW2" is always a funny argument, especially for pro-British authors given that Churchill extended WW2 by 5 years.
    3
  774.  @andrewpease3688  Not really. If that was the case then why did the French sign an armistice ?
    3
  775.  @JLar-bb5hl  Did you not read anything I wrote ? It was British aggression which provoked Germany into securing Norwegian neutrality. Germany wanted Norway to remain Neutral. The British wanted to take the iron resources from Germany and thus planned their invasions under the guise of "protecting Finland". No doubt you just think Germany invaded Norway because "world domination" or some other cringe propaganda trope. You'd notice they didn't invade Sweden which geographically was able to remain neutral from British aggression.
    3
  776. 30:24 - Britain also lost WW2.
    3
  777. it hits because that's what propaganda is designed to do.
    3
  778. Yeah no, the allies did not get along with the USSR lol The entante ultimately succeeded despite constant suspicion from both sides. The allies were suspicious the Russians would make peace with Germany and the USSR was suspicious the allies were just letting Germany grind Russia down without a western front.
    3
  779. "objection argumentative" i'm sorry what, isn't a court supposed to be argumentative ?
    3
  780. Yes its really difficult to believe this guy cared about the Empire when every choice he made was against the Empire's interest.
    3
  781. and even today we're still reaping the benefits of choosing Commie Russia over Europe.
    3
  782.  @castlerock58  Roberts doesn't know what he's talking about either, the only difference between him and Cooper is that Roberts has good rhetorical skill which makes it look like he knows what he's talking about.
    3
  783.  @paddy864  I haven't seen once Roberts back up any of his claims with evidence. He just talks as if what he says is fact when it isn't or at best out of context, which is rather ironic since that is exactly what he accuses cooper of doing.
    3
  784. yeah like 10 years ago
    3
  785. Gosh darn sound is so slow. Love how he jumps inside like 10 seconds after seeing the missile hit.
    3
  786. Indeed the Italy aspect is a very niche area of knowledge. Italy started WW2 ? The Poles make the arguments about "standing firm against Germany", but equally if Italy stood firm against Britain and France, then war might have been avoided.
    3
  787. Yes, I think the whole world owes Churchill a debt for running the british empire into the ground, something no one else could have done
    3
  788. National Socialists achieving more Socialism in 6 years than commies did in 50 really keeps them seething. Similarly; Jesse Owens saying he was treated better by Hitler than Roosevelt has Plutocrats seething to this day.
    3
  789.  @_XPXI  That's alot of words for "no"
    3
  790.  @stupot50english82  If Farage wasn't a tory traitor then UKIP would still be a serious force in British politics after getting 15% of the vote in 2015. Instead Farage left and now the right is split and the media aren't forced to host right wing voices anymore since UKIP or Brexit/Reform no longer get more than 5% of the vote.
    3
  791. The entirety of history and pop culture is literally defined by what happens. If Stalin and Hitler did come to an agreement of alliance in late 1940 then everyone would view Hitler as a socialist and leftist. But since there was the whole German-Soviet war thing, the war time propaganda was Hitler being a sole far right madman. Conversely had the Soviets and Germans allied with each other then all the Anglo-American propaganda would paint Hitler as a socialist best friend of Stalin.
    3
  792.  @sm9667  So what was "their true intention" ? They must have done something between 1939 and 1975 ?
    3
  793.  @morstyrannis1951  No, by refugees I meant ordinary people that the Commies wanted to murder simply for being the wrong kind of Russian. Soldiers are not usually included in the term "refugee". Over 40,000 Estonians alone sought refuge in Germany, most of them were given back to the communists to be murdered by the Allies at the end of the war.
    3
  794. how is smoking weed in the absence of a child "child abuse" ?
    3
  795.  Guantanamo Clay  Yes I posted a comment in the comment section, you did not have to post a rant at said comment. Who cares? Clearly you do lol
    3
  796. "Chat, shut up. Britain declared war?" slams desk
    3
  797. Nope, even that is a myth. Hitler actually offered to relinquish German claims on Polish territory as part of a Treaty of Friendship which resolved all issues between Germany and Poland. The British weren't "defending Poland from German aggression" they were preventing Poland from signing a peace agreement between the two countries. The British government didn't fear war, they feared peace.
    3
  798. US had nothing to do with Versailles
    3
  799. Unlike Kier or Rishi sunak right ?
    3
  800. Germany expansion: bad and leads to war British and French expansion: good and can't possibly lead to war. This is an awful narrative really, the miscalculation of WW2 I am in fact referring to the British Guarantee "to a people whom we know nothing about" and how right Chamberlain would be proven, he thought the Guarantee would be a warning and help Poland in negotiations, instead Poland broke off negotiations and was bolstered in the fact that Germany would also be dragged to war with Britain if Poland went to war over Danzig
    3
  801. hilarious "freedom and democracy is essential". Rules of Conduct: Don't post stuff we disagree with.
    3
  802.  @xuli3961  We're talking about the economic growth of a superpower
    3
  803.  @thebigbrain1573  waddup big brain
    3
  804. 🤣😂🤣
    3
  805. Read Simon Newman's 'March 1939 the British guarantee to Poland' for a look at how Britain unambiguously started it. Maliciously undermining German-Polish relations to the point of enabling Poland to make threats on Danzig and then obviously declaring war on Germany when Germany invaded. As an analogy, would the United States just sit back and cower from Mexican threats on El Paso or Cuban threats on Guantanamo simply because the Russians gave security guarantees to Mexico or Cuba ? I think not, and you know it wouldn't either, the US would do exactly as Germany did if not much earlier.
    3
  806. But I thought nationalism and xenophobia was a "tory" trait no ?
    3
  807. It's worked for the last 50 years, why stop now ?
    3
  808.  @s6edge706  and if you were to interview the people looting greggs, I doubt you'd get any thought that's remotely political much less "far right".
    3
  809. Can you imagine if they got a guest on that said "Germany wouldn't have committed all these war crimes if the Brits didn't start the war ?" .... "the [REDACTED] is a lie" or "Germany is a stabilizing power in Eastern Europe".
    3
  810. When has mainstream view of history ever been accurate to the realities ?
    3
  811.  @georgedrake1501  >Do you suggest the British just stand by as the Germans break more treaties and conquer more independent nations? Perhaps not, but in choosing to go to war with Germany, along with the evidence of planning such a thing, you can't then say "Britain tried to avoid war" when it played a large part in starting the war with its encirclement and power politics in eastern Europe. >respected a single treaty he signed this meme.
    3
  812. It didn't really though. It was the war which Britain unleashed against Germany which had major effects. For example if France wasn't defeated by Germany then Japan would not have 'invaded' Indochina, thus the USA would not have embargoed Japan's oil and thus Japan would not have bombed Pearl Harbor.
    3
  813. yeah peace in 1941 is ludicrous, why would you make peace when you're breaking world records on the number of armies smashed? peace after 1942 is also daft, how could Germany just go back to 1941 borders and pretend nothing happened?
    3
  814.  @samwill7259  Was he as insane as Plutocrats who wrote about the genocide of Germans or partitioning Germany ?. Most allied propaganda films would say no. Writing about the partition of Germany is "fine" but Germans writing about annexing [x] is "insane".
    3
  815. Exactly. Blatant crass hypocrisy from plutocrats episode 5 billion
    3
  816.  @Glasgow_kiss  so who would you say are the natives ?
    3
  817. "We're importing builders to build new towns for an increasing population" isn't quite the favourable argument Polly thinks it is. But then again I have yet to hear or read anything from her that isn't a gaslight.
    3
  818.  @Sergeant_Camacho  Yes sir. Sorry sir.
    3
  819. And I highly reccomend you read Simon Newman's 'march 1939 the british guarantee to poland' for a good study on Britain's contribution to the conflict that unravelled (implication: had britain left germany alone then there wouldn't have even been a german-polsih war, much less a ww2)
    3
  820. if germany only had u-boats then the RN would have focused on anti-sub warfare so building some surface ships wasn't a bad idea, though in hindsight and with better luck the Bismarck and some support ships could have done alot of damage. It should have waited for its support ships before setting off to the Atlantic
    3
  821. its the Bellamy salute
    3
  822. I mean, a nuke or very high yield explosive could render it obsolete no ?
    3
  823. Except if we do not attribute all deaths in the general war to Hitler and look at deaths during peace time, then Hitler is actually at the bottom of the death count list.
    3
  824. Because this one simple question fundamentally destroys the "Britain was only defending Poland" justification. That is even when we are totally ignorant of the scheming that went on during March 1939. I'm seriously thinking about doing a video that exposes the intrigues of the British and Americans from January to March 1939. For just a hint taken from James Forrestal's diary: "Neither the French, nor the British would have made Poland a case for war, had not been for the constant needling from Washington. Bullitt kept telling Roosevelt that the Germans wouldn't fight, Kennedy that they would, and that they would overrun Europe. Chamberlain, he says, stated that America had forced England into the war." this is corroborated by Polish embassy documents in Washington DC as well as Polish diplomatic documents published by the Germans in 1940. And when placed between the diplomatic documents published by the Allies themselves in DBFP and DGFP, along with other sources from government officials, you can start to get a picture bigger than simply "Britain was simply defending Poland from Germany that was clearly going to invade".
    3
  825.  @krainzyrumie6426  except if you read a few books you would find he never even wanted to "take on" Britain, France or Poland, let alone "the world"
    3
  826.  @bolivar2153  "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 Minutes, 30th March.
    3
  827. if pat buchanan said "grass is green" would you disagree on principle ?
    3
  828. better still they have all the windows open because the radiators are on at full blast
    3
  829.  @Mr.Soggywaffleafagous  I was responding to the "we're so back baby" comment. It's obviously a comment I made based on alternate history. There was no guarantee that Japan would mess up so badly so quickly.
    3
  830. And what do you think their "crazy ideology" was? Because their ideology wasn't "war with america".
    3
  831. There's infinitely more context that people are not aware of when it comes to the German-Polish war, namely all the pressure Poland put on Danzig, particularly after receiving the guarantee from Britain. The primary one which tipped Germany into military action was the Ultimatum of August 4th. 80 years later most 'historians' would have you think nothing happened until one day Germany did a false flag and then invaded Poland and wholesome Britain came to their rescue (which we know they didn't).
    3
  832.  @junfour  Why don't you ? Poland is mentioned 3 times in MK and 3 times in a positive light.
    3
  833. "His strategy failed" "Germany invaded Poland" Except his strategy was literally to prevent Germany and Poland from reaching an agreement. His strategy worked brilliantly. Read Simon Newman's "March 1939 the British guarantee to Poland" for the full facts about this part of history.
    3
  834. lol that's just ridiculous claiming uninhabited land that far away from the country
    2
  835. Crichjo32 1000th like... congratulations :)
    2
  836. Yes andy, they are sick of soundbite politicians xD
    2
  837. ThoseTolerableNoobs Why should EU be the priority is that not unfair?
    2
  838. Jack Penman So you're saying brits have no place in ireland... yet if the BNP said muslims have no place in britain no doubt you'd be outraged, why?
    2
  839. Kayzef2003 And where exactly is "Bongo Bong land" and are you saying only black people live in Bongo Bongo land?
    2
  840. The guardian. The whole (left wing) picture
    2
  841. SiBorg Jonnie Douglass Carswell? Watch practically any interview where he talks about how passionate he is about UKIP putting country and people before party politics
    2
  842. Surce Riol are... you being serious like? I don't think you are somehow #nazi  lol
    2
  843. ***** you can still have PR in Scotland,wales,england and NI
    2
  844. lotsofcooki3s ? Enlighten me. 12% of the population getting 0.01% of representation isn't much of a democracy. Whoever you support.
    2
  845. lotsofcooki3s yeah i just can't see it, even on BBC question time the whole audiance is wanting to leave, left wingers, right wingers all want to leave for democratic, sovereignty reasons as well as many others. Yes old people are voting for kids but then again so is everyone else wanting kids to live in a sovereign nation which does not get laws made by another organisation, which government is fully accountable and that we can fully control our own borders etc. etc. You're making it out as if the sky will fall if we brexit... it won't. And like i said old people voted for a trading partnership and have seen what the project has turned into, so god knows what it'll turn into next if we vote to remain (talk about "uncertainty").
    2
  846. he'll probably be killed in the last episode of the last season lol
    2
  847. CaptainShed Spoken with so much common sense you must be a racist, fascist nazi lol
    2
  848. Eds buzzword for "fascism" is "leadership"
    2
  849. +Charlie Wright you could say that for any politician in an interview immediately after an event like this
    2
  850. lol 5 years of Labour and it really wouldn't matter what UKIP support has there would be too many immigrants to keep on voting labour in every time
    2
  851. what a wet "leader" dave is lol
    2
  852. MikeyHNCC1701D sadly it seems the british are losing the diversity of sarcasm 
    2
  853.  @user-hb9mz2hp2g  Because there is a lot more to it than you are naturally educated about. The British were aware that Danzig may be just a 'pretext' but they were also aware it was a bad pretext for the British as well.
    2
  854.  @arghost9798  If China was communist then it wouldn't be a world power with countless prospering megacities. China is alot more fascist than it is communist. They really should drop the Commie branding.
    2
  855.  @Kanovskiy  yeah i know, which is why i kinda guessed he hasn't done it yet
    2
  856. to think Britain was also not responsible would be ignorant also. You should read "March 1939 The British Guarantee to Poland" by Simon Newman
    2
  857.  @alexandredelneste270  yeah and Poland would experience the British guarantee lol (I'm sure you know that the British gave Poland away to the Soviets) after using them as a trojan horse against Germany.
    2
  858. man carrying things: he never fails to deliver
    2
  859. the only conquest germany needed or wanted was ironically the country that supplied them the resources.
    2
  860.  @electronworld4996  given his numerous attempts at getting one, yes. See his conversation with Beck on January 5th 1939 in Documents on German Foreign Policy.
    2
  861.  @electronworld4996  He "invaded" Czechia in March 1939, he made a few offers to Poland before that, his offer of January 5th 1939 was Danzig re-joining Germany whilst Poland retaining special economic rights in Danzig and the Polish corridor being guaranteed to Poland. Basically Hitler offered to be the most pro-Polish German statesman in history. Yet Poland for whatever reason rejected these offers. >He wanted to take territory, period. He was not particularly bothered about Polish territory, contrary to popular belief as I have mentioned he offered to renounce German claims to the Corridor, which would annoy millions of Germans had he done that.
    2
  862.  @samphillips8188  US doesn't have anything to do with British-Italian treaties. "Nonsense" It's not nonsense, the Italians held down more than 2 million Austrians. 2 million Austrians that would have been employed against Serbia or Russia. "the Entente would have changed its strategy" There was no other strategy for the entente other than "fight Germany on as many fronts as possible", they would just have millions less troops fighting against millions more central powers troops. Italy's interest aligned with Italy. They literally had a motto about it "sacro egoism". They just decided Austria was an easier prey. Had the Germans defeated the French in 1914 they probably would have invaded France and tried to steal their land instead.
    2
  863. yeah didn't Mosley in speeches and in print come out against anti-semitism ? So uh, unlike every other anti-semite at the time that would definitely be a weird form of "anti-semitism".
    2
  864. Treason implies loyalty to begin with
    2
  865.  @marekmazurek8459  except they did, read "POLAND AND HITLER'S OFFERS OF ALLIANCE" and pretty much any decent book about foreign relations before WW2
    2
  866. I think their most viewed video is pretty much the same footage without the propaganda commentary. Though they disabled the comments because there was too much wrongthink lol
    2
  867. yeah its the cringe "germans were oppressed from 1933-1945" propaganda narrative
    2
  868. Indeed it's an interesting part of the story. Why did Britain guarantee Danzig ? And not Alsace Lorraine ? It's almost as if they wanted to instigate something.
    2
  869. WW2 was such a disaster for Britain that we've basically made up myths to make it seem that it wasn't too bad. "special relationship", "allies", "victory" etc. Not many "victorious" countries get occupied by millions of foreign soldiers and in financial servitude to them.
    2
  870. 99% of people don't know anything about WW2 other than "allies good, Germans bad"
    2
  871. cringe
    2
  872.  @Biggestfoo  "TIK DESTROYS REDDITORS" 2m views
    2
  873. The main lesson learned, is not to start wars you are totally unprepared for. This was entirely a political mess up on Chamberlain's part. He literally had reports from the British military warning against precipitating a war in Europe. Yet he did just that. And as we saw, it went exactly as expected.
    2
  874.  @steamedham5412  Most "nazis" wouldn't support "nazi policies" and most "anti-nazis" would agree with alot of "nazi policy".
    2
  875. Yes, Churchill won but Britain lost
    2
  876.  @thenewapelles6448  "and yet" indeed, "Chamberlain was an appeaser who didn't want war" and yet he chose to antagonize Germany with his "Peace Front" and ultimately declare war.
    2
  877.  @samsonsoturian6013  the point is that Unions these days do nothing but waste people's time, whereas in the 1930s things like paid for holidays, working hours, and minimum wages were a brilliant new idea. People take these things for granted these days and just think they had always existed.
    2
  878.  @doaftheloaf  yes and from 1933-1939 they tried to court Poland as a partner in going east
    2
  879.  @scottkrater2131  Sure but we know full well they'd be calling the perpetrators "terrorists" and not "totally understandable, fair and square"
    2
  880. Yeah but this is the right kind of banning /s
    2
  881.  @paulrevere2379  No submersible is the correct word, it is generally assumed by most people that by "submersible" we mean submersible and in a usable or functional condition afterwards. Everything is submersible in the sense it can go to the bottom of the sea.
    2
  882. Halder was the perfect capitalist actually. Took all the credit and socialized all the blame.
    2
  883.  @martinmarcinkevic3893  You need to do your research and preferably not from movies. If he didn't care about other countries, why then, did he not agree to Spain taking Algeria and Morocco from the French? He refused their demands because he didn't want to upset the French government who at this point he was trying to court into a proper alliance in the Axis.
    2
  884.  @revanofkorriban1505  Malta was practically defenceless at that point and I would have thought that they would be able to invade Malta given that they invaded Egypt and then Crete in May 1941.
    2
  885. It looks like not wanting to give "guarantees" that are worthless because A) Trump has no intention of starting WW3, or B) would drag America into WW3.
    2
  886. None of Hitler's offers included him stepping down as leader. And even if he somehow did offer that, the Brits would still demand something unfeasible like Germany withdrawing from Poland and/or Czechia. Sadly peace wasn't really possible in 1939, it was a lot more possible in June 1940 however. Luckily for the Plutocrats the Germans failed to capture the BEF, Churchill was PM and Italy declared war on them.
    2
  887. thanks to lend lease
    2
  888. It's pretty ironic that Orwell was a commie and therefore 1984 is arguably based on Fascists/ the right, yet the book resonates highly with the right/ fascists as it describes the Commie world view to a T.
    2
  889.  @wolfmuller6737  precisely
    2
  890. Not to mention some of them were actually able to talk to the policy makers themselves, such as Simon Newman in "March 1939: The British Guarantee to Poland"
    2
  891.  @sky_professor3051  someone didn't watch the video
    2
  892. 11:37 - What does Tooze make of H man's "extraordinarily generous" offer to Poland in 13938/early 1939 ?
    2
  893.  @bobthompson4133  >read original sources not the textbooks with a narrative used today. >I read many interesting papers in the imperial war museum 🤔
    2
  894. or he should have just invaded Czechia and avoided the Munich mess
    2
  895. How and why wars start are entirely opinions and government propaganda. Most people say "WW2 started when Germany invaded Poland". Few would say it started when Poland threatened war with Danzig on August 4th, and anyone that does would be branded a heretic, given that the side that supported Danzig was vanquished.
    2
  896. Indeed, Germany's plans in 1939 at most was a German-Polish war against the USSR and upon successful completion Germany would then demand the return of German colonies stolen after WW1. However of course the paranoid British believed that Germany "wanted to take over the world" after Germany seized.... Czechia. And Chamberlain subsequently stumbled whether maliciously or incompetently into a war which could have seen Germany actually dominate Eurafrasia rather than simply East Europe - a region which accounted for 2% of British trade.
    2
  897. " what does one call a "war of aggression?"" any war involving america
    2
  898.  @robinthehood00  "is the proof of what that kind of ideology leads to." except German ideology at the time was not capitalism or plutocracy.
    2
  899.  @gandydancer9710  "Britain couldn't do anything about it" Too bad our leaders couldn't see that before starting a war.
    2
  900. no, lend lease is the only reason ussr survived and was even able to launch major offensives. there are so many academic thesis you can read up about it.
    2
  901.  @jwadaow  the winners obviously
    2
  902.  @71kimg  you might want to rephrase that, I have no idea what you tried to say.
    2
  903. As Schmider basically says in his book. Invading the USSR wasn't a terrible idea, but invading the USSR and declaring war on USA at the same time as also fighting the British Empire, well that was disastrous as we saw.
    2
  904.  @coachhannah2403  you should probably use quotes when joining a months old 140+ post thread
    2
  905. This debate is interesting because everyone thought they'd lose if war broke out in 1938 which is why Munich happened lol
    2
  906.  @TheIceman567  I have, and you included the same one. I'll go ahead and copy and paste it for you again as you just did. "Historians now generally agree that an invasion and seizure of Canada was the central American military strategy once the war began. "
    2
  907. Any intelligent person wouldn't blame Churchill for starting the war, they could indeed point out, as literally everyone at the time did, that Churchill was a major lobbyist for starting war against Germany. But it was ultimately Chamberlain who was the one in government, who made the decision to "do something about Germany" leading to the guarantee of March 31st, his "Peace Front policy" and ultimately declaring war on Germany. Historians like TIK however simply ignore everything the British did and only focus on what the Germans did, at least on the worst interpretations.
    2
  908.  @TheImperatorKnight  Yeah but my version of [insert ideology] won't lead to [bad thing]
    2
  909. and then gave the victim to the other bully that was beating up the victim along with your chosen targeted 'bully'
    2
  910. When you mention it, yeah he does sound like an old age English speaker. Perhaps older than his actual age though, he sounds more like a mid 80 or 90 year old man.
    2
  911.  @DavidNaval  Yes. Just like How Churchill left Ireland alone after invading Iran, Iceland, Portugal, Lybia, Tunisia, Italy etc. etc.
    2
  912.  @lukeueda-sarson6732  "in defining what history is" I don't believe any debate about "what is the best [thing]" is a definitive investigative debate. It's mostly entertainment and discussion. "You are arguing historians are wrong" You seem to put "historians" in a very high regard, historians are not really any different to literally any other person in history who has read books and done a little bit of research. One "historian" might say x happened because Y, whilst another historian says x happened because Z, both historians can be correct, they just have different opinions.
    2
  913.  @Saeronor  the one on the 30th, as Henderson telegrammed on the 31st "If nothing happens in the next two or three hours, Germany will declare war in view of Polish general mobilization and their conviction that Poland prefers to fight rather than negotiate."
    2
  914. 2:58 in other words the USA
    2
  915. Farage has been the most important person in the tory party for 10 years at least. Notice he didn't stand in the last 2 elections and allowed the tories to win. This time he did not allow that to happen again.
    2
  916.  @officeofpeaceinformation5094  Except it is though if you actually read books about the politics and the outbreak of WW2. If Germany just wanted to invade Poland then explain the extensive German-Polish discussions over resolving their disputes peacefully, particularly from 1938-April 1939 ?
    2
  917. It's funny how foreign ministers have always been the cause of war, yet the narrative is that WW2 was solely Hitler's fault? I think WW2 is no different to any other war in this regard and that it was indeed another war caused by foreign ministers Ribbentrop, Beck, Bonnet and Halifax. Ribbentrop is accused by many diplomats of aggressively urging Hitler to go to war with Poland. Halifax created the "Peace Front". Bonnet gave Halifax the idea of a guarantee to Poland. Beck refused to return to negotiations with Germany after the British guarantee.
    2
  918. well that was an incorrect statement because the soviets built a much bigger bomb and there was no war.
    2
  919. "Adversaries are planning for the long term" This isn't anything new at all. Adversaries of short termism plutocracy has always planned for the much longer term. Thankfully plutocrat Britain has always been there to smash their evil "how about we get rid of these custom barriers" plans.
    2
  920. WW2 started when Britain declared war on Germany, its as simple as that. British apologists like to say "but Austria" or "but Czechia" yet no one declared war on Britain when it was colonizing half the world or America in the 20th century with its aggressions against Cuba, Panama, Somalia, Vietnam etc. etc.
    2
  921.  @steveparker8065  "it was just a joke bro" Then you should add an /s to the end of your "joke".
    2
  922. Read Simon Newman's "March 1939 the British guarantee to Poland". No, Britain did not wholesomely "defend it's ally" as you are led to believe. Britain didn't care much about this "ally" from 1795-1919. This wholesome "ally" that partook in the dismemberment of Czechoslovakia and put forth the Madagascar plan.
    2
  923.  @keithsledger6282  he's talking about manifest destiny, the moral fiber of which the land of the free was formed.
    2
  924. Exactly but TIK and British apologists just can't fathom the concept. Doesn't matter how much you justify it, Britain still started WW2. You could easily justify starting WW3 against Russia for its invasion of Ukraine. Thus far we haven't and thus Russia hasn't started WW3. So therefore Germany wouldn't have been able to "start WW2" if Britain didn't declare war.
    2
  925.  @Chewable396  not in november 1941
    2
  926. As usual, when faced with two options, the British government somehow chooses the 3rd option which is worst of both worlds
    2
  927. haha good one
    2
  928. At least we don't have to learn German as a second language innit.
    2
  929.  @DanielWetherill  what is sarcasm ?
    2
  930.  @TheImperatorKnight  The Polish position over Danzig was by a few ambassadors, seen as aggressive, Burckhardt and Henderson to name two, the Americans also seemed confused as to why Poland was threatening war over any form of reunion with Germany, even if it was one voted for by the Danzig people.
    2
  931. Even when they concede he was elected and democratically appointed by the President, they would say the "seizure of power" was the Law to Remedy the Distress of People and Reich. Funnily enough they never mention the bit where plutocratic Weimar politicians ruled without the support of the Reichstag.
    2
  932. China should just invade countries on the pretext of "looking for WMDs lol". Fairs fair right ?
    2
  933. Unless you're a nationalist and the first rule is to call other socalists "commies"
    2
  934. Oh yes because Iraq with no WMDs is such a threat to world peace unlike the belligerent US with 3,000 nukes. Utterly preposterous when these cretins give such cynical speeches.
    2
  935.  @kleerude  except that's a much more unbelievable statement
    2
  936. "as E. H. Carr has argued, 'the use or threatened use of force to maintain the status quo may be morally more culpable than the use or threatened use of force to alter it"
    2
  937.  Half life 3  that quote does refute his entire fundamental argument
    2
  938. doubt
    2
  939.  @funkymunky7935  One of the greatest immigrant success stories of all time xD
    2
  940. why are the finns even fighting the germans lol
    2
  941.  @russkayaimperiya4918  hardly there might be a couple of marked graves but that's it, you don't have any grand statues of german soldiers do you lol
    2
  942.  @MilitaryHistoryNotVisualized  >People also think I am German, since I speak German, but I am Austrian, same thing lol
    2
  943.  @Toe_Merchant  " Don't act like you read books or academic sources" That's where you're wrong kiddo!
    2
  944.  @TomVegas  yes but obviously its mostly been immigration in the last 20 years
    2
  945.  MrNorthernSol  not bad numbers to say he was unelectable against the whole MSM and establishment
    2
  946.  @rambonatorrrr6694  but you said "Imagine being on the side of a literal fascist", or is Azov battalion just "very right wing" to you.
    2
  947.  @dennisweidner288  How exactly do you think the British Empire came to being ?
    2
  948. "no common goals" like the allies then ? Of course not, no. The allies common goal was the destruction of Germany whilst the Axis common goal was the destruction of Russia. Japan would famously betray this goal in April 1941 with it's non-aggression pact which the Russians broke in 1945.
    2
  949. Yeah just like how Britain "decided" to leave Egypt in 1956
    2
  950.  @user-rv7ge1tc4l  Killing people is sort of human history. Should Americans be ashamed of the mass murder of Japanese civilians and the unleashing of weapons of mass destruction ? I don't think many are. Mostly because they weren't conquered and indoctrinated into hating themselves.
    2
  951. Yeah now compare house prices from 1997-2010
    2
  952. Britain started WW2 by starting WW2, there was no WW2 to join before Britain started it lol. Did Britain join WW3 when America invaded Iraq ?
    2
  953.  @toml1446  point is there was no world war was there? Similarly there would not have been a world war had Britain not declared war.
    2
  954. The USSR was clearly opportunistic in the situation but your argument that somehow they were innocent in their land grab is a bit laughable really
    2
  955.  @Belinuts  And people take even that saying literally. Reality would be "at least we don't have to learn German as a second language" similar to how everyone learns English as a second language due to the victory of America in WW2.
    2
  956.  @IvanLeonard-b7y  "Abandon them to their fate?" That is literally what we did, we had no power to do anything about their fates, other than to promise them to the Soviet Union's orbit. What Harry is suggesting, is that we don't utterly destroy ourselves coming to terms with these facts.
    2
  957. by "worked" you mean "worked in the interests of america and communism" ?
    2
  958.  @dergutehut3961  wars have been started for about 200,00 years before fascism was a thing
    2
  959.  @dergutehut3961  "Didn't you try to imply that Italy doesn't fit into the description of fascsim because it didn't go to war. " No I implied the idiotic notion that a state is "fascistic" simply for going to war. As evidence by 200,000 years of human history. Everything else you say about the generic idea that fascist countries were run on some low IQ notion of strength and superiority is just dumb. Fascist Italy went to war when it felt it was best in its interest (Albania, Greece, Ethiopia) , and also tried its best to prevent wars when it was in its interests (the German Polish war). Like any other state in existence.
    2
  960.  @TheNoobPube  but this report is clearly putting them in a negative spin
    2
  961. Indeed, it is 100% anglo-centric history. Ask anyone in Britain, has WW3 started ? They would tell you no, of course not. Zelensky in his bunker in Kiev on the other hand, would hope otherwise. Similarly in 1940 ask any American has WW2 started ? They'd say no, of course not. Churchill in his bunker in London would hope otherwise.
    2
  962. Well it's a system they all support so, you know. Lie in the bed you support and all that.
    2
  963. What is it with these "socialists" and wanting unlimited cheap labour ?
    2
  964. I bet there's a good portion of people who complain about statue demolitions support this demolition.
    2
  965.  @andrewblake2254  I don't have any because, like everyone else I am not told of them. You're not suggesting there's absolutely no one that acted against the British government like people acted against the German government ? Lack of knowledge is not proof it didn't happen.
    2
  966. and the EU is funded by colonialism so... you know...
    2
  967. or a person that worked on the game/ movie or whatever it is the video is about.
    2
  968. "None of this matters" Yeah, that's kind of the problem with plutocrat movies. The truth doesn't matter in the slightest. Having the Germans as the antagonist of a Finn is just stupid. And even offensive from a Russian perspective given that the Finns were allied with the Germans for 95% of the war.
    2
  969.  @Bingo_Bango_  "England is advising France that they should both go along regardless of Poland. " - Joseph Kennedy
    2
  970.  @Bingo_Bango_  There is also the cabinet paper where Chamberlain literally says he doesn't give a shit what the casus belli for war with Germany is, the idea that Britain was planning on a war with Germany certainly wasn't a figment of Hitler's imagination. >Poland's mistakes earned it an invasion The United States, that great good guy nation, has invaded countries for far less than what Germany endured between April and September 1939. Imagine if Mexico threatened to bomb Los Angeles whilst shooting at American planes, harassing Americans living in Mexico, blocking exports to America and having a hostile press write about Mexican guns pointed at LA all at the same time as military mobilization. What do you think America would do? Poland refused any peaceful revision in Danzig and throughout the months said they'd rather die than give back Danzig, so what else could Germany have done but invaded proper?
    2
  971. Ken's reasoning of dealing with terrorists should also have meant that he would have done a deal with Hitler to avoid the 60 million deaths of WW2. To be historically accurate he would have pressured Poland to return to negotiations with Germany, something which Chamberlain refused to do.
    2
  972. If you think Germany started WW1 then you absolutely cannot say that Germany started WW2 lol, that's the fantastic thing about our victors history "Germany started it because they gave a guarantee to Austria and built their navy to compete with Britain" so what does Germany do in 1935 ? It specifically limits its navy to 25% the size of Britain's navy, and then Britain gives Poland a guarantee but somehow Germany still started that war too. But of course, since Germany went out of its way to avoid competing with Britain, that is not a topic of discussion on how Germany started WW2 lol, lmao even.
    2
  973. bro i'm just pointing out Douglas Nash commented 5 days ago
    2
  974. yes everything these people say can be equally said of America. Breaking international law funding global organizations to parrot their agendas etc. complete hypocrisy.
    2
  975.  @johnjuiceshipper4963  you Clearly would have supported the communists steamrolling the Netherlands, those "cowards" did not
    2
  976.  @morstyrannis1951  So you're saying its okay for US soldiers to murder civilians but its bad for the SS? why is that ?
    2
  977.  @morstyrannis1951  > No one in Holland was forced to fight for the Nazis. Correct and I don't believe I ever said that they were. >Where did you learn history? Countless sources including books and websites. >Again with the Josef Goebbels binary world view. It is you that seems to have a low intellect and binary world view when you only respond to anything with insults
    2
  978.  @morstyrannis1951  > It's quite difficult to find an actual biography of a member of the SS. Leon Degelle did one and you can find that on archive website "memoirs of an SS soldier". No doubt you'd dismiss it as "propaganda" but that's the most famous one we have which scholars also refer to. >i'll stick with their own generation and nation's judgement You mean the American conquest judgement ? Naturally they're going to call these European fighters "traitors" for not helping their war against Germany.
    2
  979.  @3dcomrade  Yes funny isn't it, the vanquished are only remembered for their bad deeds whilst the victors are only remembered for their "good deeds" whatever they may be.
    2
  980.  @HistoryGameV  >A government not elected by the population, No one in Britain voted for the Churchill government either. > Not very legitimate as a government, eh? I mean it was though, I'm pretty sure the French government formed after the armistice wasn't setup by occupiers it was a continuation of the previous French governments.
    2
  981.  @petersouthernboy6327  >January 1944 and July 1945 I think food was a bit scarce thanks to the large war going on at that time.
    2
  982.  @HistoryGameV  >normal internal British political procedures Except the situation in Britain was no more normal than that of France. The French Prime Minister resigned after the cabinet refused to join the Anglo-Franco union which Churchill proposed, then Petain was appointed Prime Minister and requested an armistice with Germany. All legal procedures, not dictated to by Germany.
    2
  983.  @petersouthernboy6327  >miraculously ceased when the Germans surrendered. because funnily enough the war ended when the Germans surrendered and then America supplied netherlands with food from the Marshal programme. The Netherlands had a booming economy during the German occupation and there was no famine then was there? Until the Allied mass bombing of Europe in 1943 onwards.
    2
  984.  @petersouthernboy6327  > That’s another outright lie from you. Except it's not, the GDP of Netherlands grew substantially from its trade with Germany after 1940. there's a reason why the Dutch resistance was non existent until 1944.
    2
  985.  @kyledonahue9315  ok and? In the eyes of these nationalists it mattered not what Hitler did or did not do, it mattered that the large war against communism had begun weather Germany did or did not start X war is irrelevant
    2
  986.  @morstyrannis1951  >You're seriously suggesting Degelle is someone to read? You asked for a memoir from an SS soldier and I gave you one. And yes his book is used by historians.
    2
  987.  @TheGaymo  >You don't understand how the Parliamentary system works when forming a government, Oh and you do? Petain became Prime Minister no less illegitimately as Churchill did.
    2
  988.  @Cybermat47  > why didn’t they fight to defend their country from the Germans I can't speak for the personal circumstances of individuals but one could imagine that some of them were arrested or disallowed, and I can bet that many of them did in fact fight Germany at that time.
    2
  989. "somehow" bruh Germany economically is like 10x the size of Russia, Germany is the most powerful country in Europe, so it's not really a surprise they managed to conquer Europe really.
    2
  990.  @dennisweidner288  is this a jest? Britain signed numerous agreements with the commies giving away Poland to them despite their whole war against Germany being based on "protecting poland" which as we all saw after 1939 was a complete lie. Even the whole "Hitler was untrustworthy as he broke treaties" was a lie, as we saw the British were well willing to enter into agreements with the communists despite them breaking treaties such as the Polish-Soviet non aggression pact.
    2
  991.  @dennisweidner288  when you say "Perhaps you have not noticed, the Soviet Union no longer exists. And this is because of American and British resistance to Soviet barbarity" This is ludicrous and the total opposite from the truth, it is only because Britain and America allied with the Soviet Union that it existed beyond 1942. The Americans were good friends to the soviets until about 1949 or the early 50s
    2
  992.  @qionsaber2870  Yet as previously mentioned no one says "the terrifying Plutocrat B-17 bomber" as the state of Plutocrat America, do they ?
    2
  993. Yet he was taken in by the snake oil war with Germany mob.
    2
  994. The differences between the Ukraine war and the Poland war is laughably night and day. Poland threatened Danzig with bombings and invasions, Ukraine did no such thing to Crimea, Poland mobilized it's army multiple times, Ukraine never mobilized once. Germans in Poland were persecuted, Russians in Ukraine were not. And yet "Germany started WW2". But Russia has not somehow started WW3 ?
    2
  995.  @jj-uy6qs Yeah that's exactly what I said /big S
    2
  996.  @Pledly  except they do have plenty of evidence, perhaps circumstantial evidence, but as others have linked in this comment section. He's not just saying "voter fraud" with no evidence, unlike how the BBC makes it out to be.
    2
  997. Or more accurately, should be "The American Conquest of Europe 1944-45”
    2
  998. That's pretty much what every other European empire in history did.
    2
  999.  @guillermozalles9303  "Rome brought the rule of law to new territories, medicine, roads, architecture" You kinda missed the bit where the Romans genocided most of the inhabitants first also, right? One could say that Germany planned to bring roads, hygene and basically European civilization to the vast swathes of Eastern Europe/ Western Asia
    2
  1000.  @guillermozalles9303  Well they were planning to build roads, cities and the expansion of Europe. They weren't offering much to the natives in the same way the Americans didn't offer much to the Native Americans. Yet are you glad the America was colonized ? It's pretty funny how the same conservatives and Americophiles who say Germany was evil for wanting to colonize Russia are the same people that would also say "who can argue the colonization of America wasn't a good thing?" they argue "It's a good thing that a wasteland was turned into a multitrillion dollar civilization. Similarly had Germany successfully achieved it's goals we'd be saying "who can argue it wasn't a good thing that Germany colonized Russia, they turned a poohole into a multitrillion dollar extension of Europe?"
    2
  1001. Churchill inherited the British Empire and a vast wealth, he left office leaving it in ruins, occupied by a hostile foreign power and a penniless treasure. If you think Liz Truss was a terrible Prime Minister for jeopardizing the economy then it's entirely illogical to think Churchill as "the greatest". Was Churchill a villain ? If you argue that Hitler was a warmonger, then Churchill was an even bigger one, he was the only minister to vote to join WW1, campaigned for WW2 and even planned for WW3.
    2
  1002.  @bradleycox472  and ? "The Isle of Wight has never been under the control of the Labour party" wouldn't mean it's an independent country.
    2
  1003. Yeah this sounds like Myth, the Brits regularly blamed the Australians and South Africans when things went bad in North Africa.
    2
  1004.  @88porpoise  "That just flows naturally from Naziism" General feeling of superiority is not "nazism". Take modern America, they would always say their armies are the best and superior to smaller weaker allies. That's not "nazism".,
    2
  1005.  @88porpoise  I mean, like I said, it formed a "fundamental part" of Germany at the time, still probably does for many people lol You don't need to be a "nazi" to say the German Wehrmacht was superior to the Romanian Wehrmacht.
    2
  1006. - CNN
    2
  1007. Imagine what this guy would be saying if it was Iran or Russia that attacked UN peacekeepers ? We all know the double standards are astronomical.
    2
  1008.  @mourenx4777  yeah, I have a feeling China will show us how economic partnership works better than militaristic imperialism
    2
  1009.  @Brommear  yes, you should read Simon Newman's "March 1939 the british guarantee to poland". Roberts wouldn't want you to, but the book actually studies British policy of the time.
    2
  1010.  @bezahltersystemtroll5055  Thing is everything in history is a gamble. Declaring war on Germany in the first place was a gamble for Chamberlain. Any event in history could be considered a gamble. The only "good decisions" are gambles that payed off.
    2
  1011. those who argue 1 September 1939 could argue WW3 started on 24 February 2022
    2
  1012. "everyone who doesn't agree with me is a bot" zero seats
    2
  1013.  @TheImperatorKnight  just do it, sometimes (in fact every time for me) a video over 12 hours is still accepted
    2
  1014. So do you also think the British Empire should have intervened (aka start WW1) against the USA when it was geocoding the natives and aggressively expanding against all it's neighbours ?
    2
  1015. Hess's peace attempt is known, Hitler's many peace offers are known, Goering's peace attempts slightly less known whilst there are none attempts from the Brits. It's almost as if the Germans didn't want war but the Brits did.
    2
  1016. "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. The British ambassador to Danzig was an agent of Putin ?
    2
  1017.  @bolivar2153  Atlanticism had a huge part in the outbreak of WW2. Halifax and Chamberlain were OBSESSED with the 'public opinion of the United States'. Joseph Kennedy said to both Herbert Hoover and James Forrestal that Chamberlain was forced into the war by the USA. The reports by Juliusz Łukasiewicz showed as much. Quote: "from what Bullitt told me, the British government was very much concerned with the American opinion and wished to maintain close relations with Washington. I was very pleased that Ambassador Kennedy's conversation with Chamberlain had led the latter to adopt a surprisingly firm stand on Danzig." The Poles would also lament the Brits at this obsession with America in September 1939. The Poles wanted the Brits to bomb Germany, but the Brits refused 'for fear of upsetting American public opinion'.
    2
  1018.  @bolivar2153  It's not flawed at all, it's quite understandable when you see the Chiefs of Staff report: "The Prime Minister suggested that it might be convenient to examine the second report of the Chiefs of Staff Committee, the conclusions of which can be found in paragraph 22: If we are compelled to enter such a war in the near future, we would be confronted with a position more serious than the Empire has ever faced before. The ultimate outcome of the conflict might well depend upon the intervention of other powers, in particular the United States of America." - Cabinet Meeting, 26th January. So you can understand why Chamberlain was so willing to appease the Americans, based on the advice of the military. "citing Joseph Kennedy as evidence is problematic" This is the flawed logic. He was directly involved in the events concerned, you can't just dismiss his diary, memoirs and dispatches.
    2
  1019.  @bolivar2153  Not to mention the key tool for any historian is corroboration. Whilst it's difficult to corroborate telephone calls, you can corroborate things like Kennedy's influential conversation with Chamberlain at the command of William Bullitt, under the influence of Juliusz Łukasiewicz, in addition to Bullitt's own fear of: "If Poland rejects the British offer of an alliance, as seems possible, all resistance to Germany would cease in the eastward of French boundaries."
    2
  1020. @ When you have one single quote, it is indeed a "cherry pick", when you have several, it is no longer a "cherry pick".
    2
  1021.  @Edax_Royeaux  except Italy still might have not come to germany's aid like it didn't in 1939, despite having an alliance with Germany. Alliances and pacts are merely scraps of paper, as has been stated by world leaders many times throughout history
    2
  1022.  @TheMightyMidget  my dude, he was also a 'supremacist'. Pretty sure he wrote and spoke alot about the supremacy of the Anglo-Saxon race lol
    2
  1023.  @TheMightyMidget  "he didn’t lead ww2 England to victory" This is supposed to be sarcasm right? But what part of being occupied by a hostile military power, bankrupt and on rations for another 10 years describes 'victory' to you ? Churchill was a complete disaster for this country on literally every aspect. From direct military incompetence during WW1, campaigning for WW2 against Germany and even planning and campaigning for WW3 against Russia.
    2
  1024. Yeah lest we forget we have a statue to the only minister who wanted and voted for WW1
    2
  1025.  @dandare2586  why thank germany? you should be thanking Chamberlain or Poland
    2
  1026. If the German economy was so bad then why did Britain go broke 4 years before Germany did lol
    2
  1027. They introduced many workers rights and improved workers living standards and happiness. That's what they did. The most fundamental point of a workers union.
    2
  1028.  Ahmet Kadir Yılmaz  Given that the Germans lost it seems that rushing Moscow may have been the better option. Though the Soviets still could have been in a bad position had the leader not split AGS.
    2
  1029.  @Saeronor  "Neither did Poland threaten to bomb Germany" No but they did threaten to bomb Danzig. Numerous times.
    2
  1030.  @Saeronor  "Garbage" Literally everything I said was a fact. Deny it all you want. "this "desire" to form an agreement is an invention of yours" Hitler and Ribbentrops conversations with Beck would say otherwise. But let me guess "Hitler lied all the time apart from when he said something about invading a country or something that reinforces my views" "Britain did nothing similar in 1934 " Britain hadn't spent the previous several years making a fool of itself in European politics, laying down ultimatums and not living up to them. From Italy in Ethiopia or Czechia in 38,39. "is your fabrication based on incredulity." It's an opinion shared by the King of Italy, regent of Hungary, foreign minister of Romania and numerous diplomats. So not quite a fabrication, unlike the "Germany invaded Poland because of the Glewitz incident" myth you probably subscribe to. "I believe we covered that one already," Perhaps but just to be sure here's Poland's position in August: "In Beck's opinion the best chance of maintaining peace is for us to remain calm and firm without any compromise to negotiate". "and yet Germany, despite having far larger army already at that point, did not "intervene"" Indeed, no doubt Germany still hoped for a compromise from Poland. After months of silence and "aggressions" (I am putting this in quotes because no doubt it would offend you to suggest that threats to bomb Danzig were "aggression" even though I bet you'd call a German threat to bomb Warsaw as "aggressive") from Poland, it became somewhat clear this wasn't going to happen.
    2
  1031.  @daznis  yeah just like george floyd was on drugs and screaming "i can't breath" before the cops even did anything to him but that doesn't matter when a video is posted online does it
    2
  1032. "England is advising France that they should both go to war regardless of Poland" How about a look at events from the British side? Or are you guys just going to pretend that Britain and Poland didn't exist as well ? It's interesting how we can now say Germany wasn't alone in the events of 1914. We're not long from universally accepting that Germany wasn't alone in the events of 1939 either.
    2
  1033.  @luispalou217  So A british lad fighting against the communists was a "tratior". Tell me, what do you consider the actions of Churchill namely the surrender of the British empire and its gold to America, the Atlantic Charter and the many other efforts he took to subjugate this country to america ? That to me, was high treason. No "blitz" did as much damage to Britain as Churchill did.
    2
  1034. tbf the only reason the USSR won was because of Western Aid. Without it they would have lost and would lose against the wallies.
    2
  1035.  @dewilew2137  the context of the joke is common stereotypes. which is rather quite obvious honestly
    2
  1036.  @Saeronor  >As evidenced by a monumentally different geopolitical scene
    2
  1037. because Britain still stuck to the antiquated balance of power doctrine and russia wasn't much of a threat as Germany was. simple as. Germany offered time and again for Britain to allow Germany dominance over Europe in return for Germany to protect the British empire but Britain just refused. And, well, both Britain and Germany lost the ensuing conflict.
    2
  1038.  @Alakarr  Ultimate German victory would have seen it control and have direct access to resources in Africa, Europe and Western Asia. That is most certainly more resources than that of North America. Controlling Europe by whatever means, either a federation or direct control, Germany would also have as many, if not more, ports than America to build its fleet. Thus such a power would indeed be able to challenge the US in the longer term. Much more than the USSR did in our timeline, and in our timeline you had the USSR planting missiles on Cuba.
    2
  1039. his point, as always with far left extremists is that "white people bad"
    2
  1040. yes a simplistic solution is exactly what eastern europe needs cough versailles, trianon, Saint-Germain-en-Laye cough
    2
  1041. I mean, Napoleon is widely regarded as a "military genius" yet he made several critical mistakes which led to his utter destruction. So on that basis you could also say Hitler was lol. He arguably saved the Wehrmacht in December 1941, yet of course made critical mistakes in 1942 by splitting AGS.
    2
  1042.  @georgedrake1501  yet another one of my long ass fkn comments vanishes for some reason >they didn't choose to go to war except they did. read this - https://history.state.gov/historicaldocuments/frus1939v01/d82 >what right does Hitler have to invade these sovereign nations? to get back Danzig which everyone who lived in Danzig wanted to do so, the allies in ww1 didn't even hold a referendum because they knew what the outcome would be >examples of treaties he honoured he honored them like any other country does. Look at violations of international treaties committed by Britain or america yet they come up with dumb excuses, its no different
    2
  1043.  @thefrenchareharlequins2743  the pyramids
    2
  1044. "we're in a race with the Germans" lol, the Germans were researching atomic energy for... energy, not destruction. So they didn't even have have socks for this aeroplane race. Not to mention the Germans surrendered months before the Trinity test.
    2
  1045. Likely not, in the 80s China was like any other Commie country. A threat, a large army but not very modern, undertrained etc. Very different to China today which, for example, is expending 5x more missiles than the US does in training exercises. Fighting China in the 80s would have been like a Vietnam, fighting China today could be more like a Stalingrad for the USN.
    2
  1046.  @HW-sw5gb  "Accidentally made the reservations smaller and smaller" lool
    2
  1047.  @HW-sw5gb  "There was never an industrialized process of mass murder" But there was still a deindustrialized process of mass murder through wars and atrocities. The first use of biological warfare was against Native Americans. I think the consensus is that most people are apathetic towards genocide when it is conducted, in America, Turkey, Germany or wherever. Of course when they get conquered by foreigners who show them how evil they've been, naturally they're all "oh yeah we totally were against this #GermanResistance" It's no coincidence that suddenly everyone is a resistance fighter or communist when the other army occupies their country.
    2
  1048.  @Bazzyboss  ah yes the "conservative" party we've had that's enlarged the state, payed people to not work, record immigration etc. etc.
    2
  1049.  @Glasgow_kiss  Do you honestly think the modern day Syrians are the same Syrians that lived in that area 2000 years ago? Imagine calling others "hard of thinking" when you are like this. It's not even funny.
    2
  1050.  @TheImperatorKnight  Ah my bad, thought this was the one was from may 1939 Also Chamberlain never intended to appease Hitler, if he did, there simply wouldn't have been a war. He sympathized with reversing Versailles but was well against any German eastern empire.
    2
  1051. They misjudged American industry by about 2 years though, they predicted the US industry wouldn't max out until 1945. Turned out the US maxed out by 1943.
    2
  1052.  @yaziquexful  Yes. The "left wing" position is supporting Palestine, democracy and the principles of international law.
    2
  1053. Yeah but if you have shit tactics then you can still waste all your logistics
    2
  1054. The only reason they'd "blockade" their own country is if a foreign power smuggled in nuclear weapons. Similar to the Cuban Missile Crisis, only difference being is that Cuba wasn't and isn't internationally recognized as part of the USA.
    2
  1055. because they're not smart at all, they just think they are.
    2
  1056. Would people blame America if WW3 broke out over Cuban Crisis? Would people blame America if China guaranteed Iraq and declared war on America after it invaded iraq? Essentially it all boils down to "Britain/America does it, it's good. Anyone else does it, it's bad"
    2
  1057. Randomly clicked somewhere in the video "that's a very good question" "Im part of the conservative family". These people literally get brainwashed to say these lines lmao, they all talk the same way.
    2
  1058. Don't you mean "far right thugs" or is it only "anti-government protests" when it is a foreign government ?
    2
  1059.  Simon McCreath  Well, I get your majority point about soldiers at the front. But without the USA and it's industry. The Axis would indeed have won. It's not certain but it's very likely.
    2
  1060. it wasn't really "Anglo" relations, it was quite literally Churchill-American relations, it's why Churchill is such a big hero in America. Before the half-American came along Britain was a rival of America, as America even during the war treated them like an enemy more than an ally. It's why the Germans were so confused as to why Britain preferred to be treated this way than ally with Germany against the Americans.
    2
  1061.  @bolivar2153  The problem is you and most historians use selective quotes to paint this as Hitler's entire policy, and not simply an obvious front to his generals AFTER the events. He isn't going to make himself look weak and indecisive, like he actually was, of course after being spurned by poland he would then say "oh actually yeah i never cared about danzig we must prepare for war" etc. etc.
    2
  1062. Indeed, the why is absolutely never mention for obvious reasons, it annihilates any "just defending Poland" myth. Here's just one quote which sums it up fairly well: "The Foreign Secretary 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.
    2
  1063. There's plenty of videos where guys go around asking Americans if they support certain quotes. All of them say yes. It's not too hard to be "brainwashed" by one man when the vast majority of people would agree with his words of workers rights, equality, the terrible mismanagement of the country under capitalism etc. etc.
    2
  1064.  @ggregd  There's a total difference between being "spent" and "having more limited resources in subsequent offensives".
    2
  1065. @ either OP changed his comment or i replied to the wrong one
    2
  1066.  @robertewing3114  What did Chamberlain say ?
    2
  1067. @ he also said it was a delaying tactic and that Hitler missed the bus by not going to war in 1938
    2
  1068. @ Indeed, everyone talks about operation sealion occuring in september or even 1941, what German generals like Kesslering argued, and the British military and establishment feared, was a german invasion in june or july.... the germans never actually planned for victory in france.
    2
  1069. Yes but if you watch the video Klaus explains how Germany tried to avoid war throughout this period.
    2
  1070. >implying a modern war would last long enough for allies to matter much. see ww2, how many countries got squashed by germany without much help from the allies
    1
  1071. Chris Taylor who are the people being oppressed exactly? 
    1
  1072. oldskool4572 well maybe not mein kampf but the general national socialist jist like here http://research.calvin.edu/german-propaganda-archive/pre1933.htm 
    1
  1073.  @Jb-zx2fw  things haven't changed one bit. In fact, much to most people's surprise, things haven't really changed for 100 years. In socio-political terms.
    1
  1074. Mafia 1 tommys death, made me cry nearly lol 
    1
  1075. Hmm... wonder why that is 3:27.
    1
  1076. You obviously don't live in the UK then to say that. They are heavily pro-establishment and daily crap and twist facts on other parties and issues
    1
  1077. ThatGaymer Did i say "its just the left" ? No, but i am yet to see a constructive argument against UKIP, which does not include insults, misinformation or generalizations
    1
  1078. SuperMegaUltraPigeon "filled with homophobes" - Generalization, like "the labour party is filled with peados"  2010 manifesto is not as relevant to this election as the 2015 manifesto is
    1
  1079. SuperMegaUltraPigeon Sure, just like every other party. Just today it was revealed a labour candidate tweeted homophobic messages, is it front page news? No, that's where the whole "left wing media bias" comes from as if it were a UKIP candidate, oho you bet, it would be all over the front pages.
    1
  1080. TheCultivatedMind concentrating too much on snowden
    1
  1081. 'sounds like' dude its common knowledge C4 hates UKIP, people just come here to have a good laugh.
    1
  1082. +Kevin Castleberry lol Obama is your president.
    1
  1083. +ElGrAnTo2k10 because they were discovered by them and not artificially built...
    1
  1084. top 10 worst WatchMojo videos up next
    1
  1085. "including door keypads" oh thanks i never thought of that facepalm now it will actually be easier to get into back rooms as i know sometimes the doors are hidden behind tons of clothing items lol
    1
  1086. What do scots not understand this is the United Kingdom not England Kingodm 
    1
  1087. Must admit Vice is the best for student politics. Not so much for reality.
    1
  1088. 2 days? lol i'd have thought russia would take the baltics by lunchtime
    1
  1089. ThoseTolerableNoobs so you think we should close our borders to the rest of the world but not EU countries?
    1
  1090. Well thanks for telling us all how to rob people's PIN 
    1
  1091. What the hell's a 'scon' 
    1
  1092. +Some guy for a good laugh?
    1
  1093. +Energyflash1979 i think alot of people woke up from the media smearing ukip and farage just like they are smearing corbyn
    1
  1094. +Bob So true. And how racist this country is lol
    1
  1095. +bmarkyt132 yeah only another 5 years until there's another election :D
    1
  1096. Oh ma gerwd you racist
    1
  1097. Jack Penman Don't think anything, why lol 
    1
  1098. Siskin's Bits and Bobs I think he's referring to godfrey bloom, but can someone tell me where bongo bongo land is and who lives there? 
    1
  1099. Culturebreach none really, make your own opinions of things. 
    1
  1100. ***** The Guardian is left wing, that's what i'm saying with their tag line 
    1
  1101. I thought they bought a german gun once, or a nazi german letter thing
    1
  1102. lotsofcooki3s >UKIP >nationalists >suffer upcoming defeat >old voters who were ripped off in the last EU referendum >voting to remain lol
    1
  1103. @@MatthewSmith-yd7vk Was I wrong that a party that hates the country and never wanted to leave didn't implement Brexit like a government that does care about the country and wanted to leave? It's not possible to be wrong about this situation.
    1
  1104. If any country were to become an anarchy then the first thing that would happen is they'd get invaded by a non anarchy government lol 
    1
  1105. +Daniel harvey The chocolate kyle kulinski "Our welfare system is much more than charity because we don't say to rich people please give to the poor... instead we say german people help yourself, everyone must help weather you are rich or poor and you must think that there is someone in a worse situation than me and i must help them as a comrade" link to trump speech that said something like that?
    1
  1106. eloforfree i presume you're about to tell me
    1
  1107. 19:17 terrible. not very well handled lol
    1
  1108. bit of a pointless spoiler alert after spoiling like 5 games lol 
    1
  1109. its not a dlc lol its  seperate game
    1
  1110. If they can't talk to left wing journalists how on gods earth do they expect them to integrate?
    1
  1111. Duncetron he's saying there'd be no france to help just like ww2, germany destroyed france in 3 months
    1
  1112. Duncetron UK could win because France wasn't expecting them to attack lol. So what if Napolean took over Europe? Doesn't affect a hypothetical modern war in the slightest
    1
  1113. +Apemanwithcalculator And no one has a problem with "refugees", which terminology is the foundation of this whole "anti immigrant" debate
    1
  1114. MikeyHNCC1701D Yeah, you're so biggoted you don't understand the wonderful of diversity within different cultures 
    1
  1115. I've never heard such vicious language come out of anyones mouth other than from the "compassionate, caring, loving and open minded" left
    1
  1116. @ And either accidentally, on purpose or accidentally on purpose. Chamberlain dropped Britain into the dispute.
    1
  1117.  @bolivar2153  Indeed you make a good point that he never actually planned for war against Britain.
    1
  1118. "Ukraine is in deep trouble" John has been saying this for way too long lmao He, or someone like his arguments, said that Prokrovsk would be captured in mid September 2024. Ukraine just pushed the Russians back from there the other week lol.
    1
  1119. its an allied propaganda film, of course they'd allow it
    1
  1120. "So we just lost our whole army in France but fear not people! We can still send all our gold and navy to America and ignore all our boys who have now been captured" isn't really that inspiring to be honest. No one can ever tell the morale impact of losing the BEF, I think Churchill said as much it was mostly a morale victory rather than military.
    1
  1121. No he did not campaign for the tory government.
    1
  1122.  @fidel-3470  "they call themselves communist so they must be communist" And yet I bet you also say "Just because the DRNK says they're democratic doesn't mean they are" or "the national socialists weren't socialists just because it's in their name"
    1
  1123. "We always need to stand up to bullies and aggressors" unless of course America is the blatant bully and aggressor
    1
  1124. Not to mention the context of said invasion was that; if there were millions of Americans in Mexico being brutalized on a daily basis for several decades, Mexico was threatening to bomb San Diego, then we know that very few Americans would hold their government responsible for invading Mexico, much less so would they say "yep it's totally our fault that Russia declared war on us, we started WW3 by defending San Diego and the American community in Mexico".
    1
  1125.  @electronworld4996  It was about preventing the USSR from allying with Britain
    1
  1126. Well without lend-lease Germany takes over Eurafrasia and the USA no longer has the European market to sell its crap to. There would have then been a cold war between Europe and America and who knows what would have happened.
    1
  1127.  PumpkinHeadPro The_Minecrafter  Nope but i'm an italian nationalist anyway ;) Main point is how whitewashed "history" is, especially in the Anglo-Saxon world. How we never mention anything that might change the narrative from "everyone else is bad" to "are we the baddies?"
    1
  1128.  @Chineseconcrete  Nah the evidence is based on his other videos, if it's something Germany does then it's presented in an insidious way. If the allies do it then it's brushed over like I pointed out.
    1
  1129.  @thetruereality2  there's nothing not simple about the sentence I gave.
    1
  1130.  @ChaffyExpert  "as far as I'm aware"
    1
  1131.  @oneandonlyk1ng  yeah a "but Britain broke its promises to Italy" is simple enough.
    1
  1132. This is what The Boys warned us about!
    1
  1133. uh no, they went as germans and came back as germans
    1
  1134. Ehh, in 2004 since the internet was still fairly new, we used to search very vaguely like "music" or "news", whereas 20 plus years later we are searching much more precisely than that.
    1
  1135. We pay reparations for 19th century slavery then they can pay reparations right back for 16th century slavery and we can call it even and all get along forever right ?
    1
  1136. Basically when he says the Italians weren't racist, he means they weren't as nutty as the Germans. The Italians were as racist as the Americans or British at the time.
    1
  1137. I'm making a video that will expose the can of worms that is actually the pressure from the USA. Roosevelt and pro-war diplomats like Potocki and Bullitt, pressured Chamberlain into war in 1939. My educated guess is that the USA threatened to withdraw aid if Chamberlain didn't start a war in 1939, and a war between Germany and Britain broke out in 1940 or later. Edward Halifax also believed war would happen anyway, so the Poles, like Halifax believed that they should encourage war in 1939 instead of letting Germany get stronger peacefully.
    1
  1138. you'd have to be pretty incompetent to destroy such a simple structure in a mishandled way
    1
  1139. This is easy to say when America never sustained any major defeat.
    1
  1140.  @allangibson2408  Not really though, being overwhelmed at lightly defended garrisons isn't the same as a major defeat i.e. if the USA lost its fleet at Midway. That would have tested the resolve of the American public, however the USA suffered no such defeats, even Pearl Harbor didn't really do much, the Americans lost about 1 Battleship with everything else merely damaged.
    1
  1141.  @thethirdman225  I agree but then we attribute everything the Germans did to "nazism" don't we ?
    1
  1142.  @thethirdman225  you point out that it was geopolitics and not ideology. Same reason that Germany wanted to expand eastwards, was geopolitics and not ideology.
    1
  1143.  @thethirdman225  Yeah but then he disowned that book and acted more geopolitical, see the German-Soviet talks and even Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact. Imagine telling Hitler in 1923 that he allies with the commies lol
    1
  1144.  @thethirdman225  or what about the German-Soviet talks where Germany offered Axis membership to the Soviets ?
    1
  1145. @@dropkickthedecepticon4009 That's like saying "Manifest destiny would never let Canada or Mexico exist". Germany was entirely focused on Russia, not Poland.
    1
  1146.  @TomislavPuklin-wz1bl  USSR also annexed Poland. "granted it statehood" as a Russian puppet. 100% chance that you don't know Germans also offered to grant Poland statehood post war (the brits rejected this multiple times).
    1
  1147.  @TheImperatorKnight  I thought you didn't care about being called names ?
    1
  1148. They were offended by promises of "feeling war in the future". 99% of these comments seem to ignore the bit that set Trump off. When wanting to get security guarantees from the U.S., promising them war is not a very smart strategy.
    1
  1149.  @Paciat  I imagine we'd all still be blaming Germany for war if it was the Germans that maliciously undermined Anglo-Irish relations, went around Europe looking for allies in said war and then ultimately declared war on Britain after refusing a peace conference.
    1
  1150.  @Paciat  Why do you include war time invasions that otherwise would not have occurred ? Or do you think the Brits would invade Iceland, Iran, Norway, Portugal and Lybia outside of the war ? "Germany one day invaded Poland". You should read Simon Newman's "march 1939 the british guarantee to poland" and then read the primary sources of the diplomatic communications in "documents on british/ german foreign policy" to get the full picture yourself. Germany wanted and tried to get a peaceful and by (German) standards a very amicable deal with Poland. It was the British that feared Poland would remain a partner of Germany instead of an antagonist and thus sought to undermine their relations with Germany. Even if we pretend the narrative is as simple as "Britain merely defended Poland from big bad Germany", it was still Britain that chose to start a war against Germany. Has Russia started WW3 for invading Ukraine ? Did the USA start WW3 by invading Iraq ?
    1
  1151.  @Paciat  "You think Hitler raised his army for not fighting at peace negotiations?" Yes actually. In 1930 and 31 Austria and Germany sought to form a peaceful, cordial trade relationship. Germany had no army, the French did not want this to happen and threatened Germany. Had Germany had an army, France would have had no position to dictate upon Germany and Austria's bilateral trade relations. So it was actually proven that you need an army even to have a peaceful and wholesome economic existence.
    1
  1152. Nah even in the trailer you can see it's the "we invented world ending WMDs but its ok because the Germans".
    1
  1153. I don't get it either, Man Carrying Thing has only ever produced family friendly content like "Spider-Man Rips and Tears Elsa". Just what is YouTube doing these days ?
    1
  1154. Eh, this is literally what those men fought and died for. They were fighting for a society like this, not a happy homogenous society like in Germany which they sought to destroy.
    1
  1155.  @HMDHEGD  Yeah like Roosevelt in 1939 asking everyone not to bomb civilians, and then a few years later unleashing weapons of mass destruction on 200,000 of them
    1
  1156. Ah yes because an immigration tally of 700k and 50,000 illegal boatmen arrivals is definitely something you would expect under a BNP government
    1
  1157. This is the hilarious contradiction with his stance. Germany was merely invading Poland to prevent encirclement by the NATO-esque security framework Britain was trying to set up.
    1
  1158. >it was the Germans and the USSR. Except we wouldn't even be talking about a "WW2" if it wasn't for Britain.
    1
  1159.  @gastonbell108  I think Joe means when GI's go outside of the US bases.
    1
  1160. 0:13 😂😂
    1
  1161.  @maxfan1591  Read Simon Newman's "March 1939 the british guarantee to poland". That is a 300 page refute.
    1
  1162.  @maxfan1591  TLDR; The Germans were negotiating with the Polish on a Treaty of Friendship, such a treaty would have seen Danzig return to Germany and German-Polish relations improve considerably. Such a Treaty would have taken away "the Eastern Front" which British military leaders knew was essential in any hypothetical war against Germany. The British were not some cartoon benevolent power simply "warning Germany not to invade", they specifically sought to prevent a German-Polish agreement at the risk of war. The book goes into a lot of detail about it.
    1
  1163.  @maxfan1591  Two small exceprts: What finally convinced the British Government that this policy had to be adopted was the fear that Poland might give in to pressure from Germany to remain neutral in return for some acceptable solution of the Danzig problem. The British had to prevent this eventuality because they considered that it would be detrimental to their interests; so detrimental, in fact, that they were prepared to risk a war to prevent it. Such an agreement, coming in the wake of a long string of German successes culminating in the occupation of Prague, the annexation of Memel, and treaties with Slovakia and Rumania, would represent a further blow to Britain's prestige and influence and seriously undermine her power to organize resistance against Germany in the future. Furthermore, it would mean the loss of the eastern front which strategically was essential in a war with Germany. These were the options which the Foreign Office had all along been trying to keep open. Rather than accept their foreclosure, the British preferred to go to war. Of course it was recognized that the ideal 'long and durable' eastern front was a combination of Poland and the Soviet Union. But the Russians were considered unreliable allies, unless directly threatened. The demonstration that Poland could be won for Britain might arrest the slide towards Germany that was gathering such rapid momentum. At the time, not even Churchill quarrelled with this appreciation. What was the alternative? To insist on Russian participation at the outset, it was feared, might throw Poland into Germany's arms, thereby creating a buffer state between Germany and Russia, a zone of benevolent neutrality as wide as Germany herself with no hope of a Russian challenge in the future and ensuring freedom of action for Hitler in the West. But the position of German hegemony that this implied was precisely what the British 'peace front' was supposed to prevent. Furthermore this extension of German power would once again have been accomplished overnight and without a struggle; another 'bloodless victory', as Halifax might have put it. On the other hand a Polish commitment against Germany would almost certainly result in open conflict between the two countries, leaving Germany victorious and Russia threatened, while reducing the pressure on the West and creating the prospect of a more viable eastern front. The problem was that the Poles would never commit themselves against Germany without a commitment from Britain. It was ironic that this meant a promise to uphold the status quo in Danzig, the most volatile spot in Europe. For the British had always considered it to represent one of the strongest cases for revision in favour of Germany. It seems reasonable to argue that in choosing the path that they did in March 1939, the British Government took upon themselves a certain measure of responsibility for the conflict that ensued. They were fully aware of the probable consequences of their decision. The guarantee reduced the likelihood of a settlement between Germany and Poland and increased the probability of a clash between them. It is hardly acceptable to argue that Beck would have been intransigent anyway, even admitting that his attitude towards Hitler's hitherto rather polite initiatives had been firm all along. For we simply cannot predict how Polish policy would have evolved without the guarantee. What we do know is that there was no agreement over Danzig and that the issue resulted in war.
    1
  1164. Indeed they did a brilliant series on WW1 completely dismantling any notion that Germany alone was responsible for it, WW2 however is still the holy grail of the current world order. Acknowledging the truth will only be universal after WW3 I suspect, unfortunately.
    1
  1165. Hitler didn't need the personal experience of other cultures to come to the same conclusion as Churchill did which was "some cultures are better than others"
    1
  1166. Hitler also said that the allies would never eject the Germans from positions in Normandy. There doesn't seem to be a "Hitler was obsessed with Normandy" narrative. Is there?
    1
  1167. Yes, hindsight is 20-20. He might as well have bombed Britain into oblivion, after all you're only slandered as evil if you lose.
    1
  1168. No because the Americans won. So doing a video about all the different "crazy, insane, evil" plans that Americans had for Germany, doesn't work for our cause.
    1
  1169.  @hawkevick9184  I like how they make a movie where the Germans are the antagonists despite the Finns killing 250x more Soviets than Germans lol
    1
  1170. The problem is that utterly no one knows what a "nazi" is at all. For Commies and Russians it is anyone who resists Russian Aggression. For Americans, it's anyone who advocates for the political independence of European nation states. Which ironically would conform to the current Russian use of the term. It's a complete mess and you get this situation.
    1
  1171. Yeah, this twat would immediately call out the "DaILy MaIl" it ran a story about how Jeremy Corbyn was racist because of something one of his campaign workers said.
    1
  1172.  @bolivar2153  It was indeed still a problem when the minorities were ruling.
    1
  1173. Europeans: American Empire bad Europeans when America threatens to dismantle the Empire: NOOOOOOO COME BACK! Europeans in 2025: STOP APPEASING PUTIN Trump in 2018: Stop funding the Russians with gas deals and spend more on your militaries. This entire 'crisis' is because European leaders thought the post-WW2 freeloading order would be maintained indefinitely.
    1
  1174. "What are they doing" Well you can't expect MI5 to spy on every Muslim can you? The odd terrorist attack is just part and parcel of so-called multiculturalism.
    1
  1175. he probably just dismisses it as "nazi propaganda" like every other historical fact that contradicts the highly selective "hitler started ww2" narrative
    1
  1176.  @choppacast  I don't, you should ask him on patreon or email
    1
  1177. > post August 1942, Operation Mars ended in December 1942 and was a big success for the Germans though of course overshadowed by Stalingrad and its strategic implications
    1
  1178.  @misterbotanica  I don't know, it's only these quotes you see about him saying that Chamberlain deprived him of the war with Czechia.
    1
  1179.  @sabalight2558  pro-plutocrat / allied propaganda. If it wasn't too obvious the way they demonize Germans and don't mention any context that could paint the plutocrats in a bad light.
    1
  1180. I mean, at the time there was considerable blame given to Russia for "betraying" Chamberlain's Peace Front policy, and 'allowing' Germany to invade Poland. Naturally all of this discussion and blame was ended on June 22 1941 and has been since memory holed.
    1
  1181. Yes imagine if Britain didn't give Poland a blank cheque imagine if Britain didn't declare war on Germany imagine if Poland returned to negotiations they abandoned after the British military guarantee imagine if Poland agreed to the generous deal Hitler offered numerous times from January to April 1939 imagine if Britain and France agreed to the 25 year peace pact Hitler offered in 1936 etc.
    1
  1182. I don't think dobbing people in to authorities is anything new or unique to this country. Remember the blitz spirit? Wasn't that mostly dobbing in neighbours who had a candle lit or the Stasi in Germany etc.
    1
  1183.  @SpiritOfMontgomery  No it just shows that the battles in the east were way more intensive with more men and material. The Germans also cared about their men lol. However in 1941 they didn't have the equipment for hundreds of divisions with millions of artillery shells. They had alot but in 1944 the west could just rely on artillery unlike the Germans in 1941. There was a few thousand km difference in AO size.
    1
  1184.  @33z6i6  Yeah, less than 10k died during D-Day.
    1
  1185.  @SpiritOfMontgomery  not really
    1
  1186.  @33z6i6  or the fact that the wehrmacht had been through 4 years of war and had 80% of it's forces on the eastern front.
    1
  1187.  @33z6i6  they were hardly divisions though on the 2nd western front.
    1
  1188.  @33z6i6  so 1 division vs every american and brit one
    1
  1189.  @waynedonoghue4071  Yes, just like how the USA 'stopped' at California and Texas. Albeit having discussions about annexing the whole of Mexico, did anyone apart from maybe Napoleon III consider the USA be a menace and threat to world peace for conquering the territory it did ?
    1
  1190. Would Times Radio also agree "Afghanistan has every right to attack America" ?
    1
  1191.  @giovannidavinci20  Just adding context to your comment bruh
    1
  1192. Plutocrats use the term "democracy" when they really mean plutocracy. As you recognize, a democracy would not have a deeply unpopular government who rules over 80 million with a support base of less than probably 5 million at best.
    1
  1193.  @remoanersrknts6736  they too are plutocrats but so is the westminster regime
    1
  1194. "What if Hitler killed himself a day earlier" yeah nothing other than the deployment of Sarin gas will make much difference in 1945
    1
  1195. and paradoxically the "second front" by food was probably far more important than a western front
    1
  1196. Eastern Europe accounted for 2% of our trade.... that's not really losing much is it ?
    1
  1197. and that 200k each per writer is before tax lol
    1
  1198.  Pedro Kantor  >No Western country's national survival was ever at stake in the fight against ISIS Nor was it in WW2, or have yet to read a "Hitlers plans for colonizing france" book
    1
  1199. even though the soviets built a much bigger bomb
    1
  1200.  @ryanwilliams3070  James Forrestal diary, dated 27th December 1945, is a massive bombshell. Corroborated by Herbert Hoover and Polish documents published by the Germans in 1940. I haven't checked Harold's diary yet.
    1
  1201. "A terrible nightmare where everyone believes they are right... Russia's future" Is this not more like America or "Western Civilization's" future ? If not also it's entire past ?
    1
  1202.  @hedgehog3180  Alot of their problems also came from you know, being in a massive land war with another large country. The USA would also have had problems with industry if say, it needed 5 million men to invade China with. If Germany didn't invade the USSR then their industry would have been fine and perfectly capable.
    1
  1203. Utterly ridiculous for the propagandist to talk about 'civilization' over footage of destroyed civilization lol
    1
  1204. 10:29 cue laugh track
    1
  1205. Difference is real fascism actually worked and was only destroyed by foreign warring states. Communism on the other hand left countless starving and a terribly ran economy.
    1
  1206.  @jamesdeerwood146  the media's "truth"
    1
  1207.  @boboddyb2217  was there genocide in italy ?
    1
  1208.  @liquidrock8388  "During the winter months, the unrest in Czechoslovakia continued to grow. Slovakia in particular called for more independence which caused the government in Prague to send troops into the province and to install a new provincial government – a mistake, Henderson tells us. One day later, on 11 March 1938, Tiso, the deposed Slovakian prime minister, approached Berlin for help and made his province a German protectorate. Henderson then suggested to the Czech ambassador at Berlin that the Czech government get in touch with Hitler as well; Prague reacted positively and delegated not only the Foreign Minister, Chvalkovsky, but also the new president, Hacha – an indication that Prague was ready to conclude an agreement on the spot. On 15 March 1938, the negotiations resulted in the creation of another German protectorate, covering the lands of Bohemia and Moravia. Henderson believes that the seizure of this part of Czechoslovakia was not based on a strategic German plan and sets out a number of reasons to support his thesis; he also states that if Hacha had really felt that he had been forced to accept a solution with which he could not identify, he could have stepped down; instead, Hacha stayed at his post until the end of WW2. Henderson criticizes the creation of the Protectorate because Hitler reaped world-wide criticism; at the same time he speaks of a German annexation of the provinces involved, but this term is not really applicable in this case, because the Protectorate was never integrated into the Reich – it maintained its own administration, its own currency, even its own army. The inhabitants did not have to do military service for Germany, and Germans needed a visa to enter the area."
    1
  1209. @UCKduIlq4rGLVB__8GxQFIpw > by taking Danzig by getting back Danzig according to the peaceful and democratic loving principle of self-determination. And we'd never know what would have happened if war was avoided, for it was not avoided.
    1
  1210.  @kacperpiatkowski7208  there was no gunpoint at any point between 1933 and may 1939. On the contrary it was Poland bragging about its planes over Danzig and artillery pointed at Danzig
    1
  1211.  @kacperpiatkowski7208  >german imperial borders were huge grudge which is why Hitler also drew criticize in his pro-Polish policy, unlike Weimar Germany which wanted revision of the borders, Hitler wanted accommodation with the Poles, even offering to guarantee the Corridor >Why the fuck do you think germans started rearment? because they didn't have an army and nor could they have a foreign policy without an army, look at 1931 German-Austrian customs union. A Germany without an army can't even get a customs union without being threatened by other countries that have armies.
    1
  1212.  @Rylo1101  shooting team mates
    1
  1213. As well as preventing the chaos caused by being overstretched due to Typhoon.
    1
  1214. Well he wouldn't be wrong. Literally every scenario about a war with China involves America CHOOSING to attack China. Not the other way around.
    1
  1215. Its more that they are getting popular on TikTok and X since Musk took over. Since they were banned from youtube and Twitter
    1
  1216.  @peteryang8991  No they didn't. They could have remained neutral but instead chose to take advantage of the German victory in France. They thought the war would soon be over so decided to invade France and then Greece, Egypt etc.
    1
  1217.  @DrCruel  I'd say splitting their armies between Greece and Egypt was a bigger reason as to why they got trounced. Some historians would also say Germany was corrupt yet German corruption didn't affect it's operations negatively, until it's forces were split in July 1942 and further more in 1943 and 1944.
    1
  1218. Yeah I don't think 1 month is too long for the news cyles tbh. Bush invaded Iraq 1 and a half years after the plane event.
    1
  1219. Their position is also rather preposterous when their own army killed the Jewish hostages because they thought they were Palestinian civilians
    1
  1220. I dunno, Churchill did seem to take the V2 program seriously. Had the war gone differently as he says "when all the preparations being made on the coasts of France and Holland could be examined in detail, in scientific detail, that we knew how grave had been the peril, not only from rockets and flying-bombs but from multiple long range artillery which was being prepared against London. Only just in time did the Allied armies blast the viper in his nest. Otherwise the autumn of 1944, to say nothing of 1945, might well have seen London as shattered as Berlin."
    1
  1221.  @MilitaryHistoryVisualized  Speaking of Memory, what is your opinion of Otto Wagner's "Memoirs of a Confidant" ? How accurate do you think one can recall a 15 year old conversation ?
    1
  1222.  @MilitaryHistoryVisualized  Well it's very interesting to read, particularly when it comes to "Hitler's plans" regarding a European Union from 1936.
    1
  1223. The context which they never like to tell you is that, prior to the British guarantee, the Germans and Polish were already having negotiations on settling their differences. The British feared this happening and so gave Poland a military guarantee. Upon receiving the guarantee, the Poles broke off negotiations and then became more aggressive with their diplomacy towards Danzig. To quote the cabinet meeting of April 19th "The Foreign Secretary reported that he had now received a telegram from Berlin in regard to relations between Germany and Poland, the upshot of the report was that Herr Hitler was now dealing with these negotiations himself, but that not much progress was being made. This was attributed to the fact that the Poles were adopting a more intractable attitude since they had obtained our guarantee."
    1
  1224.  @hank964  Indeed, and the day before he gave the guarantee to Poland: "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
  1225. Hitler wasn't actually as bothered by 1914 Germany borders, he was more bothered with Lebensraum, the only problems of course was the opposition by france and britain and later poland to this.
    1
  1226.  @TheImperatorKnight  Don't read Simon Newman's "March 1939: The British Guarantee to Poland" then.
    1
  1227. yeah lets just go crawling back to a club that hates us. No.
    1
  1228.  @roccosoldi8678  Even if the USSR agreed to join the axis in 1940, it still probably would have been a temporary alliance.
    1
  1229.  @Saeronor  There's somewhat of a difference between winning and losing a war.
    1
  1230. not really but it does hide the truth, which is the whole point of censorship, or as the censors prefer to call it "moderation".
    1
  1231. No they don't want to talk about anything before 7th December, otherwise they wouldn't be able to paint the US as an innocent victim of evil Japanese aggression.
    1
  1232.  @mattmischnick2926  point being is what were they sunk by? i guess
    1
  1233. The founding myth is also that "Germany started WW2", wikipedia and "historians" like Roberts would say the war started on 1st September, when the truth is that there was no state of war between the UK and Germany until 3rd September, and the great question is "what if France and or Britain didn't declare war on 3rd September" then we wouldn't have had WW2 at that time. It's like saying WW3 started on 22nd February 2022. It's utterly counterfactual yet presented as factual merely because they are well spoken "accredited historians".
    1
  1234.  @ManForToday  And most politicians at the time literally cared less for the internal politics of Germany at the time. Such things only became a key subject in war time propaganda and primarily even from post war propaganda.
    1
  1235.  @shivill2236  There's not a shred of evidence that Hitler ever wanted to "control Western Europe".
    1
  1236.  @Dipster101  Yeah I haven't watched much "news" in like 10 years, the propaganda is just so blatant these days.
    1
  1237. If you're a white far left loonie then yeah, apparently you're not allowed to talk to other people. But everyone else can just ignore them really.
    1
  1238. tbh you should only have the "BREAKING" thumbnail if something significant has actually happened i.e. it's been found. Not for a pointless "there's x time left" story.
    1
  1239. Its known as the eastern front because the enemy was Germany, not because they were the protagonists.
    1
  1240. "you know your stuff but everything you said is wrong" huh.
    1
  1241. >How willing was Hitler on allowing Britain's empire to survive and to what extent. Everything i've ever read is that Hitler wanted Britain to keep its empire "for if Britain lost india it wouldn't benefit us" and economists were planning to "at least make a breach in the Ottawa agreement". So even in a defeat Britain wouldn't actually lose as much as it did in "victory"
    1
  1242.  @robinthehood00  "Germany had a working economy and private businesses therefore it wasn't socialist" oh boy, here we go again.
    1
  1243.  @robinthehood00  funnily enough TIK just uploaded another relevant video on this topic
    1
  1244. "Does this look like it could win against Europe" A logical argument, one however, which Hitler also made when witnessing the Soviet-Finnish war of 1940. 'If the Soviets can't even beat the Finns then they certainly won't beat the Wehrmacht'.
    1
  1245.  @gandydancer9710  Yeah, read Simon Newman's "march 1939 the british guarantee to poland" for further context. Here's a good excerpt: Halifax described the dilemma to the Foreign Policy Committee, the choice was between 'doing nothing', which would mean 'a great accession to Germany's strength and a great loss to ourselves of sympathy and support', and 'entering into a devastating war'. He preferred the latter course. Thus the guarantee to Poland was never really thought of in terms of deterrence; it was regarded as a deliberate challenge. That it would be provocative to Germany and cause Polish intransigence on the questions at issue between the two countries, thereby increasing the probability of war, was expected. As we have seen, what finally convinced the British Government that this policy had to be adopted was the fear that Poland might give in to pressure from Germany to remain neutral in return for some acceptable solution of the Danzig problem. The British had to prevent this eventuality because they considered that it would be detrimental to their interests; so detrimental, in fact, that they were prepared to risk a war to prevent it.
    1
  1246.  @gandydancer9710  Dunno what happened to my other comment but read Simon Newman's "march 1939 the british guarantee to poland" and I quote one single sentence in this 200 page book: "what finally convinced the British Government that this policy had to be adopted was the fear that Poland might give in to pressure from Germany to remain neutral in return for some acceptable solution of the Danzig problem. The British had to prevent this eventuality because they considered that it would be detrimental to their interests; so detrimental, in fact, that they were prepared to risk a war to prevent it."
    1
  1247. nothing? pretty much everything you see in this video was only possible thanks to american tanks, trucks, planes and oil.
    1
  1248. I don't really think it affected WW2 that much, Spain would have remained neutral aligned with the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact and France would still be defeated. Spain would still have been in no position to fight anyone regardless of their sympathies. However the Germans would have perhaps not have received the Blue Division, how much would that change things? Still probably not much even though they fought very well but most people like to say a few divisions doesn't change the war.
    1
  1249.  Khalil Turner  <3
    1
  1250.  @sirridesalot6652  But it is where the vast majority of kids on the internet get their information from
    1
  1251. Unless it's the people you don't like that are preparing for war, of course.
    1
  1252. Because in Britain, especially at such public events you are only ever going to hear the popular and obviously one sided version of history. You aren't going to get someone going on stage to talk about the criminality of the Allies, the Churchillian seizure of power or the appeasement myth and how actually the British wanted to stimulate tensions between Poland and Germany.
    1
  1253. Diplomacy, pacts and deals are never meant to last forever, literally everyone knows this. Stalin was also planning for war with Germany, not to mention the official reason why the Germans invaded Russia is because the Russians were supplying arms to Commies in Yugoslavia in contradiction of the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact.
    1
  1254. Well I think the obvious answer is that no one gets credit or paid for AI references or training models. Tolkein doesn't get any credit for every elf reference, nor does Shakespeare for every romance novel.
    1
  1255. Hitler didn't want war with Britain. After all the events of 1939 by late August he was resigned to war if the British chose to declare it, which they did. Had Hitler got his way there wouldn't have even been war with Poland. It was the British intervention in German-Polish negotiations and subsequent encirclement policy which led to war. If you don't blame Germany for attacking Belgium then you have even less reason to blame Germany for WW2. Even if we stick to ignorant opinions like "Germany only invaded Poland to get their territory back".
    1
  1256.  @fizban5959  Hitler may have wanted a future war with Russia but that doesn't change how the war actually started IOTL. Not to mention war with Russia was probably a goal of Wilhelm at some point too. Drag Nach Osten was championed by numerous Germans.
    1
  1257.  @fizban5959  I recommend these books to you on the political background of WW2: "March 1939: The British Guarantee to Poland" by Simon Newman "Britain, Poland and the Eastern Front" by Anita Prazmowska "The Dark Heart of Hitler's Europe" by Martin Winstone "German Diplomatic Relations 1871-1945: The Wilhelmstrasse And the Formulation Of Foreign Policy" by William Young "Eastern Europe and the Origins of the Second World War" by Anita Promowska "Germany, Poland, and the Danzig Question" by Rashid A Holloway They all go over roughly the same jist. Germany wanted to sort it's problems out with Poland (i.e. Danzig), but it was Britain that was greatly concerned about Germany becoming so powerful in Europe who needed to prevent Germany from becoming so powerful, and the only way they could do this was with war, a war that Germany did not need in order to becoming politically powerful in Europe.
    1
  1258. but 360p was HD in 2008
    1
  1259.  @71kimg  Oh I see your point with Malta, but it must be remembered that the Luftwaffe since June 1941 was primarily operating thousands of their planes on the Eastern Front. Whilst the British RAF was entirely in the Mediterranean and over Britain (fighting whatever token raid the Germans sent over). I just find the idea that Germany couldn't defeat the RAF is a bit silly given the numerous quotes from RAF leaders saying it was extremely close in September 1940 and that the Luftwaffe subsequently fought on with thousands of planes on other fronts. The LW was only defeated by mid 1944 after being stretched across all fronts and of course Germany losing against USSR, USA and UK combined.
    1
  1260.  @juanpaz5124  I wonder how Kesselring's plans for an airborne invasion in July 1940 would have faired. As we saw IOTL the Germans practically relied entirely on air force to capture create, a fortified island 100 miles wide and with 40,000 British troops against 20,000 Axis troops in total.
    1
  1261.  @harryspeakup8452  Perhaps but Britain also had no means of defeating Germany. There was no way they could invade Europe without Germany conveniently declaring war on USSR and USA.
    1
  1262.  @nottoday3817  at Khalkin Gol the soviets still lost double the men and like sextuple the tanks compared to the Japanese and the result was the status quo. So it wasn't exactly a crushing victory that should have scared the Germans.
    1
  1263.  @ssgus3682  if the LW gained air supremacy over England then I don't see how an amphibious assault is even necessary. Air power can win on its own. There are few examples of naval power besting air power.
    1
  1264.  @ssgus3682  "Air power on its own has only once ever brought an enemy to the peace table" And that's all the Germans aimed for. "the Allies still struggled to move inland." I think this was mostly due to supply issues. The Air superiority of the allies destroyed the Wehrmacht as Rommel reported to OKW. With Desert Storm the objective was to occupy Iraq whereas the Germans only sought to end hostilities with Britain.
    1
  1265.  @bookaufman9643  There was no war in the east in 1940
    1
  1266.  @JohnRodriguesPhotographer  I think some of the Generals put forward an idea to invade England like they did Crete. Whereby airborne units capture key locations swiftly and basically the surprise would help them greatly. The whole debate around sealion is the air force and navy. There wasn't much of a British Army to face the Germans but equally the Germans would be constrained by supplies, so it's really difficult to wargame and obviously Moustache Man didn't much like the risk.
    1
  1267.  @DanielB.-uv5ji  Yeah hence why I said Sealion never happened. It depended heavily on gaining air superiority over England. Alot of people like to say the Royal Navy is far too superior of an opponent to overcome yet the evidence points towards it not being the case if one side has air superiority. In the vast majority (if not every) engagement where one side had air superiority then they won that battle. The pacific war is littered with examples. I see no reason why the RN wouldn't have also struggled to conduct operations in the channel if it was constantly harassed and attacked by aircraft based in Northern France. As we know the Luftwaffe didn't gain air superiority and as you say H man wasn't too keen or bothered about invading England anyway.
    1
  1268. Why don't you censor the Union Jack? it is as equally offensive as the swastika
    1
  1269. i think TIK has already done a video about "democracy" and its varied meaning
    1
  1270. pfftt, don't worry about such trivial things, China, Russia and America will always sell us food.
    1
  1271. The allies literally wrote about about the German conspiracy to start WW2 and "prosecuted" them on such conspiracy.
    1
  1272. I doubt you'd stand up to a bully if you know it would lead to your legs being broken but then again that pretty much sums up Chamberlain "standing up" to Hitler
    1
  1273. WW1 was a mess but WW2 was fundamentally Britain aggressively getting itself involved in German issues and even German-Polish issues mostly created by the British (Versailles)
    1
  1274.  @toms9864  >detailing how he wanted to invade Slavic countries? Funny since he would then ally and work with Slav countries such as Croatia and Slovakia and before the British guarantee to Poland wanted to ally with Poland.
    1
  1275.  @toms9864  Soviet union supported communist insurgents in Yugoslavia and violated the pact in a few other ways.
    1
  1276.  @alexandredelneste270  > if Poles give away the corridor except Hitler had offered to guarantee the corridor in his earlier offers.
    1
  1277.  @alexandredelneste270  Yes, now what about his offers from october 1938-april 1939 where he offered to guarantee polish rights in danzig and the polish corridor ?
    1
  1278. well that's pretty funny given that it was the free people of Germany that fought on against overwhelming odds
    1
  1279.  @zupnanazwa  TIK also used alot of "western" historians like Kershaw and Overy though.
    1
  1280. well, i suppose if Germany expanded its navy then the british would have started war sooner
    1
  1281.  @coachhannah2403  regarding what ?
    1
  1282. "they want the Yuan to be the... the.... the thing of power" - Trump, US President 2017-2021; 2024-
    1
  1283. took you long enough didn't it lol
    1
  1284. "The Contry"
    1
  1285. And that the people of Austria in 1919 wanted to be part of Germany. Even though Britain would make war in 1939 to prevent the democratic wishes of a people being fulfilled, doing so in 1938 was even less justifiable. In 1939 the Brits at least had the 'Germany can't be trusted' thing.
    1
  1286.  @KimMarsh-c4n  'I respect Bismarck for appeasing the British'. Is what you're saying. Had Britain not given Poland the guarantee, thereby causing WW2 or had German won it, it wouldn't be as politically incorrect to say you respect the Leader for pursuing a Great Germany and bequeathing Europe with a strong European Union that stretches from Lisbon to the Urals.
    1
  1287.  @bolivar2153  the wishes of Danzigers. "is it ever?" it is when you win, see the United States, Australia etc. and Conservative historians who praise colonization with words like, and I quote "Who can argue the colonization of Australia wasn't a good thing for humanity?"
    1
  1288.  @bolivar2153  It does though. "How does invading Poland in 1939 in any way represent, defend or respect the democratic wishes of Poland?" It doesn't for Poland. But it does for Germans living in Danzig and the Corridor. Obviously Germany wasn't invading Poland to defend Poles from Danzigers.
    1
  1289.  @bolivar2153  So the Danzigers had no right in wanting to be part of Germany ? And that their economy should be forcibly under the control of Poland forever more ?
    1
  1290.  @Adsper2000  " it was morally wrong for Britain to stop Germany from conquering Poland" I'd say what was immoral, was encouraging Poland with guarantees and pledges of support. This is expressed in the Polish post-war view of "Western Betrayal". They were led to believe that the Brits and French would do various things immediately in the war with Germany, such as a French offensive in the West, the British Naval breakthrough into the Baltic and transfer of 1,500 airplanes to Poland. Without these pledges, would Poland still be resolute in fighting Germany for Danzig ? Perhaps, perhaps not. But it wouldn't have been a world war, anymore than the Polish-Soviet war caused a world war between Britain and Russia.
    1
  1291.  @bolivar2153  "but lay in the failure to react more forcefully when Germany began it's aggression?" That is the common position, written in its magnus opus of "Guilty Men". Which is rather of a paradox, isn't it ? "So you advocate for the right of conquest through force of arms?" No more than you advocate for the right to start wars because you don't like other cultures.
    1
  1292.  @bolivar2153  No more than you advocate for the right to start wars because you don't like other cultures.
    1
  1293.  @bolivar2153  A) I know full well what it is, I was being a bit sarcastic in describing it as 'magnus opus', though in some ways it is the magnus opus of the "Appeasement" theory, is it not ? B) It is a paradox to the "Germany started ww2" narrative. Because on the one hand 'Germany started WW2', but on the other hand 'Chamberlain should have started it earlier'. How is that logically consistent ? C) Yes, no, maybe
    1
  1294.  @bolivar2153  "Criticizing appeasement doesn’t automatically equate to advocating for war" It fundamentally does though. How else do you stop German expansion ? Simon Newman shows that economic agreements with countries such as Romania, either don't work, or are complete financial illogic. Yes. It appears I need to use more specific words than "sarcasm" for you to understand somehow. I notice you avoid my questions too.
    1
  1295.  @bolivar2153  If you asked any American "Do yUo SupPorT ConQuesT!" naturally they would answer no. But realistically it's a yes, if it benefits oneself. "ways to stop aggression" That's what the Poles hoped and thought. But I don't see how in this case. In any case of "Germany was just demanding land" then sure. But Germany wasn't "just demanding land". There were the moral arguments that we've already gone over many times.
    1
  1296.  @bolivar2153  Then "no."
    1
  1297.  @bolivar2153  As xyz diplomats and politicians noted, in order to fight Russia, Germany had to go through Poland or Romania, Romania more so to get to Ukraine.
    1
  1298.  @bolivar2153  "To argue otherwise would imply that only the aggressor has the right to act in its own self-interest, while others have no such right." I don't believe we ever agreed on a subject of debate, our retorts just go into different areas. My primary subject is "who started ww2" not "was Germany right to expand or was Britain right to plunge europe into war to stop Germany expanding" etc,.
    1
  1299.  @bolivar2153  Britain with their guarantees. Sorted. Except it is not so simplistic, as so often described by videos like this one.
    1
  1300.  @bolivar2153  In the German view, and obviously had they won then obviously yes.... just like in the American view, manifest destiny was right.
    1
  1301.  @bolivar2153  "Germany's invasion of Poland in 1939 was the specific event that triggered the war" The problem with this very narrow interpretation.... is that it is a very narrow interpretation for obvious reasons given the results of the conflict. It is somewhat easier to go into the minute details of WW1 and how that war started, but not WW2 seemingly. That is why I hoped, though doubtful it is, that The Rest is History would make a video going into the details of WW2 and not just the same old look purely from the German conspiratorial view.
    1
  1302.  @bolivar2153  And that's a debate of philosophy, post modernism etc, whoever it was that wrote that book about history ending in the year 2000. Which I think obviously is a load of rubbish. Wars haven't stopped, genocide hasn't stopped and it never will as long as humans are on earth.
    1
  1303.  @bolivar2153  "basic historical truth" For a long time the basic historical truth was that Germany wanted and started WW1. As this very podcast showed by going into the details in a several hour long series. That was not the case.
    1
  1304.  @bolivar2153  My view is that WW2 was a disaster for Britain. As Peter Hitchens writes in Phoney Victory.
    1
  1305.  @bolivar2153  " is a gross oversimplification " precisely my point.
    1
  1306.  @bolivar2153  "I thought you objected to narrow viewpoints?" You quite specifically asked for mine. As you point out it was indeed a disaster for everyone apart from Russia and America. And there are threads of conspiracy that Roosevelt and Stalin tried their best to start it as well.
    1
  1307.  @bolivar2153  "I was shocked at the "narrowness" Probably because I primarily care about my country, which is only natural. If however, when trying to explain "How x war started", all views and events should be taken into account. Vast majority of videos and 'documentaries' do not. "Russia suffered" But did gain domination over Central and Eastern Europe which is what Stalin wanted. So you could argue their/ his political goals were attained.
    1
  1308.  @bolivar2153  "Doesn’t that narrow the scope of empathy?" Probably. But there is always a scope on empathy is there not ? Such as countries, religion or ethnicities. "t’s attitudes like the one you expressed that limit the breadth of discussion and prevent ‘all views’ from being heard." Only when the question is "what is your view".
    1
  1309.  @bolivar2153  "something better." Which is limited to what ?
    1
  1310.  @rainbowodysseybyjonlion  Just because you don't know about it doesn't mean it didn't happen. Many Germans were murdered in Poland. Look up Bromberg massacre.
    1
  1311. "kekistan is not a real country" - ground breaking VICE journalism
    1
  1312. Does drinker take apart Mission Impossible movies when crazy things happen ? Like yes, everything that happens is crazy and totally plot convenient like an MI film, but that doesn't make it a bad movie at all.
    1
  1313. He says mere months after winning the most undemocratic, unpopular "landslide" in history.
    1
  1314. Yikes, it's clear Kier wants to be the WEF's governor of England rather than the UK Prime Minister
    1
  1315. Also love the logic of "Germany largely being responsible for WW1 and 2". Especially 2 when it was entirely a British creation. "Germany started WW1 because they didn't tell Austria to calm down". Ok so then Britain started WW2 because they didn't tell Poland to calm down ?
    1
  1316. Little did he know it was more of a defeat for Germany.
    1
  1317. Yeah just like any British resistance after Dunkirk was criminal right ?
    1
  1318. WW1 and 2 started over trivial issues so it should come as no surprise that WW3 would start over ridiculous and trivial issues as well.
    1
  1319. It wouldn't be certain but when you look at how naval-air combat actually unfolded in the war, you'll see that it very much favoured the air. Particularly in the East where Japanese land based air forces destroyed the British navy in numerous cases.
    1
  1320.  @Muskotron  Too bad we pick and choose which groups to save hmm ? cough Indians cough Boers cough Americans cough Palestinians etc. The whole "we started ww2 to save x ethnicity" is straight up post war propaganda. It wasn't even a thing until the 80s lol.
    1
  1321.  @lukeueda-sarson6732  this is what I mean by you being dense lol are you actually being serious? no fun allowed - ever ?
    1
  1322.  @lukeueda-sarson6732  Of course I'm ignorant of your personality, I don't know you do I ? "I don't publish history research for "entertainment" But you do watch YouTube videos don't you ? Thus, entertainment. After all why be a historian if you are not entertained by it ?
    1
  1323.  @lukeueda-sarson6732  "When you went to school, do you really believe your teachers were entertaining you?" No because you are forced to go to school. No one is forced to watch videos of history of which they find interesting and entertaining. I might add that the best teachers make their lessons entertaining or interesting.
    1
  1324.  @lukeueda-sarson6732  Yeah I remember watching something called "The Last Tommy" at school. That's the most educational one I can remember, everything else was just entertainment in the last week or so of the year (/grade) lol.
    1
  1325.  @lukeueda-sarson6732  Did I ever say videos can't be educational ?
    1
  1326.  @lukeueda-sarson6732  Yeah, the clear difference I also pointed out was that you chose to watch these YouTube videos, you weren't forced to do so.
    1
  1327.  @lukeueda-sarson6732  Dr. David Starkey made the point in one of his videos, that the reason he is a historian is because he is interested and entertained by history, after all why be a historian if you are not interested and entertained by it? I believe and know that things can be educational as well as entertaining. You obviously seem to believe that things can't possibly be entertaining and educational at the same time, it has to either be educational or entertaining. So let's just leave the discussion there, ok.
    1
  1328. They're only absurd if you're ignorant or 'can't think critically', as a certain crowd would say. I highly recommend a read of Simon Newman's "march 1939 the British guarantee to poland" as well as the primary sources of diplomatic communications in "documents on british foreign policy" and "documents on german foreign policy"
    1
  1329. makes little difference really, just minor semantics
    1
  1330.  @brucemarsico6  I mean Canada is technically in America as in North America, and its not like it would matter if the US was involved in the war, Churchill would probably work to have Canada and US as a single political entity like how he proposed the Franco-British union
    1
  1331. based
    1
  1332.  @j.langer5949  Imagine if Adolf's reason for intervening in Poland was "I think they may have a super secret weapon nobody knows about" instead of "Poland is economically squeezing Danzig and then threatened to bomb them if they made a customs agreement with us". He'd be labelled as an insane, evil madman.
    1
  1333.  @Saeronor  yeah like i said i don't think their justification for war would be much different than that given on 3rd september to the british
    1
  1334.  @Saeronor  I meant according to Germany and also what actually happen i.e. polish mobilization on 30th,. Henderson was probably told by Goering or someone of the sort.
    1
  1335.  @Saeronor  yeah like i said their reasoning would probably not be much difference i.e. polish intransigence and its aggression against germans
    1
  1336.  @alexandredelneste270  The Poles also mobilized multiple times throughout 1939, I believe the Wehrmacht was only partially mobilized.
    1
  1337. Yes its a rather large flaw in the moralistic "Germany started WW2" narrative. 'Germany started WW2 because it invaded Poland' 'Britain was just trying to defend Poland'. So one asks 'why then didn't they declare war on the USSR', which of course the mask slips right off. 'It wasn't convenient, strategic considerations etc.'. Oh, so the war against Germany was indeed strategic considerations. As the Cabinet and Foreign Policy Committee meetings of March 1939 indeed show. To quote Roger Makins of the British Foreign Office: "A German-Polish deal would in the long run be highly disadvantageous to us. It would defeat the policy of forming a bloc against Germany".
    1
  1338. ​ @officeofpeaceinformation5094  ​ By books I also mean first hand evidence as documented in "documents on british foreign policy, documents on german foreign policy" etc. published by the british government in the 50s. For example the British consul General in Danzig writes on the 4th September "it still seems in retrospect 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 to the Danzig senate on the night of 4th August." There seems to be few diplomats at the time who were blaming anyone other than Poland when you read these telegrams, which also mention many events regardless how minor that are never mentioned in modern western propaganda films such as "WW2 in color". By books I mean: "March 1939: The British Guarantee to Poland" by Simon Newman "Britain, Poland and the Eastern Front" by Anita Prazmowska "The Dark Heart of [censored] Europe" by Martin Winstone "German Diplomatic Relations 1871-1945: The Wilhelmstrasse And the Formulation Of Foreign Policy" by William Young "Eastern Europe and the Origins of the Second World War" by Anita Promowska "Germany, Poland, and the Danzig Question" by Rashid A Holloway among others I read at my University Library
    1
  1339. You make it sound like Churchill/ Eisenhower weren't already well aware of the atrocities the Russians had committed against Eastern Europeans for centuries. Churchill was a historian, he would know about these things. Yet he still gave Eastern Europe to Stalin. "Ukrainians joined the N-words" No they didn't. They joined the fight against Russia. Big difference.
    1
  1340. Appeasement is when not starting nuclear war.
    1
  1341. there's also the question of "what would the US actually gain by nuking all of europe"
    1
  1342. Communism: Brought to you by Capitalism
    1
  1343. Except categories exist for everything. With the logic "nations are stupid", then who is to say "there's only one race, the human race" is not stupid and exclusionary ?
    1
  1344. Except Neville Chamberlain never appeased, in fact, Churchillian propagandists like to forget the fact that Chamberlain is the one who started the most destructive war in history, that is not "appeasement".
    1
  1345.  @robertmeunier9915  read again.
    1
  1346.  @robertmeunier9915  John Mersheimer certainly argues that. "why didn't continue to occupy Poland after freeing Danzig?" Same reason why the allies didn't just end their war when they reached German 1933 borders. Real life doesn't work like that.
    1
  1347.  @robertmeunier9915  "They were trying to end a German threat, which meant making Germany surrender." Precisely. I'm not a German so I don't have such a "belief system" but I have no doubt that if Cornwall was in a similar position to Danzig, vast majority of Brits would also support relieving French economic pressure and securing Cornwall from the French. It's just funny to me how Danzig is just never mentioned in popular histories of how WW2 broke out.
    1
  1348.  @michaelmalinovsky9499  How is it at all disingenuous ? If a business does something the government doesn't like then it will stop it. It's quite that simple. It is the same for every government.
    1
  1349.  @michaelmalinovsky9499  So its only private property when the government is capitalist ?
    1
  1350.  @danieldavidisson9906  "Fascism is the form the capitalist state adopts in crisis, to smash unions," This is unfiltered Commie propaganda though lmao.
    1
  1351. Yes if Italy wasn't useless then the Axis would have done better. Just like how if Germany didn't lose they could have won. There is a reason why Britain feared and tried to prevent an Italian-German alliance so much before the war. The Italian navy posed a real threat and very well could have wounded the Royal Navy in 1940, I can't remember which battle it was but basically the Italians were just too timid despite having numerical advantage, and were 2 other Battleships nearby called into the battle it could have been superiority.
    1
  1352. "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. "Frankly, Chamberlain is more worried about getting the Poles to be reasonable than the Germans. He feels there is a great body of public opinion in England headed probably by Eden and Churchill who will suggest to the Poles that they give up nothing and that they have Hitler on the run. This, of course, will mean war" - Joseph Kennedy, 30th August. "After Rydz-Smigly's speech yesterday, thousands of Poles joined in, shouting 'we demand Danzig'" - Daily Mirror, 7th August "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. "In view of indications of increasing Polish intransigence since conclusion of the Anglo-Polish guarantee agreement..." - Joseph Kennedy, 22nd April. "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. "War, and war now with a near eastern front. Without war the desired results may never be achieved." - Noel Mason-MacFarlane, 28th March. "Halifax felt that the inevitability of war sooner or later should be met right now" - Joseph Kennedy, 24th March. "We should attack Germany, not in order to save a particular victim, but in order to pull down the bully" - Neville Chamberlain, 20th March. There's an incredible story to be told when you go through the primary sources in "documents on british foreign policy" yet incredibly these are never mentioned by mainstream popular historians.
    1
  1353. chicking out at a chicken farm, ironic.
    1
  1354.  @axios76  They fought under their own flags. Meanwhile the Russians banned the national flags.
    1
  1355. Why would it be racist? Can anyone explain without themselves showing their own racism lol
    1
  1356. I agree that Czechia wasn't worth destroying the British Empire over, but saying "Germans built some buildings" is a lame excuse for annexation lol.
    1
  1357. The problem is some opinions are inherently wrong, such as Robert's assertions that the militarization of the Rhineland is in any way a notable contributor to the outbreak of the Second Anglo-German War, or that Hitler hated Poland and had long planned on invading them, when the reality is that in January 1939 he was having a conversation with Polish minister Beck about how much Danzig needed Poland and how Hitler wanted an agreement with Poland to protect Polish economic interests in the city. Hacks like Roberts simply counter all of this by saying "Hitler was a liar" and yet at the same time Roberts would say "Hitler wasn't a liar" when it comes to things that would make Hitler look bad based on the morals of a 21st century American student union, such as the plans for colonizing Russia.
    1
  1358. Finally a politician that can speak some sense!
    1
  1359.  @jp38able  No, the US demanded so much more than just "withdraw from China" because that was literally the only point that the Japanese negotiators were willing to accept. All the other demands which amounted to total national disgrace and humiliation, they were not willing to accept. No nation would.
    1
  1360.  @jp38able  " Im sorry but you are mistaken." I'm not, see the "Hull note".
    1
  1361.  @jp38able  Yes and Harry Dexter White's plan was to have japan surrender to America or war. I can't find his exact quote but he goes on about how if Japan accepted (which no country ever would) the American terms then it would be a huge victory for Roosevelt. The Hull note didn't just demand a withdrawal from China though does it? Because the Japanese were willing and sort of wanting to withdraw from China after their failed offensives in 40 and 41. Again I don't keep sources for everything, I think it may have been Halder's diary but it is mentioned that both Japan and China wanted a face saving deal.
    1
  1362.  @jp38able  "its simply not true" it simply is true. "They had could have done it years before." They could have but why would they before their offensive failures ? It's like saying Germany could have made a peace deal with Stalin in November 1941. They could have. But why would they ? "without mentioning Manchuria." That seems to be the problem, I think the Americans should have emphasised that bit. As the Japanese thought their demand included Manchuria. "Just because someone writes something in his diary doesn´t make it true." No but it gives incredible insight into private thoughts and personal dealings and when corroborated with other sources, the balance tips in the favour of "they're not lying". "Why should Harry Dexter have any working knowledge about US-japanese negotiations?" Because he was part of high level government and close advisor to people in the US government. Or do you think they all work in total isolation with each other, and don't spend alot of time with each other, at parties, meetings etc.
    1
  1363.  @user-us7eu9uw4m  question ?
    1
  1364. £20 Bn black hole but £12 Bn foreign aid and £20 Bn hotel bill. But your a far right thug if you disagree with this situation.
    1
  1365. Only if your state is structured around plutocracy and the supremacy of the individual over the common volk. Not so much if you have an autarkic authautarian state which is what H man sought to create.
    1
  1366. It's an issue for their ability to bully smaller nations, imperialism if you will. China is already a very large economy, it's industry outmatches the US by some margin, if China took back control of Taiwan then they would be adding even more industry and people to their economy. Something like 80% of microchips are made in Taiwan. From a military point of view also, no doubt, US advisers tell the president that Taiwan was important in the Japanese conquest of the Philippines and Japan's ability to project power in the whole region. It's ridiculous but this is their mindset, fearmongering, warmongering, whatever. "If China gets control of Taiwan then they'll be able to take over the whole of Asia like Japan did in the 1940s" is what they undoubtedly say.
    1
  1367.  @Saeronor  "Prague gave back" lmao, similar to how Prague invited the German army in March 1939 ?
    1
  1368. how do you propose america defeat germany without britain or russia? bearing in mind that d-day launched from britain against a heavily worn down Wehrmacht nearly failed as it is.
    1
  1369. yes there are a ridiculous amounts of variables in such simple statements lol. Though I guess with such simple statements we are perhaps saying Germany vs soviet union in 1939 with both soviet union and germany allowed to battle in polish territory ? xD
    1
  1370. "responsible for the worst crimes in the history of man" And what would that be ? Worse than, say, massacring villagers and spraying chemical weapons over their crops ? I am of course referring to modern events with the Vietnam War but "in the history of man" I guess we should probably count the extermination of the Native Indians as one of "the worst crimes in the history of man".
    1
  1371. lol and neither do tory voters know what they're voting for
    1
  1372.  @bolivar2153  The Russians and Germans interpreted the Nazi-Anglo agreement as a delimitation of spheres of influence.
    1
  1373. Possibly. If the oil field in the Netherlands was discovered then it changes Hitler's strategies. He would have supported Moscow, he wouldn't have been as desperate to get the oil, thus not splitting Army Group South. So yeah, pretty big impact really.
    1
  1374.  @thevaultdwellerf6691  and what is he offering America for them ?
    1
  1375. yes because labour and other parties are squeaky clean, right?
    1
  1376. Albanians clearly.
    1
  1377.  @nukclear2741  how would you notice that ?
    1
  1378.  @meshzzizk  perhaps you should have begun your quotation with "Adam" then. You'd know this if you could write properly.
    1
  1379.  @meshzzizk  No we don't understand, as I said previously. If you were quoting the video you should have begun your quote at Adams. Christ, look I'll do it myself: Lol "Adam tooze and Richard evans say hitler was a bourgeois liberal", what the hell are you talking about
    1
  1380.  @billdover3165  " you mean the Allies that were dragged into the war because of Hitler" You mean the war Britain declared upon Germany? dude read some academic books and educate yourself, clearly there's no point in discussion with you here. "ignoring all the facts" the facts such as the German-Polish talks from 1938-April 1939, Hitler's offers to Poland throughout 1939, the Chamberlain "Peace Front" policy, the British cabinet meetings, the false reports from Ian Colvin regarding an alleged "German Ultimatum to Romania", the detente that was attempted by the Danzig senate and the League of Nations ambassador Burckhardt, the Polish Ultimatum of August 4th, any details of the Danzig crisis such as Poland's embargo of food exports and the blocking of rail crossings among many other events that all together create the outbreak of WW2? No, I do not ignore these facts unlike the propaganda that you've been brainwashed by.
    1
  1381. @Facts are not hate speech ,YouTube fascists. Yeah because Britain also didn't get fooked up? and for what? a selfish outdated policy of divide and conquer, ostensibly referred to as "balance of power". "but we couldn't just let germany take over da europe" and why not? Even when Germany invaded Poland (an event which otherwise might not have happened had it not been for the intervention of the Chamberlain regime with his "peace front" policy) France was reluctant to go to war, along with you know, every other country in europe. As the Romanian foreign secretary pointed out "Britain is allied, not with peace, but with continental war"
    1
  1382. @Facts are not hate speech ,YouTube fascists. Except that's a myth, it was Chamberlain that began the re-armament campaign, he invested in the air force as he knew it was important in any future war along with radar. Chamberlain was a much more complex character than most people would know due to the propaganda that the "appeasers" themselves proport. It is more acceptable to say "yeah we tried our best to avoid war, its all Germany's fault" rather than "Noo guys we tried our best to start the war!". The whole "Peace Front" policy of the Chamberlain government is entirely ignored in mainstream documentaries. I recommend "March 1939: The British Guarantee to Poland" for a good book about the Chamberlain government and how it decided on going to war.
    1
  1383.  @keefymckeefface8330  I reccommend reading books on how the war started such as the primary materials from "documents on british foreign policy" or "March 1939: The British Guarantee to Poland" by Simon Newman "Britain, Poland and the Eastern Front" by Anita Prazmowska "German Diplomatic Relations 1871-1945: The Wilhelmstrasse And the Formulation Of Foreign Policy" by William Young "Eastern Europe and the Origins of the Second World War" by Anita Promowska "Germany, Poland, and the Danzig Question" by Rashid A Holloway
    1
  1384.  @keefymckeefface8330  Perhaps you should read the books I mentioned before making such a dumb comment that adds nothing to the discussion.
    1
  1385.  @Bingo_Bango_  "and found literally no result." You say this but then literally quote it in the next sentence lol
    1
  1386. if he did then he wouldn't have surrendered UKIP and it's momentum to the blob.
    1
  1387. but Ohio never get it wrong.
    1
  1388.  @DrScopey2  "The ideas to free up land for settlement and use of resources, access for transportation and to avoid confrontations." Interesting.
    1
  1389. and the Brits know a liar because they're experts at lying
    1
  1390. wouldn't that be the Churchill award ? I'd say the Munich agreement was much more of a success than Churchill's "victory" of WW2
    1
  1391. "We should attack Germany, not in order to save a particular victim, but in order to pull down the bully" - Neville Chamberlain, 20th March. [1] "England is advising France that they should both go to war regardless of Poland." - Joseph Kennedy, 22nd March. "Beck stated that Poland had no intention of marching unless Poland were attacked." - Anthony Biddle Jr., 23rd 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 Foreign Secretary said that it was clear that if action was to be undertaken in circumstances at all favourable to us, or if the threat of action was to be an effective deterrent, Germany must be faced with war on two fronts simultaneously. Poland was therefore key to the situation." - Cabinet Meeting, 29th March [1] "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] "No doubt it would be impossible to prevent Poland from being overrun. The Chiefs of Staff, indeed, thought that Poland would likely be overrun by Germany within two or three months." - Cabinet Meeting, 30th March. [1] "I gather Mason-MacFarlane will approve our action today." - Alexander Cadogan, 31st March. The information is there. Its just Anglophile historians tend to totally ignore it. I wonder why ?
    1
  1392.  @kanedNunable  No, Reform is replacing left wing grifters with actual right wingers.
    1
  1393.  @Kim-dk9nk  Right because the settlements are "Israel's first line of defence" according to Israeli ministers, but they are also "a lie" according to this guy. Who's right and who's wrong ?
    1
  1394.  @jp38able  Yeah just like how the Europeans or Americans acquired resources by trade ?
    1
  1395.  @mrorlov2706  those 3 times they were allied with Berlin though.
    1
  1396.  @GreatPolishWingedHussars  As Alexander Cadogan wrote in his diary. The Poles should have known the weakness of the West, and also not have underestimated the Germans so so much. Poland was catastrophically led. It's not a 'western betrayal' that Beck chose to refuse Germany's offers and instead ally with Britain.
    1
  1397. yes which is why Poland wanted for a mostly peaceful war against Germany at that time
    1
  1398. If you're interested then I highly recommend a read of Simon Newman's "March 1939 the british guarantee to poland" and then read the primary evidence in "documents on british foreign policy" and "documents on german foreign policy". "the topic is complicated" Indeed but mainstream victor's history portray it as very simplistic. They never mention the German-Polish negotiations that there were before 31st March 1939, they never mention the Polish ultimatum to Danzig of August 4th or the discussions that Chamberlain and Halifax had in March 1939. It is merely "one day Germany invaded Poland and Britain promised to defend them".
    1
  1399.  @pandaprewmaster325  "One thing I know for sure germany being a superpower most likely threatens British" Yet I don't see how, when you go through "documents on German foreign policy" in every private conversation Hitler has with diplomats and other leaders [1], he only talks about being allies and friends with the british empire, there is literally no reason for Germany to ever fight Britain. Germany is never going to fight Britain over India, unlike how Britain wants to fight over Danzig. Then Alexander Cadogan wrote a white paper essentially saying "yeah, let Germany have eastern Europe, this would even benefit us, if Germany builds up eastern Europe then we can make more money as well through trade", and we still have the rest of the world to trade with. [1] such as Series D - Volume VI Document No. 784.
    1
  1400. And that isn't even accounting for the British conspiracy to start a war against Germany. "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
  1401.  @eliasmiguelfreire8965  Yes I'm aware of Glantz opinion. It's just funny how it's contradictory to the actual leaders of the USSR at the time.
    1
  1402.  @PalleRasmussen  "even today 37% of the population of the US has German ancestry." most likely because in time the amount of family members gets wider and wider, even if you have a single grandparent an American would say "I have German ancestry"
    1
  1403.  @genericpersonx333  Roosevelt would probably declare war on Germany weeks or even months after December 1941 though. Even if they needed to manufacture outrage over some mysterious incident to declare war against Germany as America did against the Spanish in 1898.
    1
  1404. How did he "waste police time" when the police chose to investigate the bloke ? The police at any moment could have simply left. Does the law not give the Police any agency ?
    1
  1405. right, and Britain militarizing Portsmouth is treason against Germany...
    1
  1406. They're not practicing because they're watching Rick Beato videos lol
    1
  1407.  @FreeDocumentaryHistory  "we learn how an entire nation was manipulated into complacency to just go along with it and let it happen" Yeah that's like every nation when their government launches a war.
    1
  1408.  @TheStephaneAdam  I'm far from any expert at the micro logistics but like, how can the German army have been "worn out" after barely 2 weeks fighting in France, yet just one year later were able to drive towards Moscow for 5 months without being worn out ?
    1
  1409.  @TheStephaneAdam  6 weeks was the whole campaign, we're talking about the halt order given barely 2 weeks into campaign against france
    1
  1410. "honest" yeah, no propaganda film is ever honest lol
    1
  1411.  @lefunnyN1  Yeah his content is detailed and intellectual unlike "simple history" and mainstream propaganda shows
    1
  1412. He wasn't forced to declare war on the USA though, that is arguably his major balls up.
    1
  1413.  @dejabu24  Yes I suppose the full answer is alot more complex, more like "He shouldn't have declared war on the USA without guarantees from Japan that they would invade Russia, as well as he shouldn't have split AGS during case blue or diverted Panzer armies away from Stalingrad" But the Japanese actually even told the Germans that they wouldn't be too bothered if they didn't declare war on the USA with them lol. It was the biggest "stealing defeat from the jaws of victory" in history.
    1
  1414. There was indeed plans and documents that support Zhukov's claims about Stalin planning for war with Germany, presumably around 1943. Funnily enough the same people who say there isn't much evidence for this claim, are also the same people that like to talk about the Gleiwitz False Flag incident.
    1
  1415. That's just not true at all though, what Buchannan argues is that Hitler's intentions were always Eastwards against the USSR, nowhere is Hitler ever recorded (until Britain intervenes in Eastern European affairs) in saying that he wants war with the West. On the contrary, Hitler wanted an alliance with Britain and France, instead it was Britain that did not want a strong German power in Europe and sought to prevent this from happening at all costs.
    1
  1416. NOOOO GERMANY HAD NO CHANCE OF WINNING WW2, THEY WERE GUARANTEED TO LOSE!!!
    1
  1417. JOE BIDEN DEBOONKED: MEXICO DOES NOT SHARE LAND BORDER WITH GAZA
    1
  1418. "Germany started ww2" "Britain couldn't just let Germany go east" which one is it TIK ?
    1
  1419.  @Spiderfisch  its literally no secret Churchill wanted war with Germany regardless of what Germany did.
    1
  1420.  @user-jq2iz9zn4p  He did. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petroleum_Warfare_Department He envisioned Kent to be set on fire in order to frustrate the German invasion.
    1
  1421.  @peterlindstrom4233  yes because giving Germany a better trade deal is "Certain death." The German economists specifically recommended to not demand a total abolition of the Ottawa preference system because it could mean the end of the British Empire.
    1
  1422.  @user-jq2iz9zn4p  Yeah Sorry I don't keep sources like a redditor. But I read it in a book where he was at dinner with the some diplomats and told his wife that she could always use a kitchen knife. Imagine yes. Again I don't have a source, I read it somewhere on wikipedia, somewhere from the link I gave where he envisioned Kent to be burnt down and the sea set on fire, an apocalyptic vision, which had it come from Hitler, it would have been "insane" or "mad" but since its from Churchill... its never mentioned.
    1
  1423.  @suityboi2126  I keep some sources but not every single thing. The one about the kitchen knife may have come from a book about the Battle of Britain but i've forgot the name of the author lol
    1
  1424.  @tancreddehauteville764  It might have done had Southern cannons been shelling their homes in Washington. The Vice President of the CSA was on his way to visit Lincoln to negotiate peace just before the defeat at Gettysburg.
    1
  1425. And how exactly are the Russians going to "put Germany back in its place"? Without starting WW3 of course?
    1
  1426. The very same reason why Labour would be obsessed with a Tory's living arrangement.
    1
  1427.  @BasedGauncho  Chamberlain appeased America. That is the truth of it. He abandoned the "Appeasement" of Germany, to appease America, and that decision led Europe to catastrophe.
    1
  1428.  Nonce killa  yeah who cares about the key people who started WW2 right ?
    1
  1429.  @JoysChamber  yeah because truth and honesty is something only Germans care about right ?
    1
  1430.  @coimbralaw  They are pretty important in regards to "world war 2". It's like omitting Genghis Khan from a mongol empire documentary.
    1
  1431. like every other word from a plutocrat's mouth this aged like milk.
    1
  1432. He was generally aware of foreign press, when you read first hand documents in "documents on british foreign policy" he references the hostile foreign press since the munich agreement in his conversations with diplomats
    1
  1433. "it's shameful" I think that's why your masters installed it and haven't removed it.
    1
  1434.  @russkayaimperiya4918  "We liberated them" Are you sure it's not the other way round? The Germans were liberating Russia from communist overlords.
    1
  1435.  @LiamTate-b1v  Nice strawman. But strawmen usually are the only arguments that ignorants have.
    1
  1436.  @bolivar2153  there's no such thing as "collective security" though is there ? There is "collective antagonism" and that is all. For example as we are seeing over this Greenland issue. If the USA actually invaded it, no one would go to war with the USA over it. Clearly demonstrating that NATO is not "collective security" but instead "collective antagonism towards Russia".; a version of bilateral agreements which politicians pretend is collective security. Chamberlain wanted collective antagonism in 1939 but totally fumbled it by giving Poland the unilateral declaration pre-emptivley, combined with the fact that more states were more concerned about Russian imperialism than they were concerned about Germany, and the fact that Britain was militarily weak, so their guarantees were worthless. They were speaking loudly without having a stick in Teddy Roosevelt's terms. To go back to OPs point, Poland is spending money on their own military because that is all that secures their security. Not promises from foreign powers, as they have learnt. NATO is one big bluff. I'm sure John Mearsheimer would agree as much. Hence all the concern that "Putin will invade Estonia" to 'test' NATO. Will NATO actually do more than what they are obliged to do in Article 5 ? Who knows, but the political fallout for an individual state wouldn't be as disastrous if they didn't do more than have a discussion about such invasion. That's why the Poles rejected "collective security" in March 1939, they wanted firm guarantees that would humiliate Chamberlain if he went back on them.
    1
  1437. Plutocrat propaganda says Hitler was a warmonger, even if we say he was one, Churchill wanted and had a large part in starting 2 World Wars and even wanted a third.
    1
  1438.  @TomVegas  they let immigrants vote ?
    1
  1439.  @TomVegas  no you mentioned population increase
    1
  1440.  @bipolarminddroppings  yeah sure
    1
  1441. "Soviet Union should have never saved Europe from Germany" imagine believing this tripe, the majority, if not all of Europe disliked Russia and fully supported the German war effort against Commie Russia
    1
  1442. Yeah, yeah "they were forced into the alliance" just like how; if Germany won WW2 then France and Britain were forced into war by their evil masters.
    1
  1443. TLDW; because Hitler wasn't mad
    1
  1444.  @fuzzy7644  Just like how we all know the 2020 riots on Oxford street weren't because of some criminal in the US overdosing on fentanyl.
    1
  1445. Indeed, we spent the best part of 300 years trying to destroy Europe, we can't let him get his evil ways.
    1
  1446. have you heard of the Polish Ultimatum to Danzig of August 4th ? 99.999% of people have not. Remember all the cries for war when a Russian drone flew over Polish territory for about 2 minutes ? Now imagine the war cries if Russia sent an official note threatening to flatten Warsaw.
    1
  1447. Maybe not actually, they would have welcomed Trump's protectionism actually. The Germans were against American exports and in favour of such controls.
    1
  1448. Poles are slavs, Brits are Anglo-Saxon
    1
  1449.  @katarzynafiakowska2054  no, slav and anglo are not the same
    1
  1450.  @tyv7364  Neither is "black and white" but for some reason we English speakers still use the term "race" for these things
    1
  1451. No the Brits don't really make any sense, "bro we literally want to ally with you, trade with you, protect your empire, why tf are you trying to wage a war that is ruinous to yourself ?"
    1
  1452.  @generaladvance5812  there's a difference between an anti-British hegemon like Napoleon and what Hitler wanted which was a pro-British hegemon. The alternative was what we got, a communist and American split Europe with a ruined Britain.
    1
  1453. @ didn't work for Japan did it ?
    1
  1454. "Elon Musk blames" wow BBC really stamping on their mask these days. Because if they weren't biased they would just say "due to frozen valve".
    1
  1455. I think calling everything "far right" is actually a far left smear lol
    1
  1456. "If Britain won the war we'd all be speaking English" but I guess it's true in a sense.
    1
  1457. No. No, sorry. In order to have been 'in the right' Germany should have done whatever the Anglo-Americans wanted them to do, this would have meant disinteresting themselves in the welfare of the German minority in Poland and the democratic wishes of the people of Danzig. Germany had no right to protect Danzigers or its minority left after the Versailles Treaty. Meanwhile the Anglo-Americans in every war since 1945: invades country xyz because they don't like its leader.
    1
  1458. It serves doubly. A weakened Ukraine means the US and it's "allies" would be able to "invest" in Ukrainian industry and resources for cheap. A longer war also reduces Russian military capability.
    1
  1459.  @univeropa3363  Just about "once", you can even argue it was still the Americans that won WW1 for the Entante.
    1
  1460.  @dannyarcher6370  the alternative was not getting millions of us killed and saddling us with debt that wouldn't be paid for for another 100 years.
    1
  1461.  @dannyarcher6370  The alternative was not allying with the French and destroying our country.
    1
  1462. No one in particular "wanted war" but in March 1939 the British are the ones that wanted war from the Cabinet meetings to British General's letters demanding war. "War, and war now with a near eastern front. Without war our desired results may never be acheived" says one such Noel Mason MacFarlane "we must have a war, we cannot lose it" says Henry Pownall "we should attack Germany" says Chamberlain and i'm sure you can dig up many other quotes.
    1
  1463. Germany had a land army, and land armies aren't much use against the English Channel. So they used it against Russia. Conquering Russia was a long time goal for Germany. So Hitler took the chance in 1941.
    1
  1464. He saved the world from cheap holidays in the East European Plain.
    1
  1465. yeah it's always ironic when propagandists talk about other "propaganda" like bruh. I'm not saying TIK is a propagandists but still in this instance he's spouting propaganda "Germany started WW2" um, no. You can argue they started the German-Polish war but it was quite clearly Britain who started the conflagration later known as WW2.
    1
  1466. Mainstream 'historians' like Roberts skip 90% of what actually happened in that period.
    1
  1467. They didn't really switch sides they just surrendered, there were some small skirmishes in order to comply with the surrender to moscow but that's about it.
    1
  1468. same could be said of pretty much British war in history
    1
  1469. "Nuclear war cannot be won" It can be won as much as Britain won WW2.
    1
  1470. and that's the fantastic thing about WW2, had it not been for Britain's guarantee of Poland, there might not have even been a German-Polish war. But, here we are with "Germany started ww2".
    1
  1471. Did sweden not have a rail line from north to south? Why was it not possible to just ship the ore by train and then ship in the south ?
    1
  1472. It's fairly easy, they should then say "where are your parents from/ were born"
    1
  1473.  @BasedGauncho  Obviously. When people ask "who was the best general" they are really asking "who was the 2nd best general of the war"
    1
  1474.  @BasedGauncho  I clearly mean that Manstein was the best General
    1
  1475. tfw born in the same century that Queen Victoria lived in.
    1
  1476. Also the "civil war" wasn't even a civil war.
    1
  1477.  @mikewlazlinski4309  you legitimately can or was the American War of Independence in fact "The British Civil War" ?
    1
  1478.  @mikewlazlinski4309  A civil war is one fought in the same state, usually two sides fighting for control of the state. Such as the English civil war; parliamentarians vs royalists. The Confederates were not fighting for control of the Union, they were fighting for independence, hence it was a war of independence as you would title any successful war of independence as such. Only in failed attempts at independence would you blasphemously call the conflict a "civil war".
    1
  1479. why?
    1
  1480.  @jayowen7830  in general
    1
  1481. "Some prophets of evil see the German economic system spreading and ousting us from the world markets, but is that to be apprehended?" - Alexander Cadogan, 1938. "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. "Poland today on war footing" - Biddle, March 26th 1939 "War, and war now with a near eastern front. Without war the desired results may never be achieved." - Noel Mason-MacFarlane, 28th March. "The Foreign Secretary said that it was clear that if action was to be undertaken In circumstances at all favourable to us, or if the threat of action was to be an effective deterrent, Germany must be faced with war on two fronts simultaneously." - Cabinet Meeting Minutes, March 1939 [23/98] "No doubt it would be impossible to prevent Poland from being overrun. The Chiefs of Staff, indeed, thought that Poland would be likely to be overrun by Germany within two or three months." - Cabinet Meeting Minutes, March 1939 [23/98] (proof that the British KNEW Poland would lose any war with Germany) "THE FOREIGN SECRETARY reported that he had now received a telegram from Berlin in regard to relations between Germany and Poland, In effect, the upshot of the report was that Herr (German Leader) was now dealing with these negotiations himself, but that not much progress was being made. This was attributed to the fact that the Poles were adopting a more intractable attitude since they had obtained our guarantee." - Cabinet Meeting Minutes, 1939 "Germany does not wish to risk a show-down with the Great Powers of the West." - Raymond H. Geist, 3rd April. "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 bombarding Danzig." - Gerald Shepard, 10th August. "Burckhardt is greatly disappointed that efforts towards a detente have been definatley 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. "The Poles had threatened severe economic reprisals and were privatley making threats of military action. Beck thought that the Senate had climbed down and published his success in the press." - Roger Makins, 14th August. "Polish mentality causes me to feel considerable foreboding." - Pierppont Moffat, 18th August "If the President is contemplating any action for peace it seems to me the place to work is on Beck in Poland." - Joseph Kennedy, 23rd August "I can only urge the importance of Poland accepting the proposal for direct negotiations and thereby putting herself right in the eyes of the world" - Nevile Henderson, 30th 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.
    1
  1482.  @CharlieZColt  It's an assumption that you literally cannot prove to be incorrect without a time machine. Would the US sit by as Japan took over East Asia? Since they totally embargoed Japan for forming an agreement with France in Indochina, somehow I don't think Roosevelt would just sit by if Japan invaded the European colonies.
    1
  1483.  @CharlieZColt  It may be but you're using the DoD's opinion on something as if it was a fact of what would have happened.
    1
  1484. indeed, and Stalin saw that the British idea was to get Russia to fight Germany.
    1
  1485. TIK, what are your opinions on Hitler's attempts to gain a deal with Poland from 1938 to April 1939. How does this fact fit with your "he had to go to war because of the economy" narrative, also what did the Germans gain economically from a poor agrarian country like Poland anyway ?
    1
  1486.  @ukkev7290  what is it titled ?
    1
  1487. They might not have been mass produced (I dunno, maybe because Germany was losing the war and being bombed into oblivion) yet they still produced the technology. Hence the argument being they were technologically superior. Weather or not they had the ability to mass produce or make these creations effective.
    1
  1488.  @rankoorovic7904  I don't see how production numbers relate to technological advancement really. You can make the same arguments with contemporary tech. Are 10,000 Intel Celeron processors better than a Ryzen Threadripper 3990X ?
    1
  1489. It's kinda difficult to just stop war unilaterally. Hitler tried to gain an entante with Britain, nor did he want war with Britain or France and then tried to end it at every juncture (October 1939, June 1940 among many others). However it was Britain that did want to fight and destroy Germany and under the insane leadership of madman Churchill, they didn't want to compromise on anything other than complete destruction of Europe or Britain.
    1
  1490.  @LloydLaughalot  Peoplehood is fascism according to this pillock
    1
  1491. Yeah this seemed a poor video by TIK standards. He just dismisses SAMs, cruise missiles, space craft etc. as "just rockets". And not the futuristic pioneering technologies that are still used today.
    1
  1492.  @MilitaryHistoryVisualized  what do they call it ?
    1
  1493.  @kallemattiwaris2422  What on gods earth is this even supposed to mean? Unlike 95% of people who see this in a theatre, I am not ignorant of history and that Finland was allied with Germany and killed 250x more Commies than they did Germans. Yet this movie would give the average viewer the impression that Germany was the antagonist lol.
    1
  1494.  @kallemattiwaris2422  You're calling me the american? when you're making such a ridiculous assumption of me not knowing about the Lapland war despite clearly referencing it in my statement of "Finland was allied with Germany and killed 250x more commies than they did Germans"
    1
  1495. Indeed the tarnation of Chamberlain is one of the strangest part of British propaganda. It's a good thing that we destroyed Europe, yet at the same time we hate Chamberlain who started the war in the first place.... ? War is bad yet at the same time gott straffe Chamberlain for not starting it earlier ?
    1
  1496.  @collinwood6573  nah its like being 2nd in a race and saying "I was the first to use nike shoes"
    1
  1497. Romania was on Romania's side. Their largest trade partner was Germany and they hated communists/ Russians like every other Russian neighbouring state. So it's not like they would voluntarily join the Communist Alliance against their trade partner is it ?
    1
  1498.  @jonathandnicholson  Nazism is when happy and prosperous country.
    1
  1499.  @Bingo_Bango_  no it was the poles that Broke off negotiations, even after March Hitler made personal attempts to negotiate with Warsaw. With Beck reiterating to the British on August 1st "The best chance of maintaining peace is for us to remain calm and firm without any sign whatsoever of compromise or inclination, official or otherwise, to negotiate about Danzig."
    1
  1500.  @Bingo_Bango_  >anecdotes and quotes, by Germans, from Germans is it not a valid source? or do you only accept anecdotes about Germany by Britons >Both of those ideas were utter fabrications well shit, the nazis were geniuses then, they got everything right, right down to the polish press demanding the shelling of danzig. If Hitler wanted to frame Poland then he would have ordered Danzig to establish a customs union with Germany which would have "provoked" a Polish invasion, yet Danzig in July wanted to ease relations, why's that? There are plenty of documents from Danzig diplomats about the efforts they went through to reach a rapprochement with Poland and most of them say the same thing, that it was Poland obstructing any peaceful negotiations. There was no effort by them to resolve the dispute peacefully. Can you blame Hitler for resorting to war if that is the only option he is given? As Henderson points out.
    1
  1501.  @Saeronor  there's plenty of his reports and Burckhardts from the previous months saying the same thing, as i've just mentioned above
    1
  1502.  @Bingo_Bango_  >You're the one who keeps promoting them Actually i've only been using British and Swiss sources in this thread >I'm not even sure what you're getting at. your point about Hitler always wanting war with Germany and trying to frame poland as the "aggressor", I gave an easy option of how he could have achieved that, he didn't. > no Poland did not invade Germany. don't think i've ever claimed such a thing, I did say that Poland threatened numerous times to invade Danzig (which they did). >No one had a gun to Hitler's head apart from Lord Halifax's power politics and the constant warmongering by western press. Sure Hitler could have just embarrassed himself and give the initiative to the west but we'll never know what would happen. >I repeat: are you delusional? not at all. >muddied attention probably the case, i'm not a redditor and don't partake in many long winded internet debates. But I have read many books, including primary sources i.e. DGFP, DBFP and DUSFP etc. There is a clear view of diplomats of the time that Poland was refusing peaceful solutions the Germans are portrayed by British and American diplomats as reasonable folk who want Poland to come to the negotiations but Poland never did. You can't deny that fact, had Poland in fact made efforts to preserve peace then people like von Hassel and Nevile Henderson wouldn't have gotten stressed about the intransigent Poles.
    1
  1503.  @Bingo_Bango_  > the foggiest hint what's going on in the conversation so far. because i presume your whole general argument is the usual "it was a long planned war by hitler" yet the facts just do not add up. Why then had Germany cancelled its planned attack on Poland and then went back to negotiations, as Martin Winstone writes "The clearest evidence that Hitler was not pursuing a predetermined plan towards Poland lay in what he actually did." ... "Precisley because Hitler's ambitions in the East were so much greater - Lebensraum at the expense of the USSR rather than the restoration of the pre 1914 borders - he was less fixated on Poland. This enabled him to pursue a more pragmatic course, despite resistance from his conservative allies." ... "The German government still went through the motions of negotiation even on the eve of war. Their motivation no doubt was to try and avoid war with France and Britain if Poland could be induced to follow the German line". >Poland did not invade Danzig again, I never claimed they did. >Not an invasion of Poland by Germany. No. Because Poland never even contemplated the most basic and universally accepted solution to the problem, championed by basically everyone with common sense i.e. the return of Danzig to Germany. Instead Poland said "fight me" and Germany responded with "alright then". Yet this is all Germany's fault of course. >Say, could I have everything you own? More like "Say can I have back this city which itself wants to come back to me and was mine until it was given to you by the allies"
    1
  1504.  @Bingo_Bango_  So you think Poland "did nothing wrong" then ? >You are not permitted to renege on treaties Unless you're country is called the United States or Britain of course. >May he be absolved of guilt in his eyes, I don't think anyone is absolving him of any guilt but equally you can't absolve Poland of all guilt.
    1
  1505.  @Bingo_Bango_  >the only thing Poland did "wrong" was not give in to pressure from the USSR to annex and go to war with Germany You're saying it was wrong for Poland to not give part of its country in order to fight against the other ?
    1
  1506.  @Bingo_Bango_  > per the Soviet-German 1939 agreement. nowhere in that agreement did it "carve up poland" contrary to british apologists like yourself. spheres of influences "in the event of" are not set in stone territory assignments. >German negotiations were fair and reasonable how were they not ? Henderson certainly said they were moderate, though of course, as we all know according to "the correct historians" he was a famous nazi. >As an aside, it's always fascinating how vehement revisionists like you guys always come out when it's to the benefit of violent extremists and Churchill wasn't a violent extremist? sure. >Germany did nothing wrong I've never implied such a thing. >Where's the revisionists swarming to conclusions that can only be used to justify peace and sensibility? I don't understand your point in this?
    1
  1507.  @Bingo_Bango_  >you have to be an absolute imbecile to believe Oh but Britain decided that Poland was suddenly an important strategic partner and in total ignorance decided to military guarantee it? sure. >hypothetically yes, hypothetically, had Poland returned to negotiations or better yet offered to unilaterally give back Danzig as a gesture of their good faith, war may have been avoided. >or if Poland "asked for it" In the eyes of outside diplomats, they did indeed ask for it, just read this. https://history.state.gov/historicaldocuments/frus1939v01/d227 Looking forward to how you dismiss this one.
    1
  1508.  @Bingo_Bango_  The general idea that Poland's position was unreasonable. How can it be reasonable for the daily tensions with Danzig and refusing the right of self determination to those people? Whilst telling everyone that they will go to war with Germany over it. >Britain became interested in defending Poland Or making sure Poland didn't give way to Germany, as we have already seen in March 1939 with Lord Halifax's meetings and Chamberlain's comments in the Cabinet meetings. You may or may not have read Simon Newman's book about the British guarantee? >you quoted a Briton in a way that implied that Poland was somehow wrong to hold Danzig Yes, here's another lovley quote by the British "it is recognized in Great Britain that Danzig is a German city and that British public opinion would welcome a peaceful solution based on the recognition of this fact" - Ashton Gwaktin >You have not addressed the fact that Germany had a policy of sabotaging negotiations How could they sabotage negotiations that never took place because the Polish didn't want them? They never took place despite the best efforts of Henderson and others to get the Poles to negotiate.
    1
  1509.  @Bingo_Bango_  > it's not this one No because as I said Danzig wanted a detente with Poland but then the Polish ultimatum of August 4th "shattered any hope" in the words of Burckhardt, though again i'm sure he's another nazi sympathizing diplomat to you, interesting that the diplomats of the time were all nazis isn't it? > By refusing to even attempt to seek common ground with Polish negotiators Would you not apply this to the Poles as well? >German troops at the border Both sides had been bolstering their borders for months, would you say Polish movements in February or March ruined the chances for a peaceful settlement ? I don't think you would. >I will continue to trust the private and authenticated communications of Germans declaring what Germany must and should do, And I will continue to trust the private and authenticated communications of Britons declaring what Britain must and should do >the victimization of the Polish Why do you just ignore the victimization of the Germans ?
    1
  1510. ​ @Bingo_Bango_  >came months prior if not years prior, everyone knew that Danzig was to return to Germany sooner or later and it was Poland who refused to let this happen hence why people also say Versailles started WW2 because it should never have been given in the first place. >usual argument about it being a planned and cunning plan to start a war I find it amazing that the only time the nazis were true geniuses and showed true cunning was in starting the war. Again do you think Poland was right to go along with the "die for Danzig" policy as supported by warmongers like Churchill and the Eden group. >no one gives a fuck about what Britain must and should do in relations to this topic except the British had a large part in this conflict though. Many contemperaries blamed Polish intransigence on the military guarantee, such as the King of Italy, Prince Regent of Hungary etc. not to mention Britain literally went around Europe asking countries to fight with them in a preventative war "regardless of Poland" not sure if i've already linked you to that document. "Beck 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." - Joseph Kennedy "The Polish view was that now that they had france and Great Britain behind them, they could not concede in full demands which they had refused in March last." "Provided we could ensure Germany having to face a war on two fronts, there was much less likelihood of war" - Cabinet meetings minutes But do tell me how Britain had nothing to do with the start of WW2
    1
  1511.  @markwhite8791  Winston Churchill would disagree
    1
  1512.  @markwhite8791  I guess so, all the warmongers thought it would be easy, they thought the German economy would collapse as soon as they declared war. As we saw, they were wrong and the British economy collapsed instead.
    1
  1513. how exactly is Berlin "nazi occupied" lol
    1
  1514.  @charlessawyer836  not the communists, no. But to say he didn't care about German people as a German nationalist is the dumbest of the western propaganda attacks.
    1
  1515.  @charlessawyer836  Are Americans proud of "killing millions and trying to take over the world " ?
    1
  1516.  @charlessawyer836  I don't think anyone is proud of genocide.
    1
  1517. I love this question because it immediately exposes that the war declared upon Germany was not out of any consideration for Poland or any kind of upstanding moral obligation.
    1
  1518.  @mikebauer6917  yeah just like how we should listen to the lessons of Snow White and the Seven Dwarves
    1
  1519.  @wizzyno1566  Wars take two parties to instigate. Especially if one party wants the war (Britain), and the other doesn't (Germany). To then say "only Germany started it" is absolutely dumb on all logical levels. Did Britain start world wars when it invaded half the world ? Has America started WW3 when it invades xyz ? No ? Why ? Because no one decided to go to war with America. Its quite that simple. Yet Britain declaring war on Germany is somehow all Germany's fault? I recommend "The British Guarantee to Poland" by Simon Newman for a good introduction on how Britain started the war it declared on Germany.
    1
  1520. Retired, the warmongers ruined his reputation anyway as "an appeaser" and then died in 1941.
    1
  1521. Germany: Ahead in technology and research UK: Ahead in lies and deception. Yep, can confirm as a brit myself.
    1
  1522. I really don't think he at all "liked" the aristocracy, he was simply practical, knowing he had to work with them in order to achieve his goals.
    1
  1523. Yeah it's such a ridiculous phrase, is it not a privilege to be black or any other race ?
    1
  1524. "both world wars" wrong. The blockade didn't do much at all in WW2, it was actually Germany that was blockading England.
    1
  1525. probably since literally every political movement in history
    1
  1526.  @ajsimo2677  "i like differences apart from differences i don't like"
    1
  1527.  @MrNuts70  indeed it is. I have no idea what this comment was supposed to mean though.
    1
  1528. no, plutocracy.
    1
  1529. Some darn fool thing in the middle east.
    1
  1530. why ?
    1
  1531. Why did you guys not mention the American pressure on Chamberlain in March 1939 and the Polish Ultimatum of August 4 ? As Herbert Hoover said; Chamberlain would not have given the guarantee if not for Roosevelt's pressure, and thus, Poland would probably not have chosen to go to war with Germany either.
    1
  1532. not really because single people don't buy houses, cars, nappies and literally everything you need to buy to raise a child.
    1
  1533.  @mythoceanas8874  I mean single people like myself and many others who still live with parents, aren't spending any of it. Or very little compared to a couple.
    1
  1534. because by 1938, Germany had an army. Unlike the times in 1919 and 1931 when Germany and Austria wanted a reunion and the French and British forbade it.
    1
  1535.  @Kris003-t9n  the Poles made their own choices of lying to the British about the generous German offer of March 21st though, and then refusing all negotiations in favour of war with their new allies. Both Britain and Poles are to blame.
    1
  1536.  @andrewpease3688  What are you confused about ?
    1
  1537.  @andrewpease3688  He was indeed PM in Late May/ June 1940. Most would call it "surrender" but, yes he could have ended the war by negotiations in partnership with the French when they asked the British government to join them in ending the war.
    1
  1538.  @andrewpease3688  "Remind me, how did that work out?" Well as the war continued, not too great obviously. Being invaded and bombed isn't usually a great thing.
    1
  1539. Why are they hypocrites? If it weren't for the dumb idiots who fought and died for this system of tyranny then they would not be in power would they ?
    1
  1540.  @philipfreyaborn8288  "brainwashed ignorant hypocrites like you" Ironic. " fighting against r-cist industrial killaars is dumb" how about starting a war that would see your empire destroyed, millions of europeans killed and the economy ruined ? Sounds kinda dumb.
    1
  1541.  @meth3rlence  That's too much logic for trump haters
    1
  1542.  John Smith  search "compilation of voter fraud" someone linked to a youtube video of it here
    1
  1543.  @ak-od7mf  It really is fantastic how these "academics" in the same breadth say Germany started WW1 AND 2. The logic that Germany started WW1 is the same logic that says Britain started WW2. Even if it wasn't already simplistic enough that Britain declared war on Germany after interfering in peaceful German-Polish negotiations on the status of Danzig.
    1
  1544. Hitler was so bothered about people having a good life it literally cost him the war lol Meanwhile in the plutocracies people suffered terrible deprivations as soon as 1939 in order to wage war against Germany.
    1
  1545. I don't think WW2 could have been a bigger disaster for this country than it actually was.
    1
  1546.  @ameyas7726  its not just a british panel, its a distinctly BBC, posh, southern middle class panel.
    1
  1547.  @rafaelsomething5880  Because the UK has already been conquered by a foreign superpower.
    1
  1548. No historian is unquestionable
    1
  1549.  @africkinamerican  I think it was Douglas McArthur, in any case it was said to James Forrestal who wrote it in his diary
    1
  1550. well volk in english is folk, so there is that reason.
    1
  1551. problem is the whole "single military power" thing, where does this military power come from ? Latvia, Norway ? Or another country that we launched 2 world wars against specifically to prevent it from uniting Europe ? As AJP Taylor said, the first and only time Europe was united was in June 1940.
    1
  1552.  @colder5465  I can't seem to find this book "wonder by moscow" what is the author called ?
    1
  1553. Nah WW1 doesn't have the SECRET NAZI PLOT or SECRET NAZI BUNKER or EVIL NAZI PLAN that WW2 has for Dr Felton to clickbait with.
    1
  1554.  @TheImperatorKnight  The Hossbach Memorandum doesn't prove at all that Germany started WW2, much less does it prove that Germany is culpable for the actions of the Chamberlain government or the Polish government. Even if we assume the conspiracy is true (that Germany had long planned for war with Poland) it doesn't negate the choices made by Chamberlain or his government (namely starting war against Germany). As Simon Newman said: If we accept that political adjustment to take account of changing power relationships is both necessary and desirable, then, as E. H. Carr has argued, 'the use or threatened use of force to maintain the status quo may be morally more culpable than the use or threatened use of force to alter it'. Even if we accept that the distinction between 'aggressive' and 'defensive' wars should be made, it is seldom possible in practice to do so with clear-cut precision. It is certainly arguable that German hegemony in central and south-eastern Europe did not represent a threat to Britain's independence. Halifax had to counter such thinking in the Cabinet, and Cadogan always had his doubts. In any case, even on the worst interpretation, the threat was only a contingent one and did not arise mechanically or necessarily from the mere fact of a shift in the European balance.
    1
  1555. Except numerous arrests were made of local people.
    1
  1556. Indeed, as a European Trump is well within his right to say "go do one", to Zelensky demanding security guarantees from the U.S. whilst saying "you will feel war in the future".
    1
  1557.  @ethericboy  Yes and a homeless man becoming Chancellor was also unheard of.
    1
  1558.  @ethericboy  Perhaps not commoners but I think it was more common for people who weren't related to the families to claim the throne and fight wars and then become King etc. I think i get your point but it would not be impossible for someone in an exceptional case to make themselves King through years of campaigning, politicking and opportunism in a similar fashion that Hitler became Fuhrer when President Hindenburg died.
    1
  1559.  @ethericboy  yeah like a referendum on the monarchy
    1
  1560.  @kristopherryanwatson  Churchill was born into a long line of aristocrats, so its not at all comparable. He got his commission in the military simply by being a Churchill.
    1
  1561.  @DawnOfTheDead991  Yeah, become PM, King/Queen dies and then merge the offices together as one. That's basically what AH did.
    1
  1562. "this may be a long comment" writes a book
    1
  1563. As they said. None whatsoever. If Rishi talked big about stopping immigration and various other right wing talking points, convincingly. Then he would have won and have been more popular. Instead he was just some soulless, corporate entity who fooled no one with his algorithmically refined speeches.
    1
  1564. "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
  1565.  @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
  1566. Yes obviously any what if scenario in 1945 is a bit silly. Which is why it's more interesting to have them in 43 or earlier. Preferably earlier, really the major, perhaps supreme one is "what if Germany didn't declare war on USA". That was really the cause of all issues. Without the USA then Germany wouldn't have lost at least 1m men and material in defending Italy and France.
    1
  1567.  @williamsnowden8186  You say that as people are currently serving jail time for saying mean things about immigrants on twitter.
    1
  1568.  @robertthompson0  It's pretty comparable. Nato is clearly designed against Russia and Chamberlain's "Peace Front" guarantees were clearly designed against Germany.
    1
  1569. The real history that people have no knowledge of is the actions of William Bullitt, Anthony Biddle and Joseph Kennedy in pressuring Chamberlain into giving Poland the guarantee of March 31st. The very instrument that caused the war.
    1
  1570.  @LukeMovement1  its always been the case with Farage, he has alot of online support, whilst the tories have none, yet the tories still win. Its likely due to generational differences. Same for fringe left wing groups like Galloway, he has alot of support online but not as much in the real world.
    1
  1571.  @LukeMovement1  except reform is second most popular party for under 30s as well.
    1
  1572.  @LukeMovement1  according to the polls they are
    1
  1573.  @LukeMovement1  well i've seen poll which show reform is 2nd popular party for various age groups
    1
  1574.  @spenser9908  So ? So what ? It's a comment not an argument.
    1
  1575. he was clearly being diplomatic, a soviet offensive, never mind victory, would have been impossible without lend lease
    1
  1576. "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
  1577.  @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
  1578.  @douglasturner6153  Yeah that would make sense but then again the British government itself published diplomatic correspondence, one of which Halifax explained how the talks between Germany and Britain of August 1939 should be kept quiet otherwise it would create "the worst possible impression in the United States"
    1
  1579. I like how he reverts to the "fight the oligarchy" mode AFTER supporting the oligarchy in an election.
    1
  1580.  @bolivar2153  "corroboration" Do you even know what corroboration means ? If you have several sources referencing an event, then you can say it happened. "far from neutral." What does this even mean? You imply we should only use sources who's persons agreed with their governments opinions. Kennedy openly said he was against the policies of Roosevelt, yet nevertheless carried out his instructions. "without concrete evidence of their impact on policy decisions" How do you propose we get concrete evidence on a secret conversation that Kennedy denied having ? Other than what other 'neutral' sources said, such as Raczynski who said "There are rumours here to the effect that Ambassador Kennedy actually did talk with Mr. Chamberlain in recent days. It is asserted that he emphasized that America’s sympathies for England in case of a conflict, would depend to a great extent upon the determination with which England would take care of European states threatened by Germany." "does not exempt his views from scrutiny." We're not scrutinizing his views though are we ? We are observing his actions, and his observations on the events that he partook in. Events which are corroborated by Raczynski, Bullitt, Łukasiewicz, and of course himself.
    1
  1581.  @bolivar2153  How do you thus attempt to claim it was "influential". Based on several other sources such as and including Bullitt, Łukasiewicz and Raczynski. You can't easily just dismiss it either and say it had "totally no effect on Chamberlain's decision making". "corroboration" No I know exactly what it means, and I don't just dismiss a source simply because I disagree with their opinions on something.
    1
  1582.  @bolivar2153  "None of these sources challenge the fact" they inherently do though. Agree to disagree mate.
    1
  1583.  @bolivar2153  "During a conversation with Ambassador Bullitt on the 24th March, I stated that all diplomatic negotiations started by London would have no possibility of success, so long as the British government decides not to accept definite and precise obligations. It is childish and criminal to hold Poland responsible for war or peace. It must be asserted once and for all that the responsibility rests principally with England and France. Ambassador Bullitt agreed completely with my views. The following day, the 25th, he informed me that, adopting my views, and exercising the authority he was accorded, he had instructed the American ambassador in London, Joseph Kennedy, to call at the residence of Prime Minister Chamberlain, and to repeat everything to him, emphasizing, categorically, the responsibility of the British Government. In order to strengthen the efforts of the American Ambassador in London, I called the attention of Ambassador Bullitt to the fact that it is possible that the British may treat the efforts of the United States with contempt. He answered that I am probably right, but that nevertheless the United States has at its disposal the means to bring pressure on England." - Juliusz Lukasiewicz 29th March. "I asked Kennedy about the conversation which he is said to have had recently with Mr. Chamberlain concerning Poland. Kennedy was surprised and declared categorically that a conversation of such significance never took place. At the same time, and contradicting his own assertion, Kennedy expressed displeasure and surprise that his colleagues in Paris and Warsaw should talk so openly about this conversation." - Edward Raczynski, 29th March. "It was difficult for me to judge what effect the conversation with Mr. Kennedy could have had on the position of Mr. Chamberlain, but I believe that it was not without meaning, since from what Bullitt told me, the British government was very much concerned with the American opinion and wished to maintain close relations with Washington. I was very pleased that Ambassador Kennedy's conversation with Chamberlain had led the latter to adopt a surprisingly firm stand on Danzig." - Juliusz Lukasiewicz, 29th March.
    1
  1584. Go ahead and tell me that practically every nation's diplomatic missions are all wrong and it never happened. Naturally you'd dismiss German diplomats as "bias". You can't so easily dismiss British, Polish and French diplomats however.
    1
  1585.  @bolivar2153  "If Kennedy himself is denying the conversation, this weakens the validity of these claims." Are you honestly that naïve ? And funnily enough you are now trusting Kennedy when you previously said he was unreliable and biased.
    1
  1586.  @bolivar2153  His "denial" is followed on by "At the same time, and contradicting his own assertion, Kennedy expressed displeasure and surprise that his colleagues in Paris and Warsaw should talk so openly about this conversation." Not to mention Juliusz Lukasiewicz said he was present when Kennedy was on the telephone with Bullitt talking about the conversation lol.
    1
  1587.  @bolivar2153  "Not one of your sources is claiming that any of this had any influence" you obviously didn't read it "There were many conversations taking place all over Europe" And yet we are led to believe that, for example, Polish leaders never talked about their political decisions with Romanian delegates. "You are just fixating on this one as a source " I mean its just the one I brought up in the subject of Atlantacism. "To reduce all of that to a single "secret" conversation" You're making stuff up now. "Your desire to reduce complex historical events to a single smoking gun" My desire is literally and totally the opposite. It is your position of "Germany expansion was the sole reason for WW2" which is reducing the complex events. "you went to great lengths to argue it was all Britain's fault. Now it's all America's fault?" My point is clearly that there is ALOT more to the story than just the "one day Germany invaded Poland".
    1
  1588.  @bolivar2153  It's as much of a strawman as your previous derisions.
    1
  1589.  @gandydancer9710  No the US didn't destroy the UK, the Churchill regime voluntarily gave them all our money and our Empire. As to your last point, even when the Germans were victorious over Europe their economic ministers were writing about how they should merely urge and ask Denmark to join a currency union, arguing forward the benefits to their economy. In a timeline where war isn't thrusted upon Germany, I doubt they would use threats and force to create such a currency union lol. Nor would I describe Britain as "a wart". And certainly it would be much less of a wart to the German Empire as it currently is a wart to the American Empire.
    1
  1590.  @KongSunWu  its a joke
    1
  1591.  @andrewcarter7503  People say "navy strong" but this just seems to fly in the face of how the war actually turned out, you only need to look at the Pacific War where land based aircraft smashed the British Eastern Fleet in numerous instances.
    1
  1592.  @justgivemethetruth  Is Ukraine in a class rival to Russia ? Read up about Chamberlain's "Peace Front". Though it's pretty difficult since there's no wikipedia page on it as it heavily undermines the mainstream narrative of "evil Germany wanted to take over the world and weak Chamberlain reluctantly defended Poland". But essentially Chamberlain wanted a security framework as NATO-esque as you could have in the 1930s. Except most European nations he asked said "no" to such a thing. Only Poland and France were in some sort of agreement with it. So my point is that it's ridiculous how John can explain "Russia attacked Ukraine because of western security guarantees" but not at all mention how Germany invaded Poland due to western security guarantees.
    1
  1593.  @Real_OSHA_Unsafety_Engineer  both statements, pretty incorrect. Yes Germany was obviously revanchist in some respects of the Versailles dictat but actually wasn't in other aspects such as offering to renounce German claims on territory given to Poland in 1919 in return for Danzig. Meanwhile Putin has talked alot about Ukraine being part of Russia.
    1
  1594. you should probably edit out your gasps honestly.
    1
  1595.  @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
  1596.  @TheMightyMidget  As many here know, his Indian policies contradict the "he fought against that" narrative.
    1
  1597. Perhaps the Russians should rebrand their war of aggression as a "war on terror" ?
    1
  1598.  @Romstroy  guided by the tens of thousands of non combatants who decided they'd rather go west than stay for communism
    1
  1599. 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
  1600.  @marionapoleoni4502  It is very, I recommend you go through "documents on british foreign policy" and "documents on german foreign policy" for a read of real history.
    1
  1601. hahah epic xD tells you everything you need to know about this lot
    1
  1602. Because wars are very difficult to start unilaterally
    1
  1603. good thing we had a monarchy to oppose massive societal change.... oh.
    1
  1604. Ronald Lindsay's dispatches from 1939 ?
    1
  1605. Yeah just like how that went well when Russia provided Cuba with nuclear deterrent ?
    1
  1606.  @kevinporter3212  Correct. Cuba was an independent country which the US blockaded, whilst Taiwan is internationally recognized part of China
    1
  1607.  @dandare2586  Yes probably, depends what the deal is.
    1
  1608.  @dandare2586  British propaganda lol
    1
  1609.  @fguocokgyloeu4817  "it worked?" is the question in the title
    1
  1610. @aBoughtLemon Britain was crucial to both wars. No British involvement in WW1 would have meant France losing in 1914. Even if France still managed to defeat the Germans in 1914, they would not have been able to resist the German offensives throughout the next 2-3 years. Even with millions of British soldiers launching offensives to alleviate French positions at Verdun, the French still nearly revolted in 1917. And WW2 of course without Britain, there's no WW2.
    1
  1611. @aBoughtLemon >but British army power was next to nothing. I've never said anything on the contrary
    1
  1612. @aBoughtLemon >Churchill you mean Chamberlain. >That war-winning strategy belongs to the Soviet Union That's just ridiculous given that the Soviets only started winning with lend-lease and the Germans making big mistakes like splitting Army Group South, if you want to see "war winning strategies" do not look at Operation Mars, Second Kharkov and the whole of 1941. Chamberlain's original strategy was mostly an economic war against Germany, he was told and urged by the warmongers that Germany would revolt and collapse if only Britain declared war, as we saw it didn't. He then planned on invading Norway and Sweden to choke Germany of its war supplies whilst France would fight off the German attack. As we saw also, the Germans beat the British to Norway by a few days if not hours. As the commander of the invading force boasted about how "the Germans missed the bus".
    1
  1613. @aBoughtLemon Except even Glantz says Germany could have won in 1941 no? >almost yeah almost, but something like 40% of soviet tanks in Moscow were of the heavier armored Matilda type. >Stalin could have done Operation Uranus down in the Caucuses instead How? I don't think there was much down there to begin with. > outproducing Germany in tanks using materials from lend-lease, without having to divert manpower or resources for other things
    1
  1614. @aBoughtLemon I believe the source was "USSR and total war, why didn't the soviet economy collapse in 1942"
    1
  1615.  @adamdavis8082  Now go research events before March 31st, particularly his conversation with Minister Beck on January 5th 1939.
    1
  1616.  @adamdavis8082  Your "he didn't stick to agreements" line is a British (lol) propaganda line, I'm not calling that a myth. I am referring to your original comment of "he just wanted German territory back" as a bit of a myth, and I don't need to repeat what I already said.
    1
  1617.  @tb8865  "Defend Europe against who?" America and Russia. "But America would never attack Europe" It's very easy to think this in a timeline where America subjugated and plundered Europe. However in a timeline where Europe unites against American interests, this could well have been the case.
    1
  1618. 2:34 too bad we couldn't have cooperated with Germany on a European Union 100 years ago. We'd have flying cars by now.
    1
  1619.  @dovetonsturdee7033  well the US didn't sign it so from that point of view they had nothing to do with it
    1
  1620.  @susakuzero  It's more stunning that people believe Adolf was a cartoon villain who wanted to "EXTERMINATE EXTERMINAAAATE everyone who wasn't German". His actions, even towards a defeated France, somewhat paint a different story. I am of course referring to the fact that he refused to give Morocco to Spain because he didn't want to upset France. German leaders particularly stressed that Germany should treat it's enemies better than how Germany was treated in 1919.
    1
  1621.  @susakuzero  >slaves they used slaves because they had millions of Germans mobilized in the army. They wouldn't have used slaves after the war. In fact German leaders and economists, even H man himself wanted to release soldiers back into the German economy for production. But their strategic or tactical decisions needed the soldiers instead. >Why would people settle in Russia same reason why people settled throughout America. Free real estate is probably a large part of the equation lol
    1
  1622.  @ResidentofVirginia  Yeah that was a bit of payback, but not quite dismantling the country style crap that you would expect from such evil monsters. The good guy allies on the otherhand did dismantle Germany lol The French proved inadequate/ unreliable in defending their territory from the Americans in Morocco which is why the Germans then militarized the south as well. Perfectly understandable. Not dissimilar to the British invasion of Iceland.
    1
  1623.  @ResidentofVirginia  You do know the Americans also occupied and still does occupy Germany right? You also know Germany was divided from 1945-1991 right?
    1
  1624. And even less people know about the atrocities the Poles committed against the Germans
    1
  1625.  @miyojewoltsnasonth2159  legibility
    1
  1626. Not to mention them recently saying the settlers are Israel's "first line of defense" literally Wehrbauer tier stuff but its ok because the US supports them.
    1
  1627.  @NotANameist  Imagine saying Nuclear War isn't a "threat" lmao
    1
  1628.  @heycidskyja4668  Can't say I've read much into WW1 but I am sure there is alot of miscalculations such as Germany allowed Austria to "start" a local war and thought it wouldn't escalate, then Grey miscalculated in his telegrams to Germany where he gave an impression Britain wouldn't get involved.
    1
  1629. "Hitler was never elected" Except the simple fact is if Hitler didn't get the most seats in the Reichstag he would never have been in any government or coalition discussions. This is literally how most democracies work.
    1
  1630.  @TimeGhost  I did, but the idea that the NSDAP/ Hitler wasn't elected is just somewhat false or misleading. Hitler didn't gain power in 1924, 1928 or 1930 because his party wasn't the largest but did gain the most seats in 1932 and thus why he was appointed Chancellor.
    1
  1631. No that wasn't a valid justification for war, but the USA was totally justified for invading Iraq because they didn't personally like their leader.
    1
  1632. Oh no, anyway.
    1
  1633. 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
  1634. y-yes it was 4d chess all along!
    1
  1635. It's still woke having the Germans as the antagonists when the Finns were fucking allied with the Germans in reality lol
    1
  1636.  @RAWRManic  "so which is it?" I'm not TIK
    1
  1637.  Ahmet Kadir Yılmaz  Because Moscow wasn't fortified in August/September 1941. Instead the leader overrid the consensus of the Generals and decided to encircle Soviet armies at Kiev instead of capturing or encircling Moscow. It's a rather common debate in the history of WW2 and alternate history. Had the USSR collapsed in 1941 or early 42 there wouldn't have been a Stalingrad. Heck, the Generals and other historians argue there was no need for Stalingrad as it is and that it was a result of the misconduct of Case Blue.
    1
  1638.  Ahmet Kadir Yılmaz  There's also the food issue. Even if we say the USSR collapses "it just takes longer". in 1942 the USSR didn't exactly have much time on the clock in regards to the food supply. If the Germans kept the Kuban region which accounted for about 5% of Soviet food. It would have tipped their food supply even more in the red.
    1
  1639. they also had something like 40 divisions in France, 20 of which they should have thrown into Russia instead of being overtly cautious, waiting for an underequipped Allied invasion.
    1
  1640. 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
  1641.  @andoapata2216  Yes and I'm explaining it's wrong to compare the Polish situation with the Ukrainian situation
    1
  1642.  @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
  1643. A government winning 20% of the vote and within a month threatening to shut down social media platforms and arrest dissenters... sounds like the very regimes they like to criticize all the time.
    1
  1644.  @Rgr262  with its foreign and economic policy controlled by poland, so it was ironically anything but free
    1
  1645.  @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
  1646.  @janek8935  yeah haha germany should have been smashed into 800 different principalities again xD haha
    1
  1647.  @paulbrown7872  He's a neocon, so he obviously supports Trump because Trump supports Israel and Israel supports Trump, it's not even a state secret lol .
    1
  1648. And UKIP with 4 million votes getting 2 seats in 2015. This is indeed the "democracy" these "democrats" love.
    1
  1649.  @Nathan-jh1ho  0/2 correct points made.
    1
  1650.  @bolivar2153  I am indeed going to share it soon enough, perhaps March. It's well evidenced, but its just not talked about by mainstream historians like "Ian Kershaw" or other popular british historians. I recommend Simon Newman's "March 1939 the british guarantee to poland" as a good book on the subject. "knowing it would trigger British and French guarantees," And was Britain not at fault for giving these guarantees, knowing it would trigger a war between Poland and Germany ?
    1
  1651.  @bolivar2153  That is the common argument. I highly recommend Simon Newman's "March 1939 the British guarantee to Poland" for a more in depth version.
    1
  1652.  @bolivar2153  A good chunk of the facts can be found in Simon Newman's "March 1939 the British guarantee to Poland". Particularly regarding the decision to guarantee the status quo in Danzig. A decision which they knew what the consequences would be.
    1
  1653.  @bolivar2153  "Are you not capable of making your own case" Not as brilliantly as a several hundred page book, like Simon Newman's "March 1939 the British guarantee to Poland". "Britain and France could not 'know' the exact outcome of their guarantees" And yet Alexander Cadogan wrote in his diary 'The die is now cast and Hitler may bomb us. But I think we've done right.' on 31st March. "He chose war" What is interesting is that Germany was the last one to do so. Britain chose war in March, albeit regretting the decision in July/ August. Poland had always thought about war, even since 1933 and Pilsudski's alleged preventative war. And famously Germany 'decided on war' in May, though delaying the decision several times in August due to diplomatic activities. "He could have pursued a diplomatic solution" He could not. The Poles refused to give back Danzig even in his early attempts, and after receiving British guarantees, they were absolutely determined not to do so. "unprovoked decision" Have you heard of the Polish Ultimatum to Danzig of August 4th ? "His vision included territorial expansion, the subjugation of other nations, and the creation of a German-dominated Europe." Which included political deals with Poland and Britain. The vision was not one of the war which we got in 1939.
    1
  1654.  @bolivar2153  They didn't have a crystal ball no, but they knew that in guaranteeing the status quo of Danzig, war was incredibly more likely. A contemporary example would be inviting Ukraine to join NATO, or guaranteeing the independence of Taiwan and then later claiming "we couldn't possibly have foreseen Russian/Chinese aggression. It is their action alone which caused WW3, we had nothing to do with it." I'll repeat again, after March 31st, there was no possible recourse to get back Danzig without conflict, or without Chamberlain openly renouncing his guarantees and urging Beck to give back Danzig. Obviously Beck and Chamberlain didn't want to be overthrown, so they took the easy way out. "Danzig was always just the "line in the sand"." I think even Churchill agreed. It was a very illogical line in the sand. "He wasn't pushed." Few Great Powers would just sit back after their citizens were threatened with bombings (Polish Ultimatum to Danzig of August 4th). The USA risked WW3 on the indirect possibility of a threat against them from the direction of Cuba in 1963, you cannot tell me in good faith that the USA wouldn't invade Cuba if the Cuban government openly threatened to bomb Miami.
    1
  1655.  @bolivar2153  "he guarantee was not designed to provoke war" Simon Newman goes over this point, there is some evidence that suggests it was. In any case, Chamberlain certainly regretted it later in the year. "this was the last viable means of maintaining peace" Not sure about that tbh "failures of appeasement" what appeasement? again, I refer you to Simon Newman's book. If there was a policy of 'appeasement' we would not have had WW2.
    1
  1656.  @bolivar2153  "this is simply historical fact" It's interpretational narrative, not fact. "were no longer prepared to negotiate away" Because they felt stronger ? "That assumption had proven disastrously wrong" Who's assumption ? Germany made no secret of it's desire for eastern expansion, it's talked about in every other diplomatic dispatch regarding Germany. This is where the 'appeasement' narrative clashes with reality. The British were well aware of German desires, firstly on the racial lines, but also of eastern expansion. Newman argues that the British merely delayed war from breaking out in 1938, due to military reasons. The French military also advised their government that they would lose war if it broke out in 1938. It wasn't because the French leaders 'appeased' Germany, it's because they had military advice not to start a war. No leader would start a war if their military says they would lose. "Negotiations with Germany were futile" Similar to the 'Germany couldn't be trusted' argument, is that this argument is defeated in June 1940, upon the French agreement made with Germany. Contemporarily, one could say "Putin is untrustworthy" or even "Trump is untrustworthy", for withdrawing from xyz agreement. Yet I know full well plenty of countries will make agreements with Russia and America none the less. As the Soviets did with Germany in 1940, despite the none existent trust between those countries.
    1
  1657. ​ @bolivar2153  Well the important thing is that they felt stronger. "window of opportunity was closing" This was a view shared in Britain and Poland too, so all states had this same view of "better war now than later", of course as mentioned previously, Germany was the last one to come to such a thinking. I'm sure it was a Cabinet meeting where a British minister quite plainly said 'if we are to go to war it will have to be 1939 or never, on account of the armaments expenditure'. As for the Polish, the British delegation of the Anglo-Polish staff talks of 12 June 1939 reported: "The Poles have a much lower opinion of the German army than we have. Many of them think a war is inevitable and that it is better to have it now and get it over with. They state their belief that the situation in Germany is favourable to Poland now, and may not be later."
    1
  1658.  @bolivar2153  "big country gets its way with small country" Isn't that common theory ?
    1
  1659.  @bolivar2153  "How did that work out" Well enough, both sides got exactly what they wanted from the agreement.
    1
  1660.  @bolivar2153  I have indeed already argued that. Does that change your argument that British politicians had no idea about what they were doing by guaranteeing the status quo in Danzig ?
    1
  1661.  @bolivar2153  Don't believe I gave such a claim as you allege. However, it is known that Stalin wanted a war between Germany and the western powers, see his speech of august 18th 1939. Indeed he did, because he planned to betray Hitler at the same time. As Viktor Suvorov shows in "the chief culprit" using evidence from Russian archives.
    1
  1662.  @bolivar2153  "military strength alone doesn't ensure victory" I mean, it kind of does.
    1
  1663.  @bolivar2153  I mean obviously real life isn't a video game, there's infinite complexities to various operations.
    1
  1664.  @bolivar2153  yeah but you said "military strength alone doesn't ensure victory" in the context of WW2, it kind of did. Unless we get into some silly arms race debate. "50,000 tanks to your 25,000 tanks" rubbish. Because of course geography and geopolitics is a huge factor. 50,000 shermans in arizona would not have been much good if Britain made peace in 1940.
    1
  1665.  @bolivar2153  They had zero reason to start WW2 but here we are.
    1
  1666.  @bolivar2153  None of that required Britain to declare war on Germany. It's noteworthy that only Britain and France declared war on Germany in September 1939. It's again noteworthy that Chamberlain regretted bringing about the confrontation by his actions of March 31st.
    1
  1667.  @bolivar2153  "None of it required Germany to invade Poland" Germany, as any country that thinks itself a 'great country' isn't going to disinterest itself in the welfare of its people, or submit to threats of bombing. But interestingly, Germany did on August 5th. Naturally the response would be 'yeah well Germany didn't want Danzig to be bombed before the German military was ready', rather than any genuine submission to Poland.
    1
  1668.  @bolivar2153  "Who else was in a position to intervene?" Everyone else in Europe, if you make the case that 'Germany needs to be stopped', 'Germany wants to dominate them' etc,.
    1
  1669.  @bolivar2153  "Tell me, who in your opinion was in a meaningful position geographically, geopolitically, or militarily to oppose German aggression?" So moral justifications for war are null and now it's about power politics ?
    1
  1670.  @bolivar2153  So we can agree there are no morals in power politics. Agreed.
    1
  1671.  @bolivar2153  "The war against Germany, for example, wasn't just about power" You just said it was.
    1
  1672.  @bolivar2153  But the point is that moral compasses rarely come into play in these decisions. (Without checking) I think it was Bullitt that told the Polish Ambassador that Roosevelt's antagonism towards Germany in 1939 was entirely based on US material interests and not any ideology. Otherwise the Brits also wouldn't have had several trade discussions and agreements with the Germans in this period.
    1
  1673.  @bolivar2153  "If your argument is going to hinge on Germany's actions being somehow morally justified" Why do you say "somehow" ? Is self determination not a democratic principle now ? Or is it only for everyone who isn't German ? Which seems to be the case. "provide justification for Germany’s documented atrocities, crimes, and injustices" I don't think it is. Nor do I need to provide justification, for there isn't any. No country has ever provided sufficient justification for atrocities, other than general justifications like 'security for ourselves in a free world' etc, etc,. I could give countless examples of atrocities committed by America and Britain, but no doubt you would dismiss that as 'whataboutism' or some such. "Tell me, who in your opinion was in a meaningful position geographically, geopolitically, or militarily to oppose German aggression" I don't believe I did. But I'll answer again: Everyone. If the your argument, and the common Allied argument is that 'Germany had to be stopped'; 'they were morally bad and it was right to start a war against them' etc,. then surely, such a view would be universally shared ?. It's interesting that in reality it wasn't. Most governments of Europe were basically "what is going on, why is this happening guys ?".
    1
  1674.  @bolivar2153  The actions against Poland were mostly moral, not material. As I'm sure you know, Poland isn't exactly a rich country.
    1
  1675.  @bolivar2153  "It would indeed be a red herring" Obviously the point wasn't "yeah well allies committed crimes too", the point was that the Allies justified - if they did at all - spraying chemicals over civilian agriculture as 'fighting communism' or mass bombing and rape of france and italy as 'liberating them'. Vague generalizations that don't directly justify the action.
    1
  1676.  @bolivar2153  "So now your claim is that Germany was somehow acting uniquely "morally" amongst the world's nations?" No.
    1
  1677.  @bolivar2153  Because the moral argument of August 1939 was that Poles were mistreating Germans and that they threatened to bomb Danzig. Like I say, few Americans would consider it morally bad to invade Cuba if the Cuban government abused Americans living there, and also threatened to bomb Miami. They would not say "hold on guys, we might do some bad things in the future, therefore we can't justify intervention"
    1
  1678.  @bolivar2153  The problem with that argument is that all those issues were internal German problems. Otherwise, why don't we declare war on China right now ? "So why choose to selectively interpret the historical record this way?" I could say the same thing. Chamberlain is on record for stating he doesn't actually care about German-Polish issues. "Germany’s true intentions." And what were they ? Other than what most diplomats already knew namely: Union of Germans into one Reich, eastern expansion and a conference on the return of colonies lost in WW1. "The Polish government had every right to carry out customs inspections in Danzig" The legal arguments are argued robustly on both sides in this case. Danzig authorities say the Poles had merely a basic right to control and not one of inquisition, which they never challenged. Various Consuls cite the Treaty of Paris in various ways etc. "it was manufactured" Even if so, is it justifiable to threaten bombs on a people if they want an economic union with another neighbour ? "This is a classic case of manufacturing a crisis" Then the Germans fumbled completely.
    1
  1679.  @bolivar2153  I don't disagree. My fundamental point is that such points can be said of the British also. 'The Rest is History' and 95% of other such content on youtube and television, never talk about what the british and polish did to contribute to the outbreak of war. Regardless of any plans Germany may have had after the british had already made theirs in march, and the Polish Ultimatum of August 4th expeditated them, though in the common narrative 'was merely a good excuse' or 'provoked by the germans'. Which is actually ironic, because they would never say the guarantee of march 31st provoked Germany.
    1
  1680.  @bolivar2153  "This is far from being simply an internal German issue, as you claim" I was claiming the treatment of its minorities and other internal issues you outlined were in fact internal issues. I then gave the analogy that we should declare war on China for the way it treats its minorities. "It's not a simple dispute over Danzig" Perhaps not, this indeed begs the questions like 'why didn't Germany just annex Danzig without invasion' etc, because Poland and Britain made it plain that such action would be a case for war anyway. So there was no recourse whatsoever to change the status quo without risking war. Whether or not larger ideas come into play or would benefit from such action. "Premeditated" The problem here is that, premeditated since when ? And would it have been 'premeditated' if a) Poland gave back Danzig b) Britain didn't give Poland the guarantee, thereby making Poland give back Danzig even less likely ? "driven by a desire to preserve peace" In the framework of appeasing his backbenchers, like Churchill, Eden and Vansittart. You don't "preserve peace" by giving military guarantees and forming military encirclements. As I point out, the USA has probably learnt that lesson when it comes to Taiwan and the theory of 'ambiguous diplomacy'.
    1
  1681.  @bolivar2153  "it was effectively presenting an ultimatum under conditions" Poles didn't see it that way. Quote: "I had a long talk with Ciecanowski who takes the view, judging by the accommodating way in which Hitler is dealing with Poland..." - Oliver Harvey, 6 February. Of course they were concerned about the demand of Danzig, and weren't prepared to give it back at first opportunity, the Germans however, were planning to play the long game, this was obviously scuppered by March 31st. Began? like, 19th century ? Drag Nach Osten is a famous one, British, French and Americans were all expanding and Germany was left in the dust. "spontaneous" Is it difficult to conceive that they were both had elements of 'predetermined vague ideas' as well as spontaneous reactions to events ? "is flawed" I know, that's why I used an analogy to demonstrate the flawed idea.
    1
  1682.  @bolivar2153  "Chamberlain was not simply appeasing his backbenchers" Then whence came the pressure to 'do something about Poland', Roosevelt ? That's another chain only mentioned by 'revisionists'. You firmly believe in 'appeasement' don't you ? Even though it's own definition doesn't apply to any British action in the 1930s. Germany never demanded anything from Britain, other than perhaps 'don't go to war with us'. Which is hardly an 'appeasement'. On the advice of the chiefs of staff, Chamberlain sought to prevent a possible conflict arising from French and Soviet ties to Czechia in 38. Had he had a strong army, he may well have gone to war with Germany. The key thing that forced Chamberlain's hand, wasn't Germany, but the weakness of the British military. This was different in 1939 after a year of rearmament.
    1
  1683.  @bolivar2153  Naturally. I doubt Taiwanese wish to re-join China is as high as Danzig's wish to re-join Germany was.
    1
  1684. 40:35 - Typical post-war mythicizing given that millions more Soviet soldiers would surrender when necessary until the war ended.
    1
  1685. Mussolini was the Hitler of Italy. Mussolini invaded Greece before conquering Egypt. Hitler declared war on the USA before conquering Russia.
    1
  1686.  @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
  1687.  @walterbailey2950  Yes, hitler is defending private property. That is known. But your definition of Socialism seems to be more like communism.
    1
  1688. Except it's not. Germany was far more justified in intervening in Poland than Russia was in invading Ukraine. Far more.
    1
  1689.  @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
  1690.  @Hamzat22  epic refute xD
    1
  1691. Most posts on the internet are bunk. There's so many realistic alternate pathways Germany had to victory it is quite astonishing that the Americans won as much as they did. Unlike the common assumption about simply american industry == guaranteed victory. American war planners in "Strategic Planning for Coalition Warfare" paint a very bleak picture. Pretty much every American victory scenario relied on the Germans losing or remaining in Russia. My favourite bit is that they explain how D-day should not be attempted if the Germans have more than 14 divisions in the Le Havre area. IRL the Germans did have 16 undermanned divisions. I just love how less informed people think the allies could have overcome even 30 well equipped divisions. Never mind the 250 they had in Russia.
    1
  1692.  @DomWeasel  "as happens in most alternate scenarios" Only Hollywood tier productions lol No serious scenario of Germany winning WW2 includes an invasion of the US. As AH himself addressed such a ridiculous notion in American propaganda in May 1941.
    1
  1693.  @Brslld  meanwhile in another universe "The allies had no chance of winning"
    1
  1694. Probably should have just let Germany have Russia and made a good trade deal with them instead of making a mess of Europe and ruining our finances.
    1
  1695. United States hegemony is not "western civilization"
    1
  1696.  @achanneltruly5331  the pseudo history is your idea of "hitler was always gonna attack france" the actual history is that Hitler offered a 25 year peace pact with France in 1935 or 36 I believe it was.
    1
  1697.  @Jamesmac77  Difference was that the Soviets violated the pact by supplying arms to Yugoslav partisans. Of course, allied propaganda films never mention this bit. But for the sake of honesty I would also say, yes, it was no surprise. Germany had long wanted to expand eastwards. They never planned to expand westwards, so that is the key difference. You will not be able to find any writing or speech before WW2 where Germany plans to expand westwards.
    1
  1698. No of course not, it's only worth mentioning Russian, Chinese or NK missile tests in western state propaganda.
    1
  1699. well yes the whole "we were just defending poland" narrative was trashed just two weeks into their insane war against Germany. It did upset them a little.
    1
  1700.  @comradesocalistfromaustralia  I hope nothing comes from Chamberlain being elected Prime Minister, he seems like a nice guy who wouldn't start the most destructive war in history or something.
    1
  1701. 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
  1702.  @Pullapitko  I know
    1
  1703. yeah i don't know why people laud him as "unbiased" when he is still biased with such biased language.
    1
  1704. Private Hitler: Arrgghh ffs what a nightmare, I don't really want war. pulls hair out kicks the door. Public Hitler: I have long sought this fight and am strongly and firmly ready to fight the warmongering US who have been arming our enemies for a long time now.
    1
  1705. and the weaponization of Anthrax, the use of WMDs. Just imagine how eeevil Hitler would be if he allowed the weaponization of Anthrax
    1
  1706. "If we had gone into it in the beginning we could have created and shaped it." Tragically this was the very thinking of "the appeasers", unfortunately the whole Versailles Treaty revision and "we can't let Germany fight Russia without fighting us first" thing championed so vigorously by Churchill got in the way of Anglo-European cooperation.
    1
  1707. Hungary invaded Slovakia and its not even a distant thought in anyone's memories.
    1
  1708. its almost like a policy of extreme selfishness will get you no friends
    1
  1709.  @tsaoh5572  I think it just exists in name only. You don't usually threaten allies with war like Britain did in WW2.
    1
  1710. Indeed, but people only do so due to propaganda. It's the only explanation why people actually think Churchill is a hero lol
    1
  1711.  @bjolie78  yeah because allying with people who still hate us over people who wanted to be our friends and allies was great, wasn't it?
    1
  1712. 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
  1713. by "national socialism" I think you just mean "controlled economies"
    1
  1714.  @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
  1715. 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
  1716. it always has had a large economy. Similarly if the USA was bombed into oblivion they too would rebound as a large economy.
    1
  1717.  @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
  1718.  @HistoryHustle  but not ones that you disagree with right ?
    1
  1719.  @HistoryHustle  Have you read "Orderly and Humane" by R.m. Douglas. Its quite interesting
    1
  1720. 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
  1721. 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
  1722. "Halifax felt that the inevitability of war sooner or later should be met right now" - Joseph Kennedy, March 24 1939. These guys: Continue the 'Germany wanted war since 1933 myth, nothing else happened that could possibly have altered German-Polish relations'
    1
  1723.  @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
  1724. i doubt the soldier on the frontline knew what was happening, the higher ups didn't believe their intel who told them the germans were invading in previous years
    1
  1725. yeah well, the Germans lost so even countries that were allied with them have to make movies about them being the antagonists lol
    1
  1726. It's almost like different people have different opinions. The Plutocrats were also contradictory on stuff like this i.e. the future configuration of Europe.
    1
  1727.  @HW-sw5gb  I simply use "Plutocrats" because some folks prefer to use the political ideologies as a substitute to Axis or German, yet funnily enough never do this for the Allies/ Americans. "insanity" Kinda like the United States entire existence isn't it?
    1
  1728.  @HW-sw5gb  "they mostly died of disease" big yikes. Imagine if someone said that about the thing that happened in the 1940s,, what would you call them? "morals were totally different in the 19th century" except they actually weren't when you read certain quotes from people who lived at the time.
    1
  1729.  @tcritt  when you're far left everyone looks rightwing.
    1
  1730.  @tcritt  I never said they're not right wing economically. That's why they support mass immigration to drive down wages. But at the same time they implement policies like paying people to not work or increasing the benefits system.
    1
  1731.  @chrisdodson8118  and who says it does ?
    1
  1732. If the Germans won before Italy switched to the allies then they would not have annexed the Italian territories lol On the contrary in many German writings in 1940 they spoke about Germany AND Italy being the masters of Europe, when the Italians were invaded and "switched" to the allies, then certain people starting writing about the treasonous Italians etc.
    1
  1733.  @Glasgow_kiss  Yeah I don't know why I bother with the comment sections of legacy media, just full of trolls such as you.
    1
  1734.  @socillizt4life  Oh wow really? Gee I thought all "white" people in England were 100% Anglo / big S
    1
  1735. 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
  1736. Indeed, the popular "historiography" purported by legacy characters like the Snow family, and this video, do give an exceptionally misleading distortion of the reality.
    1
  1737. 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
  1738. you know you can just leave the country whenever you want, no one is stopping you.
    1
  1739. some chap who really annoyed Wall Street.
    1
  1740.  @UncleKlausSchwab  Oh I know, I completely disagree with the dichotomy. I was simply explaining it.
    1
  1741. With joy and jubilation because they were nazis, and as we all know nazis love war.... oh wait.
    1
  1742. Yeah as much as it may seem daft for Russians to call this a terrorist attack, lets not damn well forget the Americans would also call an attack on American civilians by, say, Iraq or Afghanistan as an "act of terrorism".
    1
  1743. You should read into it. Because that is literally what Hitler wanted and what Britain did not want. Had Germany been able to make an agreement with Poland, who then would fight Germany on it's eastern border ? "March 1939 the British guarantee to Poland" by Simon Newman is a great book to start with.
    1
  1744.  @gaborrajnai6213  Well it must have made sense enough for the Germans to pursue friendship with Poland from 1933 onwards. You don't need a land border with your Empire. See most Empires in history.
    1
  1745. No more delusional than Roosevelt and other Plutocrats remarks about what to do with Germany
    1
  1746. "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
  1747. I'd like to bet Starkey merely just repeats the 500 hagiographies about Churchill though.
    1
  1748. 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
  1749. "The Russians are our natural enemy, always have been" Yeah but now they have nukes, so you can't just wish them away. You have to work with them unfortunately. Germany and most of Europe wanted rid of Russia in the 1930s/40s but the Anglos instead opted to destroy Germany and Europe with the whole WW2 thing.
    1
  1750. Russia only survived thanks to America and America only won thanks to Russia, it works both ways. Without them both at war with Germany, they both lose. Russia more so than the USA of course.
    1
  1751. 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
  1752. Um, this is democracy though. In an autocracy you'd have strong and stable government, not this shitshow.
    1
  1753.  @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
  1754.  @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
  1755. No they never fought for the common man's "freedom", they fought for the bankers freedom to extort nations, that's what Plutocrat's mean when they speak of freedom.
    1
  1756. Yes, we all have America to thank for Russia's continued menace to Europe. God bless America.
    1
  1757.  @jaredsheehan480  Stalin, Zhukov, Khrushchev and many others literally said they would have lost without the tanks, steel, food, fuel, boots and trains delivered in lend-lease, yet tankies still believe in, ironically, western propaganda that paints the USSR as a superpower behemoth.
    1
  1758. 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
  1759. certain parts of it at least
    1
  1760.  @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
  1761. It was Trump that told the Europeans to stop funding the Russian military by gas deals and to spend more on military spending. What did the Europeans do ? Continued to fund the Russian military with gas deals. For these people to now be complaining about "appeasement", is beyond debased.
    1
  1762. Even 70 years later we're still massively debating possible alternate courses of action for the war. It's no wonder why the Austrian Painter was so stressed. For example it still is quite difficult to see how capturing the Suez would have really helped the Germans. All that does is force allied shipping to take a longer route around the whole of Africa. How exactly does that destroy the British war effort ? On the contrary, just recently I thought that actually having the Germans spread out across Africa, could that have helped a potential allied landing in France in 1942 or 43 ? Invading Russia IMO isn't the worst decision he made, again there are countless alternate routes and decisions that could have affected it's outcome or at least course, but I think Schmider would also agree, it was really declaring war on the USA WHILST ALSO being at war with Russia that was the killer.
    1
  1763. When Germany smashed the Anglo-Franco armies in 1940, Churchill called it "the darkest hour". Not the "lol Germany is so weak they have no chance" hour.
    1
  1764. "collaborators" I mean... they were Germans lol
    1
  1765. Nice clickbait but America has 'declined to say' for the last 70 years. America isn't going to do a Chamberlain.
    1
  1766. 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
  1767.  @doctorpepsi8486  and thus indeed it is much easier and simplistic to just go with "Germany invaded poland so they started it"
    1
  1768. "Briton" how can they be Britons if they are serving in the armed forces of a foreign country ? Not so long ago this would be called treason
    1
  1769. The official White House transcription for Biden is (inaudible) 😂🤣
    1
  1770.  @МихаилЧерников-п2т  yeah, ww2 sucked for everyone apart from america
    1
  1771.  @КонстантинКругляков-г1у  "none of the slavic people would exist". Yeah just like no native Americans exist today. Oh wait, they do and some are even thankful for the victory of Europeans over them lol. Even if the claims that the Germans wanted to "murder all the slavs" and by "slavs" we mean Russians. I doubt the reality would be any different to that of the native Americans i.e. eventually placed into small territories of their own.
    1
  1772. 21:41 - fearmongering, a classic part of warmongering. Had Germany actually defeated Britain, more likely they would have sought peace with America, though for economic reasons America would prefer to fight this new autarkic power, for the economies of Germany and America were mostly the same being industrial exporters. America wanted an export market. I don't see capitalist America willingly turn itself into an autarkic power.
    1
  1773.  @nonomnismoriar9051  No because it was entirely a British-German affair.
    1
  1774.  @nonomnismoriar9051  how was it an American affair ?
    1
  1775.  @nonomnismoriar9051  Except Germany didn't want to take over Europe by force, it was Britain who wanted to prevent a peaceful German hegemony by force. However Germany resorted to force in order to get back Danzig which they failed to do so through diplomatic means in the back drop of a British encirclement attempt.
    1
  1776.  @nonomnismoriar9051  > Hitler had planned to conquer Lebensraum in the East since the 1920's. Oh yes, Hitler had long thought of a war against the commies to occur at some point, in the 1930s he hoped for a German-Polish war against the Soviet Union, likely occurring over Ukrainian independence. But "taking over Europe" in that sense is totally different. Read telegram 762.00/240 in "documents on US foreign policy", you can find it through google, unfortunately I can't link as they get blocked on YouTube. > You're sounding very suspiciously like a Nazi sympathizer now. Setting the historical record straight usually is "nazi sympathy" because the facts have been omitted from the mainstream narrative, there's a reason why the German-Polish talks of 1938-39 are never mentioned, why Britain's encirclement in 1939 is never mentioned, why even the British guarantee to Poland is usually glossed over as a "final warning to hitler who wants to take over the world". Because it changes the narrative completely from "evil germany taking over the world" to an Anglo-German rivalry for influence in Europe. I highly recommend "March 1939: The British Guarantee to Poland" for a historical analysis on British policy at the time.
    1
  1777.  @nonomnismoriar9051  Because Danzig was a German city with like 98% German population, Hitler was willing to relinquish the Corridor if Poland allied with Germany against the commies. As we all know it didn't happen for whatever reason, though it's interesting to think what if Poland did give back Danzig and didn't view Danzig as some holy site. Our whole perception of "Hitler's war to take over europe" would be changed, quite likely because there wouldn't be one.
    1
  1778.  @nonomnismoriar9051  Yes. I somehow doubt that Hitler would genocide his allies.
    1
  1779.  @nonomnismoriar9051  >July 1941 Yes, Hitler played alot of politics in his speeches, if Poland was Germany's ally then no doubt he would be talking highly of them. read this - https://www.jstor.org/stable/25776202?seq=1
    1
  1780. "No plan survives first contact with the enemy" or something like that. Artist from Vienna can have long term or general ideas but cannot possibly have any "plan" to achieve them, so of course most of his decisions were reactionary. For example his original "plan" was to have a joint German-Polish war against the USSR without being involved in any war with France or Britain. Things happened, he reacted to them and made decisions he would have preferred not to take (such as declaring war on USA). That's how reality goes.
    1
  1781. Almost seems like the Germans are purposely trying to break down Ukraine logistics by sending these lol
    1
  1782. I think england does, just not with gareth southgate
    1
  1783.  @yanikem6655  and then blew it all with utterly ridiculous sub choices
    1
  1784.  @yanikem6655  not really they were still young and inexperienced, plus he didn't use subs unlike the italians which clearly impacted the game in the second half. If England won, it would be despite him
    1
  1785. ​ @innocentbystander3798  Yeah I guess its much easier to portray Britain as morally right for interfering in other people's business than it is to explain to complexities of geopolitics. Heavens above imagine if a mainstream "documentary" mentioned that Hitler offered to guarantee the Polish corridor through a Treaty of Friendship, perhaps people might view WW2 a bit differently to "Hitler hated Poles". As Simon Newman stated "the omission of the facts is understandable, for the implication is that Hitler's unique responsibility for WW2 is undermined"
    1
  1786.  @Virolaxion  i'm sure most Americans do though
    1
  1787.  @Virolaxion  yeah that too lol
    1
  1788. No more "insane" than the majority of US history lol
    1
  1789.  @khalidaser1430  we don't need to be importing cheap labouir for those things
    1
  1790. I mean how many assassinations are carried out by foreign countries throughout Europe? Particularly I'm thinking of Israel and the USA, and what do these countries "do about it?". Nothing. So what is Ian saying Britain should have done in response to Putin assassinating political (Russian) enemies in Britain ?
    1
  1791. He's not wrong, if you openly hate the country then you shouldn't be allowed to be there.
    1
  1792.  @bolivar2153  Documents on British Foreign Policy and Documents on German Foreign Policy
    1
  1793.  @janys6502  completely different situations my dude
    1
  1794.  @janys6502  I literally gave you a good quote on that. And there's many telegrams in "documents on british foreign policy", have a read through them, very interesting stuff.
    1
  1795. It does seem that way. Had Hitler really wanted war, and genuinely wanted to make Poland 'the aggressor' under such conditions. He would have ordered Forster to go ahead with the disarmament of Polish 'customs officers' in early August. What on earth am I talking about you ask ? Obviously something Anglo-American historians have kept out of their stories, namely the Polish Ultimatum to Danzig of August 4th. The most alarming part of the Ultimatum: "I do not doubt that you, Mr. President of the Senate, have no doubts that such an infringement of the fundamental rights of Poland would under no pretext be tolerated by the Polish Government. Should the above-mentioned abuses take place the Polish Government will retaliate without delay against the Free City." This of course preceding Marshall Rydz-Smigly's speech of 6th August stating "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." and as reported by the Daily Mirror on 7th August "After Rydz-Smigly's speech yesterday, thousands of Poles joined in, shouting 'we demand Danzig'". There is a copy of the Ultimatum from Danzig, sent to the German foreign office, that also states that Forster/ Danzig would seek advice from the Fuhrer on what to do. Given that Roger Makins reported on 14th August "The Poles had threatened severe economic reprisals and were privately making threats of military action. Beck thought that Danzig had climbed down and published his success in the press." it would seem that the Fuhrer's orders were to 'back down' rather than facilitate a possible Polish attack on Danzig.
    1
  1796.  @GorgeDawes  Stalin wouldn't have been there if the British government didn't guarantee the status quo of Danzig.
    1
  1797. people easily manipulated by british propaganda
    1
  1798. Biden in this situation be like : "Hey there how are ya! Shakes hand"
    1
  1799.  @Kommander_Rahnn  if you didn't notice his flag, I don't think he appreciates that "help"
    1
  1800.  @TheImperatorKnight  Have you read Simon Newman's 'March 1939 the British Guarantee to Poland' ?
    1
  1801.  @mynamejef7963  Churchill in June 1942 after the Japanese wipe out the remaining USN carriers in the pacific: ....oh.
    1
  1802.  @andrewsprague4566  Except the Polish Ambassador, on the orders of Beck, refused to accept the German proposals. So you can hardly say they weren't delivered when you refuse to accept them.
    1
  1803. Polish steadfastness, American intrigues (See Juliusz Łukasiewicz memoirs), Halifax's warmongering of March 1939 and as we all know, of course, Hitler's gambling.
    1
  1804. @ Yeah you won't find many details on google, you have to read books, better still the primary evidence in things like diaries and 'documents on british foreign policy': "I asked Beck what attitude the Polish Ambassador in Berlin would adopt if Ribbentrop handed him the German proposals. Beck replied that Lipski would not be authorized to accept such a document." - Howard Kennard, 31st August. "Dahlerus had communicated the German terms to the Polish Ambassador, who had replied that acceptance would be out of the question and that his government would not give way." - Alexander Cadogan I'm literally reading a diary of Adolf A. Berle right now which says the Poles refused negotiations on August 31st
    1
  1805. @ Among much other evidence, you can find assembled in Simon Newman's "march 1939 the british guarantee to poland": "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." - March 27th
    1
  1806.  @andrewsprague4566  Nah, the British government knew Poland would lose in a war with Germany, and knowingly strengthened their resistance to German desiderata on Danzig. That is the text book definition of warmongering.
    1
  1807. Well its not supposed to be a monument of pride is it ?
    1
  1808.  @augnkn93043  The point is that you can't on the one hand say Britain was morally right to "defend" Poland from "German aggression" and then on the other turn a blind eye to the Russian invasion for "practical geopolitical reasons", especially so as Britain gave Poland to the Soviets in 1945 anyway, which utterly defeats the whole "we defended Polish independence" schtick. WW2 was such a disaster for Britain, which is why it's so hard for us to come to terms with what we did. So it is much easier to do, as TIK does in this video, to go in knots and circles to rationalize how actually it was Germany that declared war on Britain. As I mention, even when we pretend that Germany was this uniquely rogue power that hated Poles and had long planned for war with them, it is still the Chamberlain government making a sovereign decision to make war on Germany. hint: its not true, because ironically one of Hitler's biggest criticisms from Germans in 1939 was that he was too weak on the Poles, he admired Pilsudski too much, and saw in Poland a state that had a common enemy - Russia. Britain knew of this, and knew that Germany and Poland were having negotiations on solving their outstanding issues. Leading Chamberlain to make the guarantee on 31st March. As is recorded on 30th March in a Cabinet meeting "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."
    1
  1809. Not really Nation: a large body of people united by common descent, history, culture, or language, inhabiting a particular country or territory.
    1
  1810. The Brits were indeed angry at Russia 'betraying' the British peace front policy, however the Brits were the ones who started the policy to begin with, so really they were angry at themselves.
    1
  1811. "He thought he would win" I mean that's literally why anyone starts a war, Chamberlain thought he could win because he was told the German economy was close to collapse and that the Generals would overthrow Hitler if Britain declared war on Germany, we all saw how that went.
    1
  1812. Funny, back in the day liberals used to hate "mentally ill Christian extremists" shouting about the world ending a few decades ago.
    1
  1813. Youtube: Please report these but be warned if our dodgy system flags your report as fraudulent we'll ban your channel.
    1
  1814.  @LuisCarruthers  Notice the people in the video giving the speeches? They're literally part of the government they are complaining about.
    1
  1815. yeah but its easier to say that than to explain how hitler actually wanted to be allies with britain and poland lol hence "oversimplified" or rather the sort of history we've been told for 80 years "oversimplified so much that its almost alternate history"
    1
  1816. He was however, responsible for supporting our entry into WW1, and for pressuring Chamberlain into WW2. No man did more to dismantle Britain's power than Churchill.
    1
  1817.  @MmmGallicus  but when that country is also protestant, is friendly to Britain, has personal relationships with our Royal Family and historic ties. The whole "lets always go to war because we don't want big countries" thing makes less sense. Otherwise why did we never go to war with the United States despite it's constant hostile expansionism ?
    1
  1818.  @poserdragon719  you clearly don't know the meaning of the words you use
    1
  1819.  @Icemann89  he's trying to justify the military build-up of tensions over a fishing dispute.
    1
  1820. 9:40 nor do we have the mostly peaceful "George Floyd protests".
    1
  1821.  @MilitaryHistoryNotVisualized  Similarly there's plenty of documents that are held under British Secret laws. I think one of Hitler's peace offers was supposed to be released a while ago but got extended protection.
    1
  1822. ​ @charlesburgoyne-probyn6044  "it's unlikely to alter the basic picture" Have you read Simon Newman's "March 1939 the British guarantee to Poland" ? and/ or read the primary sources yourself ? It's super interesting how we go from "England is advising France that they should both go to war regardless of Poland" to "it's totally all Germany's fault" in the popular historiography.
    1
  1823. If Churchill was alive we'd be on World War 6 or something
    1
  1824. what do you mean? Did Home have any diaries or something ?
    1
  1825.  @jiimmyyy  free health care, affordable travel, workers rights, paid holidays, Winterhilfswerk and so on are not typically "far right" policies. And many people supporting such policies wouldn't describe themselves as far right either.
    1
  1826. Indeed, declaring war on Germany after the Peace Front collapsed on August 24th was a total disaster. But I can assume Chamberlain thought that not declaring war and thus totally embarrassing Britain's 'guarantees' would be equally disastrous. So Chamberlain took the easy way out and declared war anyway, hoping things would somehow not go as they did in 1940.
    1
  1827. only naughties kids remember
    1
  1828.  @jamessnee7171  No I know full well along with anyone who watches a TIK video that the German army wasn't fully equipped with jet aircraft and assault rifles (obviously). But the argument is that they had better technology. However I realize I mostly think in terms of the cutting edge futuristic technology without taking much into account of widely used technology such as Piston aircraft or tanks that were widely used.
    1
  1829.  @tkm238-d4r  "Their ideology is that Britain and France should have done nothing to stop Germany." Which also means that Germany and Poland don't go to war. It was Britain that encouraged Poland to go to war with Germany, this is why you have Polish historians like Piotr Zychowicz raising awareness of the real history. Unlike Anglo-Americans who omit most of the story for this obvious reason.
    1