• Re: OT: Churchill, Hitler and the Unnecessary War

    From Byker@byker@do~rag.net to alt.history,can.politics,soc.history.what-if,alt.history.what-if,sci.military.naval on Mon Dec 2 10:50:30 2019
    From Newsgroup: soc.history.what-if

    "A Moose in Love" wrote in message news:5d15f12a-cfa4-4c6a-994c-8106ee9971cc@googlegroups.com...

    A good outline of the book. This thread is actually on topic for this NG since Canada was involved in both world wars.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Churchill,_Hitler_and_the_Unnecessary_War

    Just think if Lord Halifax would have been PM instead of Churchill, which
    very nearly happened. When the BEF was pushed all the way back to the
    Channel, he'd probably have sued for peace, and Franco-Prussian War II would have lasted a grand total of eight months. It's not as ludicrous as it
    sounds. In April, 1940, over 90% of Americans polled wanted nothing to do
    with getting involved in another European war. 110,000 U.S. troops died in
    WWI, and the popular notion that we were "duped" into getting involved
    produced a resentment that lasted a generation.

    Interesting scenario to ponder: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EnQ_3anpWQk

    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From SolomonW@SolomonW@citi.com to alt.history,can.politics,soc.history.what-if,alt.history.what-if,sci.military.naval on Tue Dec 3 21:01:22 2019
    From Newsgroup: soc.history.what-if

    On Mon, 2 Dec 2019 10:50:30 -0600, Byker wrote:

    "A Moose in Love" wrote in message news:5d15f12a-cfa4-4c6a-994c-8106ee9971cc@googlegroups.com...

    A good outline of the book. This thread is actually on topic for this NG >> since Canada was involved in both world wars.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Churchill,_Hitler_and_the_Unnecessary_War

    Just think if Lord Halifax would have been PM instead of Churchill, which very nearly happened.


    I am not so sure although many wanted Lord Halifax as Prime Minister after
    the resignation of Neville Chamberlain, he declined.

    Partly it was dubious if he could be and part of the problem was the lack
    of support he had from the Labour Party.

    When the BEF was pushed all the way back to the
    Channel, he'd probably have sued for peace, and Franco-Prussian War II would have lasted a grand total of eight months.

    This is possible, both Halifax and Chamberlain wanted peace at this point.

    I am not sure what sort of peace it would be, during the Napoleonic wars, Britain made peace several times and then broke it.

    Britain would be arming fast. Germans would still need vast reserves in the West just in case. Would the British and U.S. allow war materials into
    Germany?

    It's not as ludicrous as it
    sounds. In April, 1940, over 90% of Americans polled wanted nothing to do with getting involved in another European war. 110,000 U.S. troops died in WWI, and the popular notion that we were "duped" into getting involved produced a resentment that lasted a generation.

    But also surveys at the time showed that Americans thought that sooner or
    later they would get involved.



    Interesting scenario to ponder: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EnQ_3anpWQk

    Very nice. Spelling mistakes

    I doubt Hitler would have offered anywhere as much as this POD assumes.


    Some points would Barbarossa have been so successful if Britain and Germany
    had been at peace. I doubt it would be a surprise.

    Would the British and the U.S. have done nothing is Hitler attacks Russia,
    it is very much than in their interest that Russia holds! They supplied
    China, why not Russia?

    Why would the axis allies not send forces to help Germany take Russia, and
    why would Hitler refuse more troops?

    Also, I doubt Hitler if he was winning would make peace with Russia, and if
    he did, he would undoubtedly intervene in a later Russian Civil War.


    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Byker@byker@do~rag.net to alt.history,can.politics,soc.history.what-if,alt.history.what-if,sci.military.naval on Tue Dec 3 11:25:56 2019
    From Newsgroup: soc.history.what-if

    "SolomonW" wrote in message news:17j68wu8n19tc$.15ydnkihv705s.dlg@40tude.net...

    Interesting scenario to ponder:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EnQ_3anpWQk

    Very nice. Spelling mistakes

    Not mine...
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Rich Rostrom@rrostrom@comcast.net to soc.history.what-if on Tue Dec 3 16:45:09 2019
    From Newsgroup: soc.history.what-if

    "Byker" <byker@do~rag.net> wrote:


    Just think if Lord Halifax would have been PM instead of Churchill, which very nearly happened. When the BEF was pushed all the way back to the Channel, he'd probably have sued for peace, and Franco-Prussian War II would have lasted a grand total of eight months.

    And there would be further and bloodier wars when Nazi Germany renewed
    its career of aggression. Moral idiots like Buchanan imagine that Nazi
    Germany would have destroyed the USSR and then everything would be all
    rosy. That assumes Germany would win that war - not at all certain,
    since Germany would not be attacking with complete operational and
    and tactical surprise as in OTL.

    If Germany loses, the USSR would have the sole credit for doing it,
    and would "liberate" the whole of Europe. Communism's pose as the
    true enemy of Nazism would be a reality, not a fake. With Communist
    control of the home countries, Communism would be imposed throughout
    the French, Dutch, Italian, Spanish, and Portuguese colonies.

    Also, the USSR would develop the atomic bomb first. Britain couldn't
    afford to, and the peaceful US would never allocate the enormous
    budget. (Besides which, many American and British scientists had
    left-wing and pacifist sympathies; they worked on the Bomb only
    because they feared the Nazis might get it.

    So there's Buchanan's result: Soviet control of all Europe, most of
    Africa, major chunks of SE Asia, and a substantial beachhead in the
    Americas.

    But let's stay with Buchanan's preferred fantasy: Nazi Germany
    triumphant. We know the horrors Nazi Germany perpetrated in its
    short and territorially limited rampage. Those horrors would be
    expanded and extended. Nazi success would inspire imitation and
    alliance. The peace with Britain would soon dissolve as Germany
    moved against Britain in the Middle East. (Germany wants the
    oil, and the Arabs like Germany and want Germany to support them
    against Britain.)

    Germany would support Indian nationalists like Bose, so there
    goes the Empire. The Afrikaners in South Africa were pro-German
    already. Japan would mop up SE Asia.

    The US of course could ignore all this - until Latin American
    nations began veering into fascism, in imitation of the highly
    successful German model. (See Peronism in Argentina, and
    Integralism in Brazil.)

    Eventually, of course, the US would have to fight - on far worse
    terms than OTL's WW II. Or maybe the US could do what Buchanan
    might secretly want - become a fascist and explicitly racist
    state like Germany. (He doesn't want that? Well, there were lots
    of leftists who claimed they didn't want the US to go Communist,
    while opposing every effort to resist Communism. I never believed
    them.)
    --
    Nous sommes dans une pot de chambre, et nous y serons emmerdos.
    --- General Auguste-Alexandre Ducrot at Sedan, 1870.
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Byker@byker@do~rag.net to alt.history,can.politics,soc.history.what-if,alt.history.what-if,sci.military.naval on Sat Dec 7 17:29:22 2019
    From Newsgroup: soc.history.what-if

    "M I Wakefield" wrote in message news:qsdovn$9jg$1@dont-email.me...

    Auschwitz visit: Angela Merkel says past Nazi crimes part of German
    identity

    Chancellor Angela Merkel has said Germany has an unending responsibility
    to remember the Nazis' war crimes, as she made her first trip while in
    office to the Auschwitz death camp in Poland.

    The responsibility was "part of our national identity", she said.

    https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-50671663

    The late Charles Krauthammer on Fox commented that the shame of the
    Holocaust in WWII Europe has all but worn off after seventy years. He also noted that anti-Semitism has been part and parcel of European civilization
    for the last 2,000 years and nothing is going to change that.

    Ask Polish, Austrian, and French Gentiles, and they'll say something like,
    "Oh, yes, that was a terrible thing that happened to the Jews." But were
    some Merlin the Magician to wave a magic wand and bring all six million Jews back, would the Poles, Austrians, and French really WANT them back? NOT!

    In his book "Justice, Not Vengeance" (1990), Simon Wiesenthal devotes a
    chapter to former U.N. Secretary-General Kurt Waldheim, whose involvement
    with the Nazis during WWII was brought to light shortly after he became president of Austria. Although he was not charged with any war crimes, the Wiesenthalers hoped that this disclosure would provoke so much public indignation that he would resign. As expected, his approval rating took a nose-dive, from 70% to less than 40% virtually overnight. Waldheim,
    however, stuck to his guns and refused to budge. Then a curious thing happened: His popularity began to creep upwards again, and within a few
    weeks it was right back up where it was before. Simon and company scratched their heads and wondered what the hell was going on. Then it finally dawned
    on them: After spending 40-plus years hearing Jews bitch about what
    happened to them at the hands of the Nazis, the Austrians were simply sick
    and tired of hearing it. It was as if they were collectively saying, "Fuck
    you and your Holocaust! We don't want to hear it anymore."


    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2