Chamberlain REFUSES to declare war on September 3 1939

Discussions on alternate history, including events up to 20 years before today. Hosted by Terry Duncan.
User avatar
wm
Member
Posts: 8108
Joined: 29 Dec 2006 20:11
Location: Poland

Re: Chamberlain REFUSES to declare war on September 3 1939

Post by wm » 05 Aug 2022 05:57

It needs to be added that on March 21, Ribbentrop proposed another meeting between Hitler and Beck. Beck agreed to that four days later and wrote it would be of immeasurable importance.
In the same month, Hitler again assured the Poles that as long as he was the Chancellor, all disagreements would be resolved peacefully.
And Beck told his colleagues that maintaining good relations with Germany was his most important task.
So there was no lack of effort to avoid disagreement.

ljadw
Member
Posts: 14455
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

Re: Chamberlain REFUSES to declare war on September 3 1939

Post by ljadw » 05 Aug 2022 06:23

wm wrote:
04 Aug 2022 21:01
ljadw wrote:
04 Aug 2022 20:40
Hitler knew,as did Poland,that Stalin would never admit that Germany would occupy the whole of Poland .
Do we have evidence for that?


ljadw wrote:
04 Aug 2022 20:40
The reasons are obvious : the main one was that the occupation of Poland with its 30 million inhabitants would not benefit the USSR, but would hurt her .
When did Stalin say that?
Because according to Russian historians, the only reason was to avoid the appearance of a military alliance with Nazi Germany. Stalin didn't want to be seen as an ally of Hitler.
Additionally, although the Germans were ready to invade, the Soviets weren't (for obvious reasons) and needed time to mobilize their 2.6 million soldiers.
The evidence is that Hitler did not occupy the whole of Poland .
Stalin could have invaded Germany in May 1940, but for the obvious reasons we know, he didn't do it .
Stalin would attack a capitalist country only when he thought it was necessary, because he was afraid that such an attack would create a capitalist alliance against him .And divide et impera was better .
For Stalin Hitler was the valet of the Ruhrbaronen and if he attacked Hitler,he attacked his masters and international capitalism would help its German members .

User avatar
wm
Member
Posts: 8108
Joined: 29 Dec 2006 20:11
Location: Poland

Re: Chamberlain REFUSES to declare war on September 3 1939

Post by wm » 06 Aug 2022 09:53

You wrote:
the occupation of Poland with its 30 million inhabitants would not benefit the USSR,
when I asked, "When did Stalin say that?"
You responded with a non sequitur opinion:
The evidence is that Hitler did not occupy the whole of Poland

ljadw
Member
Posts: 14455
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

Re: Chamberlain REFUSES to declare war on September 3 1939

Post by ljadw » 06 Aug 2022 20:04

What you asked was a non sequitur question .
My question :did Stalin invade Poland between 1920 and 1939 ?
Stalin was only ,and not very much, interested in Eastern Poland, not in Warsaw or Danzig .And, he was afraid that an attack on Poland would bring back the anti-communist alliance from 1919.Alliance from Finland, Baltics, Poland, Germany, F + B .
The Poles were already very strong anti Russian since the end of the 18 th century and a new occupation would create only new insoluble problems for the USSR .
About Eastern Poland :
there were 3 possibilities
a It was occupied by the Soviets
b it was occupied by Poland
c it was occupied by Germany
What was the best possibility for Stalin ? b
What was the worst possibility for Stalin ? c
Why did a occur ? Because the Germans attacked Poland .

Return to “What if”