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
Steve
Member
Posts: 982
Joined: 03 Aug 2002 01:58
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Chamberlain REFUSES to declare war on September 3 1939

Post by Steve » 20 Jul 2022 21:42

General Ironside reported on his mission to Poland to Lord Halifax and he briefed the British Cabinet on July 26. The General had formed the opinion that Poland in the event of a German coup in Danzig would not take military action. There would have to be a definite military invasion of Poland by the German army. If Hitler had confined himself to seizing Danzig in 1939 he probably could have avoided a war.

ljadw
Member
Posts: 15655
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

Re: Chamberlain REFUSES to declare war on September 3 1939

Post by ljadw » 26 Jul 2022 13:56

But Hitler was not satisfied with the return of Danzig (neither was Weimar ).

historygeek2021
Member
Posts: 641
Joined: 17 Dec 2020 06:23
Location: Australia

Re: Chamberlain REFUSES to declare war on September 3 1939

Post by historygeek2021 » 26 Jul 2022 15:44

Steve wrote:
20 Jul 2022 21:42
General Ironside reported on his mission to Poland to Lord Halifax and he briefed the British Cabinet on July 26. The General had formed the opinion that Poland in the event of a German coup in Danzig would not take military action. There would have to be a definite military invasion of Poland by the German army. If Hitler had confined himself to seizing Danzig in 1939 he probably could have avoided a war.
Ironside was just repeating the company line because Chamberlain didn't want to go to war. Poland was not going to give up Danzig without a fight.

"If Germany persists in her plans for Anschluss, Poland will fight, even if she fights alone and without allies. The whole nation, to the last man and woman is ready to fight for Poland’s independence, for when we say we shall go to war over Danzig we shall be fighting for our independence. Danzig is necessary for Poland. Who controls Danzig controls our economic life. The taking of Danzig by the Germans would be an act which recalls to our minds the partition of Poland. In case of war every man and every woman of whatever age would be a soldier of Poland." -Marshal Edward Rydz-Śmigły, quoted in Case White by Robert Forczyk.

ljadw
Member
Posts: 15655
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

Re: Chamberlain REFUSES to declare war on September 3 1939

Post by ljadw » 26 Jul 2022 17:36

Rydz-Smigly did not determine the foreign policy of Poland,thus ...
And his economic knowledge was very questionable (and this is an understatement ):Danzig was not necessary for Poland and it did not control Poland's economic life .

User avatar
Steve
Member
Posts: 982
Joined: 03 Aug 2002 01:58
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Chamberlain REFUSES to declare war on September 3 1939

Post by Steve » 26 Jul 2022 20:28

Rydz-Smigly was clearly exaggerating. By 1939 approximately a third of Polish sea borne trade was passing through Danzig and this was mainly bulk cargo. Gdynia by 1939 was more important than Danzig with approximately two thirds of Polish sea borne trade passing through the port. Cutting off Polish imports and exports through Danzig would have very likely hurt Danzig more than Poland which could have survived without the port. As Danzig was not part of Poland losing it was not equivalent to a new partition. The situation in Danzig was clearly unsustainable in the long run. Because of the imbalance in power between Poland and Germany it was just a question of when and how Germany regained the City.

User avatar
wm
Member
Posts: 8759
Joined: 29 Dec 2006 20:11
Location: Poland

Re: Chamberlain REFUSES to declare war on September 3 1939

Post by wm » 26 Jul 2022 21:00

Steve wrote:
26 Jul 2022 20:28
Because of the imbalance in power between Poland and Germany it was just a question of when and how Germany regained the City.
Strangely it never happened. Germany lost Danzig and much more in the most ignominious manner possible. Maybe the Germans needed to learn international politics from the Poles.
Actually, it was what Goebbels wrote in his diary in his thirties, "we need to learn from the Poles" (meaning the Sanacja movement led by Rydz-Smigly), and well, Hitler in his hubris didn't listen. Bad luck Mr. Hitler, how it was to be humiliated - by subhumans.

User avatar
wm
Member
Posts: 8759
Joined: 29 Dec 2006 20:11
Location: Poland

Re: Chamberlain REFUSES to declare war on September 3 1939

Post by wm » 26 Jul 2022 21:12

ljadw wrote:
26 Jul 2022 17:36
Rydz-Smigly did not determine the foreign policy of Poland,thus ...
So the semi-dictator of Poland, supported the Army, a large political movement, the corrupt state administration, stuffed with his adherents parliament (frequently in a criminal manner) didn't determine the foreign policy of Poland.
Well, then who. The Jews or the lizard people, maybe.
Too bad the orthodox Jews and the nationalist Jews supported Rydz-Smigly and his movement wholeheartedly. And the Jewish socialists and communists weren't allowed to poison that.
That Rydz-Smigly gave Beck a (seemingly) free hand didn't mean Rydz-Smigly wasn't in control. Actually, both men disliked each other, and Beck was going to offer his resignation, and only Hitler's antics prevented that.

User avatar
Steve
Member
Posts: 982
Joined: 03 Aug 2002 01:58
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Chamberlain REFUSES to declare war on September 3 1939

Post by Steve » 26 Jul 2022 22:19

"Strangely it never happened. Germany lost Danzig and much more in the most ignominious manner possible. Maybe the Germans needed to learn international politics from the Poles."

Unless there is an alternative reality out there that I am not aware of Danzig was regained by Germany in 1939. What happened in 1945 when the Soviet Union captured Danzig is something else. The Soviets handed the city over to their vassal state the Polish Peoples Republic. Polish diplomacy played no part in Danzig being given to the Polish Peoples Republic it only mattered what Stalin decided.

User avatar
wm
Member
Posts: 8759
Joined: 29 Dec 2006 20:11
Location: Poland

Re: Chamberlain REFUSES to declare war on September 3 1939

Post by wm » 26 Jul 2022 22:41

Yes, they regained it in 1939, but for the Germans, it was a wild political/military downhill ride from then till 1945.
And at the end of the ride, in Berlin, German women sold themselves for a pack of cigarettes to Polish soldiers, i.e., the ones that weren't raped outright for free.
It ain't over till the fat lady sings.

historygeek2021
Member
Posts: 641
Joined: 17 Dec 2020 06:23
Location: Australia

Re: Chamberlain REFUSES to declare war on September 3 1939

Post by historygeek2021 » 27 Jul 2022 00:28

Steve wrote:
26 Jul 2022 20:28
Rydz-Smigly was clearly exaggerating. By 1939 approximately a third of Polish sea borne trade was passing through Danzig and this was mainly bulk cargo. Gdynia by 1939 was more important than Danzig with approximately two thirds of Polish sea borne trade passing through the port. Cutting off Polish imports and exports through Danzig would have very likely hurt Danzig more than Poland which could have survived without the port. As Danzig was not part of Poland losing it was not equivalent to a new partition. The situation in Danzig was clearly unsustainable in the long run. Because of the imbalance in power between Poland and Germany it was just a question of when and how Germany regained the City.
Right, so if a leader in a country says their people will fight to resist an invader, and their people do in fact fight, he is clearly exaggerating. But if a British person makes a statement about another country after a short visit, then clearly the British person is all knowing and should be trusted 100%. Makes sense. :roll:

User avatar
Steve
Member
Posts: 982
Joined: 03 Aug 2002 01:58
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Chamberlain REFUSES to declare war on September 3 1939

Post by Steve » 27 Jul 2022 05:11

“Right, so if a leader in a country says their people will fight to resist an invader, and their people do in fact fight, he is clearly exaggerating.”

My post referred to Rydz exaggerating the importance of Danzig to Poland It said nothing about resisting Germany. Perhaps I should have said I was only referring to the situation with regard to Danzig.

“But if a British person makes a statement about another country after a short visit, then clearly the British person is all knowing and should be trusted 100%. Makes sense.”

This “British person” was not a tourist on a fishing holiday or whatever it was a senior British General who talked to the Polish General Staff. You would expect him to have a good idea of what the Polish position on Danzig was after talking to the countries military leadership. Of course it is a possibility that General Ironside spent most of his time either drunk or in the flesh pots of Warsaw and on his return made up what he reported,

ljadw
Member
Posts: 15655
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

Re: Chamberlain REFUSES to declare war on September 3 1939

Post by ljadw » 27 Jul 2022 08:13

wm wrote:
26 Jul 2022 21:12
ljadw wrote:
26 Jul 2022 17:36
Rydz-Smigly did not determine the foreign policy of Poland,thus ...
So the semi-dictator of Poland, supported the Army, a large political movement, the corrupt state administration, stuffed with his adherents parliament (frequently in a criminal manner) didn't determine the foreign policy of Poland.
Well, then who. The Jews or the lizard people, maybe.
Too bad the orthodox Jews and the nationalist Jews supported Rydz-Smigly and his movement wholeheartedly. And the Jewish socialists and communists weren't allowed to poison that.
That Rydz-Smigly gave Beck a (seemingly) free hand didn't mean Rydz-Smigly wasn't in control. Actually, both men disliked each other, and Beck was going to offer his resignation, and only Hitler's antics prevented that.
The foreign policy of Poland was not determined,not decided by an individual and R-S had not the powers of Hitler . There was the president Moscicki and the supporters of former PM Slawek and at the funeral of Slawek, R-S, the ''semi-dictator of Poland '', was Howled.
AND, after the defeat of 1939, Sikorski took over and forbade the return of R-S to Poland to head the Home Army .

ljadw
Member
Posts: 15655
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

Re: Chamberlain REFUSES to declare war on September 3 1939

Post by ljadw » 27 Jul 2022 08:15

The foreign policy of Poland was determined,decided by Hitler and Stalin .
Without Hitler and Stalin, the foreign policy of Poland would have been different .

User avatar
Takao
Member
Posts: 3776
Joined: 10 Mar 2002 19:27
Location: Reading, Pa

Re: Chamberlain REFUSES to declare war on September 3 1939

Post by Takao » 27 Jul 2022 09:45

Neither Hitler or Stalin determined Polish Foreign policy.

Hitler and Stalin affected Polish foreign policy, but they did not determine it.

User avatar
Takao
Member
Posts: 3776
Joined: 10 Mar 2002 19:27
Location: Reading, Pa

Re: Chamberlain REFUSES to declare war on September 3 1939

Post by Takao » 27 Jul 2022 10:45

Steve wrote:
26 Jul 2022 22:19
Unless there is an alternative reality out there that I am not aware of Danzig was regained by Germany in 1939.
It was annexed by Hitler's decree on October 8, 1939.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reichsg ... st_Prussia

Steve wrote:
26 Jul 2022 22:19
What happened in 1945 when the Soviet Union captured Danzig is something else. The Soviets handed the city over to their vassal state the Polish Peoples Republic. Polish diplomacy played no part in Danzig being given to the Polish Peoples Republic it only mattered what Stalin decided.
A few diplomatic lessons here...
1. If you are weak, make sure you have strong friends.
2. Make your country wanted/needed by your strong friends.

Return to “What if”