Adolf Hitler’s speech on 30 January 1939 and Lebensraum

Discussions on the propaganda, architecture and culture in the Third Reich.
George L Gregory
Member
Posts: 1073
Joined: 13 Nov 2020 15:08
Location: Britain

Re: Adolf Hitler’s speech on 30 January 1939 and Lebensraum

Post by George L Gregory » 07 Feb 2022 09:09

NickA wrote:
07 Feb 2022 04:41
All very fine - perhaps some big lies have been told. But we know that Poland was engaged in a considerable and extraordinarily provocative ethnic cleansing of German-speakers, most of them been in place for 100s of years.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bydgoszcz#History wrote:In 1910 the city [Bromberg] had 57,700 inhabitants of which 84 percent were Germans and 16 percent Poles. In 1919 Bromberg was assigned to Poland by the Paris Peace Conference and the Versailles Treaty. ... The local populace were required to acquire Polish citizenship or leave the country. This led to a steady and significant decline of ethnic Germans, whose number within the town decreased from 74,292 in 1910 to 11,016 in 1926 and from 31,212 to 13,281 within the district.[9] In 1938 it was made part of the Pomeranian Voivodeship.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but that's an ethnic cleansing, 85% in 7(?) years (1919 - 1926) in the "town" and 57% in "district". We know what followed 60% forced emigration of Jews from Germany in 6 years (1933 to 1939) - Poland was very far along this track, with the very important German outlier of Danzig also being ethnically cleansed. I don't know of Germans and Germany doing anything like that until the expulsion of (alleged illegally immigrated post-1919) Jewish Polish citizens in November 1938.
No, we do not know that Poland engaged in a "considerable and extraordinarily provocative ethnic cleansing of German-speakers, most of them been in place for 100s of years". What we do know is that Poland had been partitioned twice by the Germans (Austrians and Prussians) and was literally non-existent on any map for a very long time. I don't mean to sound too rude, but are you really going to cite Bromberg as an example of Poles ethnically cleansing Germans? Are you kidding me? Whom are you trying to fool? 8O Are you aware of the Polish–Teutonic War (1326–1332)? Are you aware of what the Teutonic Knights actually did? The Germans had been trying for a very long time to capture (and later recapture) the region. In the late 18th century during the Prussian Partition of Poland the region became part of West Prussia and thus under German rule. It then became under Polish rule and then became under German rule again and was actually part of the German Empire. After WW1 and during the interwar years the people who wanted to stay there had to acquire Polish citizenship which in turn led to the number of ethnic Germans living there to decrease. That's not a form of ethnic cleansing at all.

What books about the history of Poland have you read? 8O If you think that Poles just suddenly turned on the Germans who happened to live in Polish territories for no reason then you're largely ignorant about the conflict between Germany and Poland. The Germans dominated Europe for centuries and they invaded, conqeured and annexed many territories during that long period. There are many areas of modern-day Germany and Poland that are ethnically mixed between Germans and Poles because the territories have been under German rule and then Polish rule and vice versa many times.
And its alleged that these severe Polish provocations were even more serious than that, they extended into Germany:
G.H. Ohio, USA wrote:"I lived in Germany during the 1980's when many people who lived during the war were still alive. I sought out anyone who lived near Poland in 1939 and was lucky enough to meet several people. One was a customs official who said it was so bad on the border they were armed and also had grenades in their office ready for attacks.
Another told me his farm animals were often stolen by Polish (Jewish?) terrorists. Another told of his niece being raped by a Pole (Jew?) who crossed the border. He told me in 1940 they caught the man and showed me a copy of the death order signed by Heydrich, in which he ordered the man put to death.
This is just one of many stories told to me by German civilians who witnessed these border incursions just like had happened in 1919-1928. One thing many people fail to see is that Poland openly attacked Germany right after World War I, which led to many border battles. Once Germany started pressing Poland to work out a solution to the corridor, the attacks started again. And one thing that is clear to me is that Germany did not make up these attacks."
Clearly, something was going on - nationally and culturally and militarily and economically, Poland was provoking Germany to some small or great extent. Our history is deeply flawed if we ignore what pressures acted on Hitler and the Germans.

I'm participating here to try and discover, in part, what more is known about these very important factors before 1939. If we really forced WW2 on the world by partitioning Germany, it would be very foolish of us to try to force the same thing on Russia. Especially since this will look like a pincer momvent on China.
Do you take hearsay to be factual?

Where did that person get his information from exactly? A quick Google search of some of the text that you quoted shows that it's simply been copied and pasted on sites like Stormfront and other Nazi fanboy websites. Why has no respectable historian ever quoted that text?

Who is Marcus S. King? A quote from the text shows that it's been used in his books The Bad War: The Truth Never Taught about World War II, Planet Rothschild: The Forbidden History of the New World and The British Mad Dog: Debunking the Myth of Winston Churchill. Those books are based on conspiracy theories including Holocaust denial and the New World Order.

Are you convinced by such claptrap?

ljadw
Member
Posts: 13766
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

Re: Adolf Hitler’s speech on 30 January 1939 and Lebensraum

Post by ljadw » 07 Feb 2022 11:22

The Wikipedia figures about the population of Bromberg in 1910 are not correct .
It was not 84 % German and 16 % Polish, but 81 % German, 16 % Polish and 3 % bilingual .For suspected reasons the source used by Wiki included the bilinguals in the German total .
And, Germany was already losing the demographic battle in the East BEFORE WW 1 : the Ostflucht .
There were in 1831 in the Bromberg region 51,8 % of Germans. In 1910 only 49,7 %.
Source "Bromberg in 1910 '' which is using official German stats .

User avatar
Topspeed
Member
Posts: 4784
Joined: 15 Jun 2004 15:19
Location: Finland

Re: Adolf Hitler’s speech on 30 January 1939 and Lebensraum

Post by Topspeed » 07 Feb 2022 16:11

George L Gregory wrote:
17 Dec 2021 18:08
Sid Guttridge wrote:
17 Dec 2021 12:10
Hi ljadw,

It is not true that "at the end of 1938" there "were living a lot of Germans" in "Czechia". After Munich the 225,000 Germans still living there were only 3.3% of the population and they amounted to under 1/320th of all Germans in Europe.
Yup. That’s why the Sudetenland (the so-called last territorial demand in Europe Hitler was going to make which was soon found out to be a lie) was given to him. However, the further annexation and occupation of what was left of Czechoslovakia was a violation of the Munich Agreement and went way beyond the alleged claim that he was only interested in ‘ethnic Germans’ because ‘ethnic Czechs’ became under Nazi rule.

What’s quite odd is that given Hitler’s view that the Czechs were racially inferior to the Germans, after the annexation and occupation of the rest of Czechoslovakia the definition of ‘German’ included someone of partially Czech (and other Europeans were used) descent. Even before that, the Czechs were used as examples of ‘related blood’ (so-called Aryans) to the Germans. Half of the Czech population was deemed to be racially valuable (Nordic) to be Germanised too.

The quote about being of partially Czech descent and being regarded as a German was said by the Nazi Karl Frank:
Whoever professes himself to be a member of the German nation is a member of the German nation," provided that this profession is confirmed by certain facts, such as language, upbringing, culture, etc. Persons of alien blood, particularly Jews, are never Germans. . . . Because professing to be a member of the German nation is of vital significance, even someone who is partly or completely of another race—Czech, Slovak, Ukrainian, Hungarian, or Polish, for example—can be considered a German. Any more precise elaboration of the term "German national" is not possible given current relationships.
Oddly enough this went against Hitler’s own views about the Czechs. In the late 1920s he wrote:
The National Socialist Movement, on the contrary, will always let its foreign policy be determined by the necessity to secure the space necessary to the life of our Folk. It knows no Germanising or Teutonising, as in the case of the national bourgeoisie, but only the spread of its own Folk. It will never see in the subjugated, so called Germanised, Czechs or Poles a national, let alone Folkish, strengthening, but only the racial weakening of our Folk.
And during WW2 he said:
…Of all the Slavs, the Czech is the most dangerous one, because he is diligent. He has discipline, is orderly, he is more Mongoloid than Slavic. He knows how to hide his plans behind a certain loyalty. ...I don't despise them , it is a battle of destinies. An alien racial splinter has penetrated our folkdom, and one must yield, he or we. ...That's one of the reasons why the Hapsburgs perished. They believed they could solve the problem through kindness.
I tend to agree that "the boasting proclamations of Hitler and Goebbels were nothing else than ..boasting proclamations." Their public statements were designed to be effective at that moment. They didn't necessarily have to be consistent, true or unchangeable so long as they served the political needs of the day.

Cheers,

Sid.
Well as far as the Anschluss went, it allowed Hitler to state that he was really from Germany since Austria was back to being part of the Reich since it was not when he was born, but Austria at that time was viewed as being a German state that was just for many Germans unfortunately not part of Germany.

Well as the war progressed the Nazis even proclaimed a [b]Greater Germanic Reich[/b].

Wad ist dat in deutsch ?

ljadw
Member
Posts: 13766
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

Re: Adolf Hitler’s speech on 30 January 1939 and Lebensraum

Post by ljadw » 07 Feb 2022 16:53

225000 Germans is a lot of Germans .The population of Klaipeda (Memelland ) was 140000 of whom 120000 Germans .
And, don't forget that still 1840 Prague was a Germanized city .

NickA
Member
Posts: 124
Joined: 11 Mar 2020 17:01
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Adolf Hitler’s speech on 30 January 1939 and Lebensraum

Post by NickA » 11 Feb 2022 00:20

George L Gregory wrote:
07 Feb 2022 09:09
we do know is that Poland had been partitioned twice by the Germans (Austrians and Prussians) and was literally non-existent on any map for a very long time.
Why are you defending an artificial country with no fixed boundaries? Poland is the homeland of the people of Warsaw. 700 years ago Poland was Warsaw and a huge area to the East - but after the relatively consensual failure of the country and a 120 year break the 1919 Versailles Treaty created an almost entirely new Poland consisting of Warsaw and previously Germany territory to the West.
George L Gregory wrote:
07 Feb 2022 09:09
No, we do not know that Poland engaged in a "considerable and extraordinarily provocative ethnic cleansing of German-speakers, most of them been in place for 100s of years". ... I don't mean to sound too rude, but are you really going to cite Bromberg as an example of Poles ethnically cleansing Germans? Are you kidding me? Whom are you trying to fool? 8O Are you aware of the Polish–Teutonic War (1326–1332)? Are you aware of what the Teutonic Knights actually did?
Firstly, in immediately recent German history, as I said and quoted from the Wiki, Poland was engaged in a considerable and extraordinarily provocative ethnic cleansing of German-speakers ,,,, In 1910 the city [Bromberg] had 57,700 inhabitants of which 84 percent were Germans and 16 percent Poles ... number within the town decreased from 74,292 in 1910 to 11,016 in 1926 and from 31,212 to 13,281 within the district.[9] ... an ethnic cleansing, 85% in 7(?) years (1919 - 1926) in the "town" and 57% in "district".

Secondly, I put it to you that the wars mostly fought across the real German heartland by all the continental powers, were much, much worse than what happened in the Poland-Teutonic War (1326–1332). Germany has suffered three much bigger wars subsequent to that, the 100 years war (actually, 116 years), then the Eighty Years' War (1568–1648) and the Thirty Years' War (1618–1648, killed approximately eight million people) were Germany's own Holocaust. Germany suffered yet another genocidal infliction between 1919/1920, when 800,000 of them were starved to death for no reason other than to prove that the German homeland was undefendable.
George L Gregory wrote:
07 Feb 2022 09:09
The Germans had been trying for a very long time to capture (and later recapture) the region. In the late 18th century during the Prussian Partition of Poland the region became part of West Prussia and thus under German rule. It then became under Polish rule and then became under German rule again and was actually part of the German Empire. After WW1 and during the interwar years the people who wanted to stay there had to acquire Polish citizenship which in turn led to the number of ethnic Germans living there to decrease. That's not a form of ethnic cleansing at all.
I think you're just in denial. Poland failed in the 18th Century and was re-invented as a means to bash the Germans.
George L Gregory wrote:
07 Feb 2022 09:09
The Germans dominated Europe for centuries and they invaded, conquered and annexed many territories during that long period.
All you're doing is proving that Germany is a real country with a continuous history and existence. Whereas Poland is not.
George L Gregory wrote:
07 Feb 2022 09:09
There are many areas of modern-day Germany and Poland that are ethnically mixed between Germans and Poles because the territories have been under German rule and then Polish rule and vice versa many times.

I've proved that Poland was a nation engaged in large-scale ethnic cleansings. Also very antisemitic - the Madagascar Plan was Polish, not German. And Polish society seems to have been exceptionally brutal - David Ben-Gurion boasted of his gangs excellence in street-fighting in Plonsk. (His brother abandoned making a new life in the Holy Land and returned, clearly no refugee). The Weimar Republic had problems of violence and banned the Rotfront (symbol the clenched fist, so much more threatening than the open handed "Bellamy Salute" used by Americans and Nazis).
George L Gregory wrote:
07 Feb 2022 09:09
Do you take hearsay to be factual? Where did that person get his information from exactly? A quick Google search of some of the text that you quoted shows that it's simply been copied and pasted on sites like Stormfront and other Nazi fanboy websites. Why has no respectable historian ever quoted that text?

80 years of occupation of Germany (forbidden again just in the last week to connect to a desperately needed and almost completed gas pipe-line!) has stamped out every effort to collect and publish these kinds of stories.
George L Gregory wrote:
07 Feb 2022 09:09
Who is Marcus S. King? A quote from the text shows that it's been used in his books The Bad War: The Truth Never Taught about World War II, Planet Rothschild: The Forbidden History of the New World and The British Mad Dog: Debunking the Myth of Winston Churchill. Those books are based on conspiracy theories including Holocaust denial and the New World Order. Are you convinced by such claptrap?
I discovered this in a book - there should be a vast literature on the feelings of the German people about this apparent threat:
G.H. Ohio, USA wrote: ... people fail to see is that Poland openly attacked Germany right after World War I, which led to many border battles. Once Germany started pressing Poland to work out a solution to the corridor, the attacks started again. And one thing that is clear to me is that Germany did not make up these attacks."
Its no good your blathering "Those books are based on conspiracy theories including Holocaust denial and the New World Order" when the semi-official war-aim of the US was published as "Germany Must Perish" in March 1941. And yet, there is almost no mention of the threat faced by the entire German people anywhere in any of the books you think I should have read. Though that book (and much other genocidal posturing from the US) surely persuaded the entire German people and their government that the US was going to come into the war and exterminate them. Only making total war on the Soviet Union and then being prepared to defend against the slow moving but extremely dangerous US would save the entire German people from genocide.

George L Gregory
Member
Posts: 1073
Joined: 13 Nov 2020 15:08
Location: Britain

Re: Adolf Hitler’s speech on 30 January 1939 and Lebensraum

Post by George L Gregory » 11 Feb 2022 07:23

NickA wrote:
11 Feb 2022 00:20
Why are you defending an artificial country with no fixed boundaries? Poland is the homeland of the people of Warsaw. 700 years ago Poland was Warsaw and a huge area to the East - but after the relatively consensual failure of the country and a 120 year break the 1919 Versailles Treaty created an almost entirely new Poland consisting of Warsaw and previously Germany territory to the West.
As if you think Poland 700 years ago was only Warsaw. :lol:

Do you think Poland shouldn’t exist as a country? Why is it any more artificial than any other country?

Previous German territory, LMAO. Those areas had been invaded by the Germans years ago, but they were originally Polish.
Firstly, in immediately recent German history, as I said and quoted from the Wiki, Poland was engaged in a considerable and extraordinarily provocative ethnic cleansing of German-speakers ,,,, In 1910 the city [Bromberg] had 57,700 inhabitants of which 84 percent were Germans and 16 percent Poles ... number within the town decreased from 74,292 in 1910 to 11,016 in 1926 and from 31,212 to 13,281 within the district.[9] ... an ethnic cleansing, 85% in 7(?) years (1919 - 1926) in the "town" and 57% in "district".
That’s not ethnic cleansing. The Polish government issued a policy of citizenship being open to Poles which caused many Germans to leave the area(s). The German government did the same thing with regard to citizenship in 1913.
Secondly, I put it to you that the wars mostly fought across the real German heartland by all the continental powers, were much, much worse than what happened in the Poland-Teutonic War (1326–1332). Germany has suffered three much bigger wars subsequent to that, the 100 years war (actually, 116 years), then the Eighty Years' War (1568–1648) and the Thirty Years' War (1618–1648, killed approximately eight million people) were Germany's own Holocaust. Germany suffered yet another genocidal infliction between 1919/1920, when 800,000 of them were starved to death for no reason other than to prove that the German homeland was undefendable.
Where do you get the idea that 800,000 Germans were starved to death in 1919-20?
I think you're just in denial. Poland failed in the 18th Century and was re-invented as a means to bash the Germans.
You don’t like my response so you personally attacked me. Is that how it works with you?

Your response is utter hogwash.
All you're doing is proving that Germany is a real country with a continuous history and existence. Whereas Poland is not.
What is a “real country”?

If Poland is not a country, what is it?
I've proved that Poland was a nation engaged in large-scale ethnic cleansings. Also very antisemitic - the Madagascar Plan was Polish, not German. And Polish society seems to have been exceptionally brutal - David Ben-Gurion boasted of his gangs excellence in street-fighting in Plonsk. (His brother abandoned making a new life in the Holy Land and returned, clearly no refugee). The Weimar Republic had problems of violence and banned the Rotfront (symbol the clenched fist, so much more threatening than the open handed "Bellamy Salute" used by Americans and Nazis).
You have proven no such thing.

Antisemitism was rife all over Europe at the time, Poland was no exception.

Were the Nazi SA not brutal? The last time I checked the members of the SA and similar groups were thugs who enjoyed giving their opponents a good bashing.

Prove that the Madagascar Plan was Polish. :lol:
80 years of occupation of Germany (forbidden again just in the last week to connect to a desperately needed and almost completed gas pipe-line!) has stamped out every effort to collect and publish these kinds of stories.

I discovered this in a book - there should be a vast literature on the feelings of the German people about this apparent threat:
G.H. Ohio, USA wrote: ... people fail to see is that Poland openly attacked Germany right after World War I, which led to many border battles. Once Germany started pressing Poland to work out a solution to the corridor, the attacks started again. And one thing that is clear to me is that Germany did not make up these attacks."
No-one is forbidden from publishing factual stuff. Whereas your conspiracy theory that the victors are forbidden the German people from knowing the so-called ‘truth’ is utter claptrap.

You have no problem quoting the quote so you should have no problem verifying it.

What book? What is the author’s reference? Who is/was “G.H. Ohio, USA”? I’ve never known someone to have a state and a country as part of his name, so who was/is “G.H.”?
Its no good your blathering "Those books are based on conspiracy theories including Holocaust denial and the New World Order" when the semi-official war-aim of the US was published as "Germany Must Perish" in March 1941. And yet, there is almost no mention of the threat faced by the entire German people anywhere in any of the books you think I should have read. Though that book (and much other genocidal posturing from the US) surely persuaded the entire German people and their government that the US was going to come into the war and exterminate them. Only making total war on the Soviet Union and then being prepared to defend against the slow moving but extremely dangerous US would save the entire German people from genocide.
The book was self-published and had nothing to do with the aims of the American government in WW2.

The rest of this piffle has to be one of the worst explanations for the Nazi invasion of the Soviet Union.

This forum deals with factual stuff and not made-up nonsense so you ought to sort yourself out! This isn’t the same as the ridiculous forums that like to hide under the name of ‘revisionism’ whilst posting Holocaust denial and other such rubbish.

User avatar
Topspeed
Member
Posts: 4784
Joined: 15 Jun 2004 15:19
Location: Finland

Re: Adolf Hitler’s speech on 30 January 1939 and Lebensraum

Post by Topspeed » 11 Feb 2022 08:09

George L Gregory wrote:
11 Feb 2022 07:23


Do you think Poland shouldn’t exist as a country? Why is it any more artificial than any other country?

Why do you think countries are artificial ?

George L Gregory
Member
Posts: 1073
Joined: 13 Nov 2020 15:08
Location: Britain

Re: Adolf Hitler’s speech on 30 January 1939 and Lebensraum

Post by George L Gregory » 11 Feb 2022 14:06

Topspeed wrote:
11 Feb 2022 08:09
George L Gregory wrote:
11 Feb 2022 07:23


Do you think Poland shouldn’t exist as a country? Why is it any more artificial than any other country?

Why do you think countries are artificial ?
The boundaries of countries were made by humans rather than by nature, hence why there are so many disputes over territories.

User avatar
Topspeed
Member
Posts: 4784
Joined: 15 Jun 2004 15:19
Location: Finland

Re: Adolf Hitler’s speech on 30 January 1939 and Lebensraum

Post by Topspeed » 12 Feb 2022 05:52

George L Gregory wrote:
11 Feb 2022 14:06
Topspeed wrote:
11 Feb 2022 08:09
George L Gregory wrote:
11 Feb 2022 07:23


Do you think Poland shouldn’t exist as a country? Why is it any more artificial than any other country?

Why do you think countries are artificial ?
The boundaries of countries were made by humans rather than by nature, hence why there are so many disputes over territories.
How about UK ?

George L Gregory
Member
Posts: 1073
Joined: 13 Nov 2020 15:08
Location: Britain

Re: Adolf Hitler’s speech on 30 January 1939 and Lebensraum

Post by George L Gregory » 12 Feb 2022 06:45

Topspeed wrote:
12 Feb 2022 05:52
George L Gregory wrote:
11 Feb 2022 14:06
Topspeed wrote:
11 Feb 2022 08:09
George L Gregory wrote:
11 Feb 2022 07:23


Do you think Poland shouldn’t exist as a country? Why is it any more artificial than any other country?

Why do you think countries are artificial ?
The boundaries of countries were made by humans rather than by nature, hence why there are so many disputes over territories.
How about UK ?
Stop asking stupid questions over and over again.

The UK is no different.

Try discussing the subject of this thread.

NickA
Member
Posts: 124
Joined: 11 Mar 2020 17:01
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Adolf Hitler’s speech on 30 January 1939 and Lebensraum

Post by NickA » 13 Feb 2022 05:05

ljadw wrote:
07 Feb 2022 11:22
The Wikipedia figures about the population of Bromberg in 1910 are not correct . It was not 84 % German and 16 % Polish, but 81 % German, 16 % Polish and 3 % bilingual .For suspected reasons the source used by Wiki included the bilinguals in the German total . And, Germany was already losing the demographic battle in the East BEFORE WW 1 : the Ostflucht . There were in 1831 in the Bromberg region 51,8 % of Germans. In 1910 only 49,7 %. Source "Bromberg in 1910 '' which is using official German stats .
It would not suprise me atall if the Wiki figures have been corrupted. However, you are tasked to provide references for your assertions.

Moreover, the Ostflucht is movement of the poor, penniless industrial workers towards wage-slavery in industrial Germany and industrial US. Keen to learn German or American English and study and fit in to their adopted home.

That movement is much less important than the Drang nach Osten, settlers pushing back the frontiers, taking their German culture with them just as Americans pushed back frontiers against the natives and took their American culture with them.

ljadw
Member
Posts: 13766
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

Re: Adolf Hitler’s speech on 30 January 1939 and Lebensraum

Post by ljadw » 13 Feb 2022 09:38

The Ostflucht was much more important than the Drang nach Osten : til 1907 2,3 million people had left the eastern provinces of Prussia,of whom 1,6 million Germans and only 358000 had emigrated to the east .
20 % of the population of East Prussia did not speak German in 1905 .In Upper Silesia Polish candidates won 5 of the 12 seats in the last pré-war elections for the Reichstag .
And US had lost much of its attraction when in 1893 land became no longer free available for settlers .

NickA
Member
Posts: 124
Joined: 11 Mar 2020 17:01
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Adolf Hitler’s speech on 30 January 1939 and Lebensraum

Post by NickA » 13 Feb 2022 10:57

George L Gregory wrote:
11 Feb 2022 07:23
As if you think Poland 700 years ago was only Warsaw. :lol:
That's what before and after maps show - Poland was always Warsaw and lands to the East. We re-created it in 1919 as Warsaw and lands to the West, "German" lands. It was this effective partition of Germany that has led some commentators people to condemn Versailles as making another war inevitable.
George L Gregory wrote:
11 Feb 2022 07:23
Do you think Poland shouldn’t exist as a country? Why is it any more artificial than any other country?
I'm not passing judgement on the validity of Warsaw being the capital of a state, I'm stating the obvious. Poland was not re-created to bring any form of "national justice" to Polish people (most of them abandoned to a different state in the East) but as an "artificial" creation to govern large numbers of "German" to the west of Warsaw and, presumably, de-Germanise them.
George L Gregory wrote:
11 Feb 2022 07:23
Previous German territory, LMAO. Those areas had been invaded by the Germans years ago, but they were originally Polish.
If German armies invaded those areas then grave injustices may have been done - but I've seen no evidence of that. What I see is Germany being attacked and devastated by all the powers of Europe in three immense and very long wars since the shortish Teutonic War you mentioned. (Actually, 9 short wars - 1308, 1326–1332, 1409–1411, 1414, 1422, 1431–1435, 1454–1466, 1467–1479, 1519–1521)

However, the defining war of the period is this one:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thirty_Years'_War wrote:The Thirty Years' War[l] was a conflict fought largely within the Holy Roman Empire from 1618 to 1648. Considered one of the most destructive wars in European history, estimates of total deaths caused by the conflict range from 4.5 to 8 million, while some areas of Germany experienced population declines of over 50%.[18]
George L Gregory wrote:
11 Feb 2022 07:23
That’s not ethnic cleansing. The Polish government issued a policy of citizenship being open to Poles which caused many Germans to leave the area(s). The German government did the same thing with regard to citizenship in 1913.
You keep throwing off statements that sound unlikely and for which you have no reference. I've told you why I believe Poland was carrying out ethnic cleansing and given you a solid reference. Now explain what you've just said: "The Polish government issued a policy of citizenship being open to Poles which caused many Germans to leave the area(s)"
George L Gregory wrote:
11 Feb 2022 07:23
Where do you get the idea that 800,000 Germans were starved to death in 1919-20?
Well known fact, innit. Why are you forcing me to quote from unimpeachable sources that are clearly prejudiced against Germany?
The Transfer Agreement, Edwin Black, p.21 wrote:... The deterioration of the once powerful German economy really began in World War I, when German military and political leaders simply did not calculate the economic effects of a prolonged war. The Allied blockade cut off Germany's harbors and most of her land trade routes. Trade was decimated. Industry couldn't export. War materiel and civilian necessities, including food, could not be imported. Before the blockade was lifted, 800,000 malnourished German civilians perished ... the popular perception among Germans was that they had been starved into submission, defeated not on the battlefield but by political and economic warfare and connivance, by what became known as the "stab in the back."
This vulnerability of Germany to genocidal blockade has huge influence on what happened in the 1930s and 1940s. And, one could argue, is what forced Hitler and an ill-prepared and late Wehrmacht to attack the Soviet Union in Jun 1941.

You jeer at mention of "Germany Must Perish" of March 1941 but can't deny we made every effort to convince ourselves and the Germans that WW2 would end in a massive genocide.

This source is rather more balanced and doesn't seek to blame the Germans for their own suffering.
https://mises.org/library/blockade-and-attempted-starvation-germany wrote:In December 1918, the National Health Office in Berlin calculated that 763,000 persons had died as a result of the blockade by that time; the number added to this in the first months of 1919 is unknown.[7. The British historian Arthur Bryant, writing in 1940, put the figure even higher, at 800,000 for the last two years of the blockade, "about fifty times more than were drowned by submarine attacks on British shipping." Cited in J.F.C. Fuller, The Conduct of War, 1789–1961 (London: Eyre & Spottiswoode, 1961), p. 178.] In some respects, the armistice saw the intensification of the suffering, since the German Baltic coast was now effectively blockaded and German fishing rights in the Baltic annulled.
George L Gregory wrote:
11 Feb 2022 07:23
Antisemitism was rife all over Europe at the time, Poland was no exception. Prove that the Madagascar Plan was Polish. :lol:
I'm getting sick of this - I come to this Forum to learn, not to be confronted by LOLLING people who seem to be desperately short of any historical understanding. I shouldn't have to point out to you the most basic of historical facts appearing even in the victors account.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madagascar_Plan wrote:The idea of re-settling Polish Jews in Madagascar, then part of the French Empire, was investigated by the Polish government in 1937,[1][2] but the task force sent to evaluate the island's potential determined that only 5,000 to 7,000 families could be accommodated, or even as few as 500 families by some estimates.[a] Because efforts by the Nazis to encourage the emigration of the Jewish population of Germany before World War II were only partially successful, the idea of deporting Jews to Madagascar was revived by the Nazi government in 1940.
This image from the "Jewish Press" but widely recognised and circulated eg at the Wikipedia. France is the colonising power in Madagascar and Poland is the country seeking to rid itself of Jews. Germany is nowhere mentioned, there has been no expulsion and none is planned (though there is one of illegal immigrants in November 1938). Germany continues to encourage and help (eg lifting of currency restrictions) until October 1941.
1937 Franco-Polish Madagascar Plan "Proposed sites of settlement". Image
George L Gregory wrote:
11 Feb 2022 07:23
Were the Nazi SA not brutal? The last time I checked the members of the SA and similar groups were thugs who enjoyed giving their opponents a good bashing.
You're pumping pernicious and highly distorted rubbish in here - and this time you need to find the "approved version" for yourself. Look up Rotfront, again, the very western-biased Wikipedia should persuade you that you're wrong.
George L Gregory wrote:
11 Feb 2022 07:23
No-one is forbidden from publishing factual stuff. Whereas your conspiracy theory that the victors are forbidden the German people from knowing the so-called ‘truth’ is utter claptrap.
Then show me the papers that Rudolf Hess brought to the UK in May 1941 (remember - the US had published a semi-official plan to entirely exterminate the entirety of the German people in March 1941). Peace was uppermost in the minds of every German including Hitler. No Peace Treaty signed with France, none needed, Germany wanted to withdraw, only needing Britain's word that the attacks and the war would come to an end.

There are videos out there asking "Why did Germans fight right to the end". They're deeply insulting when we know from our own sources why that was but the other side cannot be put.
George L Gregory wrote:
11 Feb 2022 07:23
The book was self-published and had nothing to do with the aims of the American government in WW2.
Thomas Kaufman, thought to be close to Roosevelt, published this book with great fan-fare and considerable acclamation. The US would go to war (though it didn't do so for other 9 months) and it would finish the genocide of the German people that had been started by the British fleet only 22 years earlier.
George L Gregory wrote:
11 Feb 2022 07:23
The rest of this piffle has to be one of the worst explanations for the Nazi invasion of the Soviet Union.
Strange that I have references for everything I'm posting and you have nothing for your assertions.

George L Gregory
Member
Posts: 1073
Joined: 13 Nov 2020 15:08
Location: Britain

Re: Adolf Hitler’s speech on 30 January 1939 and Lebensraum

Post by George L Gregory » 13 Feb 2022 12:49

NickA wrote:
13 Feb 2022 10:57
George L Gregory wrote:
11 Feb 2022 07:23
As if you think Poland 700 years ago was only Warsaw. :lol:
That's what before and after maps show - Poland was always Warsaw and lands to the East. We re-created it in 1919 as Warsaw and lands to the West, "German" lands. It was this effective partition of Germany that has led some commentators people to condemn Versailles as making another war inevitable.
That's changed quite sharply... first it was just Warsaw and now you claim it was 'Warsaw and lands to the East' - which one was it?

Who are "we"? Many of the lands given to Poland after WW1 were historically Polish that had been invaded by the Germans e.g. Danzig/Gdansk.
I'm not passing judgement on the validity of Warsaw being the capital of a state, I'm stating the obvious. Poland was not re-created to bring any form of "national justice" to Polish people (most of them abandoned to a different state in the East) but as an "artificial" creation to govern large numbers of "German" to the west of Warsaw and, presumably, de-Germanise them.
Have you actually studied the Partitions of Poland? I somehow doubt it.

Do the Poles have a right to a country of their own? Or, do you think they should always be dominated by their so-called German masters which is what the Nazis concluded was their destiny?
If German armies invaded those areas then grave injustices may have been done - but I've seen no evidence of that. What I see is Germany being attacked and devastated by all the powers of Europe in three immense and very long wars since the shortish Teutonic War you mentioned. (Actually, 9 short wars - 1308, 1326–1332, 1409–1411, 1414, 1422, 1431–1435, 1454–1466, 1467–1479, 1519–1521)

However, the defining war of the period is this one:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thirty_Years'_War wrote:The Thirty Years' War[l] was a conflict fought largely within the Holy Roman Empire from 1618 to 1648. Considered one of the most destructive wars in European history, estimates of total deaths caused by the conflict range from 4.5 to 8 million, while some areas of Germany experienced population declines of over 50%.[18]
You should familarise yourself with the concepts of Drang nach Osten, Lebensraum and Germanisation.
You keep throwing off statements that sound unlikely and for which you have no reference. I've told you why I believe Poland was carrying out ethnic cleansing and given you a solid reference. Now explain what you've just said: "The Polish government issued a policy of citizenship being open to Poles which caused many Germans to leave the area(s)"
It was a nationalist approach to citizenship which is what the Germans did in 1913. Ethnic nationalism for citizenship wasn't exclusive to Poland in the early 20th century.
Well known fact, innit. Why are you forcing me to quote from unimpeachable sources that are clearly prejudiced against Germany?
The Transfer Agreement, Edwin Black, p.21 wrote:... The deterioration of the once powerful German economy really began in World War I, when German military and political leaders simply did not calculate the economic effects of a prolonged war. The Allied blockade cut off Germany's harbors and most of her land trade routes. Trade was decimated. Industry couldn't export. War materiel and civilian necessities, including food, could not be imported. Before the blockade was lifted, 800,000 malnourished German civilians perished ... the popular perception among Germans was that they had been starved into submission, defeated not on the battlefield but by political and economic warfare and connivance, by what became known as the "stab in the back."
Have you looked into the background of the blockade?

What do you think this proves exactly?
This vulnerability of Germany to genocidal blockade has huge influence on what happened in the 1930s and 1940s. And, one could argue, is what forced Hitler and an ill-prepared and late Wehrmacht to attack the Soviet Union in Jun 1941.
Did Lebensraum not have anything to do with the invasion of the Soviet Union?
You jeer at mention of "Germany Must Perish" of March 1941 but can't deny we made every effort to convince ourselves and the Germans that WW2 would end in a massive genocide.
That book had no direct impact on America's decision to get involved in the war. You're making things up.
This source is rather more balanced and doesn't seek to blame the Germans for their own suffering.
https://mises.org/library/blockade-and-attempted-starvation-germany wrote:In December 1918, the National Health Office in Berlin calculated that 763,000 persons had died as a result of the blockade by that time; the number added to this in the first months of 1919 is unknown.[7. The British historian Arthur Bryant, writing in 1940, put the figure even higher, at 800,000 for the last two years of the blockade, "about fifty times more than were drowned by submarine attacks on British shipping." Cited in J.F.C. Fuller, The Conduct of War, 1789–1961 (London: Eyre & Spottiswoode, 1961), p. 178.] In some respects, the armistice saw the intensification of the suffering, since the German Baltic coast was now effectively blockaded and German fishing rights in the Baltic annulled.
How come you're the only one who concludes that the blockade that happened 20 or so years prior to the invasion of the Soviet Union had anything to do with it? Even Hitler himself never mentioned it in his speech in which he tried to justify the invasion. Funny that!
I'm getting sick of this - I come to this Forum to learn, not to be confronted by LOLLING people who seem to be desperately short of any historical understanding. I shouldn't have to point out to you the most basic of historical facts appearing even in the victors account.
Awwww, do you want a tissue to wipe away your tears you little cry baby?

Don't make-up crap then... prove that the Madagascar Plan was Polish. Your claim, you prove it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madagascar_Plan wrote:The idea of re-settling Polish Jews in Madagascar, then part of the French Empire, was investigated by the Polish government in 1937,[1][2] but the task force sent to evaluate the island's potential determined that only 5,000 to 7,000 families could be accommodated, or even as few as 500 families by some estimates.[a] Because efforts by the Nazis to encourage the emigration of the Jewish population of Germany before World War II were only partially successful, the idea of deporting Jews to Madagascar was revived by the Nazi government in 1940.
That's not proof it was of Polish origin. The origins of it go way further back than 1937.

Your reading comprehensions seem to be lacking. Perhaps that's why you're believing hook, line and sinker so-called revisionist nonsense.
This image from the "Jewish Press" but widely recognised and circulated eg at the Wikipedia. France is the colonising power in Madagascar and Poland is the country seeking to rid itself of Jews. Germany is nowhere mentioned, there has been no expulsion and none is planned (though there is one of illegal immigrants in November 1938). Germany continues to encourage and help (eg lifting of currency restrictions) until October 1941.
1937 Franco-Polish Madagascar Plan "Proposed sites of settlement". Image
What "Jewish press"?

You said that the plan itself was Polish, not that the Poles investigated the idea in 1937. Those are two very different things.
You're pumping pernicious and highly distorted rubbish in here - and this time you need to find the "approved version" for yourself. Look up Rotfront, again, the very western-biased Wikipedia should persuade you that you're wrong.
God help you.

Are you seriously trying to convey the idea that I believe in "highly distorted rubbish" for pointing out that the SA were thugs?

Oh right, so Wikipedia is Western-biased, but you have no problems quoting from it (see above). That's so funny. Your credibility is getting less and less every time you post.
Then show me the papers that Rudolf Hess brought to the UK in May 1941 (remember - the US had published a semi-official plan to entirely exterminate the entirety of the German people in March 1941). Peace was uppermost in the minds of every German including Hitler. No Peace Treaty signed with France, none needed, Germany wanted to withdraw, only needing Britain's word that the attacks and the war would come to an end.
"Show me, show me!" I don't need to show you ANY THING.

If you think that peace was in the minds of the German generals in the early 1940s then you have honestly read absolutely nothing.

Erm, the last time I checked, Hitler was Austrian. Peace was not in the mind of Hitler in 1941. Stop lying.
There are videos out there asking "Why did Germans fight right to the end". They're deeply insulting when we know from our own sources why that was but the other side cannot be put.
What was what? You aren't making yourself very clear.
Thomas Kaufman, thought to be close to Roosevelt, published this book with great fan-fare and considerable acclamation. The US would go to war (though it didn't do so for other 9 months) and it would finish the genocide of the German people that had been started by the British fleet only 22 years earlier.
"Thought to be"... according to whom?

The book called for the sterilisation of the German people. Where in the book did it advocate the genocide i.e. murder of the Germans? When did the Americans ever say that they got involved to mass murder the German people?
Strange that I have references for everything I'm posting and you have nothing for your assertions.
Who was/is "G.H."? You know... the person whom you like to quote about the alleged Polish aggression towards Germany. You seem to have responded to every bit of my post but that bit. Tell me the book you found his/her quote in, the reference to it and his/her full name.

You insult Wikipedia, but you have no problem quoting from it.

You claim something and then cite and reference something else that doesn't even prove your initial claim.

You quote someone without any references.

IOW, your idea of sourcing is null and is all over the place. Try harder.

User avatar
Topspeed
Member
Posts: 4784
Joined: 15 Jun 2004 15:19
Location: Finland

Re: Adolf Hitler’s speech on 30 January 1939 and Lebensraum

Post by Topspeed » 13 Feb 2022 12:58

George L Gregory wrote:
12 Feb 2022 06:45
Topspeed wrote:
12 Feb 2022 05:52
George L Gregory wrote:
11 Feb 2022 14:06
Topspeed wrote:
11 Feb 2022 08:09
George L Gregory wrote:
11 Feb 2022 07:23


Do you think Poland shouldn’t exist as a country? Why is it any more artificial than any other country?

Why do you think countries are artificial ?
The boundaries of countries were made by humans rather than by nature, hence why there are so many disputes over territories.
How about UK ?
Stop asking stupid questions over and over again.

The UK is no different.

Try discussing the subject of this thread.
I just want to debunk your insane fantasies.

Return to “Propaganda, Culture & Architecture”