2 consecutive heads of the Armed Forces ?? Which ones ? Blomberg was the only one who had the title (without power ) of head of the Armed Forces,in reality ,he was only minister of war, without even having power over the LW .Fritsch did not resign because of what HItler said during the meeting, neither did Beck ,when Fritsch was fired, for the reasons everyone knows, Beck, the so- called resistant, remained at his post .What Hitler said during the meeting was nothing new : everyone who was present, knew them.Hanny wrote: ↑14 Dec 2018, 15:27Factually correct and has been taught that way for decades to.ljadw wrote: ↑13 Dec 2018, 20:32
This is not true : they were not fired/resigned because they told Hitler that Germany was not in position to start war in 1938 : only Blomberg and Fritsch were military, the others were civilians, and Beck was not present . Räder, OTOH, was present but not fired .
\BTW : Hitler was not planning to start war in 1938 .
Someone who is talking about German national character is a Shmuck.
Two consecutive heads of the Armed Forces advised against war in 38, next up was Beck and resigned over that issue. The others, Schacht Minister of Economics advised the economy could not support a war at that time and was against agressive war ( note AH used the term aggressive war/s when expalining what he wanted at the meeting) in 38, Neurath objected on political grounds as well as military, stating Germany needed more time to rearm as war in 38 would certainly bring in UK and Empire France.
The meeting was called by Raeder, KM was receiving insufficient allocations of steel and other raw materials and that its entire building programme was thus in danger of collapse, LW and Heer refused to lower the steel allocation and AH was to resolve the dispute.
Neurath and Raeder were convicted at Nurmburg on planning and preparing wars of agression and crimes against peace which included the transcripts of the Nov 37 meeting in respect of invasion in 38 wherin AH stated his intention to start a war, or series of small wars.
Gerhard Weinberg, Andreas Hillgruber and Richard Overy and Evans, are amongst authers works that explain this intpretation. The minority view ( not intentional but ad hoc repsonse) is perhaps best articulated by kershaw.
M Howard, AJP Taylor etc are all shmucks acording to you.
Your current post like most you inflict on readers, is at best uniformed, at worst revisionist, which is why D Irving holds the view your promoting.
Neurath was so anti nazi that a year after he was fired as foreign minister, he accepted the post of governor of Czechia .
Schacht, also a post war resistant, was fired in November 1937, - he was not present at the conference -, not because the Sudeten crisis, but because he objected to a further development of the Wehrmacht, but he remained Director of the National Bank til January 1939, after the Sudeten crisis, thus he had no objections to Hitler's foreign policy .
BTW : I agree with Taylor who debunks the importance of the meeting of November 1937 .