Scott Smith wrote:Roberto wrote:Scott Smith wrote:At any rate, the British were capable of exercising a lot of coercion. The Netherlands had a lot of foreign investment and an overseas empire. No, they were in the British pocket, whether they liked it or not.
They were not subject to British influence, but they might have been subjected to it.
They did not allow British or French troops on their territory, but they might have done so.
So the Führer was fully justified to attack them.
Conclusion: Any country that might in one way or another be influenced by his enemies, the Führer was entitled to attack.Scott Smith wrote:Sorry to burst your bubble
Wishful thinking taking over again?Scott Smith wrote:but superpowers can do anything they want, however they perceive their security interests.
One thing is what they do, another what they are entitled to do. Smith keeps mixing up the two.Scott Smith wrote:That is how the British played it, though they were more manipulative and subtle, masters of cant and propaganda, whereas the Germans believed in the direct approach, and Hitler particularly in seizing the opportunities of the day.
Subtle manipulations, apart from being hard to prove, don't consitute aggression and breach of international law. Adolf's "direct approach" did.