Was Hitler really surprised when England and France followed thru and declared war?

[ljadw]

When did he say that (would not declare war)?
Because "My dear Goring, if the British ratify a treaty one day, they don't break it the next."

The treaty with Poland did not oblige Britain to declare war on Germany if Poland was attacked by Germany .
States do not declare war because of a piece of paper .
In 1914, Britain had no treaties , not with France, not with Russia; it remained neutral when Germany attacked Russia ,but declared war when Germany attacked France, but not when Italy attacked the Ottoman Empire .
Before 1914,a German attack on an independent Poland would not have resulted in a British DOW.
If Hitler was convinced that F +B would declare war, he would not have attacked Poland .
The Wohlthat discussions of August 1939 fortified Hitler's conviction that Britain would do nothing .

[wm]

The treaty with Poland did not oblige Britain to declare war on Germany if Poland was attacked by Germany

Although the question was "when did he say that (would not declare war)"?

Hitler didn't know what was in the treaty (i.e., in its secret protocol) so he knew nothing about British obligations anyway.

[ljadw]

There was nothing in the secret protocol that was obliging Britain to declare war .

[ljadw]

Other point : I did not say that Hitler said that the West would not declare war;I said that he was convinced that they would not declare war .
If he thought that they could/would maybe declare war, he would not attack Poland .
But,as they had done nothing when he reoccupied the Rhineland, when he marched in Austria, when he took Sudetenland, when he marched in Czechia,when he took Memelland , why should they suddenly change their policy ,especially if they could not help Poland ?

What Hitler thought was logical ,but he failed to understand that after Versailles public opinion in France and Britain had changed : before 1914, war was the continuation of politics by other means, after 1914 the man who started a war was a criminal .

[wm]

So when did Hitler say he was convinced they would not declare war?
What was in the secret protocol is immaterial. Hitler didn't know what was in it so he had to plan for the worst.

It was times when "Ministries of War" were renamed to "Ministries of Defense" so the treaty, for obvious reasons didn't mention war but said, "at once give ... all the support and assistance in its power".
In the talks between Chamberlain/Halifax and the Polish foreign affairs minister, it was said it meant war so it meant war.
Or when did Chamberlain say he wasn't going to keep his commitment?

[ljadw]

All the support and assistance in its power means :all the support that is available,and Britain, only Britain would decide what was available .
About the secret protocol : Hitler did not know there was a secret protocol,thus he had not to plan for the worst .
When the guarantee was declared, it was obvious for everyone that it was only blahblah,mainly for domestic electoral reasons,besides, at that moment there was no risk of war :Chamberlain said : if Germany attacks Poland and IF Poland fights back, we will give Poland all support that is available .But everyone knew that Britain had no support available .Thus, neither Poland, nor Germany attached any importance to what Chamberlain said, because it was only bluff,with as aim ,not to help Poland in case of war, but to prevent war .
The British and French declarations of war had nothing to do with the guarantee .
If Hitler was convinced that the Wallies would declare war, he would not attack Poland;he attacked Poland,thus he was convinced that they would not declare war .

[john2]

The key thing is that he kept talking to the British. There was no reason to talk if Hitler didn't care what they thought. Hitler was a gambler and may very well have thought Britain would back down but he was willing at least to risk war.

[ljadw]

In the talks between Chamberlain/Halifax and the Polish foreign affairs minister, it was said it meant war so it meant war.
Or when did Chamberlain say he wasn't going to keep his commitment?

You are giving much too importance to what politicians are saying :politicians like to talk,because this gives them publicity .
On April 4 1939, after the guarantee, Litvinov told Maiskii:........and maintained that it was impossible to predict whether Chamberlain would really be willing to go to war with Germany .
Source : Stalin and the Inevitable War P 155.

[Sid Guttridge]

Hitler was a gambler. He had gambled successfully in 1936 in the Rhineland, in 1938 in Austria and Sudetenland, and in 1939 at Memel and Bohemia-Moravia. He knew that at any stage he could have provoked a war. August 1939 was another gamble. He didn't want a wider war, but he knew the risk he was taking and can hardly have been surprised at the result. The fact that he put off the attack on Poland from 25 August to 1 September when he learnt that Italy would not march with him, shows that he was well aware of the risks. Italy had no role in a war with Poland, unless the war spread to France and the UK.

Cheers,

Sid.

[ljadw]

The attack on Poland was not delayed because of Italy .Italy had no role in a war with France and Britain .When the war with Britain and France started seriously on 10 May 1940, Italy remained neutral .
Besides: on 1 September Italy was still neutral .

[ljadw]

Returning to the Guarantee and the OP :
Britain (and France ) said that they would guarantee the independence of Poland, something they could not do it and they knew it . They did not say that they would guarantee the existing borders of Poland ,which they also could not do and they knew it .
The result of the war was that Poland ceased to be an independent state and that it lost a very big part of its territory .And, that B+F ceased to be superpowers. which they knew would happen .No wonder that Hitler was surprised when B +F declared war .
Only Hitler AND Stalin ( both simultaneously ) could guarantee the independence and the existing border of Poland ,and ,Chamberlain knew it ,as did all Homines Sapientes ( journalists of course excluded ) .
In 1915 the Russians were defeated and the Germans were in Warsaw.
In August 1920,Germany was out and Trotzky was at the gates of Warsaw .
Thus, the cause of the B+F DOW on September 1939 was not their guarantee .

[Sid Guttridge]

Hi Guys,

Hitler was a gambler. He had gambled successfully in 1936 in the Rhineland, in 1938 in Austria and Sudetenland, and in 1939 at Memel and Bohemia-Moravia. He knew that at any stage he could have provoked a war. August 1939 was another gamble. He didn't want a wider war, but he knew the risk he was taking and can hardly have been surprised at the result. The fact that he put off the attack on Poland from 25 August to 1 September when he learnt that Italy would not march with him, shows that he was well aware of the risks. Italy had no role in a war with Poland, unless the war spread to France and the UK.

Cheers,

Sid.

[wm]

You are giving much too importance to what politicians are saying :politicians like to talk,because this gives them publicity .
On April 4 1939, after the guarantee, Litvinov told Maiskii:........and maintained that it was impossible to predict whether Chamberlain would really be willing to go to war with Germany .
Source : Stalin and the Inevitable War P 155.

This is why I asked a simple question when did Chamberlain or Halifax ever indicate they weren't going to keep their commitments, especially that they enjoyed the support of the British and French public (heartfelt and genuine - according to "Public Opinion and the End of Appeasement in Britain and France").
That:

The majority of the British and French people now accepted this harsh reality.
Peace with honour was no longer a possibility, war was confronted, without enthusiasm, but with a steady heart.
Public Opinion and the End of Appeasement in Britain and France by Daniel Hucker

What Litvinov said in April is immaterial.
The Anglo-Polish military alliance was signed in August - six days before the war - and as Mr. Hitler said "if the British ratify a treaty one day, they don't break it the next."

[ljadw]

You are giving much too importance to what politicians are saying :politicians like to talk,because this gives them publicity .
On April 4 1939, after the guarantee, Litvinov told Maiskii:........and maintained that it was impossible to predict whether Chamberlain would really be willing to go to war with Germany .
Source : Stalin and the Inevitable War P 155.

This is why I asked a simple question when did Chamberlain or Halifax ever indicate they weren't going to keep their commitments, especially that they enjoyed the support of the British and French public (heartfelt and genuine - according to "Public Opinion and the End of Appeasement in Britain and France").
That:

The majority of the British and French people now accepted this harsh reality.
Peace with honour was no longer a possibility, war was confronted, without enthusiasm, but with a steady heart.
Public Opinion and the End of Appeasement in Britain and France by Daniel Hucker

What Litvinov said in April is immaterial.
The Anglo-Polish military alliance was signed in August - six days before the war - and as Mr. Hitler said "if the British ratify a treaty one day, they don't break it the next."

The Anglo-Polish military alliance had no military importance, even no military significance at all and both,Halifax and Beck ,knew it .
Peace with honour was never the aim of the British government .
And, about Halifax /Chamberlain indicating that they were not going to keep their ''commitments '' : after the guarantee, Halifax said to his collaborators : it is obvious that Britain, not Poland ,will decide when Britain will keep its ''commitments ''.The guarantee was an empty promise that had as aim not to be kept .
If Hitler had annexed Danzig and the result was war with Poland , do you think that Britain would have declared war on Germany ?

[Yuri]

His enemies were becoming stronger, his Germany was reaching its economic limits, ...

This way of thinking is true for the 19th century.
However, since the end of the 19th century, the Economy has been determined by Financial-Industrial oligarchies.
As you know, finance has no limits (neither upper nor lower).
For example, the deepest abyss in the world is financial, you can fall into this abyss all your life.
It is also known that on the other hand, finance is never enough, especially since there are never many of them,
finance only can be really lacking.