Quote:
Originally Posted by Dezzy
China reveals a scary truth, if Hitler had chosen to go the economic route instead of war, we would have all let him gleefully carry on with his monstrosities unabated as long as we could have profited from it..
We'll tut, we'll say it's not right but China will never be held accountable for it's crimes against humanity, not unless their economic bubble bursts and they are suddenly less useful to the governments and economies of the world.
|
Yup and we even sort of DID... for quite a while... Britain had no real intention of going to war until Germany invaded Poland and Britain had to intervene or break the defense pact with them (breaking a pact like that would be international political suicide)... and the US had no intention of being anything other than politically neutral to Germany until Japan (then a German ally) attacked Pearl Harbour. The fluffy fairy-tale that the allies saved the day out of a sense of justice and to rescue those who were being persecuted and murdered is just that.
Honestly I think if he had played it differently and played a longer game, Hitler could have developed the UK into an independent political ally, and if he had done so, the US would have happily worked alongside Nazi Europe so long as the American continent was left alone (from both east and west). That has largely been the default US stance since its conception. There's this idea of them as "world police" but in truth there's little evidence that they're interested in engaging in conflict unless they feel directly threatened (WW2, Vietnam, Cold War), or can see a material/strategic benefit (Middle East).