[Angus]

Originally Posted by MojoNixon

No, "different foreign policy" he said. And can you explain what that is?

Well perhaps if he wasn't being shouted down and people did him the courtesy of listening to what he had to say, we would have had his views on that.

Has everyone forgotten one crucial fact and that is that Ben is JEWISH - in fact he is the only Jewish contestant in the house. Far from defending Hitler I got the impression he was trying to say that there were other ways Britain could have handled Hitler. Revisionists would say that in 1940 when Britain's back was to the wall the Germans offered a number of peace deals and guarantees to Britain and her empire but they were refused. America was still pursing an isolationist policy and the Russians had a non-aggression pact at that time with the Germans.

Had Britain decided to engage in talks with the Germans, who knows whether the genocide that followed could have been averted by diplomatic intervention. We shall never know because by then Churchill was PM and was intent on pursuing the war, rejecting any peace talks. It is no coincidence that when the war was over, the voters overwhelmingly voted him out of office as he was seen as a "war monger".

So FFS give Ben a break. He is a Jew and I guarantee he does not condone the genocide that was inflicted on the Jewish people during Hitler's regime; I believe he was trying to say that Britain had other options on the table in 1940 other than all out war, and had these other options been explored, who knows how the course of the war would have gone?

[lynz]

Originally Posted by angus58

Well perhaps if he wasn't being shouted down and people did him the courtesy of listening to what he had to say, we would have had his views on that.

Has everyone forgotten one crucial fact and that is that Ben is JEWISH - in fact he is the only Jewish contestant in the house. Far from defending Hitler I got the impression he was trying to say that there were other ways Britain could have handled Hitler. Revisionists would say that in 1940 when Britain's back was to the wall the Germans offered a number of peace deals and guarantees to Britain and her empire but they were refused. America was still pursing an isolationist policy and the Russians had a non-aggression pact at that time with the Germans.

Had Britain decided to engage in talks with the Germans, who knows whether the genocide that followed could have been averted by diplomatic intervention. We shall never know because by then Churchill was PM and was intent on pursuing the war, rejecting any peace talks. It is no coincidence that when the war was over, the voters overwhelmingly voted him out of office as he was seen as a "war monger".

So FFS give Ben a break. He is a Jew and I guarantee he does not condone the genocide that was inflicted on the Jewish people during Hitler's regime; I believe he was trying to say that Britain had other options on the table in 1940 other than all out war, and had these other options been explored, who knows how the course of the war would have gone?

Excellent post!

[StGeorge]

Originally Posted by angus58

Had Britain decided to engage in talks with the Germans, who knows whether the genocide that followed could have been averted by diplomatic intervention. We shall never know because by then Churchill was PM and was intent on pursuing the war, rejecting any peace talks. It is no coincidence that when the war was over, the voters overwhelmingly voted him out of office as he was seen as a "war monger".

Im sorry but that is not an exellent post due to the bit i have quoted.

People forget that the atrocities as you put it had already started long before Germany invaded Poland ( and subsequently our involvement), and things like kristallnacht, the anti-Jewish pogrom in Nazi Germany and Austria from the 9th until the 10th November 1938, were just a sign of Hitlers plan and indoctrines with regards his views on the Aryan Races and the inferior Jewish and Slav races.

[Angus]

Originally Posted by StGeorge

Im sorry but that is not an exellent post due to the bit i have quoted.

People forget that the atrocities as you put it had already started long before Germany invaded Poland ( and subsequently our involvement), and things like kristallnacht, the anti-Jewish pogrom in Nazi Germany and Austria from the 9th until the 10th November 1938, were just a sign of Hitlers plan and indoctrines with regards his views on the Aryan Races and the inferior Jewish and Slav races.

You are correct that the precursors of what was to come were there for anyone with eyes to see long before the war started, and Chamberlain's foreign policy of appeasement and his signing of the Munich Agreement in 1938 were fundamental errors of judgment which strengthened Hitler's hand and his belief that Britain would not intervene if they invaded Poland and continued their aggressive occupation of neighbouring countries. However, there was still a good chance that if Britain had engaged in diplomatic talks with Hitler in 1940 the worst of the atrocities may have been averted.

[StGeorge]

Originally Posted by angus58

You are correct that the precursors of what was to come were there for anyone with eyes to see long before the war started, and Chamberlain's foreign policy of appeasement and his signing of the Munich Agreement in 1938 were fundamental errors of judgment which strengthened Hitler's hand and his belief that Britain would not intervene if they invaded Poland and continued their aggressive occupation of neighbouring countries. However, there was still a good chance that if Britain had engaged in diplomatic talks with Hitler in 1940 the worst of the atrocities may have been averted.

Its unfortunate that we will never know. Same as we will never know whether Saddam was intending to build bridges with the world and then become the next Nobel Peace winner. Who knows?

I think the politics of the time were very different to today as armourment mobilization and military means were the predominant policy of most of the nations at the time. But i cant believe that there wasnt at least some negotiations and diplomacy via all those mentioned before who were sympathetic to Hitler like the Prince of Wales etc.

[Angus]

Originally Posted by StGeorge

Its unfortunate that we will never know. Same as we will never know whether Saddam was intending to build bridges with the world and then become the next Nobel Peace winner. Who knows?

I think the politics of the time were very different to today as armourment mobilization and military means were the predominant policy of most of the nations at the time. But i cant believe that there wasnt at least some negotiations and diplomacy via all those mentioned before who were sympathetic to Hitler like the Prince of Wales etc.

That is the beauty of revisionism - the "what might have been" if such and such course had been pursued. We can all be wise after the event. But it's still fascinating to debate.

To paraphrase Burke "All it takes for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing", which is basically what the British government did in the 1930s.

[StGeorge]

Originally Posted by angus58

That is the beauty of revisionism - the "what might have been" if such and such course had been pursued. We can all be wise after the event. But it's still fascinating to debate.

To paraphrase Burke "All it takes for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing", which is basically what the British government did in the 1930s.

I love that saying, and its a shame that when good men do actually do something, their motives are questioned and they are called criminals because they havent got the appropriate United Nations resolution bla bla bla.

[calyman]

Originally Posted by StGeorge

Im sorry but that is not an exellent post due to the bit i have quoted.

People forget that the atrocities as you put it had already started long before Germany invaded Poland ( and subsequently our involvement), and things like kristallnacht, the anti-Jewish pogrom in Nazi Germany and Austria from the 9th until the 10th November 1938, were just a sign of Hitlers plan and indoctrines with regards his views on the Aryan Races and the inferior Jewish and Slav races.

It also has to be said that it was people of Ben's class who allowed the rise of the nazis to occur. After the Germans were beaten in the 1st world war. The Rhineland was controlled by the allies. They allowed Hitler to walk in, take the place back and then begin mass production of armaments. One of the few voices warning the British Government to do something about this was Churchill.

It was the inaction of the rulling classes in France and Britain that allowed Hitler to prepare for war. Right up to the early 30's, Hitler could have been easily defeated. The ruling classes in Britain, France and even Germany allowed Hitler to gain strength because they all thought he could be controlled by them. Big ****in mistake. So Ben and people of his class were partly responsible because of their narrow minded and short sighted views, which then brought the the whole of Europe to into appalling violence and genocide.

[Livia]

Originally Posted by calyman

It also has to be said that it was people of Ben's class who allowed the rise of the nazis to occur. After the Germans were beaten in the 1st world war. The Rhineland was controlled by the allies. They allowed Hitler to walk in, take the place back and then begin mass production of armaments. One of the few voices warning the British Government to do something about this was Churchill.

It was the inaction of the rulling classes in France and Britain that allowed Hitler to prepare for war. Right up to the early 30's, Hitler could have been easily defeated. The ruling classes in Britain, France and even Germany allowed Hitler to gain strength because they all thought he could be controlled by them. Big ****in mistake. So Ben and people of his class were partly responsible because of their narrow minded and short sighted views, which then brought the the whole of Europe to into appalling violence and genocide.

There was a HUGE depression before WW2. Did you hear about that? The whole of the world suffered. The reason Hitler came to power was that he promised the Germans, who were starving, he would put food on their table. They worked, they built autobahns, he fed their children. Hearts and minds. Thats how he rose to power so astonishingly quickly. The mass production of arms didn't occur until quite a while after Hitler was in power.

To say that the upper Class British gave Hitler power is ill-informed and really classist. It wasn't just the working class that died in WW2, people from all classes died.

[oddballmisfitsFTW]

Originally Posted by Livia

There was a HUGE depression before WW2. Did you hear about that? The whole of the world suffered. The reason Hitler came to power was that he promised the Germans, who were starving, he would put food on their table. They worked, they built autobahns, he fed their children. Hearts and minds. Thats how he rose to power so astonishingly quickly. The mass production of arms didn't occur until quite a while after Hitler was in power.

To say that the upper Class British gave Hitler power is ill-informed and really classist. It wasn't just the working class that died in WW2, people from all classes died.

There was the great depression and there is the "economic crisis" that happened recently. I have a very bad feeling something seriously ****ed up is gonna happen within next few years. I dont trust the ruling classes who own the politicians.
I am very paranoid about it. I do think there is something behind WWII and the depression is connected to it and the economin crisis of recent times is connected to the Iraq, Afghanistan and any future wars we may have (eg Iran).
And, WWII and modern wars are connected in some way, I think
Knee jerk reaction I even say to myself is paranoid etc, but they got found out to be blatantly lying about Iraq and Afghanistan, so what else are they lying about. Seems very dodgy to me, very sinsister and doesnt sit right with me at all
Economic crisis was caused by the banks themselves, no question in my mind. They are greedy and stealing the publics money from under their noses under the guise of "oooh we have a crisis, we need help"
NO they are lying just like Iraq and Afghanistan.

[StGeorge]

Originally Posted by oddballmisfitsFTW

There was the great depression and there is the "economic crisis" that happened recently. I have a very bad feeling something seriously ****ed up is gonna happen within next few years. I dont trust the ruling classes who own the politicians.
I am very paranoid about it. I do think there is something behind WWII and the depression is connected to it and the economin crisis of recent times is connected to the Iraq, Afghanistan and any future wars we may have (eg Iran).
And, WWII and modern wars are connected in some way, I think
Knee jerk reaction I even say to myself is paranoid etc, but they got found out to be blatantly lying about Iraq and Afghanistan, so what else are they lying about. Seems very dodgy to me, very sinsister and doesnt sit right with me at all
Economic crisis was caused by the banks themselves, no question in my mind. They are greedy and stealing the publics money from under their noses under the guise of "oooh we have a crisis, we need help"
NO they are lying just like Iraq and Afghanistan.

I dont know the complete ins and outs of the reasoning behind Iraq and Afghan' but if in Iraq in particular we went knowing there were no WOMDs, then those in power at the time should be questioned accordingly.
IMO we were wrong not to have finished the job in the freeing of Kuwait. We gave Saddam the benefit of the doubt and a second chance and he preceded to annialate the Kurds & Shiites and push the boundaries until the Allies kicked him out. I personally beleive we have been justified in removing an Hitlerite tyrant irrespective of WOMDs or not.
Afghan? I think we are again justified to enter a country and remove those responsible for one of the worsed terrorist acts against a civilian population in modern times. What narks me is that the USA intelligence network(there's an anomaly if ever there was one) had a perfect opportunity prior to 911 to remove Ossie Bin Liner and bulked. It resulted in the murder of a prominent Afghan leader who was working with the west. Shameful period.
I agree with the Afghan war but know that its one we wont win unless we win the people, which we arent doing in certain areas. This type of war has failed in Vietnam and even as close as N.Ireland, where armed conflict against an enemy you cant identify hinders your chances of success. Fortunately both those conflicts ended once both sides came to the table and talked. But with the indoctrines that the Bin Liner Fundamentalists follow, talking is never ever going to be an option.

[oddballmisfitsFTW]

Originally Posted by StGeorge

I dont know the complete ins and outs of the reasoning behind Iraq and Afghan' but if in Iraq in particular we went knowing there were no WOMDs, then those in power at the time should be questioned accordingly.
IMO we were wrong not to have finished the job in the freeing of Kuwait. We gave Saddam the benefit of the doubt and a second chance and he preceded to annialate the Kurds & Shiites and push the boundaries until the Allies kicked him out. I personally beleive we have been justified in removing an Hitlerite tyrant irrespective of WOMDs or not.
Afghan? I think we are again justified to enter a country and remove those responsible for one of the worsed terrorist acts against a civilian population in modern times. What narks me is that the USA intelligence network(there's an anomaly if ever there was one) had a perfect opportunity prior to 911 to remove Ossie Bin Liner and bulked. It resulted in the murder of a prominent Afghan leader who was working with the west. Shameful period.
I agree with the Afghan war but know that its one we wont win unless we win the people, which we arent doing in certain areas. This type of war has failed in Vietnam and even as close as N.Ireland, where armed conflict against an enemy you cant identify hinders your chances of success. Fortunately both those conflicts ended once both sides came to the table and talked. But with the indoctrines that the Bin Liner Fundamentalists follow, talking is never ever going to be an option.

I dont know whole truth about Iraq/Afghanistan either but I lean more towards Afghanistan was more justifiable than Iraq, IF what the US/UK government tells us is true.
Problem is I dont trust a single word they say at all.
I do know that both Bin Laden and Saddam were formerly "allies" with the west. Both times it was the CIA who were involved. These sneaky guys are always around at the start of trouble are they not?
Who was involved at start of Vietnam, CIA again.
Something is not right and the governments of the west I think are treating us like gullible idiots.
I just wanna know what they are upto, what is the reason they causin so much **** around the world. Is it simply due to fundamentalists wanting to bring down the west? I dont believe that is the reason, because my philosophy now is, whatever the politicians tell you, thats a lie and the truth is hidden somewhere. They tell us over and over and over war on terror war on terror.
What could be true is that the west wants to control the middle east and Saddam and Taleban needed to be removed for them to do this. Next they might move onto Iran, which cause WWIII, if Iran have nuclear weapons.
Maybe thats what the sick, twisted ruling classes want though.

[Ketman]

Originally Posted by oddballmisfitsFTW

And, WWII and modern wars are connected in some way, I think
Knee jerk reaction I even say to myself is paranoid etc, but they got found out to be blatantly lying about Iraq and Afghanistan, so what else are they lying about. Seems very dodgy to me, very sinsister and doesnt sit right with me at all

No need to suppose a grand conspiracy that includes all wars ever fought. The war against Iraq was an opportunist war for the US and there is very little that can be said in defence of Bush-Blair. WWII is a different case, however. Fighting that war impoverished Britain for a generation. There were no material gains of any kind for us. The only motives in 1939 were those of sheer survival - fight and win, or go under. They should have acted earlier, and Churchill wanted them to, but he was out of the loop in those years. Instead they let the armed forces go to pot while the Nazis were building theirs up, and this had the effect of leading the Nazis to believe that they could act as they liked in Europe, and Britain would just let them. That was a mistake, but we have to take some blame for allowing them to make it. But, overall, it was one of the few wars in our history where we can be proud of our role.

[oddballmisfitsFTW]

Originally Posted by Ketman

No need to suppose a grand conspiracy that includes all wars ever fought. The war against Iraq was an opportunist war for the US and there is very little that can be said in defence of Bush-Blair. WWII is a different case, however. Fighting that war impoverished Britain for a generation. There were no material gains of any kind for us. The only motives in 1939 were those of sheer survival - fight and win, or go under. They should have acted earlier, and Churchill wanted them to, but he was out of the loop in those years. Instead they let the armed forces go to pot while the Nazis were building theirs up, and this had the effect of leading the Nazis to believe that they could act as they liked in Europe, and Britain would just let them. That was a mistake, but we have to take some blame for allowing them to make it. But, overall, it was one of the few wars in our history where we can be proud of our role.

there may well be no connection at all, but I dont discount it completely, I just keep at back of my mind and try not to worry bout it

if it was true there wouldnt be material gains for us the general population, but there would for the ruling classes.
The UK was in massive debt before the crisis, who was the money borrowed from? and then cos of the economic crisis the banks cry help, so taxpayer helps out the banks and UK has even more debt. Then to get rid of the debt (yeah right) cuts are made and taxes go up again.
Its all ****ed up and they are getting away with it before our very eyes. Alomst comical really how much they have PWNED us
To me it equates to "we got you by the short and curlies, now this is what we gonna do....."

[StGeorge]

Originally Posted by Livia

There was a HUGE depression before WW2. Did you hear about that? The whole of the world suffered. The reason Hitler came to power was that he promised the Germans, who were starving, he would put food on their table. They worked, they built autobahns, he fed their children. Hearts and minds. Thats how he rose to power so astonishingly quickly. The mass production of arms didn't occur until quite a while after Hitler was in power.

To say that the upper Class British gave Hitler power is ill-informed and really classist. It wasn't just the working class that died in WW2, people from all classes died.

Its true that Hitler fed off the impoverished to gain power.

A similar thing is what is happening in this country now. I personally do not agree with our open door policy regarding immigration under Labour. But some quarters, use this to stir up those who are out of work or generally feeling down and depressed due to the economy etc, and they try to gain acceptance by misguided policies and playing on peoples fears and worries. The BNP in particular springs to mind.

[calyman]

Originally Posted by Livia

There was a HUGE depression before WW2. Did you hear about that? The whole of the world suffered. The reason Hitler came to power was that he promised the Germans, who were starving, he would put food on their table. They worked, they built autobahns, he fed their children. Hearts and minds. Thats how he rose to power so astonishingly quickly. The mass production of arms didn't occur until quite a while after Hitler was in power.

To say that the upper Class British gave Hitler power is ill-informed and really classist. It wasn't just the working class that died in WW2, people from all classes died.

It's a well documented fact of history that Churchill was a lone voice warning about the danger of the rise of the nazis, it's clear that the Allies had the resources to stop Hitler until he began rebuilding Germany's armaments, after seizing the Rhineland, indefiance of the versailles treaty, that itself was sufficient reason for the allies to take effective action when they could.

Hitler also fed the Germans, the lie that the previous war's Government had given victory to the allies, he fuelled hatred of Jews, eastern europeans, Homosexuals, the disabled and Romany peoples.

Working class people have never had power in Government, have never decided national policy in respect of Government, had no say in deciding what to do about the bazis, though many working class people did fught for the Republican forces in Spain, this was not sanctioned by the British Government.

It was the British ruling classes who denied Jewish immigrants entry to Britain, fleeing from Nazi persecution, the ruling classes who allowed Hitler's rise unopposed, the ruling classes who by their inaction and tacit support of nazism, who are ultimately responsible, along with the nazis; for the slaughter of disabled, Jewish, Homosexual and other minorities in Germany. Also responsible for the countless deaths of young British soldiers in a conflict that need never have happened.

[Shasown]

Originally Posted by calyman

It's a well documented fact of history that Churchill was a lone voice warning about the danger of the rise of the nazis, it's clear that the Allies had the resources to stop Hitler until he began rebuilding Germany's armaments, after seizing the Rhineland, indefiance of the versailles treaty, that itself was sufficient reason for the allies to take effective action when they could.

Hitler also fed the Germans, the lie that the previous war's Government had given victory to the allies, he fuelled hatred of Jews, eastern europeans, Homosexuals, the disabled and Romany peoples.

Working class people have never had power in Government, have never decided national policy in respect of Government, had no say in deciding what to do about the bazis, though many working class people did fught for the Republican forces in Spain, this was not sanctioned by the British Government.

It was the British ruling classes who denied Jewish immigrants entry to Britain, fleeing from Nazi persecution, the ruling classes who allowed Hitler's rise unopposed, the ruling classes who by their inaction and tacit support of nazism, who are ultimately responsible, along with the nazis; for the slaughter of disabled, Jewish, Homosexual and other minorities in Germany. Also responsible for the countless deaths of young British soldiers in a conflict that need never have happened.

Lots of good facts there too, but again you are missing the point that Ben was probably trying to make.

Why did Hitler rise to power? Because of the state of Germany after World War 1. We pretty much imposed the Versaille Treaty on them and let them get on with it. If instead of punitive measures against Germany we had actually helped rebuild the country and assist them through the Depression,(like we did in the late 40's and 50's) Germany wouldnt have been such an easy country to take over for the Nazi Party.

Although he stated Britiains Foreign Policy was flawed towards Gemany through the 1930's, it was flawed far earlier than that. It was flawed from the turn of the century, and didnt change until the end of the Second World War. In the 1900's and 1910's Germany was jealous of the Empires of other countries and tried to build her own, this is what lead to the First World War.


Following their defeat in WW1 they had to make reparations and comply with certain requirements which made the proud old germans lose their national pride, along comes Hitler with his ideas of Germany being equal to any of the worlds powers, and people to blame for the German Defeat, a bit of attitude like why cant we have an army to defend ourselves, lets build one.

Of course people were going to follow him. If our foreign policy had been different after WW1 we could have possibly prevented his rise to power.

[oddballmisfitsFTW]

Originally Posted by calyman

It also has to be said that it was people of Ben's class who allowed the rise of the nazis to occur. After the Germans were beaten in the 1st world war. The Rhineland was controlled by the allies. They allowed Hitler to walk in, take the place back and then begin mass production of armaments. One of the few voices warning the British Government to do something about this was Churchill.

It was the inaction of the rulling classes in France and Britain that allowed Hitler to prepare for war. Right up to the early 30's, Hitler could have been easily defeated. The ruling classes in Britain, France and even Germany allowed Hitler to gain strength because they all thought he could be controlled by them. Big ****in mistake. So Ben and people of his class were partly responsible because of their narrow minded and short sighted views, which then brought the the whole of Europe to into appalling violence and genocide.

The part in bold is interesting. I dont trust the ruling classes of Europe at all. In the part i highlighted in Italics you say they allowed Hitler to gain strength cos they thought they could control him and big effin mistake. But what if they had no intention of stopping him and it wasnt a mistake. What if they actually wanted it to happen?
And the same ruling classes are the real reason we went to war in Iraq and Afghanistan too?

[Livia]

Originally Posted by angus58

Well perhaps if he wasn't being shouted down and people did him the courtesy of listening to what he had to say, we would have had his views on that.

Has everyone forgotten one crucial fact and that is that Ben is JEWISH - in fact he is the only Jewish contestant in the house. Far from defending Hitler I got the impression he was trying to say that there were other ways Britain could have handled Hitler. Revisionists would say that in 1940 when Britain's back was to the wall the Germans offered a number of peace deals and guarantees to Britain and her empire but they were refused. America was still pursing an isolationist policy and the Russians had a non-aggression pact at that time with the Germans.

Had Britain decided to engage in talks with the Germans, who knows whether the genocide that followed could have been averted by diplomatic intervention. We shall never know because by then Churchill was PM and was intent on pursuing the war, rejecting any peace talks. It is no coincidence that when the war was over, the voters overwhelmingly voted him out of office as he was seen as a "war monger".

So FFS give Ben a break. He is a Jew and I guarantee he does not condone the genocide that was inflicted on the Jewish people during Hitler's regime; I believe he was trying to say that Britain had other options on the table in 1940 other than all out war, and had these other options been explored, who knows how the course of the war would have gone?

Good post Angus. Balanced and informed.

Furthermore, at the end of the war, the allies decided it would do Europe no good to keep Germany in rags, so we rebuilt their country at our own expense. We had borrowed an enormous amount of money from the USA in order to be able to afford to fight a war at all, and we only finished paying that war loan back in December 2006. Germany is now a major manufacturer and economic power, while we're... well, a bit wobbley economically and we produce nothing. In fact we've sold off most of our family jewels too; Rolls Royce, Jaguar, Land Rover... they're all German now.

I don't disrespect the valour of the generation that pulled us through the war, nor the sacrifices they made. I respect absolutely that we had to do something, but with the benefit of hindsight I think we would have been in a much better situation now had we been able to negotiate a peace instead of fighting for it.

[StGeorge]

Originally Posted by Livia

Good post Angus. Balanced and informed.

Furthermore, at the end of the war, the allies decided it would do Europe no good to keep Germany in rags, so we rebuilt their country at our own expense. We had borrowed an enormous amount of money from the USA in order to be able to afford to fight a war at all, and we only finished paying that war loan back in December 2006. Germany is now a major manufacturer and economic power, while we're... well, a bit wobbley economically and we produce nothing. In fact we've sold off most of our family jewels too; Rolls Royce, Jaguar, Land Rover... they're all German now.

While I don't disrespect the valour of the generation that pulled us through the war, nor the sacrifices they made. I respect absolutely that we had to do something, but with the benefit of hindsight I think we would have been in a much better situation now had we been able to negotiate a peace instead of fighting for it.

Read my post above and go and research what Hitlers plans were. There was no way in hell any appeasement was going to stop him. That is not hindsight....thats historical fact. His own indoctrines were well known to his gang from day 1 and that was their cause.

[Livia]

Originally Posted by StGeorge

Read my post above and go and research what Hitlers plans were. There was no way in hell any appeasement was going to stop him. That is not hindsight....thats historical fact. His own indoctrines were well known to his gang from day 1 and that was their cause.

Actually, I've done a lot of research on that period... But thanks for the advice.

[Blueisthecolour]

Originally Posted by angus58

Had Britain decided to engage in talks with the Germans, who knows whether the genocide that followed could have been averted by diplomatic intervention. We shall never know because by then Churchill was PM and was intent on pursuing the war, rejecting any peace talks. It is no coincidence that when the war was over, the voters overwhelmingly voted him out of office as he was seen as a "war monger".

The bit about Churchill is a little unfair.

He was negotiating with Hitler and exploring avenues to avoid all out war, he wasn't comfortable with it - but he was doing it.

Eventually he reached the conclusion that Hitler was just paying lip-service and wasn't serious about an agreement being reached.

Hitler felt he had what he wanted and didn't need to compromise.

This was the period immediately before Churchill's "Fight them on the beaches" speech.