by anyone? including the Germans, the English, the Polish, the Russians, the Americans, the French, etc etc

How could anyone have prevented the war?

Well the US could have joined the Lon.

Don't make the Germans pay reparations, or at least reduce the figure and lengthen the repayment period, don't force them to assume all guilt for starting the war. Bring the Kaiser back from his abdication, but as a much weakened constitutional monarch. Permit Germany to have an army, navy and air force in some form, with whatever reduced restrictions are put in place lapsing after 20 years.

Have the US join the League of Nations, at least as an observer. (And I can't tell you much it pains me to say that, as some who tends toward isolationism.) Have the US forgive at least some of what Britain and France borrowed so they can get their economies on their feet, which should also make them a bit less likely squeeze the German economy.

I'm of the school that Versailles made WW2 in some form a virtual certainty. The treaty actually wasn't all that harsh by the standards the Germans forced on the French following the Franco-Prussian War or on the Russians at Brest-Livotsk, BUT sometimes life just ain't fair. The allies should have been willing to compromise and look to the longer term. What little credit I give Woodrow Wilson is that he actually tried to do this, though he failed miserably in carrying his ideas out. I doubt things would have been much different even if he hadn't had a stroke.

Assassination of Hitler

Indeed. Bassicaly, being nicer to Germany would have averted the entire situation.

what about the Asian half of it?

*shrug* Im doubtful any Asian involvement would have happend had it not been for Hitlers aggression. Likely a diplomatic solution would have been achieved in US-Japan relations, and blossomed from there... A direct war between the two was unlikely. Thats my oppinion.

Don't make the Germans pay reparations, or at least reduce the figure and lengthen the repayment period, don't force them to assume all guilt for starting the war. Bring the Kaiser back from his abdication, but as a much weakened constitutional monarch. Permit Germany to have an army, navy and air force in some form, with whatever reduced restrictions are put in place lapsing after 20 years.

Have the US join the League of Nations, at least as an observer. (And I can't tell you much it pains me to say that, as some who tends toward isolationism.) Have the US forgive at least some of what Britain and France borrowed so they can get their economies on their feet, which should also make them a bit less likely squeeze the German economy.

I'm of the school that Versailles made WW2 in some form a virtual certainty. The treaty actually wasn't all that harsh by the standards the Germans forced on the French following the Franco-Prussian War or on the Russians at Brest-Livotsk, BUT sometimes life just ain't fair. The allies should have been willing to compromise and look to the longer term. What little credit I give Woodrow Wilson is that he actually tried to do this, though he failed miserably in carrying his ideas out. I doubt things would have been much different even if he hadn't had a stroke.


Aww... I was getting all ready to post basically the same thing, and then I read your message! In short, I agree. Versailles sealed the deal on WWII. And regarding the Franco-Prussian War: in today's day and age, Alsace-Lorraine would have come under the protection of the UN! :D

The Pacific is a different story (and I'm not nearly as well versed in Asian history of the PTO during WWII), but I might hazard to guess that without Germany and Italy in Europe, Japan may have been less inclined to war. I don't know that for certain- just throwing it out there...

Are you all suggesting that the Nazis were justified in invading Poland because the treaty of Versailles was unfair? I think the Poles who died in the invasion may disagree, especially considering that they didn't get a chance to personally negotiate the treaty.

Hitler was able to order the invasion of Poland because he got into power blaming the ToV.

Appeasement failed, it made Hitler more confident: Hitler was one of those people where giving them what they're asking for is a sign of weakness to them.

In terms of Japan, they were aggressive long before the US put embargoes on them. It wasn't US embargoes that made them go to war. They were already behaving terribly in the mid-'30s: The Rape of Nanking started in late 1937.

Are you all suggesting that the Nazis were justified in invading Poland because the treaty of Versailles was unfair? I think the Poles who died in the invasion may disagree, especially considering that they didn't get a chance to personally negotiate the treaty.


No. Hitler came to power in Germany because of the conditions that the Treaty of Versailles created. Of course, a global depression didn't hurt, either, but actually the Treaty exacerbated the effects of the depression in Germany.

Obviously the Germans were not justified in an unprovoked attack on Poland. Maybe this is where some clarification is necessary: the economic provisions of the Treaty of Versailles led to the ascendancy of Hitler.

There were several factors.

The ToV created the majority of them, thus it is probably the biggest contributor to creating WWII. Another major aspect, however, was communism. Communist were feared in much of Europe, and the very reason much of Europe didn't mind Germany returning to its former Prussian military glory was that they would serve as the vanguard against communist invasion.

There were several factors.

The ToV created the majority of them, thus it is probably the biggest contributor to creating WWII. Another major aspect, however, was communism. Communist were feared in much of Europe, and the very reason much of Europe didn't mind Germany returning to it's former Prussian military glory was that they would serve as the vanguard against communist invasion.


Real good point, and illustrated by the fact that the Soviets were not invited to the table at Versailles. Not that they should have been, since they surrendered after they took power (expecting in short order a communist revolution to sweep Europe and the world). Had the western powers been interested in conciliating, they would have at least been involved in the talks. The Soviets took it as a snub, settled in to their "besieged" mentality, Stalin takes over, and the rest is as you say- the west allowing Germany to act as a buffer.

In such a light, Nazi Germany is a creature of the west's own creation.

And to think that all of this basically boils down to a lousy dispute between the Prussians and the French over Alsace-Lorraine.

Impossible to prevent IMO. WW2 is merely an extention of WW1 and the unresolved issues both before and after. If you read the political and diplomatic history of Europe you cannot understand what caused the Second World War without beginning your studies at the end of the 19th century and including the Great War. Yes, the ToV was a factor, as was communism, as was the power vacuum created by Woodrow Wilson after he disappeared off of the European politic map, as did unresolved issues of Germanic territory, old Ottoman territory and the division of Hapsburg lands, the arms race between the great colonist powers, the depression, out of date mentality, and naiivity.

To sum up - no way at all it was preventable.

Well, Germany winning WWI would have surely prevented WWII.

It's actually quite unfortunate they lost. Up until the first world war, Germany was the artistic and intellectual heart of the planet. WW2 would have also have not occurred, although it may have been a more minor version (Prussia versus Russia.) The problem in Europe was always jealousy and colonial interests from way back. Sad, really.

I don't know how the United States joining the League of Nations would have prevented World War II. We were typically lashed out at for suggesting that German war debts be shortened and by the time Hitler came to power, they certainly weren't listening to anyone as they would eventually withdraw from the League of Nations.

Instead of appeasing Hitler, the European powers should have moved on Hitler while Germany was only picking on the likes of a Czechoslovakia.

Instead of appeasing Hitler, the European powers should have moved on Hitler while Germany was only picking on the likes of a Czechoslovakia.

I don't see how this comes even close to preventing WWII.

I don't see how this comes even close to preventing WWII.

Not only was Hitler unready for war against major powers when he was picking on Czechoslovakia, it's known that an invasion by, say France, would have initiated a coup against Hitler. He was poised to be arrested, and it all depended upon whether or not France or Great Britain would show some teeth instead of caving in. When they did cave in, it bought Hitler the time he needed and ended hopes of a coup.

Not only was Hitler unready for war against major powers when he was picking on Czechoslovakia, it's known that an invasion by, say France, would have initiated a coup against Hitler. He was poised to be arrested, and it all depended upon whether or not France or Great Britain would show some teeth instead of caving in. When they did cave in, it bought Hitler the time he needed and ended hopes of a coup.

I don't believe this, simply "showing some teeth", would have had a significant impact on WWII whatsoever.

I don't believe this, simply "showing some teeth", would have had a significant impact on WWII whatsoever.

I have an excellent book that argues to the contrary, a pretty convincing argument. Unfortunately, my copy is currently being borrowed (I think by Sulla the Dictator, actually). It's The German Army: 1933-1945 by Matthew Cooper:

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0812885198/qid=1121834699/sr=8-1/ref=pd_bbs_1/002-2965479-5699250?v=glance&s=books&n=507846

I may be able to find other sources to quote here, but I'm not prepared to do so right now.

I thought this was all common knowledge, though...

I have an excellent book that argues to the contrary, a pretty convincing argument. Unfortunately, my copy is currently being borrowed (I think by Sulla the Dictator, actually). It's The German Army: 1933-1945 by Matthew Cooper:

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0812885198/qid=1121834699/sr=8-1/ref=pd_bbs_1/002-2965479-5699250?v=glance&s=books&n=507846

I may be able to find other sources to quote here, but I'm not prepared to do so right now.

I thought this was all common knowledge, though...

It's voodoo-esque, magic 8-ball nonsense -- would have, could have, should have nonsense. Clearly, it would have had affected some aspect of it, but there is no logical groundwork to assert it would have prevented WWII. I don't see the silver bullet, "common knowledge" notwithstanding.

It's voodoo-esque, magic 8-ball nonsense -- would have, could have, should have nonsense.

I'm sorry, I thought this thread was about "how could World War 2 have been prevented."

I'm sorry, I thought this thread was about "how could World War 2 have been prevented."


Whatever. Gee, if Hitler would have stubbed his toe on day X, WWII would have surely been avoided. If you can't defend your assertions logically, factually don't make them.

Whatever. Gee, if Hitler would have stubbed his toe on day X, WWII would have surely been avoided. If you can't defend your assertions logically, factually don't make them.

I will. I require time to type them up, though. My position is a commonly held one, really.

Appeasement failed, it made Hitler more confident: Hitler was one of those people where giving them what they're asking for is a sign of weakness to them.

this is the crux of it, regarding Hitler. The Treaty Of Versailles wasn't harsh on Germany, and they defaulted on the reparations anyway. The mistake was not having an Allied occupation force in Germany for a few years afterwards, disarming people like Roem, rooting out their hidden arms caches, and the various right and left wing militias running around loose, making political stability impossible, in turn making economic stability impossible as well.

I will. I require time to type them up, though. My position is a commonly held one, really.

Ernham thinks Germany really won WW I and WW II, so you shouldn't really put a lot of time into typing it up, unless you would like to do an essay for the history forum.

Ernham thinks Germany really won WW I and WW II, so you shouldn't really put a lot of time into typing it up, unless you would like to do an essay for the history forum.

They did win both -- nominally, as I've said. Your ignorance of reality doesn't change reality.

They did win both -- nominally, as I've said. Your ignorance of reality doesn't change reality.

Yes, here's the Germans winning World War II:



http://www.warfarehq.com/articles/wargame_articles/reichstag.gif

I was going to add that hitler was only able to bully his way into the Reichstag by having the best armed street gang, i.e. being better armed than his rival and the Army, which an Allied occupying force would have prevented, or at least muted down.

They did win both -- nominally, as I've said. Your ignorance of reality doesn't change reality.

So deshalb sprechen wir Deutsches? :rolleyes:

The opposition to the Fuehrer’s grandiose plans for aggression was led by General Ludwig Beck, Chief of the Army General Staff, who henceforth would assume the leadership of such resistance as there was to Hitler in the Third Reich. Later this sensitive, intelligent, decent but indecisive general would base his struggle against the Nazi dictator on broad grounds. As late as the spring of 1938, however, after more than four years of National Socialism, Beck opposed the Fuehrer only on the narrower professional grounds that Germany was not yet strong enough to take on the Western Powers and perhaps Russia as well.

Beck, as we have seen, had welcomed Hitler’s coming to power and had publicly acclaimed the Fuehrer for re-establishing the conscript German Army in defiance of Versailles. As far back as 1930, it will be remembered from earlier pages, Beck, then an obscure regimental commander, had gone out of his way to defend three of his subalterns on a treason charge that they were fomenting Nazism in the armed forces and, in fact, had testified in their favor before the Supreme Court after Hitler had appeared on the stand and warned that when he came to power “heads would roll.” It was not the Fuehrer’s aggression against Austria—which Beck had supported—but the rolling of General von Fritsch’s head after the Gestapo frame-up which seems to have cleared his mind. Swept of its cobwebs it began to perceive that Hitler’s policy of deliberately risking war with Britain, France and Russia against the advice of the top generals would, if carried out, be the ruin of Germany.

Beck had got wind of Hitler’s meeting with Keitel on April 21 in which the Wehrmacht was instructed to hasten plans for attacking Czechoslovakia, and on May 5 he wrote out the first of a series of memoranda for General von Brauchitsch, the new Commander in Chief of the Army, strenuously opposing any such actions. They are brilliant papers, blunt as to unpleasant facts and full of solid reasoning and logic. Although Beck overestimated the strength of will of Britain and France, the political shrewdness of their leaders and the power of the French Army, and in the end proved wrong on the outcome of the Czech problem, his long-range predictions turned out, so far as Germany was concerned, to be deadly accurate…..


….on June 3, Beck got off another memorandum to Brauchitsch in which he declared the new directive for “Green” was “militarily unsound” and that the Army General Staff rejected it.

Shirer, William L. The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich: A History of Nazi Germany. Simon and Schuster: New York, 1960. p.366-7.

Hitler says himself:

…I will decide to take action against Czechoslovakia only if I am firmly convinced…that France will not march and that therefore England will not intervene.

ibid, p. 368.

On July 7, however, Hitler is laying down “considerations” of what to do if France and Britain intervene. “The prime consideration,” he says, “is to hold the western fortifications” until Czechoslovakia is smashed and troops can be rushed to the Western front. The fact that there are no troops available to hold the western fortifications does not intrude itself upon his feverish thinking. He advises that “Russia is most likely to intervene” and by now he is not so sure that Poland may not too. These eventualities must be met, but he does not say how.

Apparently Hitler, somewhat isolated at Obersalzberg, has not yet heard the rumblings of dissent in the upper echelons of the Army General Staff. Despite Beck’s pestering of Brauchitsch with his memoranda, the General Staff Chief began to realize by midsummer that his unstable Commander in Chief was not bringing his opinions to the notice of the Fuehrer. By the middle of July Beck therefore determined to make one last desperate effort to bring matters to a head, one way or the other. On July 16 he penned his last memorandum to Brauchitsch. He demanded that the Army tell Hitler to halt his preparations for war:

In full consciousness of the magnitude of such a step but also of my responsibilities I feel it my duty to urgently ask the Supreme Commander of the Armed Forces [Hitler] call off his preparations for war, and abandon the intention of solving the Czech question by force until the military situation is fundamentally changed. [b]For the present I consider it hopeless, and this view is shared by all the higher officers of the General Staff.

Beck took his memorandum personally to Brauchitsch and augmented it orally with further proposals for unified action on the part of the Army generals should Hitler prove recalcitrant. Specifically, he proposed that in the case of the ranking generals should all resign at once….If Hitler insisted on war, they should resign in a body. In that case, he argued, a war was impossible, since there would be nobody to lead the armies.

Ibid.

On the next two pages:

Brauchitsch did summon up enough courage to show Beck’s July 16 memorandum to Hitler. Hitler’s response was to call in not the resisting ranking generals, who were behind it, but the officers just below them, the Army and Air Force staff chiefs of various commands who formed a younger set on which he believed he could count after he had treated it to his persuasive oratory. Summoned to the Berghof on August 10—Hitler had scarcely budged from his mountain villa all summer—they were treated after dinner to a speech that, according to Jodl, who was present and who described it in his faithful diary, lasted nearly three hours. But on this occasion the eloquence of the Fuehrer was not so persuasive as he had hoped. Both Jodl and Manstein, who was also present, later told of “a most serious and unpleasant clash” between General von Wietersheim and Hitler. Wietersheim was the ranking officer at the gathering and as designate chief of staff of the Army of the west under General Wilhelm Adam he dared to speak up about the key problem Hitler and the OKW were dodging: that with almost all of the military forces committed to the blow against Czechoslovakia, Germany was defenseless in the west and would be overrun by the French. In fact, he reported, the West Wall could not be held for more than three weeks.……..


So the generals certainly thought that France could defeat Germany if they invaded while Germany was in Czechoslovakia.

And the coup attempt:

As it happened, certain key generals who were willing to help were quickly discovered and initiated into the budding conspiracy. Three of them held commands which were vital to the success of the venture: General Erewin von Witzleben, commander of the all important Wehrkreis III, which comprised Berlin, and the surrounding areas; General Count Erich von Brockdorff-Ahlefeld, commander of the Potsdam garrison, which was made up of the 23rd Infantry Division; and General Erich Hoepner, who commanded an armored division in Thuringia which could, if necessary, repulse any SS troops attempting to relieve Berlin from Munich.

The plan of the conspirators, as it developed toward the end of August, was to seize Hitler as soon as he had issued the final order to attack Czechoslovakia and hale him before one of his own People’s Courts on the charge that he had tried recklessly to hurl Germany into a European war and was therefore no longer competent to govern. In the meantime, for a short interim, there would be a military dictatorship followed by a provisional government presided over by some eminent civilian. In due course a conservative democratic government would be formed.

There were two considerations on which the success of the coup depended and which involved the two key conspirators, General Halder and General Beck. The first was timing. Halder had arranged with OKW that he personally be given forty-eight hours’ notice of Hitler’s final order to attack Czechoslovakia. This would give him the time to put the plot into execution before the troops could cross the Czech frontier. Thus he would be able not only to arrest Hitler but to prevent the fatal step that would lead to war.

The second factor was that Beck must be able to convince the generals beforehand and that the German people later (during the proposed trial of Hitler) that an attack on Czechoslovakia would bring in Britain and France and thus precipitate a European war, for which Germany was not prepared and which it would certainly lose. This had been the burden of his memoranda all summer and it was the basis of all that he was now prepared to do: to preserve Germany from a European conflict which he believed would destroy her—by overthrowing Hitler.

Ibid, p. 375.

If Britain and France would declare publicly that they would not stand idly by while Hitler threw his armies into Czechoslovakia and if some prominent British statesmen would issue a solemn warning to Germany of the consequences of Nazi aggression, then the German generals, for their part, would act to stop Hitler.

Ibid, p. 380.

And, of course, Munich is where history was made.

Thank you, good game, I win. :)

http://www.warfarehq.com/articles/wargame_articles/reichstag.gif

I'll read through it all tomorrow, not to mention checking the sources. However, The first half has not at all substantiated the assertion you have made. The question is whether it would have prevented a world war, nothing to do with Germany's prospects of winning the war. Additionally, surely Hitler never lied. ROFL :nice:

And why do you keep posting that picture??

I'll read through it all tomorrow, not to mention checking the sources. However, The first half has not at all substantiated the assertion you have made.

I would think the generals of the German Army are qualified to assess the strength of their own military.

edit...here, I'll shorten your reading right now...this is from the Shirer book:

If Britain and France would declare publicly that they would not stand idly by while Hitler threw his armies into Czechoslovakia and if some prominent British statesmen would issue a solemn warning to Germany of the consequences of Nazi aggression, then the German generals, for their part, would act to stop Hitler.

The question is whether it would have prevented a world war, nothing to do with Germany's prospects of winning the war.

The German officers presumed there would be no world war, since the combination of arresting Hitler and the tank treads of Somua S-35s rolling into the Ruhr Valley would have been sufficient in killing the monstrous conflict in its infancy.


Additionally, surely Hitler never lied.

I'm not sure what straw man argument you are knocking down.

And why do you keep posting that picture??

It's the Germans winning World War II.
:p

Well, Two real ways WW2 could have been prevented would be Britian getting involved sooner, instead of claiming the matter wasn't important enough to bring the empire to war over (opps ;) ), or by staying out of it all together. Without Britian its unlikely anyone could have beaten germany in europe, so the war would have been shortened, and probly not turned into a world war. While that wouldn't have prevented it totally, it would have shortened it.

Hugs

lilnymph

I notice that nobody has mentioned the Weimar Republic. If it had been supported thatt too might have had an effect, certainly if they had been able to create an economically stable country Hitler would have found it much harder to take over.

I notice that nobody has mentioned the Weimar Republic. If it had been supported thatt too might have had an effect, certainly if they had been able to create an economically stable country Hitler would have found it much harder to take over.

Here's something: If WWII hadn't occurred, what would have helped to pull the world out of the Great Depression?

by anyone? including the Germans, the English, the Polish, the Russians, the Americans, the French, etc etc

How could anyone have prevented the war?
Ether
1 Killing Hitler

or

2) By striking a deal with Hitler where he could invade Russia and not invade he western powers.

But then again Hitler was a really irrational person who did as he pleased. I do not know if the guy could really be trusted.