Colonies on all continents

>>the Brits were responsible for the Holocaust and Operation Barbarossa
holy shit /pol/int/ has really been huffing some fucking dank memes

Obviously, it's Britains fault that we didn't defeat them first.

Germany is not responsible for it's own actions.

_donald

Btw Nuremberg was a scam. If anything they should've been tried in Switzerland or Sweden.
Also Soviets tried to shift the blame entirely on Germans.

>brits where responsible for the holocaust and operation Barbarossa
that's not what i said niggers,
what i said is that if the Brits didn't declare war on the Germans (The Brits obviously didn't do it for humanitarian reasons)
shit wouldn't have got as bad as it did.
The Brits however where responsible for alot of other shit that happend outside of Europe

>"Im not a nazi!"

>proceeds to shill retarded stormfag revisionist history and propaganda

wow, this totally tricked me!

thats retarded though and doesnt make any sense whatsoever.

>he thinks declaring war is starting the war

I know this is a troll post but I still got to give you a (you)
>If I just leave the expansionist power alone they'll just get tried and stop taking over

>reeeeee how dare you honor your agreements and alliances

Pure autism

If Nuremberg was a scam and they were just out to make heads roll, then how come some people on trial were found innocent and let go? Or found not guilty of everything they were charged with and got really reduced sentences?

so you are saying, if Bris didn't declare war on Germany, then Hitler wouldn't have invaded Soviet Union?
I think the opposite is true, Operation Barbossa would come much sooner

to make it look more belivable
seems like it worked

It was the Brits who declared the war tho, they only used Poland as an excuse
the Germans had no interest expanding too the west

It's almost like stormcunt accounts of what happened aMr here are significantly more conspiracy theory than historical fact and is done so with a deliberate agenda to blacken the Allies.

And declaring war is not starting the war.

>honoring a defensive pact is an "excuse"

Go home /pol/

for what reason do you think they even entered a defensive pact with Poland, and why didn't they declare war on the Soviets for doing the same shit?

There would be but they would end with Churchill, Chamberlain, FDR and Stalin being hung from barbed wire and beaten.

Because the Soviets hadn't done it a number of times already.

>the Germans had no interest expanding too the west
No one can be this retarded, Nazi ideology specifically calls for the creation of a pan-European union for all Germanic-Nordic peoples. Hitler's original plan could have very well been one of subterfuge and corrosion rather than armed conflict but it still entails conquering other sovereign nations

>what is the finnish winter war
>what is the annexation of the baltics post-ww2

>post WW2

user, I...

reminder that this was the nazi New Order planned to happen after they won the war

if they weren't hypocrites they would have declared on the soviets too when Stalin started his bullshit post ww2.
He didn't gain nukes anyways until 1949

>for what reason do you think they even entered a defensive pact

To try and stop Germany from killing Poland.

>why didn't they declare war on the Soviets

Because they weren't suicidal.

Germany knew that the Western allies were going to declare war. That was the whole point you little fool.

At least the map didn't do that retarded shit where the Mediterranean is the colour of Italy an a giant blob

>nazis still occupying north France
>nazis owning romania and Hungary
nice meme

>hey guys, we know you're exhausted and pushed to your limits with many of your friends and family dead or crippled, but we need to keep fighting! Against the people we have been arming and supplying this time!

Don't forget that Churchill DID want to open hostilities against the Soviets, and was essentially stonewalled by the Americans.

Why do you leftist snowflakes want a SJW safespace?

>anglo wants to backstab his allies
why aren't I suprized?

>30 seconds ago the Anglos were evil for NOT attacking the Soviets

Make up your minds people.

As someone that's totally ignorant about WW1, I'd like to ask three things I've seen flying recently from /pol/ people:

1. Is it true that the British had a smear campaign against the Germans that was outright false in every way? That they insisted Germans speared babies and cut the hands of little boys, and that it all turned out to be fake.

2. I see that /pol/ people keep saying that Germany was "forced" to enter through Belgium in order to knock out the French first and that it was self-defense and simple preservation. But hadn't they been drawing up plans to do this long before the British declared war on them?

3. How much truth is there to the fact that the British and French just had it in for Germany, and they were looking for reasons to start a war? The theory I see put forth is that they basically allied together because they wanted to see Germany destroyed and brought to disunity once more.

>if you dont believe in retarded stormfag made up history it means you are an SJW!

>hadn't they been drawing up plans to do this long before the British declared war on them?
lot's of nations tend to have war plans if shit hit the fan. Americans had plans on how to invade Canada in the most efficient way if they would go to war with the commonwealth,
even tho it was extremely unlikely

1. Some actions committed by Germans in Belgium were exaggerated for the sake of propaganda such as impailing multiple children on bayonets

2. Not necessarily, going through Margiot Line was always an option but it was heavily defended. Germany went through Belgium believieing it would be a pushover and they would simply march through and then move onwards to France

3. Both Entente and Central Powers all had it out for each other and questionable goals. Germany, especially because of Wilhelm, alienated itself from France and Britain with its aggression and stupid policy making especially since the enemy was always considered Russia. Wilhelm's newspaper interview showed his disapproving views towards Britain, France, Russia and Japan which further isolated Germany from those powers and discouraged much cooperation between them so Germany ended up with two face and Abdul when he could had Pierre, Nigel and Akira spitroasting the Russians.

1. Yes the British had a smear campaign. But so did ever other country. It's called state propaganda and we still use it today.

2. While it's true that the best way to invade France is though Belgium the Schlieffen Plan was first drawn up in 1905. The Germany plan was to knock out France fast in a fashion similar to the Franco Prussian war so British involvement wouldn't have been a factor.

3. While France certainly had it out for Germany (hence why they allied Russia) the British were far more indecisive. Britain and France weren't even allied. It's possible that with a different set of people in Westminster they might have stayed neutral for quite sometime.

Japan were oppurtunist cunts tho, they would have invaded German colonies anyways if they knew they didn't have resourches to take them back

1. Literally every country ever has used propaganda to make the enemy into villians. This is in no way some shocking conspiracy or anything out of bounds so I dont even get what you are trying to imply here. The Germans did the same thing against the British for example. And there was "The Rape of Belgium" which was ampted up in proapganda to show how barbaric and violent the "Huns" were. It started being a thing to notice that it was greatly exaggerated for propaganda, but recent historians found out it wasnt that exaggerated at all.

2. The Plan used was "The Schlieffen Plan" which was written up in 1905

3. Sort of right, but this is a really muddy issue. The whole problem was that there was an arms race in Europe during the early 1900s, which caused tensions among all the major powers in Europe. Everyone distrusted everyone and then when the Duke was assassinated, it set off a powder keg of intertwined alliances. France at the time was the big swinging dick of mainland Europe though.

Thank you, my lords. But what I'm asking as far as (1) goes is whether or not the British smear campaign was legendary in a way that forever changed the perception of Germans from highly-civilized and peace-loving people into mongrel dogs akin to Uruk-Hai. And whether it was all made up, or just exaggerated for effect. Because in /pol/ writings it's presented as if the British went far and beyond with the campaign (supposedly because they were financed by Jews that controlled the media and had relations in British aristocracy).

Where can I find that interview? And why was he pursuing such a dangerous course of action? Did he not see losing everything as an option?

> but recent historians found out it wasnt that exaggerated at all

Where can I read about that?

>1. Is it true that the British had a smear campaign against the Germans that was outright false in every way? That they insisted Germans speared babies and cut the hands of little boys, and that it all turned out to be fake.
Yes and every nation at the time did similar things to dehumanize their foes.

>2. I see that /pol/ people keep saying that Germany was "forced" to enter through Belgium in order to knock out the French first and that it was self-defense and simple preservation. But hadn't they been drawing up plans to do this long before the British declared war on them?
Germany, Austria, France, the United Kingdom, and Russia all signed the first treaty of London which guaranteed the neutrality and independence of Belgium, and Luxembourg. The British also warned Germany that invading Belgium meant war with them prior to the invasion.

>3. How much truth is there to the fact that the British and French just had it in for Germany, and they were looking for reasons to start a war? The theory I see put forth is that they basically allied together because they wanted to see Germany destroyed and brought to disunity once more.
France yes, Britain no, it was in Britains interest for France to not lose the war so the balance of power was maintained on the continent, but they had no interest in fighting on Frances behalf, but declared war on Germany only after they refused the ultimatum to leave Belgium and cease hostilities against the neutral power.

h-net.org/reviews/showrev.php?id=10090

Sorry for mobile link but here's stuff about the interview
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daily_Telegraph_Affair

Wilhelm pursued a dangerous course of action because he was depressed and anxiety ridden idiot who should have been left to play grab ass on his yacht and rant about Japs sending Buddhism to Europe like he used to do before the war

>Using your reply to another thread to create a new one
You should be gassed.

Thank you both.

>>were the ones starting the war

>sure, we'll look the other way while you re-arm
>sure, we'll look the other way while you re-militarize the rhineland
>sure, we'll look the other way while you annex austria
>sure, we'll look the other way while you dismember our ally

Clearly, ((((((((((Britain)))))))))) was hell-bent on war with Germany.
I really feel so bad for Chamberlain, he worked with Hitler in good faith, all logic and good sense was with him, who could want another war just 20 years after the war? Everyone knew how horrible war is but (((Hitler))) couldn't be reasoned with and he had to destroy Europe, costing millions of lives and ruining nationalism for all future generations.

Liberal democracies had a temporary team up with the Soviets. It's not like they were actually best friends. USSR still started the war together with Germany so betraying them wouldn't damage their honor. Would actually restore it.

>I really feel so bad for Chamberlain

Me too. Especially since he's now a bad guy when that warmongering piece of shit Churchill is considered a (((((hero))))).

>backstabbing their ally of last 5 years without a declaration of war or any causus belli wouldn't damage their honor.
of course not, since anglos have no honor left

>litterally just gone to war, had its men killed and cities destroyed for honor

How was Churchill a warmonger?

Aggressors don't deserve loyalty.

Chamberlain was spineless and the reason things got out of hand.

Regarding 1 they claimed the French town that was massacred and burned by the nazis also was full of children and fetuses that were crucified. It's true the town burned down and the people died but no crucifixions were ever found.

and agressor is whoever the anglo doesn't like?

Whoever starts the war of aggression like Germany and their allies Soviet Union Allying with either of them would be shameful so by attacking them the Brits would be clean.

>WW2 wouldn't have started if the Brits didn't declare war on Germany
One coupon for one free dolphin therapy session was sent to your hone address.

Why is it that every neonazi or /pol/tard makes outright idiotic statements and goes full retard after being called out?

Because they're used to an echo chamber circle jerk, so don't know how to respond to disagreement.

>evil

...

>if you don't support socialism you're a leftist
back to Stormfront you fucking retard

>and why didn't they declare war on the Soviets for doing the same shit?
Because the Soviet pretext was a legitimate one. They were moving into areas with Belorussians and Ukrainians and the policy of the Allies post-Versailles was one of ethnic unity.

no, they still do it on /pol/ too
>argue with a nazi about politics
>he tries arguing that somehow seizing the means of production and redistributing the wealth of the capitalist class is right wing as long as you talk shit about Marx and Lenin while doing it
>point out how blatantly fucking stupid that is
>he stops responding to me and spams "info"graphics about how Hitler dindu nuffin
mysticism is a hell of a drug

Is it because the staple crops in India was replaced by cash crops and other profitable industries?

stormfags are just kids playing cowboys and indians. They only hate communism in the first place because their childish mindset NEEDS a bad guy to fight against, and they fill that with communism.

>everything that's not my anti white Leftypol propaganda is stormfront
You Leftypol shills are so pathetic
Veeky Forums isn't your safespace, SJW

You're saying people trying to make money to feed there family gives them responsibility to feed the people in the nation? If I am a farm and the British want to buy a cash crop for a better price than me selling rice I should still just do rice for the goos of the country? There is a reason Indians are basically slave labor even today if they aren't forced to farm what you want the country will starve. The population is out of control and always has.

Just like how you leftists need to vilify white people and any else who doesn't agree with your SJW shit

>if they declared more wars they wouldn't be aggressors
/pol/tard logic

same shit can be said about your shitpost kike apologist

they shouldn't be declaring wars if they aren't going to finish them

thanks for proving my point dumb dicks

> dumb dicks
what kind of a fucking insult is that

germany dindu nuffin

dey wuz good volks

No one is getting triggered because of conflicting ideologies. It's because you're a fucking mouth breather with the critical thinking skills of a rock, even still after getting reminded multiple times that it has nothing to do with politics and moreso with the fact that /pol/fags think they're experts qualified to speak on every subject while the majority probably have legit learning disabilities.

>You Leftypol shills are so pathetic

you are literally shilling nazism you stupid faggot, so you obviously cant turn that shit around. And no one is "tiggered" we are annoyed because you post the SAME EXACT shit over and over and over and over again despite the fact that we constantly answer all your "just asking questions!" totally not shill post. You faggots think that if you stubbornly throw this shit at a wall, it will eventually stick. You arent going to convert a bunch of history buffs to your retarded ideology based entirely around made up revisionist history dumbass. You are the creationist of history

>were the ones starting the war
So they should just have let Germany invade Poland without any repercussions?

yes, why the fuck should they care about Poland?
Besides their victory was phunic, they lost their empire and became a vassal to America,
b-but atleast Germany didn't get poland guys

*Pyrrhic

>why should they care about a powerful, industrialized, country in Europe annexing everyone around them

Fixed that for you.

> Hitler's original plan could have very well been one of subterfuge and corrosion rather than armed conflict
This is absolutely not the case. Hitler's ideology was one of militarism from the very beginning, because aggressively pillaging foreign countries is the only way the Nazis could pay off their massive domestic debt.

That's why they beelined for the gold reserves of whichever country they conquered, and why afterward they did anything possible to extract wealth and bring it back to Germany. Otherwise they would have defaulted and the entire regime would have crumbled.

more like took back parts that previously belonged to them or had a german majority,

About WWI German occupation in Belgium and France.

armstrong.edu/history-journal/history-journal-the-forgotten-victims-of-the-north-french-civilians-under-g

remembrancetrails-northernfrance.com/history/the-department-of-nord-and-the-coal-basin-under-german-occupation/forced-labour-hostages-and-deportees.html

>France
>Luxembourg
>Poland
>Belgium
>Netherlands
>Norway
>Yugoslavia
>Greece
>the entire fucking USSR west of the Urals
>"""German majority"""

where would Germany look after Poland? Conflict with England, France and the USSR was inevitable

>>France
declared war on Germany
>>Luxembourg
German
>>Poland
Didn't hand over the rightfuly German parts of the country
>>Belgium
strategically necessary to get into France.
The allies would have invaded neutral countries too if strategically necessary
>>Netherlands
same as before
>>Norway
so that the allies wouldn't beat them to it
>>Yugoslavia
pro-allies coup detat
>>Greece
Mussolini was a retard
Most off these wars wouldn't have happend if the allies didn't declare war, and when it comes to the USSR the Brit's wanted to take them out too

>where would Germany look after Poland
east

Germany would have given some of the rusky land to the deserving fins