Was WW2 Inevitable?

According to anti-Nazi propaganda (sorry, the ‘mainstream’ version of history), Nazi Germany bore the sole responsibility for the outbreak of the Second World War. Consequently, the WW2 could have been avoided had someone either prevented the Nazis from coming to power in Germany (e.g., a united Communist/Social Democratic coalition in the Reichstag or Reichspresident von Hindenburg) or taken this power away from them (e.g., Reichswehr or Wehrmacht via a military coup d’etat or Britain & France via a military invasion).

The only problem with this theory is that it is completely wrong. World War 2 in Europe (the Second Great War) was inevitable – and not because Hitler wanted it (he didn’t). But because Stalin wanted it. And not just wanted it, but created the military-industrial complex (at that time the most powerful in history) that made it actually possible to fight this war – and win it.

Stalin was so determined to start the global war that nobody and nothing (short of unexpected death from natural causes) could stop him. Consequently, even if some internal or external power put an end to Nazi regime (or prevented it in the first place), it would not have prevented the WW2. Just the opposite, it would have ensured the subsequent Stalin’s victory – and the end of the human civilization as we know it.

Hitler and the Nazis knew that Germany was one of the first (right after Poland) to be attacked by Bolshevik hordes (it almost happened in 1920 when only the ‘Miracle on the Vistula’ saved Germany and the whole Europe from being occupied by the Soviets). Ironically, the man who saved the Germany from Bolshevik occupation and destruction was no other than Marshal Józef Piłsudski – the sworn enemy of Germany.

Hence, the Fuhrer had no illusions: in order to save his Fatherland from invasion, occupation and inevitable destruction by the Soviet Union, he had to perform a miracle of his own – in the shortest possible time create the military-industrial complex capable of defeating its Soviet counterpart.

Which – for all practical purposes – meant being able to launch a preventive lightning strike and win the blitzkrieg in the shortest possible time. And that’s exactly what Adolf Hitler did.

Consequently, the answer to this question is: Yes, it was inevitable. And it had nothing to do with Hitler and Nazi Germany – and everything to do with Joseph Stalin and the Soviet Union.

Why Did Hitler Invade the Soviet Union?

The answer (not surprisingly) depends on whom you ask. The ‘mainstream’ historian will tell you that Nazi Germany invaded the Soviet Union because it wanted to create sufficient Lebensraum (‘living space’) for its citizens (at the expense of the latter).

More specifically, to establish control (although ‘ownership’ would probably be a much better word) over agricultural (fertile land, livestock, etc.), natural (oil, metals, timber, etc.), human and other resources of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. In short, according to ‘mainstream’ historians, invasion of the Soviet Union was pretty much a typical colonial war aimed at making a significant chunk of Soviet territory a colony of the Third Reich.

The ‘revisionist’ historian will say that Hitler invaded the Soviet Union to save his Fatherland (and the whole Europe – if not the whole world) from invasion, occupation and subsequent destruction by the ‘Red Tamerlane’ Joseph Stalin and his Bolshevik hordes. Consequently, the war on the Eastern front was essentially a holy war for Hitler and Nazi Germany.

Who is right? Interestingly enough, both are. With a minor correction – being a national sociopath, Adolf Hitler could not have cared less about the well-being about any nation other than his (literally) beloved Germany. Let alone Europe or the world.

Actually, there is one more, far more interesting question: Did Hitler really have a choice or did he have to invade the Soviet Union? And the only historically correct answer which fits the indisputable facts, rock-solid logic and the good old common sense is No. Regardless of whether Hitler even asked himself this question or not (most likely, he didn’t).

No, Hitler had no other choice but to invade the Soviet Union and thus to launch the de-facto pre-emptive war. In September of 1939, Britain and France had the choice whether to declare war in Germany or not but in June of 1941 Nazi Germany had no choice.

It had to invade the Soviet Union because Stalin was about to attack Germany regardless of what Hitler did – or didn’t – do. In fact, Stalin almost did invade Germany – there is very strong evidence (which I will cover in one of my future posts) that Hitler beat him by 24 hours (or even less).

Hence, the correct answer to this question is: It does not matter.

Who Committed the First War Crime in WW2?

Mainstream historians implicitly create an impression that Nazi Germany was the only nation that committed war crimes and crimes against humanity during the WW2 in Europe (and Japan – in the Far East, correspondingly).

Implicitly because this is simply not true. In reality, all major powers (and even minor, of you add the immediate aftermath of the war into equation) committed horrible war crimes and crimes against humanity during the war. It is a well-established and totally indisputable historical fact that I will cover in detail in one of my future posts.

Interestingly enough, Nazi Germany was not even the first belligerent country to commit a war crime. The first war crime of WW2 was committed… by Poland on September 3^rd  1939 – two days after Nazi Germany invaded that nation and right on the very same day when Britain and France declared war of Germany (thus transforming a very much manageable local conflict between neighboring nations into a full-scale Great War). The Second World War.

This war crime came to be called the Bromberger Blutsonntag (‘Bloody Sunday in Bromberg’). As it is typical in almost all such incidents, an account of what actually happened depends heavily on ‘who is writing’. Hence, German and Polish versions of events are… well, different.

Given the general situation of the first days of this brief German-Polish war, the most probable version is something like this. In the morning of September 3^rd the contingent of the Polish Army was withdrawing through Bromberg (currently Polish city of Bydgoszcz) and was attacked by German commandos (operating behind the enemy lines) supported by some armed German citizens of the city (the ‘insurgents’, if you will).

There was an exchange of gunfire which resulted in some heavy Polish losses and in a complete extermination of their German opponents. When the Polish soldiers (and officers) and some local Polish citizens discovered that they have been fired upon by their ‘good German neighbors’, they got so outraged that they massacred all German citizens of the city they could lay their hands on.

The death toll, according to different sources, was anywhere from around 100 (Polish estimates) to over 1,700 (German estimates). The latter, however, includes the number of Germans who died during the subsequent so-called ‘death marches’.

Unfortunately, the Poles did not stop there. They continued wholesale killings of their ‘good German neighbors’ and by the end of the German-Polish war, murdered about 5,000, according to American historian Alfred-Maurice de Zayas – probably the leading expert on war crimes against Germans and their allies.

Not surprisingly, German reprisals were horrendous. Right after taking Bromberg and discovering war crimes committed by Poles, German military units of the Einsatzgruppen, Waffen SS, and Wehrmacht executed between 200 and 400 Poles practically ‘on the spot’.

Interestingly enough, there was an actual investigation of the events by German military authorities – and even a formal, official trial. According to German historian Christian Raitz von Frentz, 876 Poles were tried by German military tribunal for their alleged involvement in the events of Bloody Sunday before the end of 1939. 87 men and 13 women were sentenced to death without the right to appeal and promptly executed. Whether they were actually guilty, is a very big question, but there is evidence that German military tribunals (unlike the Soviet ones) at least tried to conduct fair trials.

All in all, it is estimated that more than 20,000 Polish citizens of Bydgoszcz (14% of the population) were either executed or died in concentration camps during the occupation. The Bromberger Blutsonntag, not surprisingly, heavily influenced the whole German program for the so-called ‘pacification’ of Poland (Nazis were always really big on vengeance) which resulted in the death toll of over 800,000 (!) Poles.

It did not cause this program, of course (Nazis had been planning mass murders of Polish nationals as early as in Spring of 1939), but it did influence it. It is highly probable that without the ‘Bloody Sunday’ and subsequent mass murders of Germans in Poland, the number of casualties of German reprisals would have been much lower.

Who Started World War II and When?

According to the ’mainstream’ history of the WW2, the Second World War broke out when Nazi Germany attacked Poland. Hence, the answer to this question appears to be obvious: WW2 was started by Nazi Germany on September 1^st, 1939. Right?

Wrong. Dead wrong, in fact. On September 1^st, 1939, Nazi Germany started a local war with the neighboring Poland (exactly why it did so is an interesting question that I will cover in one of the following posts). The Second World War started on September 3^rd, 1939, when France (and especially Britain) declared war on Germany. It is a very little understood, but nevertheless indisputable historical fact.

Why is it so? Because by declaring war on Germany, Britain essentially forced all its colonies and dominions (Canada, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, and India – which at that time included present-day Pakistan and Bangladesh) to do the same. So did France – to its colonies. Which almost instantly (actually, by September 10^th) transformed a significant but still very much local armed conflict into a full-fledged world war.

‘Mainstream’ historians would say that because Britain and France on March 31^st 1939 pledged support to guarantee Polish independence and on August 25^th Britain and Poland signed the so-called Agreement of Mutual Assistance, both governments had no choice but to declare war on the ‘German aggressor’. As this agreement promises of mutual military assistance between the nations in the event either was attacked by some “European country” (according to then-secret protocol, very specifically Germany).

Unfortunately for the ‘mainstream’ historians, there was a small problem with that guarantee. Lord Halifax – then Foreign Secretary of the British government, on the very next day after that agreement was signed, quite openly stated: “We do not think this guarantee will be binding“.

Polish publicist Stanisław Mackiewicz stated in the late 1940s: “To accept London’s guarantees was one of the most tragic dates in the history of Poland. It was a mental aberration and madness“.

These two statements are more than enough to kill the arguments of mainstream historians right then and there.

In terms of Realpolitik, it meant that the British government by no means considered itself to be bound to offering any military assistance to Poland if the latter is attacked by Germany (let alone declare war on the Third Reich).

Which means that there was nothing ‘automatic’ about the decision by British government to declare war on Nazi Germany on September 3^rd, 1939 (ditto for the French government). It was a deliberate choice to go to war – and a very strange choice at that. At least for Britain.

Why? Because Hitler on literally dozens of occasions made it loud and clear, plain and simple that he had no desire to have war with Britain and that the Third Reich did not and never would be a threat – neither to the territory of the United Kingdom proper nor to its dominions and colonies (Poland was obviously neither). France was (no less obviously) an entirely different matter due to the Alsace-Lorraine issue.

Both Britain and France essentially bluffed when they ‘guaranteed Polish independence’, because there was no way they could have prevented a quick and decisive defeat of Poland. iHiHitler obviously knew that and called their bluff by invading, defeating and occupying Poland – all in less than a month.

And on September 17^th when the Soviet Union invaded Poland through the eastern Polish border, the Poles got another iron proof of the cynicism of the British government.

On that day, the Polish ambassador in London, Edward Raczyński, contacted the British Foreign Office pointing out that clause 1(b) of the abovementioned agreement which concerned an “aggression by a European power” on Poland, should apply to the Soviet invasion. The Foreign Secretary Lord Halifax calmly responded that the obligation of British Government towards Poland arising out of the Anglo-Polish Agreement, was restricted to Germany, according to the first clause of the secret protocol.

The French were not much better (if not worse). According to Polish historian Piotr Zychowicz, French ambassador to Poland, Leon Noel, as early as October 1938 wrote: “It is of utmost importance that we remove from our obligations everything that would deprive French government the freedom of decision on the day when Poland finds itself in war with Germany“. French foreign minister Georges Bonnet reassured Noel, writing that “our agreement with Poland is full of [deliberate] gaps, [which we] needed to keep our country away from war“.

Which proves beyond the reasonable doubt that the decision by British and French governments to declare war on Nazi Germany had little (if anything at all) to do with German invasion of Poland. Exactly why they did that (and whether it was a good idea) is a subject for one of my future posts, but it is painfully clear that neither government was forced by Hitler to declare war.

It was a conscientious, not automatic decision which means that the Second World War, indeed, was started not by Nazi Germany on September 1^st, 1939, but by Britain and France on September 3^rd, 1939.

Jews in Germany and Japanese in the USA

http://listverse.com/2014/10/25/10-shameful-truths-about-japanese-american-internment/

Prior to the invasion of the Soviet Union in June 1941, there was a lot of similarities (as well as some crucial differences) in the way of how and why the Nazis treated Jews after the beginning of WW2 and how the US government treated its citizens of Japanese ethnicity after it entered the war. In fact, the latter was much worse than the former (as the article above clearly shows).

The USA declared the war on Japan – and the World Jewish Organization declared war on Germany and the German people (as early as in 1933 – right after Adolf Hitler came to power). In 1939 – right after the Great Britain declared war on Nazi Germany – the same World Jewish Organization publicly (in The London Times, of all newspapers) publicly announced that all Jews in the world will support His Majesty Government in its war against Germany.

There was a major difference, obviously, because WJO was NOT the government of Jewish people (who at that time didn’t even have their own state); however, in the eyes of the Nazis it was one and the same thing – due to certain peculiarities of Nazi ideology (‘the Nazi racial theory’). And perceptions, as we all know, are the only reality.

So up until July 1941, Nazis reacted in much the same way. This explains, by the way, why an overwhelming majority of Germans (with the exception of those who directly carried out mass murders of Jews – of which there were never more than 10,000) had no idea about Holocaust.

They knew about the way the Americans treated the Japanese and just assumed (incorrectly, as it turned out) that the Nazis (who put a very tight lid of secrecy on mass murders) were doing the same thing (actually, for about two years they had been doing exactly that).

There was another very important difference. While the US government was totally wrong in its assumption that their citizens of Japanese ethnicity were a ‘fifth column’ of the enemy and thus an ‘internal threat’ to its security (they were not) and therefore simply had to be interned in concentration camps, the Nazis had every reason to believe that the Jews in occupied territories (and even in Germany) were such a threat.

Hence the internment (but not murder, of course!) of Jews by the Nazis was a perfectly logical decision based on sound risk management principles and procedures.