quote:

ORIGINAL: Crouchingtiger77

a Fantasy based on historic fact that you seem not to be able to accept
1. France and Britain had agreement with Czechoslovakia to come to their defense and did not do so.
2. Chamberlain gave over the Sudetenland to Hitler and that was after having in Hitler's presence witnessed the maniacal rage Hitler could explode into.
3. Chamberlain's appeasement by giving over the Sudetenland also meant the end to the conspiracy to kill Hitler.

There is no fantasy in any of the above. Are you also an appeaser?

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
As to long range aircraft, I'm not really sure what you mean. they had the Me 110 long range fighter and the He 111 medium bomber that both had respectable ranges for aircraft of the era,.

quote:

Chamberlain was in no way responsible for world war 2. You can theorize that if he did things differently things would of happened differently but at the end of the day it will be nothing more than a theory you can never and will never prove. There is only one person you can claim was responsible for world war 2 and that is Hitler himself.

quote:

ORIGINAL: RottenJohnny

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
As to long range aircraft, I'm not really sure what you mean. they had the Me 110 long range fighter and the He 111 medium bomber that both had respectable ranges for aircraft of the era,.

Yeah, I caught that after I wrote it but couldn't go back and change it. I was referring to bombers.

For the most part, the Germans flew shorter-range, 2-engine bombers. One thing the Russians did after Germany opened up the Eastern Front was pack up their manufacturing facilities and move them to the other side of the Ural Mountains where German bombers couldn't easily reach them.

The first HE-111 had a range of something like 700 miles. The Germans made improvements that eventually got it up around 2,000 miles but I don't think they could build enough of them to do any good. Comparatively, the B-17 had a range of over 3,000 miles. The Germans had four-engine planes like the Condor, as well as several other designs, but between production numbers and tactics, they never really fielded any useful long-range bombers.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Crouchingtiger77

quote:

Chamberlain was in no way responsible for world war 2. You can theorize that if he did things differently things would of happened differently but at the end of the day it will be nothing more than a theory you can never and will never prove. There is only one person you can claim was responsible for world war 2 and that is Hitler himself.

Petskye, first, nice photo, and then second and to your point.

For years, all I would ever assert was that Chamberlain was an appeaser. For what ever reason, I did not know that he had "Signed Over the Sudetenland" to Hitler and Germany.

If Chamberlain were any type of reader of others body language or understood when someone was lying through their teeth, then perhaps Chamberlain would not have been so quick to give this up so easily.

Also, this was done after Hitler and the German army walked into Austria as they did.

Here is a bit more on what Chamberlain gave over to Hitler and politically and militarily this was just plain "Stupid" on the part of Chamberlain

In fact it seems if Russia which had promised to come to the aid of Czechoslovakia as well as France and Britain that Hitler would have been forced to give it up.

The fortifications and landscape would have made the German army to have paid a heavy price to take Czechoslovakia with military force.

The more you look at this act of complete stupidity on the part of Chamberlain the more you can actually see that this one act of appeasement was what gave Hitler, his military leaders and yes now the German people the belief that Chamberlain and the Brits and France and Russia would easily be defeated.

As we can see, France with its army larger than Germany's indeed did fall quite easily and Hitler came within an eye lash of capturing nearly a quarter million British Soldiers.

As to Russia, had he been a bit more intelligent he would have permitted his army to bypass Stalingrad and march straight into Moscow capturing the capital. And of course had he not declared war on the U.S. after Pearl Harbor could have also have meant victory first in Russia before having to having a two front war.

Yes, Chamberlain is directly responsible for the Act of Enabling the madman Hitler and therefore he is indirectly responsible for the start of World War II.

quote:

I count 13 assassination attempts before the one you keep mentioning ... what is to say that one specific attempt would of killed him when 13 before had failed?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Crouchingtiger77

[quote
we will never know.

quote:

why are you not blaming Joseph Stalin and Albert Lebrun.

quote:

ORIGINAL: petskye

First off Crouching. Please please please stop stating everything as facts. I could claim that the same actions from Chamberlain indirectly stopped an alien invasion because they were scouting us at the time and if they saw us fighting among each other they would of attacked. However I could never know such a thing because it didn't happen and similarly with your proposal maybe everything aligns how you say it would and you are right but there were like 2 billion people who were alive during that time (I struggled for find an exact number so it's just an estimate) and lets just be honest you can't calculate in every single one of their actions to know what would of happened had chamberlain chosen differently.

Secondly, stop blaming Chamberlain for such a large thing. He was only realistically in charge of England forces. He could not of ordered France or Russia to fight and if France really was so strong why did they need Britain to help them? why are you not blaming Joseph Stalin and Albert Lebrun.

quote:

Both Britain and France appeasement of Hitler didnt help, however as for the cause, no.

quote:

ORIGINAL: petskye

You are however assuming that had Chamberlain chosen a different path everything would of went exactly as you predict when truth is it is a fantasy because all you know is what happened up to the point of Chamberlains decisions not afterwards. For all we know Chamberlains decision to back down stopped man kind going extinct because Hitler might of stayed on leading Germany and created an atomic bomb before anyone else dropping it on all countries that opposed him. At the end of the day everything you say is just conjecture you have no facts to prove what would of happened if Chamberlains decision would of been different because no matter what you say think or do you could never work out the truth of what would of happened without it actually happened.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Crouchingtiger77

The Sudetenland was given by Chamberlain to Hitler and Germany in the belief that this would avert a new
world war.

But what Chamberlain did not know was that there was a Conspiracy to have Hitler killed when he did go in to take the Sudetenland.

But, after, Chamberlain's appeasement of Hitler, this broke up the conspiracy.

So, was Chamberlain inadvertently responsible for World War II?

I would say yes because I believe the Germans were not yet ready to take on Europe as they did. This pact with Chamberlain gave them time and if Chamberlain along with France had stood up to Hitler it would have set him back on his heels.

And, this whether there had been a conspiracy to kill Hitler or not, Chamberlain because of his gutless and spineless persona was responsible for permitting Hitler to do what he did.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: RottenJohnny
Three things that doomed Germany...

1. No long range aircraft.
2. The Eastern Front.
3. Hitler

I don't believe any of that had anything to do with Chamberlain.

Hitler was most of it. He clearly made a huge blunder going to war with the Soviets while Britain remained standing.

There were some other problems endemic to the German war effort that often go unremarked.

1) The Germans had a very small system for training pilots. It simply could not keep up with the losses sustained and the Luftwaffe eventually, after 1942, had more planes than pilots.
2) The Germans didn't all know how to drive cars. This seems bizarre but it is true. They had to have a school for truck drivers and they still relied on horse and mule teams to move a lot of their equipment. Moving the feed and water for the animals put a huge strain on the logistics of the German army. 

As to long range aircraft, I'm not really sure what you mean. they had the Me 110 long range fighter and the He 111 medium bomber that both had respectable ranges for aircraft of the era,.

hey had nothing like the British Lancaster or the B-17, The Me 110 was no match for hurricanes and
spitfires, The HE 111 and JU 88 lacked the payload for serious strategic bombing.
The Luftwaffe was built for close air support not strategic bombing.

quote:

ORIGINAL: RottenJohnny

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
As to long range aircraft, I'm not really sure what you mean. they had the Me 110 long range fighter and the He 111 medium bomber that both had respectable ranges for aircraft of the era,.

Yeah, I caught that after I wrote it but couldn't go back and change it. I was referring to bombers.

For the most part, the Germans flew shorter-range, 2-engine bombers. One thing the Russians did after Germany opened up the Eastern Front was pack up their manufacturing facilities and move them to the other side of the Ural Mountains where German bombers couldn't easily reach them.

The first HE-111 had a range of something like 700 miles. The Germans made improvements that eventually got it up around 2,000 miles but I don't think they could build enough of them to do any good. Comparatively, the B-17 had a range of over 3,000 miles. The Germans had four-engine planes like the Condor, as well as several other designs, but between production numbers and tactics, they never really fielded any useful long-range bombers.