• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Boris Johnson and World War Two

C

columbus

yawn <ignore> yawn
Lots of modern people prefer to forget how popular Hitler and the Nazis were.

Hitler had a framed portrait of Henry Ford in his office. Ford was a solid supporter of the Nazis and their way of running a country.
Tom
 
exchemist

exchemist

Veteran Member
Estro Felino said:
I would like to ask the British here.
Why did they decide to abandon the alliance with Italy in 1936, that is after we Italians passed a law known as Legge Bankitalia that practically excluded the Rothschilds banking system from Italy?
Thank you in advance.
Click to expand...
Never heard of it. But I seem to recall Mussolini was ignoring the League of Nations at the time, with its war on Abyssinia, so Italy was not flavour of the month. Maybe that had something to do with it. No, wait, Britain was in a grip of a Jewish cabal, that must be it. :D

Anyhow, pray enlighten us, in your inimitable way, Musso. :rolleyes:
 
Stevicus

Stevicus

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
Bob Jones said:
I am only dumbfounded by all of the negative reactions that Mr. Johnson has received when yesterday he made a short impromptu speech concerning the 80th anniversary of the out break of the Second World War. Basically he reminded everyone of the guilt of the NAZI Germans but also pointed out the complicity of the Stalin Government. Mr. Johnson was 100% correct. World War Two was started jointly. Hitler invaded first and the Russians soon thereafter. Moreover, there was a very lucrative trade agreement between the two and another secret agreement in which Stalin annexed the Baltic States with the expressed approval of Hitler. I assume Russia does not want to be reminded that once in its political world, they licked the boots of the NAZI`s!
Click to expand...

Some have speculated that if the British and French had not made the Munich Agreement, Germany might have either backed down - or it would have started hostilities a year earlier, in which the Soviets might have joined the Allied side. That's a part of the equation which is often not mentioned. Stalin apparently concluded that Britain and France were weak and unreliable allies (which wasn't too far from the truth), so he had to work out another strategy for his nation's survival.

He probably also saw Britain, France, and Germany as Western capitalist states which were also aggressive and expansionist - morally equivalent to each other. None of them were ever friends of Russia or the Soviet Union. It was a mere 20 years earlier that numerous countries sent troops into Russia to intervene in the Russian Civil War against the Bolsheviks.

Of course, Britain's guarantee to Poland would have obligated them to declare on the USSR as well, but they didn't do that. Given the geography of the nations involved, there wasn't really much the British could do to save Poland from either Germany or Russia, so their "guarantee" was pretty useless overall. The only thing they could have done was invade Germany immediately from France, while the Germans still had the bulk of their forces in Poland.

That may have been what Stalin was hoping for. Perhaps he was hoping for Germany to get bogged down in a long, drawn-out stalemate with Britain and France, just like what happened in WW1. Only this time, Russia could sit back and watch from a distance.

Presumably, such a struggle would weaken all three powers and the rest of Europe, which would have put the Soviet Union in a decisive advantage. What was unexpected was France folding up so quickly, as well as Hitler's decision to break off his attack on Britain and turn against the Soviet Union.

Stalin didn't kiss any Nazi boots. It was Hitler who felt under pressure and was practically begging Stalin to make a treaty. If anything, it was Hitler kissing Stalin's boots.
 
shmogie

shmogie

Well-Known Member
Bob Jones said:
What about it? Maybe you are implying that the UK was complicit in the annexation of the Czech Republic?
Click to expand...
They were, but only through Chamberlain and his staff. He knew he was agreeing to the Czech invasion, in exchange for ¨peace in our time¨, He was part of the conspiracy that brought it about.
 
shmogie

shmogie

Well-Known Member
Stevicus said:
Some have speculated that if the British and French had not made the Munich Agreement, Germany might have either backed down - or it would have started hostilities a year earlier, in which the Soviets might have joined the Allied side. That's a part of the equation which is often not mentioned. Stalin apparently concluded that Britain and France were weak and unreliable allies (which wasn't too far from the truth), so he had to work out another strategy for his nation's survival.

He probably also saw Britain, France, and Germany as Western capitalist states which were also aggressive and expansionist - morally equivalent to each other. None of them were ever friends of Russia or the Soviet Union. It was a mere 20 years earlier that numerous countries sent troops into Russia to intervene in the Russian Civil War against the Bolsheviks.

Of course, Britain's guarantee to Poland would have obligated them to declare on the USSR as well, but they didn't do that. Given the geography of the nations involved, there wasn't really much the British could do to save Poland from either Germany or Russia, so their "guarantee" was pretty useless overall. The only thing they could have done was invade Germany immediately from France, while the Germans still had the bulk of their forces in Poland.

That may have been what Stalin was hoping for. Perhaps he was hoping for Germany to get bogged down in a long, drawn-out stalemate with Britain and France, just like what happened in WW1. Only this time, Russia could sit back and watch from a distance.

Presumably, such a struggle would weaken all three powers and the rest of Europe, which would have put the Soviet Union in a decisive advantage. What was unexpected was France folding up so quickly, as well as Hitler's decision to break off his attack on Britain and turn against the Soviet Union.

Stalin didn't kiss any Nazi boots. It was Hitler who felt under pressure and was practically begging Stalin to make a treaty. If anything, it was Hitler kissing Stalin's boots.
Click to expand...
I believe it was Von Ribbentrop who said if someone like Churchill had been at Munich.and had stood up to hitler, he would not have invaded when he did.

He was worried about the quality of his troops in combat, much of the equipment they needed was still being tested and supplied and he was very worried about France and Britain reacting

Chamberlain reassured hitler .
 
Estro Felino

Estro Felino

Believer in free will
Premium Member
exchemist said:
Never heard of it. But I seem to recall Mussolini was ignoring the League of Nations at the time, with its war on Abyssinia, so Italy was not flavour of the month. Maybe that had something to do with it. No, wait, Britain was in a grip of a Jewish cabal, that must be it. :D

Anyhow, pray enlighten us, in your inimitable way, Musso. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
Churchill did far worse things in Africa.

Btw our Duce was far better than Churchill. He was no Frermason, but a son of the people who expropriated banking stakes from bankers and lands from greedy landlords.
 
exchemist

exchemist

Veteran Member
Estro Felino said:
Churchill did far worse things in Africa.

Btw our Duce was far better than Churchill. He was no Frermason, but a son of the people who expropriated banking stakes from bankers and lands from greedy landlords.
Click to expand...
Whataboutery.

So you have no answer to your own question, then? I had presumed you would be pleased to regale us with your version of why the UK abandoned this alliance you speak of with Italy in 1936. But apparently you have no idea. Fair enough.
 
Estro Felino

Estro Felino

Believer in free will
Premium Member
exchemist said:
Whataboutery.

So you have no answer to your own question, then? I had presumed you would be pleased to regale us with your version of why the UK abandoned this alliance you speak of with Italy in 1936. But apparently you have no idea. Fair enough.
Click to expand...
Speaking of today we still have Nationalists here who want to undo the Rothschilds Banking System whose the ECB and the EU are the main sentinels.

I see in Britain the Bank of England is doing anything to hinder Brexit through their parliamentarians-puppets.


So apparently these banking families unleashed conflicts among European countries both in the 20th century and now.
 
exchemist

exchemist

Veteran Member
Estro Felino said:
Speaking of today we still have Nationalists here who want to undo the Rothschilds Banking System whose the ECB and the EU are the main sentinels.

I see in Britain the Bank of England is doing anything to hinder Brexit through their parliamentarians-puppets.


So apparently these banking families unleashed conflicts among European countries both in the 20th century and now.
Click to expand...
Juden, raus! eh? :rolleyes:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top