"How to avoid WW2 " Topic

Wasn't sure where to put this. Just been thinking after WW1 the allies decided to punish Germany, too harshly thus setting Germany up for a surge in extremist polotics.

Why didn't the allies break Germany up? It was only some 70-80 years old. Re-establish an independent Hanover, Saxony, Bavaria, Hesse-Kassel and Prussia. They can all rebuild free from guilt, Prussia can be re-established with limits to its Air Force and Army but not its economy.

Future threats would be nullified as I'd assume individual states would fall into different alliances again. Hanover close to the UK, Bavaria close to France, Saxony with Austria maybe…

Was this idea ever put forward? If not why was it not feasible? If it was suggested why was it rubbished?
Is it a bad idea?
Would it have made Europe better or worse?

It would have required a strong military occupation, and the Allied Powers were exhausted.

WOULD Hanover have been eager to affiliate with Britain?
WOULD Bavaria with France?
etc.
I doubt it. Too much blood shed in the Great War.

Just another thing for Hitler to be ed off about.

Hitler started off collecting areas and countries with German speaking people and lands that he claimed belonged with Germany. At the time there was nobody interested or capable of stopping him.

John is right too much left over pain From WW 1 or the great war before we got so smart we had to number them. (Paraphrase) If no Hitler you still have Stalin and the Japanese. Also a civil war in China. Maybe if you duck the Crash then British and France will have the money but don't think they have the will to stop the baddies.

Hitler started off collecting areas and countries with German speaking people and lands that he claimed belonged with Germany. At the time there was nobody interested or capable of stopping him.

"The most effective treatment for obsessive-compulsive disorder is often cognitive-behavioral therapy. Antidepressants are sometimes used in conjunction with therapy, although medication alone is rarely effective in relieving the symptoms of OCD."

or a trip to the vets? That would also have stopped him spraying the furniture.

The allies also saw the rapidly growing "threat" that the newly communist Russia/Soviet Union was becoming. In part, Germany was kept in one piece as a buffer and counter-balance.

HistoryPHD for the win. Germany was also a done deal by then, I'm sure there's a complete archive available of what options were considered by the victors, and I'm pretty sure devolution of Germany doesn't figure highly.

So was it inevitable?

Could it have been avoided?

The French were keen to partition Germany. The UK wanted Germany intact as a balance against the French. You have to remember that Britain allied to France rather than Germany was a bit of an aberration considering the past few centuries. The Brits were no keener to see a continent dominated by the French than one dominated by the Germans.

A unified Germany was seen as a natural development as opposed to a patchwork of states, same in Italy, and the most disastrous of all, 'Yugoslavia'. One of the many baleful side effects of nineteenth century nationalism.

Versailles wasn't wholly responsoble for WW2, the complete and utter failure of capitalist democracies to deal with the economic and political crises of the 1920s and 1930s were a bigger influence on the rise of totalitarian nationalism of both right and left.

Perhaps try and prevent WWI which was far more preventable than WWII.

I don't think war with France or Britain was inevitable, though I think it highly likely in the east. Fact is everyone bent over backwards to accomodate Germany, but ultimately Hitler broke every agreement he made. The West actually waving a sabre during the Czechoslavakia crisis may have made the Germans pull their heads in.

But really, who the hell knows.

The Versailles treaty broke new ground in terms of punitive measures visited upon a defeated European nation state – it can be viewed from certain perspectives as a revenge treaty. Germany was in fact materially dismembered, with most of East Prussia taken to form the new Polish nation state (Austria-Hungary suffered an even worse dismantling). The long occupation and economic exploitation of the Rheinland and a crushing war reparations burden crippled Germany economically. The parlous state of the German post-war economy, coupled with the lengthy civil war against the Bolsheviks, created the conditions that fostered the dramatic rise of the NSDAP and all that came after.

Fortunately, the Allies learned from their mistakes and did a better job after WW2.

B

Having read a little bit about the chaps at Versailles they actually didn't want to break up anything – including the Ottoman Empire and the Austrio-Hungarian Empire. At the start of talks they hoped they would stay together as they predicted (correctly) that there were a lot of friction if those two empires dissolved

However, the people at Versailles actually had a lot less ability to control things than people think – the Allied armies were de-mobbing at the rate of a division a month, the Allied taxpayers did not want any more wars and most people, Allied and Central Powers, just wanted to wrap things up and try to get back to normal

The best way to prevent WWII is to prevent WWI – failing that, having Weimar survive the Depression in better shape

As History PHD stated breaking up Germany would have left the way open for

Germany was broken up a little bit, around the edges – France re-assimiliated Alsace and Lorraine, Poland was reconstituted as an independent state, Denmark recovered some of Schleswig, etc.

The best way to prevent WWII is to prevent WWI – failing that, having Weimar survive the Depression in better shape

It's hard to disagree with either of those statements, though it's hard to see how WWI could have been prevented. Europe in 1914 was a powder keg, with bigger armies and navies than the world had ever seen, some frighteningly aggressive military doctrines, and an excess of powerful absolutist politicians. If it hadn't been "some damned thing in the Balkans" that set it off, something else probably would have, sooner or later. There were just too many well-armed people spoiling for a fight.

The greatest chance for avoiding the great bloodbath of 1914-1918 was probably a bunch of smaller bloodbaths attenuating the tense political environment – a long and bloody Russian revolution, revolts and wars collapsing the Ottoman state, the sundering of Austria-Hungary into smaller states, lesser wars between Italy and its neighbors, etc. to name some likely possibilities. However, Germany was clearly keen to have a war and it's hard to imagine things that would have changed that attitude before they started one.

- Ix

Prozac, Lots and lots of Prozac. Oh, excuse me that's how we're avoiding World War III. My apologies folks!
Cheers.
Rod Robertson.

Perhaps Leon Trotsky could have saved us all from WWII by spreading communism across all of Europe. Europeans would have been miserable but at least many more of them would have been alive. And of course when communist Europe attempted to spread to the Americas then there would have been a world war, anyways. Sometimes the cure can be worse than the disease.
So pan-continental medication still remains the best bet.
Cheers again.
Rod Robertson

WWII might have been avoided in Europe if Hitler 'bought it' as a corporal in WWI. Or if the harsh conditions of the Treaty of Versailles didn't cripple the German economy and humiliate the nation, giving rise to national socialism and made Germany 'militaristic.'

"It's the economy, stupid" might apply here, as Martin says. Post-WW2 consensus comes about 50 years earlier?

The combination of the harsh terms of the Treaty, the 'bad timing' of the Great Depression and the popularity of Adolf no doubt conspired to lead to WWII.

The victors didn't want to make the same mistake after WWII, so they were much 'kinder and gentler' in rebuilding Germany and Japan.

Versailles wasn't as harsh as it is generally accepted. In real terms no worse then had been imposed on France 40 years earlier and probably much lighter then Germany would have imposed if the positions had been reversed. It suited Germany to represent them as harsh in the thirties.

If you really want to prevent the second war you need to finish the first properly. No armistice, keep fighting until a general surrender so no 'stab in the back' story. I will admit the stomach wasn't there to carry on the fight, the allies had had enough themselves.

Versailles wasn't as harsh as it is generally accepted. In real terms no worse then had been imposed on France 40 years earlier and probably much lighter then Germany would have imposed if the positions had been reversed. It suited Germany to represent them as harsh in the thirties.

France got hit with war reparations of 3 years total GNP as a result of the Franco-Prussian War? Really?

FPW reparations, as per Wiki: link

This article estimates 22% of GDP over 3 years.

An informed take on WWI reparations link

If I'm not mistaken the Germans paid their reperations in full?

From WW1?

No, they only repaid about 2/5ths, the rest were negotiated away.

No. US Financiers bought the greatly reduced debt and it was finally paid in the 80's, I believe.

Britain on the other hand paid all of its Lend-Lease debt. Better to lose than win sometimes, clearly.

The Germans are acting very high and mighty about fiscal responsibility in the Euro-zone yet still owe $4 USD Billion USD plus interest for a forced loan from Greece in 1942………

"Fortunately, the Allies learned from their mistakes and did a better job after WW2."

LOL, what, by chopping Germany in half and occupying it for 50 years and giving the whole of East Prussia to Poland this time?

If the French had sent tanks and infantry across the border when Hitler militerized the Rhineland he wouldn't have been seen as a winner and the chock that held the big rock from rolling evermore swiftly downhill wouldn't have been knocked out.