"The war of 1938" Topic
13 Posts
All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.
Please be courteous toward your fellow TMP members.
For more information, see the TMP FAQ.
Back to the Interwar (WWI to WWII) Message Board
Areas of InterestWorld War One World War Two on the Land
Featured Hobby News Article
Featured Link
Top-Rated Ruleset
Featured Showcase Article
Featured Workbench ArticleThe painting of the Aeronef Moni.
Featured Profile ArticleAt long last, the Stalingrad winners have been revealed.
Featured Book Review
Featured Movie Review
|
Patrick R | 04 May 2017 5:19 a.m. PST |
I was following yet another discussion about how the European powers should have attacked Hitler as soon as he came to power if only they had a backbone. My reaction was that if the experience of 1914-1918 was not enough of a deterrent to leap into action, nobody could have even guessed how far Hitler might go. It may well be that if there had been a war to "stop Hitler" we would be debating endlessly about how much of a risk Hitler really was and my guess is that most people would never believe that Hitler would get as far as Stalingrad, North Africa and holding dominion over most of continental western Europe. Interestingly somebody then asked what would be the odds to defeat Hitler much earlier. And surprisingly it could be done as late as 1938, should all of Europe acted in concert against Germany and said njet to a settlement in Munich. 1) Hitler's position was far from absolute at that time. The resounding success of snatching Czechoslovakia without firing a shot and his subsequent removal of nazi-sceptics from the military cemented his power. In 1938 his authority was still disputable. 2) Czechoslovakia was a reasonably successful state, one of the few central European nations that had weathered the Great Depression with its democratic institutions mostly intact. It had a strong industry, but with only a fifth of the population of Germany and effectively surrounded on three sides meant that most observers gave it roughly three weeks to a month at best. An attempt was made to enlist the support of Romania and Yugoslavia in the so-called "Little Entente" which upset the treaties British and French had helped set up in Europe after WWI and resulted in a certain measure of disapproval on their behalf. 3) The German army was still lagging behind despite a crash program to expand the available troops and officer cadre, but by early 1938 the German high command could only report that it could only execute a limited action as supplies of ammunition would only last a month at best. Some artillery departments reported an ammo shortfall of up to 70% 4) Czechoslovakia had a small, but strong army, backed up by the third largest military-industrial complex in Europe, behind Krupp in Germany and Schneider in France. It had access to coal and iron and could call upon the resources of south eastern Europe. A series of fortifications were built to deter German aggression, the so called "Little Maginot" So we get to a different Munich conference, one where not only France and Britain are present, but Czechoslovakia, Poland and other Eastern European nations to offset Germany and Italy. With people like Von Beck and Oster almost openly hostile to Hitler and gaining support, Hitler sticks to his ultimatum, but his gamble fails and he has to go to war … |
skipper John | 04 May 2017 5:50 a.m. PST |
|
Dn Jackson | 04 May 2017 5:51 a.m. PST |
As I see it you have to consider a couple of additional things: 1. Europe was not bi-polar, it was tri-polar. Along with the western democracies and the fascist dictatorships, you have to include the communists of the Soviet Union. Stalin changes the equation greatly and seeing as he allied with Hitler in 1939 to take part of Romania, Poland, and the Baltic States, an aggressive war on Germany could conceivably include Russia as a German ally. 2. Germany and Italy are not the only fascist dictatorships. You have to include Bulgaria, Romania, and Hungry as German allies which means the Czechs have no back door to their fortified line. Just a couple of thoughts on an interesting scenario. |
Silent Pool | 04 May 2017 6:48 a.m. PST |
There was no international political will to stop Hitler – meaning just Britain and France! The horrors and the sacrifices of the Great War had a lastling impact on the British and there was a deep desire to avoid future bloodshed. Appeasement was very popular with the general public, whilst the peace lasted. |
Winston Smith | 04 May 2017 6:50 a.m. PST |
Being a fascist dictatorship does not guarantee that you ally with others. Mussolini was not ok with Munich, for one thing. Nations will act in what they perceive to be their own national interests. |
Umpapa | 04 May 2017 7:58 a.m. PST |
Marschall Piłsusdski tried to start so called preventive war in 1933 and 1934 to remove Hitler. link link Noone want to join, noone even want to support verbally unilateral Polish action. Neither GB, France nor even Czechoslovakia. Czechoslovakia believed German aggresion can be directed at Poland only, while counting on pact with Soviets. Czechoslovakian elites saw Poland as a "seasonal state" and as a rival to leading Intermarum/Eastern Europe. Poland tried to forget about warcrimes of Polish-Czechoslovak war and 150 000 Poles living in Czechoslovakia. link link Ghosts of Zaolzie…https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zaolzie Before Munich Poland proposed Czechoslovakia joining defence pact of Poland-Romania against both Germany and USSR, but Benes declined, believing more in Stalin's assurances. link I am quite sure that alliance of Czechoslovakia + Poland could effectively defeat Germany even in 1938. |
22ndFoot | 04 May 2017 8:01 a.m. PST |
It is hard to tell what else Chamberlain could have done as the Prime Minister of a country which had little desire to go to war. The French, if anything, were even more reluctant, having suffered far more in the Great War and being riven by much greater internal political considerations. Also, and this is often forgotten, Chamberlain's government was, at the same time, busily engaged in the rearmament started by Baldwin's government. This produced only just enough and only just in time but it was HM Government's policy to prepare for a war that nobody wanted. There were those including, of course, Churchill, who argued against Chamberlain's policy, but Churchill, at that time, had little prospect of ever actually wielding political power – we forget that, in many ways, he was "yesterday's man." Admirable though he was in many ways, he was not averse either to blowing his own trumpet or advocating for military action which had little grounding in reality. Chamberlain's position was unenviable: there was no support for a war; he was faced by a man the depravity of whom, at that time, nobody could conceive of; there were no allies on whom he could rely outside the Empire; and the League of Nations was a busted flush. His biggest mistake was believing that Adolf was going to act like aggrandizing European politicians of a stamp that had been seen before. We know now that this was a dreadful error but at the time it was the least bad option. |
KTravlos | 04 May 2017 9:19 a.m. PST |
"1. Europe was not bi-polar, it was tri-polar. Along with the western democracies and the fascist dictatorships, you have to include the communists of the Soviet Union. Stalin changes the equation greatly and seeing as he allied with Hitler in 1939 to take part of Romania, Poland, and the Baltic States, an aggressive war on Germany could conceivably include Russia as a German ally." Stalin was willing to go to war against in Germany in 1938 if he UK and France were willing to join. France was willing if the UK was. The UK was not willing to go to war with Germany in alliance with the USSR in 1938. So Stalin sought other ways to gain security from Germany (via grouping-alliance, which was what the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact was). If the UK and France were willing to go to war with Germany in 1938, Stalin would enter on the allied side. Notice that Poland also refused any potential participation of the USSR in a war against Germany in 1938 (more justified than the allies). The problem with the middle-european states were that they all had spent the 1920s being aggressive against each other. None of them were trusting the other. Hell Poland participated in the final dissolution of Czechoslovakia and bullied Lithuania. The Hungarians in turn participated in the dissolution of Poland. To put it simply, while none of the middle european countries deserved what happened to them, their foreign policies in the 1920s-1930s created an easy environment for Germany to use to divide and conquer. |
piper909 | 04 May 2017 10:04 a.m. PST |
I don't see how the Soviets could have effectively prosecuted a war against Germany in 1938 without the cooperation of at least Poland or Lithuania -- the two countries didn't share a border in 1938. France would have been left to carry the burden in the west, since Britain was only beginning a rearmament that was not complete even by 1939, so the French would have continued to be reluctant to initiate a pre-emptive clash with Germany in which they would be shedding the most blood, with the horrible reminders of 1914-1918 still so fresh and the "lost generation" of the trenches affecting French conscription. There are lots of reasons why Germany was left alone during the 1930s despite the rise of Nazism and Hitler's provocations. There was little prospect of an effective anti-Germany coalition forming from so many weaker and mutually antagonistic states surrounding it. |
Frederick | 04 May 2017 12:42 p.m. PST |
You know, Harry Turtledove did do a whole series on this – The War That Came Early – with six books |
KTravlos | 05 May 2017 3:57 a.m. PST |
The expectation was that if the UK, France and USSR declared war on Germany, either Poland, or Romania would cave in to pressure and permit transit or declare war on Germany. Big if, but that was the Soviet thinking. |
Weasel | 05 May 2017 10:16 p.m. PST |
A retread of WW1 with Panzer 1's and T26? Not sure how it'd go, but I'd play the heck out of that. |
Your Kidding | 14 May 2017 9:34 a.m. PST |
Can't discount the political upheaval going on within all the countries. Hard to rally against a potential foreign threat when there are competing political and social parties taking to the streets within a nation's borders. |
|