Not mine, but feel it’s the proper type of thing to be shared.

  • Buttons@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    Neville Chamberlain met with Hitler and judged him based on their one-on-one conversation. Chamberlain trusted Hitler based on this personal meeting and infamously predicted “peace for our time”.

    Winston Churchill had to judge Hitler based only on his actions, because he never met Hitler personally. Churchill did not trust Hitler.

    Less than a year after Chamberlain’s one-on-one meeting with Hitler, Hitler invaded Poland and began WW2.

    Sometimes it’s better to judge people based only on their actions as seen from afar.

    • DragonTypeWyvern@literature.cafe
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 months ago

      Reminder that even if Hitler had decided not to invade Poland, Chamberlain “trusting Hitler” abandoned Czechoslovakia, one of the most fortified and industrialized nations in Europe.

      It is not simply possible, it is a certainty that Britain, Poland, France, and Czechoslovakia could have defeated Hitler’s Germany in 1938, a year after the opening of the first concentration camp.

      • buzziebee@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 months ago

        Yeah there were multiple times when the allies could have pushed Germany over before they started steamrolling. When they remilitarised the Rhineland, as you said when they occupied the Sudetenland, and even when they invaded Poland.

        France started pushing into Germany once war was first declared and there was basically nothing in front of them. Most of the tanks etc were in Poland. If they had continued pushing then it might have all ended there. Instead they pulled back to the Maginot line and the rest is history.

        • thecrotch@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          8 months ago

          Frances problem was they were still trying to fight WW1. The Maginot line would have been really effective in 1917

          • Johanno@feddit.de
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            8 months ago

            It would have been effective in ww2 too. However they trusted that the Belgian will defend their short borders, and not surrender like in ww1.

            Belgium however did not even really notice the Germans running through their country. Then Belgium surrendered since the Germans were already going through their country and they had no chance of winning any fight (also France did not give them any real support against Germany).

            Once in France the Germans mainly ignored the Maginot line or attacked it from the back where it was almost not inforced.