Click here: to donate by Credit Card
Or here: to donate by PayPal
Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794
Thank you very much and God bless you.
Posted on 08/17/2025 3:12:58 PM PDT by RandFan
An adviser used by Nigel Farage and others in Reform UK to boost their social media popularity has suggested that Britain would be better off had it stayed neutral in the second world war instead of fighting Nazi Germany.
...
“Trillions of pounds of British taxes have been spent in foreign lands in the pursuit of ‘democracy’, ‘human rights’ and ‘doing what is right’,” the post said. “More than a million British lives have been lost since WW1 in wars and battles that have never once been fought by British men, on this island.”
Fighting in both the world wars ensured the UK was no longer a great power, he wrote: “We impoverished ourselves for decades, we didn’t finish paying the loans off to America until 2006. Our economy stagnated, we lost an empire, and we are pushed around by America. And Germany, a country we beat, has been richer than us since the 1970s.
“Alternative history is interesting; if Britain had not fought in WW1 and WW2, it would not have had to rely on America for economic support, and it would have had the independence to act accordingly. Britain could have developed India, Cyprus, Fiji, Malta, Saint Lucia, Seychelles, the Bahamas, Australia, Canada, South Africa, Ireland and New Zealand. In the coming meritocracy, perhaps Britain could regain some of these nations.”
The same post also argues against providing support for Ukraine after Russia’s invasion: “We are sending billions of pounds (that we cannot afford) to prop up a country that we have no allegiance to. Russia is not our enemy, they have not attacked Britain.”
(Excerpt) Read more at theguardian.com ...
|
|
Click here: to donate by Credit Card Or here: to donate by PayPal Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794 Thank you very much and God bless you. |
He was bombing us heavily night after night
I think he would have taken the UK had it not been for the Ruskies and the 2nd front
We owe them more than you think. Dare you mention that to PM Starmer
The bottom line is that by 1939, it was clear that Hitler simply could not be trusted to keep his word, after violating the Munich Agreement and invaded the rest of Czechoslovakia.
While it’s easy to fault Chamberlain for the Munich Agreement, at least he understood that when it came Poland’s turn, it was the ‘hill to die on’.
Especially after the atrocities the Belgians committed in The Congo.
Brits needed “Brexit” in 1914. Make a deal with the Germans to let them have the continent, while Britain has their Empire. Would have saved the world a lot of grief.
You can't say that. WWI began because of the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand of Austria. There still would have been a war. It remains to be seen if Germany would have won WWI if no other country entered that war against Germany. It was the Treaty of Versailles that was used as the catalyst by Hitler to wage war once again. He hated the French the most because of that Treaty, and he blamed the Jews for the loss and the state of Germany's economy in the aftermath of that war. If Britain hadn't fought in WWI, it's still possible that Germany wouldn't have been victorious during that war, so there would still have been a Treaty for Hitler to use as an excuse to use force on the rest of the world.
RandFan wrote: “It is complicated but you’re right the reparations drove the Nazis to power.”
It was the 1929 Wall Street Crash that opened a pathway for Hitler to come to power.
WWI began because of the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand of Austria. There still would have been a war.
Not if the Brits told the French and Belgians to ‘flip off’.
Screw the French, would things have been any worse if the Germans defeated the French in 1914? Heck, we might never have had to deal with Vietnam.
It was the 1929 Wall Street Crash that opened a pathway for Hitler to come to power.
Also fear of Bolshevism. And frankly Germany was either going to go Nazi or Bolshevik, there was no middle ground.
dfwgator wrote: “Brits needed “Brexit” in 1914. Make a deal with the Germans to let them have the continent, while Britain has their Empire. Would have saved the world a lot of grief.”
Assuming Hitler would have continued to honor those agreement is a very big assumption.
I said 1914. If Britain stayed out of it, there never would have been a Hitler.
[It is complicated but you’re right the reparations drove the Nazis to power.]
German reparations were small relative to what France had to pay Germany after losing the Franco-Prussian war. What irked Germans was the sense that as the superior race, it was humiliating to have to pay their inferiors across the Rhine.
The conclusion to WW2 was far more humiliating for Germany - partition and indefinite military occupation. And the destruction dwarfed WW1 by a factor of thousands, with entire cities razed. But at the end, with 8m dead, vs 2m from WW1, Germans finally had to acknowledge they had been beaten, as they did not after WW1. Countries don’t only have to be defeated, they have to feel they have been defeated. That was why the Allies insisted on unconditional surrender despite the high cost of such a demand - to break the spirit of entire Axis populations, forestall the resurrection of the threat.
After Napoleon, France should have been broken up.
That was why the Allies insisted on unconditional surrender despite the high cost of such a demand -
And pressure from the Soviets. If the Soviets weren’t in such a strong position by 1945, would we have demanded it?
Saying “Alternative history is interesting” is hardly advocating not fighting WWII.
Guardian distorts purposely.
Not the U.S. bankers who loaned money to Germany after WWI. Germany never repaid those loans in full.
“...Britain would be better off had it stayed neutral in the second world war instead of fighting Nazi Germany.”
I wasn’t aware that Britain was exempt from getting “v-weapons” thrown at them since almost 40,000 were sent into their country by 1944. Hitler didn’t want any particular country, he wanted them all. He was truly one of the first EOC organizations.
wy69
Course it would have been nice if the Nazis and Bolsheviks bashed each other before getting in, instead of having the war start in the West, after the Nazis took Poland.
[And pressure from the Soviets. If the Soviets weren’t in such a strong position by 1945, would we have demanded it?]
It’s obvious that they have learned NOTHING from History.
The unabated INVASION of their country by terrorists of various stripes is proof enough of that!
So glad I’ll be dead before Islam overtakes the world. I know they think it’s going to be glorious, but it will be anything but...
Hard to tell. Hitler didn't begin the blitz until almost a year after the UK declared war on Germany. Hitler invaded the Channel Islands in June of 1940. He started the bombing of London in September.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.