Replies

A few years ago I really started thinking about it . . . it really starts to come off as a "its really our fault that Hitler and the German people started the war . . .we were mean to them." Then I started thinking about the people who said, "its really our fault the hijackers flew those planes into the buildings . . .we were mean to them"

The "we were mean to them" answer is at least partly true. Among other things, it provided some ready-made grievances and problems that made militarism attractive, and it prompted the Weimar government to initiate hyperinflation to pay off the reparations.

Moreover, although the treaty was tough, it depended on the political will of (especially) the French -- which was of course non-existent.

Also, however, the Germans were not defeated in WWI the way they were in WWII. The lack of damage to the homeland allowed the militarists (who were not punished) to formulate the "stabbed in the back" excuse.

At the same time, we cannot forget the commies, who were actively trying to foment revolution in Germany, which gave traction to the various "marching societies," of which the Nazis were one.

it prompted the Weimar government to initiate hyperinflation to pay off the reparations.

There are a number of reasons for the hyperinflation, but this ain't one of them. Even the French and British weren't stupid enough to take inflated German marks in payment of their reparations.

It did, however, allow the government to pay off its entire debt to its own citizens for essentially nothing.

Don't include the US in the "we" part. The US never ratified the treaty. Partly out of isolationism, and partly out of concerns for the massively unfair reparations.

The treaty was the direct result of French delusions of grandeur.

Further, the starting point of the war in Europe is the reoccupation of the Rhineland. Had the French stepped up at that point, history MAY have been different. But then there would still be the war in the pacific, which started much earlier.