[KampfgruppeZ]

The "so called country, Poland" was a creation of Germany itself! Naturally the Germans thought Poland should come 100% out of the hide of Russia, but after Germany SURRENDERED in 1918, the WESTERN ALLIES decided that at least SOME of Poland should come out of the hide of Germany too.

Most of the area today called Poland was inhabited by German tribes since before the fourth century. Territory inhabited by Germans is always German territory, period!

Yes, you are correct, the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk created Poland but out of RUSSIAN TERRITORY! In fact the Baltic states of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania and others were established out of Czarist Russian territory. So much for the WESTERN HISTORY TEACHING of greedy German territorial expansion aims during WWI. If you honestly evaluate German aims on it's eastern boarders at that time, you'll see Germany needed to remove the threat of Russia on the east boarder. By having these eastern territories split among smaller countries, a buffer was created. Thereby, protecting Germany from sudden invasion from the east (Russia). There was No German desire for more eastern territory. If there was, creating Poland, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania out of European Russia was stupid.

Maybe one of Germany's WWI goals was to eliminate having enemies on both east & west boarders.....Naaaaa.

HUMMMMM......protect from sudden invasion from the east....hummmmm.....Naaaaa, I was just thinking, that might have helped prevent WWI.....just my little piece of lunacy.

Oh yea! The Kaiser wanted to take over the world......at least that's what the WESTERN HISTORY books say. An' heaven knows there's no reason to assume Germany should be allowed to protect Der Vaterland.

An' those valiant Allies, resisted that evil Kaiser.....yea right. The French had plotted and maneuvered for forty years to get their revenge against Germany for the Franco-Prussian War......France wanted war in the worst way (till it actually happened), as long as France had plenty of bad boys on their side.

England had a world wide empire to protect and Germany was a rapidly becoming a threat to that empire.

An' the pure, angelic Neutral USA....let's go there for a while. What does Neutral mean? A neutral country takes no side in a war between other parties. In fact, Pres. Wilson's statement on US neutrality was, " The United States must be neutral in fact, as well as in name, during these days that are to try men's souls. We must be impartial in thought, as well as action, must put a curb upon our sentiments, as well as upon every transaction that might be construed as a preference of one party to the struggle before another."

Is that the position the USA took?

Let's look at a letter dated, November 19, 1914, a letter from a Professor Munsterberg to Woodrow Wilson,

"Many of the complaints refer more to the unfriendly spirit than to the actual violation of the law. Here above all belongs the unlimited sale of ammunition to the belligerents. The administration originally advised Mr. Morgan that the making of loans to the nations at war would not be looked upon with favor by the President, and Mr. Morgan canceled the plans. This attitude has been given up; the State Department has emphasized that money and arms may be sold to the belligerents, while evidently the friends of peace had firmly hoped that the President would denounce the sale of ammunition or any other sale which would be likely to prolong the war. Indeed our friends of peace must regret this encouraging attitude with reference to the sale of agencies of destruction, but the friends of Germany cannot forget that this sympathetic attitude of the State Department under the conditions which objectively exist is not only helpful to the prolongation of the war, but helpful exclusively to the Allies against Central Europe. The favorite interpretation of the Germans is even that the government makes itself a party to the violation of neutrality by giving clearance papers to vessels loaded with war material for England and France. They say, moreover, that the President as Commander-in-Chief of the Army and Navy could and did restrain the shipment of war material into Mexico. Hence he has the same power to restrain the shipment of such material to Europe...."

WELL, Well, well,(violation of neutrality by giving clearance papers to vessels loaded with war material for England and France) looks like those pesky Washington communists and New York bankers were in fact aiding those valiant Allies from the get go, all the while proclaiming USA NEUTRALITY !

Anyway, I suspect that this little piece of lunacy by KampfgruppeZ is just a small tip of the iceberg of insanity he'd unleash on us, if he thought he could get away with it. ;-)

SO, BroJoeK looks at history thru his USA SUPER PATRIOT GLASSES, an' sees the lie turned into what he thinks is truth.......so far, he's gotten away with it. ;-)

Fact remains, had the USA truly been neutral:

1) Germany would have won WWI, most likely before 1917.

2)1-2 year shorter war, saving thousands of lives on both sides.

3)Russian European territory would have remained divided into Poland, Ukraine, Belarus, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania. Keeping a buffer between Russia and Europe.

4)The starvation (killing millions in the 1920-30's) forced upon Ukraine & Belarus by their communist masters in Moscow would never have happened.

5)With a strong post WWI Germany, Russian communists would never have been able to threaten Europe

6)possibly, just possibly no 1920's depression

7)and most important no Hitler or WWII!

But we don't live in that world, WE LIVE IN THE POST WWI WORLD, created by the Allies WHERE THE CHICKENS ARE COMMING HOME TO ROOST.....I HEAR ONE NOW....BRACK, BRACK, Barack, Barrrrack, Bok, Bok, Bok.

BTW, the small tip of the iceberg of insanity is about to be unleash on you, starting Jan 20th 2009, from WASHINGTON DC.

Ich bin froh über Ihre Schmerzen.

[BroJoeK]

"Most of the area today called Poland was inhabited by German tribes since before the fourth century. Territory inhabited by Germans is always German territory, period!"

Now you've changed the subject again -- so you lose again!

I think we've now established AS FACT, that Poland in 1939 was not a "so called country," but a REAL country, where REAL Poles lived, and had always lived -- a new country first created by GERMANY in 1918.

Yes, in 1919, the Western Allies ADDED TO Poland a small piece of Germany, as JUST PUNISHMENT for Germany's first STARTING, then LOSING the First Wold War.

And I'll say again, the PUNISHMENT Germany received was fair, just and MINOR compared to the punishment Germany itself meted out to, say, Russia or little NEUTRAL Belgium. Or compared to the punishment of the Austrian-Hungarian and Ottoman Turk Empires.

But Germany refused to accept its punishment, and so began ROUND TWO in 1939. This time the punishment of Germany was MUCH more severe, especially as regards Poland, and will NEVER be reversed.

Here's the bottom line: In 1914 the German Kaiser's government began the First World War because they believed they could WIN it, and they were ALMOST right. In 1939 Hitler began the Second World War because, A) he did not believe Germany had been defeated in the First War, and B) he believed Germay would WIN another war.

So, the most serious problem Germans had was, they believed their own lies! And it cost them most grievously. Now, when do you suppose you will stop telling those lies??

[BroJoeK]

"Maybe one of Germany's WWI goals was to eliminate having enemies on both east & west boarders .....Naaaaa."

Obviously, Germany's war aims in 1914 included eliminating France and Russia as potential threats to Germany. That's the reason the Kaiser FIRST declared war on Russia, then on LITTLE NEUTRAL BELGIUM, then on France.

NONE of those countries EVER declared war on Germany, and NONE made ANY military moves TOWARDS GERMANY before Germany declared war.

For example, consider: in late July 1914, Russia was starting to mobilize against AUSTRIA to protect its ally SERBIA, when Germany declared war on Russia.

Then, as required by the "Schlieffen Plan," Germany declared war on LITTLE NEUTRAL BELGIUM, and on France.

France, hoping to avoid ANY provocative acts, had ordered its forces to MOVE BACK SIX MILES AWAY from the border with Germany. It didn't matter. The German plan called for war, so there was war.

On Germany's territorial ambitions, we should note that in the East, under the Brest-Litovsk Treaty, new countries like Poland were German protectorates, ruled over by German princes (Hitler's plan in 1941 was pretty much the same, with Nazi overlords replacing the German WWI era princes).

In the West in 1918, before the Germans had given up all hope of winning, their minimum territorial demands were: A) to annex Luxembourg, B) to annex the French iron and coal fields in Lorraine.

Nor were the reparations Germany actually paid out of proportion to those Germany had imposed on France in 1871, on Belgium in 1914 or on Russia in 1918.

So, I'll say again, the peace terms imposed on Germany at Versailles in 1919 were more than fair and just, when compared to the terms Germany imposed on its victims.

Besides that, even at the moment of German SURRENDER, there were many Germans who believed they had not been fairly defeated, and so MUST have another go at it SOONER OR LATER.

In other words, it DIDN'T MATTER WHAT terms Versailles imposed -- easy or harsh -- Germany was eventually going to start another war regardless.

After all, why should they accept ANY terms, when by rights (in their minds), they should have been the VICTORS?

[BroJoeK]

"Oh yea! The Kaiser wanted to take over the world......at least that's what the WESTERN HISTORY books say. An' heaven knows there's no reason to assume Germany should be allowed to protect Der Vaterland."

I've read no "Western History books," which say "the Kaiser wanted to take over the world."

But he obviously did want to dominate Europe, and his chosen method -- the "Schlieffen Plan" in 1914, was to destroy first France, and then Russia as potential enemies.

To accomplish these goals, Germany must first invade little NEUTRAL BELGIUM, which the Germans thought might bring Britain into the war. But that DIDN'T MATTER to German planners (i.e., Moltke, Ludendorf), because Britain only had three or four divisions readily available, against over 100 German divisions! The Brits were inconsequential to German planners.

And Germans could EASILY have "defeated" Russia, France AND Britain in the same way Bismark did -- by making FRIENDS & ALLIES with some of them. But, of course, the Kaiser was not noted for his "friendliness," now was he?

[BroJoeK]

"An' those valiant Allies, resisted that evil Kaiser.....yea right. The French had plotted and maneuvered for forty years to get their revenge against Germany for the Franco-Prussian War......France wanted war in the worst way (till it actually happened), as long as France had plenty of bad boys on their side."

I've seen this same claim posted on Free Republic several times, but NEVER with a SINGLE serious FACT of history from the SUMMER OF 1914 cited to support it.

The real TRUTH of the matter is: in July 1914, the French deliberately did NOTHING to provoke the Germans. They even ordered French troops to MOVE BACK SIX MILES from the border, just to be certain they did not give the Kaiser some excuse to invade.

Of course, it didn't work, because the Kaiser didn't NEED any excuse. The "Schlieffen Plan" required Germany to first invade France, and that's all there was to it.

So, I challenge you to cite EVEN ONE actual historical fact, PROVING that FRANCE actually STARTED WWI.

[BroJoeK]

"An' the pure, angelic Neutral USA....let's go there for a while. What does Neutral mean? A neutral country takes no side in a war between other parties. "

Here's the real truth of the matter. In the spring of 1914, US President Wilson suggested to the German Kaiser a "Nordic Alliance" to include Germany, Britain and the US. At the same time, the Brits sent their fleet to Germany, at the Kaiser's invitation to celebrate German-British friendship.

So, up until the actual time war broke out, there were serious efforts going on to make nice and make friends with Germany!

But once war DID break out, and Britain and America were forced to CHOSE, between FRANCE on the one hand and GERMANY on the other, there could be no question. The US owes our existence to France, big time, and in the end, we were not going to let them down.

Naturally the US did not want to get into Europe's war, and wanted to appear as neutral as possible. And many in the US even wanted to BE neutral. For example, Secretary of State "Cross of Gold" Bryant resigned in 1915 over Wilson's strong protest against Germans' sinking the Lusitania.

But there was no question which side the US favored. What Wilson really wanted was that the German Army would GO HOME and behave itself. Eventually it turned out, this was NEVER going to happen without US help.

[BroJoeK]

"Fact remains, had the USA truly been neutral:

1) Germany would have won WWI, most likely before 1917.... "

Here you are making pretty much the same argument Pat Buchanan makes in his new book, Buchanan, "The Unnecessary War". Of course I disagree with Buchanan, but it's an interesting book, and I do suggest reading it.

The fundamental problem with this kind of talk, especially from the British and American perspectives, is that what Germany did in that summer of 1914 was PURE EVIL, wickedness beyond measure!

With NO PROVOCATION whatever, Germans invaded little NEUTRAL BELGIUM and France, for purposes of destroying them and dominating Europe. From the beginning, this was intolerable for Britain and eventually became so for America.

When Americans first arrived in France in 1917, the cry was, "Lafayette we are here!" America owed an existential debt to France, and returned to pay it off.

Of course, by then France also owed a huge monetary debt to the US, which would be lost if France suffered defeat!

[BroJoeK]

"SO, BroJoeK looks at history thru his USA SUPER PATRIOT GLASSES,... "

So here I am, posting on Free Republic, and accused by a German propagandist of being a "USA SUPER PATRIOT"!

My, oh my... Shouldn't that be some kind of badge of honor?