It is astonishing how many plots there are alleged to have been on Hitler's life, some by generals, others by civilians, none of which succeeded.
I am at the point of discounting nearly all such talk.
Yes, Valkyrie was real, and came close to success, but others, well... not so much.
Think of a recent Hitler-lite dictator, oh, say, Saddam Hussein.
In the end, nothing but nothing could bring his own people to overthrow, much less murder him.
And consider any number of similar examples -- a Stalin or Mao, Castro -- so I think there is something deep in human psyche (fear, love, loyalty, community?) which protects dictators of a certain status.
Of course, they protect themselves, but they also depend on supporters' loyalty, and that never failed Hitler.
I'm only saying that, considering how many actual plots against Hitler failed, how might we suppose some potential plot might somehow succeed?
donmeaker: "One of my considerations was if FDR had pulled the Marines from the banana republics, and sent them off (with permission of France) to throw Hitler out of the Rhineland."
Oh, dear me... and if pigs had wings could they fly?
I would be interested to learn if there was ever any such idea mentioned, much less seriously considered.
Isn't the reality that Congress busied itself in those years passing "Neutrality Acts" forbidding the President from taking sides in any foreign disputes?
Yes, I know, President Roosevelt was among the first to recognize the danger Hitler represented.
Indeed, Roosevelt had understood in 1918 that Wilson's "Peace without victory" ideas would not end well.
But I've seen nothing to suggest that FDR thought he had the option of sending US troops into the Rhineland in 1936.
Instead, France and Britain were the First Responders for that emergency, and since they didn't, Europe's fires continued to burn.
I sure agree that the Locarno pact has Britain and France as responsible. Belgium in response to the fecklessness of Britain and France became neutral. (how well did that work out in 1914?)
FDR probably would have been impeached, or better yet, would have only served two terms. He would have been villified for saving millions of lives.
GW Bush gave 16 reasons for the invasion of Iraq. He was villified, and won reelection anyways, so he could win the war.
Obama gave away the gains, but because of the democratic framework left by Bush, the Iraqi prime minister is moving away from Iran as he seeks votes from the Sunni-Iraqis.
There sure are a lot of feedback loops, and the progress of history is anything but linear.