Are we reliving the 1930's that led up to WW2?

Those who do not learn history are doomed to use this quote over and over again.

Moderators: danlo, Damelon

Post Reply
User avatar
SoulBiter
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 9190
Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2004 2:02 am
Has thanked: 74 times
Been thanked: 12 times

Are we reliving the 1930's that led up to WW2?

Post by SoulBiter »

I had posted this in the Tank a number of weeks ago as Russia started its invasion of Ukraine. This has so many mirrors that point back to the events leading up to WW2 that I find it difficult to accept that NATO is sitting on its collective ass while Russia again makes a run at taking over a country through force of arms.

I see this as a defining moment of our times. Ukraine is literally fighting for their countries survival against an opponent they cannot beat in a conventional sense. The world sits and does nothing. Scared of the implications of war with Russia. Don't think that Russia doesn't see this. The West called their bluff only to find they weren't bluffing. Once they take Ukraine, they will put in a pro-Russia administration who will then ask to become part of Russia again. Russia will magnanimously accept them back into the fold. A few years from now, they will do this again, and then rinse repeat.

The parallels with 1936 - 1940 are astounding. Truly history repeating itself. Hitler did the same things. He reassured the surrounding countries that they had nothing to fear as he broke the treaty of Versailles. Then when Austria would not willingly become a part of Germany, he moved his Army in putting his own people in place, then had a referendum where Austria (agreed) to become part of Germany. Again he reassured the World that everything was fine. He knew that Europe and the US were weary from WW1 and would do nothing that might start another war. Thus there was a period of appeasement, where Countries held off engaging in any defiance of Hitler as he continued to annex countries he felt were "German".

Hitler threatened war over the issue of annexing Sudetenland. In September 1938 the British, Italian, French and German leaders met in Munich to discuss the issue.

The Allies agreed to concede the Sudetenland ( Czechoslovakia) to Germany in exchange for a pledge of peace.

Less than half a year after it was signed, Germany broke the Munich Pact. Germany invaded the Czech provinces of Bohemia and Moravia in 1939.

Despite breaking the pact, there was again no response from the "Allies".

I bring all this up because what led up to WW2 and how far the World allowed Hitler to go before they acted, might have cost more lives in the long term. The policy of appeasement that Europe and the USA had at the time did not work. It will not work this time either.

Here is a statement from the Auschwitz Memorial:
“As we stand at the Auschwitz-Birkenau Memorial, it is impossible to remain silent while, once again, innocent people are being killed purely because of insane pseudo-imperial megalomania.

“We express our absolute solidarity with the citizens and residents of the free, independent, and sovereign Ukraine and with all Russians who have the courage to oppose this war.

“At this moment, the free and democratic world must show it has learned its lesson from the passivity of the 1930s. Today, it is clear that any symptom of indifference is a sign of complicity.�
We miss you Tracie but your Spirit will always shine brightly on the Watch Image
User avatar
Fist and Faith
Magister Vitae
Posts: 23439
Joined: Sun Dec 01, 2002 8:14 pm
Has thanked: 6 times
Been thanked: 30 times

Post by Fist and Faith »

I agree entirely. Everything from the parallels, to the thought that this is a defining moment of our time, to incredulity that we are letting it happen.
All lies and jest
Still a man hears what he wants to hear
And disregards the rest
-Paul Simon
User avatar
aTOMiC
Lord
Posts: 24588
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2003 6:48 am
Location: Tampa, Florida
Has thanked: 4 times
Been thanked: 7 times
Contact:

Post by aTOMiC »

It's a familiar scenario to be sure but the appeasement of Adolph Hitler was not predicated on the fear of the total annihilation of every living thing on Earth by a nuclear war.

Were it not for the nuclear threat I believe the Western Allies would have moved to check Putin's advance in Ukraine and inevitably force the Russian army out of the country the way Iraq was forced out of Kuwait.

The truth is M.A.D. is the only reason the United States and the Soviet Union were able to avoid a direct conflict during the cold war years and it will play a role in our future struggles as well. Unless Putin really is losing his mind and he somehow convinces the zealots that surround him to let him launch missiles instead of putting a bullet in his head.
"If you can't tell the difference, what difference does it make?"
Image

"There is tic and toc in atomic" - Neil Peart
User avatar
Fist and Faith
Magister Vitae
Posts: 23439
Joined: Sun Dec 01, 2002 8:14 pm
Has thanked: 6 times
Been thanked: 30 times

Post by Fist and Faith »

True, the threat of MAD is not why Hitler was allowed to go so far before he was opposed. It could be that will make the world wait longer before trying to stop Putin. It could be the world will never try to stop Putin because of that.
All lies and jest
Still a man hears what he wants to hear
And disregards the rest
-Paul Simon
User avatar
sgt.null
Jack of Odd Trades, Master of Fun
Posts: 47250
Joined: Tue Jul 19, 2005 7:53 am
Location: Brazoria, Texas
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 6 times

Post by sgt.null »

We do nothing because Biden is a tool of Putin.
Lenin, Marx
Marx, Lennon
Good Dog...
User avatar
wayfriend
.
Posts: 20957
Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2004 12:34 am
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 4 times

Post by wayfriend »

aTOMiC wrote:It's a familiar scenario to be sure but the appeasement of Adolph Hitler was not predicated on the fear of the total annihilation of every living thing on Earth by a nuclear war.
On the one hand, that about sums it up entirely.

On the other hand, the reason for appeasin' may be different, but the end result is the same.

However, I think we took a left turn where the 1930's turned right. Instead of responding with armed forces, we're going a different way. Instead of sending soldiers, we're sending arms. Instead of bombing, we're boycotting.

It's still an open question if that will work out better or worse. Russia's invasion is stalled for a time, but they are using that time to just flatten everything in range. On the other hands, there are talks - not yet promising talks, but talking itself is promising.

I'd like to think that this is a "more modern" approach to armed imperialism. It may be slower to achieve results. It may be dictated by nuclear weapons. But it's a different approach, and if it works, it will change everything.
.
User avatar
SoulBiter
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 9190
Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2004 2:02 am
Has thanked: 74 times
Been thanked: 12 times

Post by SoulBiter »

Some good points WF. We are trying to go about this very differently and it is up in the air whether this is just another way to avoid armed conflict and works, or ends up only delaying the inevitable.

Sadly, Putin will not settle for not winning in this so he will go scorched earth (and in fact has started just that) until Ukraine gives in, or there is nothing left there to give in with.

But my own thoughts on this are that these boycotts (and this proxy war) are just another way of appeasement without appearing to do so. I also have a very real fear that after taking or destroying Ukraine, Putin will continue to threaten nuclear war and will try to get other countries to abandon NATO or not join NATO. Its the neighborhood bully but on a larger scale. The West has to stand up to him sooner or later. I suspect it will be later but as I said above, delays the inevitable.

(Or we can hope someone in Russia takes out Putin and ends the war)
We miss you Tracie but your Spirit will always shine brightly on the Watch Image
User avatar
Fist and Faith
Magister Vitae
Posts: 23439
Joined: Sun Dec 01, 2002 8:14 pm
Has thanked: 6 times
Been thanked: 30 times

Post by Fist and Faith »

I wonder how much damage the hacker group Anonymous is actually doing. That's a very interesting development, imo. Of course, if they are doing as much as they are saying they are, they'll be hunted down when this is over.
All lies and jest
Still a man hears what he wants to hear
And disregards the rest
-Paul Simon
User avatar
Avatar
Immanentizing The Eschaton
Posts: 61651
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2004 9:17 am
Location: Johannesburg, South Africa
Has thanked: 13 times
Been thanked: 19 times

Post by Avatar »

Yeah, I have trouble with the whole appeasement thing too...if NATO / whoever is unwilling to get involved because of the fear of nuclear reaction, then what stops them from doing whatever else they want, since everybody is so afraid they'll pull the trigger?

You'd think Russia is the only nuclear capable country...say what you want about MAD, but it clearly worked...

--A
User avatar
wayfriend
.
Posts: 20957
Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2004 12:34 am
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 4 times

Post by wayfriend »

Avatar wrote:if NATO / whoever is unwilling to get involved because of the fear of nuclear reaction, then what stops them from doing whatever else they want, since everybody is so afraid they'll pull the trigger?
Is the fear of nuclear reaction a misplaced fear? I don't think so.

Is the fear that Russia could start bombing Poland, Slovakia, Romania if NATO gets involved a misplaced fear?

The nuclear deterrent works both ways. If NATO sends in troops to support Ukraine, Russia won't respond with nukes -- not immediately. But it will widen the scope of the war. Russia may not invade NATO countries, but it will bomb the crap out of them, kill as many civilians as possible. This is the WWIII scenario.

The end-game is this: any escalation that is short of an existential threat to Russia gains nothing. Any escalation that could be an existential threat to Russia provokes a nuclear response.

So, we go down the same appeasement road as we did 80 years ago. But the reasons are different, and the way out will be different.

It may be too late to save Ukraine. But never before has it been seen why NATO is so important, and no one will worry about the diplomacy of standing NATO up on Putin's borders any longer. A wall should be built around his country, leaving him no where else to expand.
.
User avatar
Fist and Faith
Magister Vitae
Posts: 23439
Joined: Sun Dec 01, 2002 8:14 pm
Has thanked: 6 times
Been thanked: 30 times

Post by Fist and Faith »

The question is whether a nuclear war is worse than watching Russia kill as many people as it wants as it takes over country after country.
All lies and jest
Still a man hears what he wants to hear
And disregards the rest
-Paul Simon
User avatar
Avatar
Immanentizing The Eschaton
Posts: 61651
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2004 9:17 am
Location: Johannesburg, South Africa
Has thanked: 13 times
Been thanked: 19 times

Post by Avatar »

Couple of things I think maybe...

NATO troops on the ground are not necessarily necessary. Just a no-fly zone could make a difference. NATO refusing to be involved though was a bit of a green light to use whatever means he wanted.

I'm not convinced that he would bomb NATO countries, not least because it seems uncertain that Russia could sustain any kind of escalation or the inevitable retaliation for it.

The nuclear threat may be only that, a threat, but of course, nobody wants to be the one to call that bluff, in case it's not a bluff.

@Fist...many might say it would be...but not for the Ukrainians I guess.

We seem stuck in this paralysed state it appears...unable to provide direct assistance, unable to enforce short-term (the kind Ukraine needs) consequences, and unable to walk away and say "It's their problem."

Hardly seems right somehow...

--A
User avatar
Fist and Faith
Magister Vitae
Posts: 23439
Joined: Sun Dec 01, 2002 8:14 pm
Has thanked: 6 times
Been thanked: 30 times

Post by Fist and Faith »

Avatar wrote: @Fist...many might say it would be...but not for the Ukrainians I guess.
It's true that the Ukranians probably don't care if they are killed with a bayonette, bullet, grenade, traditional bomb, or nuke. But the issue doesn't end with the Ukranians. It will be country after country, untold numbers dying, and the survivors losing their freedom to one degree or another. This is the path we're on. Is that future better than nuclear war?
All lies and jest
Still a man hears what he wants to hear
And disregards the rest
-Paul Simon
User avatar
wayfriend
.
Posts: 20957
Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2004 12:34 am
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 4 times

Post by wayfriend »

Fist and Faith wrote:The question is whether a nuclear war is worse than watching Russia kill as many people as it wants as it takes over country after country.
Yes. Yes, it is. And I dare say that many Ukrainians would agree. (They plea for help. But they do not condemn any other country for not sending soldiers. They understand the stakes.)

If Russia goes nucular, they aren't going to launch a couple and sit back. Because they know a hard rain is gonna fall - no one is gonna forgo retaliation once the line is crossed. (That will never be appeased.) So Russia will go all in if they go at all. Which means the US will go all in. And the other umpteen nuclear powers? They can only make it worse.

He may get Ukraine. But nothing else, no, never anything else.

And Ukraine ain't over yet.
.
User avatar
SoulBiter
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 9190
Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2004 2:02 am
Has thanked: 74 times
Been thanked: 12 times

Post by SoulBiter »

I agree WF.

When we start even talking about or considering a nuclear war, the stakes change drastically because we would/could be looking at the end of human kind on this planet. At the very least it could be a return to a much poorer, meager existence but coupled with areas of the earth that would not be habitable for hundreds of years.
We miss you Tracie but your Spirit will always shine brightly on the Watch Image
User avatar
Skyweir
Lord of Light
Posts: 25188
Joined: Sat Mar 16, 2002 6:27 am
Location: Australia
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 18 times

Post by Skyweir »

It’s true the stakes do change dramatically but as much as I appreciate the rationale: 1. MAD, 2. Putin being a loose cannon and 3. Putin’s irrational agenda ~ to restore the Soviet Union to its previous glory (at least geographically) … I can’t help but think that fear is paralysing.

What is that old adage ~ “all it takes for evil to succeed us for good people to do nothing�.

And although making moral judgement about the actors and inaction of some ~ I do feel the messaging Putin is getting is ~ green lighted do as you want.

Now I agree with WF that it’s not like NOTHING is being done ~ the provision of munitions is a value, and sanctions I am sure provide some significant discomfort ~ but is it enough.

And when dealing with a tyrannical megalomaniac with nuclear capability ~ it’s a hard call arguably untenable to make.

But I think NATO could act cuz it’s not just Putin whose being green lighted, it’s China, North Korea, it’s every nuclear capable rogue nation on the planet.

A sovereign, independent and stable Ukraine, firmly committed to democracy and the rule of law, is key to Euro-Atlantic security and I know NATO is coordinating munitions supply & support to Ukraine and I don’t know how you make a stand against a rogue like Putin … but can’t help hoping someone will take him out.
ImageImageImageImage
keep smiling 😊 :D 😊

'Smoke me a kipper .. I'll be back for breakfast!'
Image

EZBoard SURVIVOR
User avatar
SoulBiter
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 9190
Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2004 2:02 am
Has thanked: 74 times
Been thanked: 12 times

Post by SoulBiter »

I don't disagree with you Sky. I am super concerned about letting Russia continue with expansion by force. I am heartened that we will probably see Sweden and Finland may soon be joining NATO but also I think that NATO would put boots on the ground if Putin tried to invade those.

I know that we need to avoid nuclear war. But we also cant let Putin continue to use it as a way to keep NATO from acting.
We miss you Tracie but your Spirit will always shine brightly on the Watch Image
User avatar
Skyweir
Lord of Light
Posts: 25188
Joined: Sat Mar 16, 2002 6:27 am
Location: Australia
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 18 times

Post by Skyweir »

Indeed and what is a perpetual concern is what inaction is informing both Putin, Putin's overall agenda, and every other national leader who shares similar expansionist agendas.

I appreciate the sensitivities where force is considered and applied ... particularly given the potential for catastrophic destruction.

And yet Ukrainian has a tenth of the military might Russia has - and there is significant disinformation re Russias invasion propagated by the Russian government.

I know there are significant differences between the conflict scenarios re Russia today than existed in 1930s - however, but for allied involvement in both world wars - we would be greeting each other with Seig Heils

I know the worlds saying - no - this is not ok. And I hope sanctions are useful but they are not preventing Putins advances in Ukraine.

I have to admire Zelensky and the Ukrainian people - they are combatting an overwhelming foe in the Russian military.

Im glad neighbouring nations are supporting Ukrainian families fleeing the conflict.
ImageImageImageImage
keep smiling 😊 :D 😊

'Smoke me a kipper .. I'll be back for breakfast!'
Image

EZBoard SURVIVOR
User avatar
SoulBiter
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 9190
Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2004 2:02 am
Has thanked: 74 times
Been thanked: 12 times

Post by SoulBiter »

Skyweir wrote:Indeed and what is a perpetual concern is what inaction is informing both Putin, Putin's overall agenda, and every other national leader who shares similar expansionist agendas.
Absolutely true. +1000

Allowing Russia to take Ukraine is only going to make them even more emboldened to do this again... and again. At some point the World needs to put their foot down and say ENOUGH!
We miss you Tracie but your Spirit will always shine brightly on the Watch Image
Post Reply

Return to “Doriendor Corishev”