92 Years ago today.........

[DuckofTindalos]

Whether or not Versailles was unfair is completely irrelevant. All that matters is that the Nazis convinced the German people that it was...

[Przemcio231]

Yes that is true there were high unemployment , most of the society was poor... and they promised Great Country , Work and Food... something like Coalition Ruling in Poland now... shish[:@]

[Montrose]

Ursa - you are just reinforcing what I outlined. Have a look at Europe in 1919. Germany was actually stronger than in 1914, her neighbours were wrecked. No more Russian (revolution), Austro-Hungarian (dismembered), British (bankrupt), or French (hamstrung) power blocs to worry about. The only country whose diplomatic and industrial situation was enhanced by the First World War, compared to the other European powers, was Germany.

Pauk - I can't remember the guy offhand, I know he was an American economic historian, I'll check my old sources.

anarchyintheuk - I was trying to show that the treaty of Versailles was anything but humiliating. It was a complete let-off which thankfully was not repeated when the Allies insisted on unconditional surrender in WW2.

BLUESOB - I can believe it. However I live in the UK which apparently has finished paying back its Lend-Lease debts just this year.

Terminus - exactly! The 'harsh' treaty of Versailles was complete right wing bullcrap which Hitler pounded out to the masses.

[Edit] too many typos!

[captskillet]

The rump armed forces that Germany was allowed to keep suited the situation perfectly. They didn't need to pay for a massive army while rebuilding but still kept a core of veterans for future expansion.

.......and who by all intents and purposes (thru Hans von Seeckt ) ran Weimar Germany and was greatly aided in their retraining/rearming by none other than future antagonist Uncle Joe Stalin and the secret training program he let them run in Soviet Union!

[Mynok]

Some of you guys need to pick up one of the more modern assesments of the so-called 'harsh' Treaty of Versailles. You are repeating the same rubbish that right wingers in 1920s and 1930s Germany did.

Um....I, for one, didn't use 'harsh' or any such adjective. The word I used was destructive, and I stand 100% behind that meaning. It was a bad peace by every sane definition of the word, and the fact remains indisputable that it was a cause of WWII on multiple levels. Whether one thinks it was 'fair', 'harsh', or '<insert favorite historian-babble here>' is irrelevant.

[Montrose]

Yes but the reason that the peace was 'destructive' was that it was a 'bad' peace because it let Germany build upon an improved postition, and in effect was not worth the paper that it was written on. It suprises me to see people nearly&nbsp;90 years later buying into the same old 'harsh' crap. Oh, and it is far from irrelevant, it is a perfect example of how people are prepared to repeat recieved views without a moments thought. That isn't good for the human species.

[Mynok]

It was harsh to all the other countries. [:D]

[Montrose]

Exactly [:D]