PDA

View Full Version : This Day in Liberal History: September, 1


PittsburghAfterDark
09-01-2006, 12:42 PM
This day in liberal history the folly of Western negotiators and appeasers got the ultimate slap in the face when Hitler destroyed the Munich Pact and invaded Poland. To further slap down appeasing and liberal realities the great hope of progressive minds everywhere, the USSR, the country deemed most likely to end the "inequality" of men everywhere with Communism, invaded Poland as well after secretly signing the Ribbentrop-Molotov non-aggression pact.

Of course no liberal or progressive will today admit that their actions today are the historical mirror of the Munich Pact and the UN is playing the roll of the Ribbentrop-Molotov non-aggression pact with fascist Islam.

So on this day, September 1, I remind our readers that liberalism/progressive thought will always lead to incredible death and destruction when allowed to run its course.

In Poland... At 0445 hours German forces invade Poland without a declaration of war. The operation is code named Fall Weiss (Plan White). The Germans allot 52 divisions for the invasion (some 1.5 million men), including the 6 armored divisions and all their motorized units. Of the divisions left to defend against an Anglo-French front, only about 10 are regarded by the Germans as being fit for any kind of action. General Brauchitsch, the Commander-in-Chief of the German Army, is in command of the campaign. Bock leads Army Group North, consisting of the 4th Army (Kuchler) and 3rd Army (Kluge); Rundstedt leads Army Group South, consisting of 8th Army (Balskowitz), 10th Army (Reichenau) and 14th Army (List). Air support comes from two Air Fleets, commanded by Kesselring and Lohr, which have around 1,600 aircraft. Army Group South, advancing from Silesia, is to provide the main German attacks. The 8th Army on the left is to move toward Poznan, the principal thrust is to be delivered by 10th Army which is to advance in the center to the Vistula River between Warsaw and Sandomierz, while 14th Army on the right moves toward Krakow and the Carpathian flank. The 4th Army from East Prussia is to move south toward Warsaw and the line to the Bug River to the east; 3rd Army is to cross the Polish Corridor and join 4th Army in moving south. The Poles have 23 regular infantry divisions prepared with 7 more assembling, 1 weak armored division and an inadequate supply of artillery. They also have a considerable force of cavalry. The reserve units were only called up on August 30th and are not ready for combat. In the air, almost all the 500 Polish planes are obsolete and prove unable to blunt the impact of the German attack. During the day, the Luftwaffe launches air strikes on Warsaw, Lodz and Krakow. The Polish Commander in Chief, Marshal Rydz-Smigly, has deployed the stronger parts of his army in the northwestern half of the country, including large forces in the Poznan area and the Polish Corridor. He hopes to hold the Germans to only gradual gains. All along the front the superior training, equipment and strength of the Germans quickly brings them the advantage in the first battles. Many Polish units are overrun before their reinforcements from the reserve mobilization can arrive. At sea, as in the air, Polish technical inferiority leads to crushing early defeats. Three of the four Polish destroyers manage to leave for Britain before hostilities begin and later one submarine also escapes. On the first day the old pre-Dreadnought battleship, Schleswig-Holstein, bombards the Polish naval base at Westerplatte.
In Berlin... Officials claim that Polish army regulars started firing on Germans along the frontier and that the fire was returned beginning at 0445 hours. Hitler addresses the Reichstag during the day, declaring "I am determined to eliminate from the German frontiers the element of insecurity, the atmosphere which permanently resembles that of civil war."

From Warsaw... The Polish government appeals for British and French intervention under the terms of the Mutual Assistance Treaties.

In London... The British government demands a German withdrawal from Poland.

In Britain... Because of the fear of air attacks, the evacuation of young children from London and other supposedly vulnerable areas is begun. General mobilization is proclaimed. (The Royal Navy was mobilized on August 31st.) Air Raid Precautions (ARP) are introduced and a "blackout" enforced from sunset. British railways are taken under government control.

In Paris... The French government demands a German withdrawal from Poland.

In France... General mobilization and a "state of siege" (martial law) are proclaimed.

In Rome... The Italian government announces that it will not take any military initiative.

In the Soviet Union... The armed forces are mobilized and the draft age is lowered from 21 to 19.

In Washington... President Roosevelt calls for a ban on indiscriminate bombing of civilians and undefended towns.

In Oslo... The Norwegian government declares its neutrality.

In Bern... The Swiss government declares its neutrality.

In Helsinki... The Finnish government declares its neutrality.
Link (http://www.onwar.com/chrono/1939/sep39/f01sep39.htm)

CheesyMuslim
09-01-2006, 01:02 PM
Sorry bout that,

1. But the Germans of the Nazi era represent the same evils we are seeing today.
2. Both wanted the Jews dead, as a prime reason for doing what they do.
3. But now, this new enemy of the world wants more of us dead on top of the Jews.
4. Resistance is futile, they claim.
5. It saddens me, that this world has come to this, I for one refuse, and I will resist even unto death.
6. And if I could say forgive them for they know not what they do, I would, be its plain to see they do know, so I can and will not.
7. The only problem I see is, what the terrorists and Islamofascists have started in this war, is like the mouse attacking the Lion, they can and will not win.
8. Unless they feel they can human bomb us to death, one of theirs for how many ever they can kill of us per explosion.
9. Which I don't think that this way of war can ever be effective enough to get us all.

Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

sbannon
09-01-2006, 03:59 PM
Going by what Chess said to equate the current evils with those of the past, I have to ask how exactly the last 5 years of conservative/regressive policy has produced favorable results?

I just don't see this as a liberal vs. conservative issue. It's about good vs. dumb ideas. Both sides have been guilty of each in history but neither has offered much in the way of good ideas lately.

Make7
09-02-2006, 07:35 PM
So on this day, September 1, I remind our readers that liberalism/progressive thought will always lead to incredible death and destruction when allowed to run its course.

Are you saying that Hitler was liberal/progressive?

Or are you saying he wasn't responsible for invading Poland?

-Make7

Technocrat
09-02-2006, 11:21 PM
So on this day, September 1, I remind our readers that liberalism/progressive thought will always lead to incredible death and destruction when allowed to run its course.

Are you saying that Hitler was liberal/progressive?

Or are you saying he wasn't responsible for invading Poland?

-Make7


Hitler was a Catholic conservative. According to the OP's logic...


Well, aside from there, are there certain problems with the premise in the OP dealing with appeasement, liberalism, and "threat."

Foremost, it's rather silly to consider Nevil Chamberlin's policy "liberal" as we undestand the term progressive or liberal today. Being anti-war or sketpical of the claims of the government that everything they must do is in our self-interest, and all we need do is everything they say, is not appeasement. Appeasement is not "liberal" or "progressive." It's not even a remotely accurate analogy.

It's also incredibly invalid to pretend that liberals believe in "appeasement" in the first place. That's an exaggeration used to discredit anyone who disagrees with "war at all cost" and "patriotism"-- the latter being an emotional ploy to rally the mob. It's like how Dick Cheney and Rumsfeld go around creating a pavlovian assiation between the word dissident and "anti-american." It's emotionally powerful rhetoric, but empty. But it works.


Secondy, it's also a false analogy to liken today's problems to the problem of the Nazis. Two totally different threat levels are represented. We are not in the same positions, nor are we facing the same type of threat. There's a difference between appeasing, as did Chamberlin, in the hope of peace, and mindless obedience to the government's dogma that war solves all ills, when we know that's true.