It's the long term goals of the German Reich to expand into new land, and for the USSR to spread the Revolution. They weren't going to stay long-term allies, if they ever even allied.
- 6
- 2
Poland caves! Danzig corridor to Hitler!
- Thread starter Rommel41
- Start date
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
It's the long term goals of the German Reich to expand into new land, and for the USSR to spread the Revolution. They weren't going to stay long-term allies, if they ever even allied.
Lebensraum is something they came up later. After the retaking of the former german territory they decided, just as Japan, that they have to be self sufficient in a world where countries get more and more dependant on each other. The Lebensraum basicly was exactly that and would have functioned as a massive farmland to provide enough food and resources for germany to be completly self sufficient.
- 3
- 2
Don't forget this.
For half a year Germany rightfully owned a lot of what later would become the area defined by the Generalplan Ost.
The idea of retaking what had been lost and expanding into the Soviet Union was not as incompatible as it is often thought.
Has it never accured to anybody to wonder why the French where not scheduled for extermination to provide Lebensraum, being the Erbfeind and everything?
Because the whole ideology of Hitler and the Nazis was heavily informed by their experiences in and observations of the World War I.
France was the enemy to be held off and probably be beaten, but the black earth of the Ukraine was to feed the German people and make them immune to the threat of the British Navy.
The easy victories in the East, the starvation bloackade, the long war in the West and the Worker's Revolution in both Russia and Germany were the guiding star of the Nazis and even more of Hitler.
I fail to see how the German economy was on the verge of collapse. Seems like more propaganda by historians with an Allied bias.
- 1
To say that the German economy was literally "on the verge of collapse" in 1938 is hyperbole, so you're kind of right about that. However in 1938 and 1939 Germany was facing severe money and resource shortages that precluded a military buildup past 1939, while at peace, on a level which Hitler deemed acceptable.
And this is what the economic planners told Hitler:
So the mobilization forecast for Germany in July 1939 looked bleak unless they were able to switch to a wartime production ASAP...
...which they did:
Last edited:
- 2
Not many Germans in USSR, except some "Volga Germans" of remote origin (a few centuries).
Not many Germans in France (excepted Alsace) Yugoslavia or Greece, or Danemark or Norway...
- 1
In Mein Kampf (1925), Hitler dedicated a full chapter titled "Eastern Orientation or Eastern Policy", outlining the need for Lebensraum for Germany and the German people.
And the concept was "invented" long before that.
- 2
Most of the ones you mentioned are either to ensure security of Germany by denying the Allies a land front (France, Denmark), political moves to either secure Europe or ensure that Italy remains reliant on Germany (Yugoslavia, Greece), or securing badly needed resources (Norway).
That was my point, the objective was not only to reunite so-called ethnic Germans, it was a dream of conquest.
- 1
Wiki:
Mitte 1938 lebten nach nationalsozialistischen Kriterien etwa 8,6 Millionen Deutsche außerhalb der östlichen Reichsgrenzen: in der Tschechoslowakei (hauptsächlich Sudetenland, 3,48 Millionen Sudetendeutsche), in Polen (Polnischer Korridor, Ostoberschlesien, 1,15 Millionen), Rumänien (0,75 Millionen), in Ungarn (0,6 Millionen), Jugoslawien (0,55 Millionen) und in der Sowjetunion (1,15 Millionen) und weitere 0,6 Millionen in Estland, Lettland, Litauen (Memelland) und in der Freien Stadt Danzig.
Translation:
In Mid 1938 according to nationalsocialist criteria about 8.6 million Germans lived outside the eastern borders of the realm: In czeckoslovakia (mainly Sudetenland, 3.48 million sudentendeutsche), in Poland (Polish corridor, Eastern Upper Silesia 1.15 million), Romania (0.75 million ), Hungary (0.6 million), Yugoslavia (0.55 million) and in the Soviet Union (1.15 Million) and another 0.6 million in Estonia, Lithunia and Livonia und in the Free City of Danzig.
- 2
Germany didn't only want to unite all Germanic people, they also wanted to expand the land that they believed belonged to Germanic people, all the way from the Low Countries to the Ural mountains. Unification wasn't the ultimate goal, expansion and Germanization of new lands was the ultimate goal.
- 1
I would replace "they believed belonged to" with 'Hitler believed necessary to the survival of the German race'.
One should be careful when quoting such production figures, especially for ammunition: before the fall of France there were whole warehouses that were, indeed, filled to the brim with ammo, but it was all shells that couldn't be shot. There was no copper, so no driving bands could be added to them. And the situation only worsened as time went on: Germany was forced to use iron to craft those driving bands, and eventually steel for the shells themselves, which wasn't too bad as long as the Soviet Union exported some copper, but eventually became the lion's share of steel consumption (half of all the steel Germany produced at the end of 1944 went into jackets).To say that the German economy was literally "on the verge of collapse" in 1938 is hyperbole, so you're kind of right about that. However in 1938 and 1939 Germany was facing severe money and resource shortages that precluded a military buildup past 1939, while at peace, on a level which Hitler deemed acceptable.
And this is what the economic planners told Hitler:
So the mobilization forecast for Germany in July 1939 looked bleak unless they were able to switch to a wartime production ASAP...
...which they did:
- 1
Actually, you have written a big pile of nonsence.
Germany didn't want to invade Poland at all, but were forced too because of Józef Beck idiotic foreign policy. From 1938, especially after Poland participation in "Czechoslovakia case" and annexing Tesin Poland was thought to be Germany biggest ally (more than Italy!). From Hitler point of view and Foreign Affairs ministry Poland was ideal. It was incredibly anti-communist, they already had non-agression pact from 1934 and if it would be convinced, the entire Eastern Front would be safe unti they will deal with France and Britain. Hitler thought that Poland would make a great ally to fight Soviet Union - his ideological grand enemy.
However, in 1938 Germany asked Józef Beck if "the conflict with France would erupt" what would be his policy. And he answered that he would keep the promise and help France. Ministry of Foreign Affairs was really dissatisfied, but they tried again, again and again. However, in the late 1938 they realised Józef Beck was complete imbecile, and later Poland accepted "guarantee" from Great Britain, making them de facto part of anti-German coalition. Because Germany knew France wouldn't prepere massive offensive in the first months of war, they decided to crush Poland first to secure eastern flank and that's why they created Ribbentrop-Molotov pact out of really nowhere.
If you really want to recreate how it looked in history, you can create event chain like this:
1. Poland guarantees France from the beginning of the game.
2. Poland can choose either to claim Tesin in 1938 (Historical) or stand in Czechoslovakia defence.
3. If Historical path chosen, there should be event about "Conflict in West case". Historical option would make Poland continue to guarantee France. However not-historical outcome would make Poland abandon it.
4. If unhistorical path chosen - instead of "Danzig of War" event there should be event about "proposition of anti-soviet alliance". How Józef Zychowicz, famous polish historian called it - "Pact Ribbentop-Beck", making Poland lose Danzig to Germany, but making Poland part of Axis.
To make the game balanced, AI should never choose "unhistorical" way, because it would make player Germany job far too easy. But it would be really interesting way to play Poland. And before any critique will appear, Germany-Poland alliance was very probable, and many historics have written about it. Also, if you have access to Mackiewicz's diaries and the works of Polish emigration in Britain, you can see how many of them were mad becaue of Beck idiotic "honourable" policy and what it led too.
Germany didn't want to invade Poland at all, but were forced too because of Józef Beck idiotic foreign policy. From 1938, especially after Poland participation in "Czechoslovakia case" and annexing Tesin Poland was thought to be Germany biggest ally (more than Italy!). From Hitler point of view and Foreign Affairs ministry Poland was ideal. It was incredibly anti-communist, they already had non-agression pact from 1934 and if it would be convinced, the entire Eastern Front would be safe unti they will deal with France and Britain. Hitler thought that Poland would make a great ally to fight Soviet Union - his ideological grand enemy.
However, in 1938 Germany asked Józef Beck if "the conflict with France would erupt" what would be his policy. And he answered that he would keep the promise and help France. Ministry of Foreign Affairs was really dissatisfied, but they tried again, again and again. However, in the late 1938 they realised Józef Beck was complete imbecile, and later Poland accepted "guarantee" from Great Britain, making them de facto part of anti-German coalition. Because Germany knew France wouldn't prepere massive offensive in the first months of war, they decided to crush Poland first to secure eastern flank and that's why they created Ribbentrop-Molotov pact out of really nowhere.
If you really want to recreate how it looked in history, you can create event chain like this:
1. Poland guarantees France from the beginning of the game.
2. Poland can choose either to claim Tesin in 1938 (Historical) or stand in Czechoslovakia defence.
3. If Historical path chosen, there should be event about "Conflict in West case". Historical option would make Poland continue to guarantee France. However not-historical outcome would make Poland abandon it.
4. If unhistorical path chosen - instead of "Danzig of War" event there should be event about "proposition of anti-soviet alliance". How Józef Zychowicz, famous polish historian called it - "Pact Ribbentop-Beck", making Poland lose Danzig to Germany, but making Poland part of Axis.
To make the game balanced, AI should never choose "unhistorical" way, because it would make player Germany job far too easy. But it would be really interesting way to play Poland. And before any critique will appear, Germany-Poland alliance was very probable, and many historics have written about it. Also, if you have access to Mackiewicz's diaries and the works of Polish emigration in Britain, you can see how many of them were mad becaue of Beck idiotic "honourable" policy and what it led too.
- 2
- 2
- 1
Verlax said:
Please - Zychowicz isn't a historian (just like Wołoszański) and his book is nothing but a fairy tale.
That kind of alliance was possible - true - but on the other hand the fate of newborn Axis Alliance would be written by French-Soviet agreement (that would probably - 90% - happened)
BTW - The same fairy tale is to talk about Polish-Soviet Allience.
In fact Allies side was in fact the most reasonable choice in that time
- 3
After ww2 Poland was basically moved west, eastern parts were annexed by russia and eastern germany was annexed by poland.
If poland would cede danzig, could it be the first step in moving poland east?
Germany could annex some regions in the west while helping poland to reunite the PLC?
If poland would cede danzig, could it be the first step in moving poland east?
Germany could annex some regions in the west while helping poland to reunite the PLC?
Germany had only one ambition - hegemony
There is no reason to make Reichs more powerful and in fact - dangerous
Sure some parts of Byelorussia and Ukraine could have been given to Poland but PLC borders would be probably unacceptable.
There is still a Ukrainian issue (how to solve it ?)
France allied with the Soviet Union? The same France terrified of communist fifth columnists, whose papers continuously spoke about the Red Menace and where you could be dropped out of politics if there was a whiff of you being a Soviet spy? Yes, I'm sure it would have 90% happened. Positive.
I also doubt that you would see the Soviets and the French get together.
Don't forget:
The Allies had supported the Whites.