at least in Europe anyway. This upcoming Doctor Who episode, "Let’s Kill Hitler’ got me thinking about the subject. I’m not talking about something like the July 20th plot but an assassination much, much earlier, like before 1919. (Never mind the ethical issues with killing someone before they have committed any crime.)
My thinking is that given the resentments resulting from the ending of WWI that WWII war was pretty much inevitable and if it wasn’t Hitler, it would have been someone else. But I’m not a historian.
Shit, depends upon which theory you’ve read last. Since my last Hitler exposure was at the hands of Ian Kershaw, I would say that killing Hitler in 1919 would have prevented WW2.
No. Germany was going to be at war with France before too long no matter what, because of the vindictiveness of the Versailles peace treaty. Killing Hitler early enough would change the whole character of that war, however.
Simpler to find a way to keep Wilson healthy and involved in the whole process. That would have cut down on a lot of the “punishment” aspects of the treaty, and would have killed Clause 231 completely.
I also would have given Ho Chi Minh a seat at the table. etv - No, but most anti-Semites aren’t genocidal maniacs capable of leading an entire country down a path of unmitigated Evil either.
In a previous thread, I disputed the common consensus that the Versailles Treaty was actually unreasonable. It was actually pretty normal. The Germans just complained a lot because its terms were being inflicted on them instead of the other way around.
So I don’t see any change based on something different happening in 1919. Germany was going to be angry no matter what happened.
But I think killing Hitler would have prevented another world war. There were plenty of people who might talk about “restoring” Germany as a world power. But they could also do the math and knew that Germany would lose another world war like it lost the first. So with most people it would have just been talk or maybe some minor wars in Eastern Europe. Hitler was unique in his willingness to actually start another big war and his ability to get Germany to follow him.
Same thing with the Holocaust. There were plenty of Germans who might have been anti-semites. But only Hitler was willing to start an actual program of genocide and make it happen.
This. Many forget that Hitler’s generals were against re-militarization of the Saar and the Rhineland and also didn’t want to invade Poland. It was only the French not going deep into Germany during the “Phony War” that kept them from rebelling. Guderian said after the war that there weren’t any Panzer units in the west in late 1939 - early 1940 because they were all in Poland and had France invaded with a concentrated armor spearhead, nothing could’ve stopped them.
No Hitler, no W.W. II in europe. While another charismatic figure may have re-armed Germany, the military leadership did not support invading other countries.
Ultimately, isn’t the world much better off for having endured WWII? Lots of tech and medical advances, having Germany and Japan as allies, causing the Cold War that comes with it’s own set of gains. One could even argue the value of the holocaust as the ultimate lesson in humanity and inaction. From a historical perspective, once the U.S. enters the war, victory is all but assured because of our immense manufacturing capabilities that are basically untouchable from Europe. If WWII helped the world as much as it did, and with the assurance of the Nazi’s defeat, if anything we should be using time travel to strengthen Hitler and Nazi Germany in an effort to lengthen the war.
On the other hand, that would require a complete rethinking of French tank tactics. “Concentrated armor” was not in their playbook, though de Gaulle tried to change that.
I agree with Little Nemo and Bri2k. Many Germans may have resented the treaty of Versailles, but they would have been probably happy just to bitch without Hitler whipping them on. Also, Hitler’s gang of thugs seem to me to have been the only Germans who would stoop to the filthy tricks he used to run out some key generals who opposed his plans (see William Shirer’s The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich). I think Hitler was the only German politician with the balls and political astuteness to invade the Rhineland in 1936 and even Hitler admitted that was the worst 48 hours in his life, at least up until 1945.
I don’t see any peaceful way for Germany to have escaped its interbellum economic woes. When you’ve got hyperinflation so extreme you need scientific notation to express it, something’s got to give. At best, it might have been confined to an internal civil war. But I don’t think it would have stayed confined.
Marshal Foch, long before anyone had heard of Hitler, said “This is not peace. It is an armistice for 20 years”. They left the Germans pissed off but, besides taking back Alsance-Loraine, still the large Berlin-led polity from the German Wars of Unification, and still with borderlands in good position to launch new wars.
The hyperinflation was over by 1924, and need not have caused a war in 1939. I agree with those saying killing Hitler would have avoided it. Of course, there would still have been a “World War II” in Asia.
It was still more or less inevitable that an authoritarian nationalist party or movement of some kind would eventually take over from the Weimar Republic.
I get the feeling that the Weimar Republic was seen by the German citizens, more or less, as something of a failure due to the constant bickering in the Reichstag, and the failures of various economic policies.
I don’t know if a military backed authoritarian dictatorship would be willing to be completely passive, internationally speaking. Most seem to beat the prapaganda/war drums for the purpose of shifting anger, attention, or blame upon some outside “threat”, and away from the regimes weaknesses, corruption, or failures. (I don’t know if Franco’s Spain was an example of one that did not. I know very little about Spain.)
War might have happened anyway. Stalin was super paranoid, and managed to engage in adventures of his own while the west was preoccupied with Hitler. (The Winter War.) Maybe, eventually, some kind of clash would have occured between Germany and the Soviet Union, even without Hitler.
The hyperinflation was an intentional government policy. The German government deliberately crashed its economy in an attempt to “prove” that it was impossible for them to pay reparations.
It was like some unstable guy being told by his wife that he spends too much time watching TV. So he throws the TV out the window and starts yelling, “That’s what you wanted, right? No TV, no problem! Is everything perfect now?” Basically using a ridiculous over-reaction to a request to create the impression that the original request was unreasonable.