Position:Home>History> What do you think of Neville Chamberlain's appeasement?

Chamberlins appeasement policy was sown to one policy 'avoid war at all costs' The carnage of WW1 was still fresh in peoples memories and there was an understandable fear of mass casulaties and this was shown by Chamberlins predecessor Baldwin who said 'the bomber will always get through' The policy also went under the misapprehension that Hitler like France and Britian wanted to avoid war, where Hitlers ideology was based on expansion and violence!. Chamberlin honestly thought by appeasing Hitler he would prevent war and he also had to accept that the British miltary had been severly underfunded since the late 1920's and while the Army had armour, tanks and guns there had been no devolpment and the equipment was out of date!. The RAFs planes were unreliable and antiquated and the Royal Navy were still using warships commisioned during the First World War!. However rearmament didnt come until after the breaking of the Munich agreement as the Government realised that Hitler could not be trusted!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

---

---

it never happened - u can't prove it!
don't be fooled!
u are on the other of the biggest secret ever kept from mankind!
only time will tell the truth of the matter
(x files music starts subtly in the background)Www@QuestionHome@Com

---

---

He may have been trying to secure time for England who was dreadfully unprepared for war against Germany but he still should have known that Hitler would not keep his word!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

---

---

I think he was just buying for time!. But its quite dumb come to think of it, since when could Hitler be trusted!?Www@QuestionHome@Com

---

---

The Policy of appeasement generally gains the support of people who are misled by the situation Britain faced in the 1930s!.

For instance, those who defend the policy of appeasement suggest that it gave Britain time to mobilise her economy!. By appeasing Hitler, we avoided war, at a time when our armed forces were not ready!. This does seem a logical point of arguement!. In that we are told Britain was not ready for war, and the Great Depression had serious economic impacts of the British economy!. Furthermore, since Hitler came to power, he had started to mobilise the German economy to the needs of war etc!.

Well in actual fact, this is not true!. Although the Germans did start to increase the size of their armed forces the German economy was not geared to war, until after 1942!. Ok, i hear what you are saying, "but the German army rolled over the French and British in 1940, and successfully defeated Poland in 1939"!. Yes thats true, but this had very little to do with the relative strengths of Britain and France versus Germany at this time!.

From 1939-43 Britain outproduced Germany!. This was possible for a few reasons!. 1) Germany had not mobilised her economy to the needs of war!. 2) British industry was more flexible in that it could switch to producing armements!. 3) Germany had no planned for war in 1939!.

Just as much as Britain was not ready for war in 1939, neither were the Germans!. When Britain and France handed over Czechoslovakia in 1938, Germany gained access to the entire equipment of the Czech army, which they used to defeat France and Britain in 1940!. Furthermore, another indication of how the German economy was not ready for war, was that in 1941, when germany attacked the Soviet Union, she did so, with 40% of her entire army equipped with French weapons!.

Germany defeated Poland, because Poland quite simply had a daunting task of being encircled by German territory and as such, could not defend her borders in strength!. She was then attacked by the Soviets in the rear!. German forces used the Polish campaign as a testing ground and were surprised when the French and British declared war!.

In 1940 when the Panzers smashed through France, and forced the Brits to seek shelter at Dunkirk, they did so not because of numbers of tanks, aircraft or men, but rather greater tactical know how!. Where as the French and British who in actual fact had more tanks in service than the Germans, positioned their armour accross the entire width of the front line!. The Germans on the other hand, took notice of British ideology on tank delpoyment and massed them in formations!. The Germans simply utilised concentration of force against the allies, of which they were ill-prepared to respond to!. The Germans who had very few men on their flanks, could easily have suffered set backs had British or French forces attacked here, but they fought a stagnant defensive campaign, which played into the German hands!.

The Germans were totally and utterly surprised by their success!. They had not planned for a campaign for much after an initial attack!. They expected to make progress but thought they would be held up somewhere along the Meuse river!. Little did they know that the French would collapse!.

A myth has lived since 1940 that the Germans tactics were revolutionary, and they were planning for war for years with ruthless intensity!. In actual fact, the allies fought poorly, and were poorly led!. But as a matter of principle, many falseholds are told about the fall of France and the position of the German economy!. Its easier to say, the Germans were planning for war, rather than say the British and French fought poorly!.

Appeasement played into the German hands, in that it allowed Hitler to strengthen his position at little cost, and antagonised Stalin, in that he thought the allies were weak!.

Had Britain and France gone to war in 1938 and attacked Germany, its possible the Germans could have been crippled early!. The Bismark and Tirpitz were under construction but would not be ready for another two years, and the German u boat arm was virtually non existent in 1938!. With Britain and France, supporting the Czech's its likely the Poles would have attacked Germany also!. With the Germans fighting a costly war with the Czech's who were in control of strong defensive positions in the Sudetenland, German prospects were grim!.

Ofcourse that is what ifs!?

What we do know, is that in 1936 when German troops marched into the Rhineland, they were under express orders that if they were faced by French troops, then they were to retreat!. Hitler was suprised by the lack of opposition and this resulted in him, seeing what else he could get his hands on!.

Appeasement really only has the support of those, who are misled by those commentators who suggest Britain was not ready for war, and that Germany was!. Or for that matter, people who did not want to see another war, and felt that diplomacy was advisable rather than military action!.

Well diplomacy is preferable to military action, but again lets evaluate the events of the 1930s!. It was clear Hitler was rebiulding Germany's army!. Something that was forbidden by the treaty of Versailles!. Germany did not need a large army to defend her borders, because no country in Europe threatened her!. So this was clearly an aggressive action!. It was simply short sightedness by those who felt, there is nothing wrong with Germany wanting a large army!.

Furthermore, uniting with Austria was forbidden by the Treaty of Versailles, and the Sudetenland had never belonged to Germany!. Before the 1919 agreement, it had belonged to the Austro-Hungarian Empire!. So handing this over was nothing more than betrayal to the Czech's!. The Sudetenland was a key region for Czech industry and defence!.

Why then, were the articles of the Treaty allowed to be broken by the Germans!? Well, there was a growing opinion that the Germans were treated too harshly in 1919, which in actual fact is questionable (check out, my q, Was the Treaty of Versailles too harsh on Germany!?)!. More importantly, the Great Depression had crippled economies around the globe, and countries looked to their own problems, before getting involved with foreign issues!.

Allowing Hitler to freely break for the constaints of the Versailles Treaty, simply justified Hitlers actions to the German people!. Had it been fair, then Europe would not stand for German action!.

Unfortunately, British policy in the lead up to World War 2, was pretty shameful!. We turned our back on the Czech's, played into the hands of militaristic Germany, when the evidence was quite clear he was building up for war!. Our own economy was actually superior to the Germans, but we were let down, due to poor military planning, in terms of acknowledging weapons changes and how this would effect tactical changes, as well as basic infantry training!.

To hide from these facts, Britain is often portrayed, as a nation with very few resources who were unprepared for war, against an opponent who instituted stunning military revolutions!. What should be remembered is that in 1939, the French Army was as strong as the German army on paper, and the British navy was the equal to that of the US or Japan!. (The R!.A!.F and the Luftwaffe were almost equal in strength at the beginning of the Battle of Britain)!. Yet the Germans crushed Western Europe in a matter of weeks!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

---

---