Who is to blame on starting WW2?

Poland or Germany?

Other urls found in this thread:

smoloko.com/?p=11142
youtube.com/watch?v=NSI5LkRGOKg
mises.org/library/review-origins-second-world-war
twitter.com/AnonBabble

the jews

France for not rolling into Germoney in 1934 when Hitler began ignoring Versailles

Jews start the ww2. .

Churchill

Japs

Jews

Stalin.
He let that faggot hitler a free pass to attack poland in Molotov–Ribbentrop pact.

...

I kinda wonder if Sup Forums existed back then, how it would react to WW2.

the poles were killing german civilians in danzig.

But really this is the answer, (((international financiers))) were responsible for the insane, unrealistic indemnity Germany was required to pay for WWI

>best timeline

It is undeniable that Jewish influence caused WW2

smoloko.com/?p=11142

Who did Germany get the money for all those tanks and planes and soldiers if they were broke from ww1? That’s who started ww2.

Everyone. There is no one who wasn't preparing and stepping into it before hand.

Danzig repatriated is what the headline should say.

Everything was titled against Germany.

We all know the truth, but here are a couple of starter redpills.

Pat Buchanan is a smooth redpill on what happened.
>youtube.com/watch?v=NSI5LkRGOKg

Here's Murray Rothbard's view. (Rothbard was a jew.)
>mises.org/library/review-origins-second-world-war

>Germany and Hitler were not uniquely guilty of launching World War II (indeed they were scarcely guilty at all); Hitler was not bent on world conquest, for which he had armed Germany to the teeth and constructed a "timetable." Hitler, in brief, (in foreign affairs) was not a uniquely evil monster or daimon, who would continue to gobble up countries diabolically until stopped by superior force. Hitler was a rational German statesman, pursuing — with considerable intuitive insight — a traditional, post-Versailles German policy (to which we might add intimations of desires to expand eastward in an attack on Bolshevism). But basically, Hitler has no "master plan"; he was a German intent, like all Germans, on revising the intolerable and stupid Versailles-diktat, and on doing so by peaceful means, and in collaboration with the British and French. One thing is sure: Hitler had no designs, no plans, not even vague intimations, to expand westward against Britain and France (let alone the United States). Hitler admired the British Empire and wished to collaborate with it. Not only did Hitler do this with insight, he did it with patience, as Taylor excellently shows; the legend (that perhaps all of us have accepted in one degree or another), is that Hitler annoyingly created one European crisis after another, in the late 1930s, proceeding hungrily onward from one victory to another; actually, the crises naturally arose, were developed from external conditions (largely from the breakup of the inherently unstable conditions imposed by the Versailles-diktat), and by others, and which Hitler patiently awaited the outcome to use to his and Germany's advantage.

No they weren't.

cont.
>The European tragedy was that it was generally admitted, by most of the British, by the French (when their grandeur was not involved), and by world opinion, that the Germans were morally right, that the Versailles settlements deserved to be radically revised (e.g., the truncation, and then the prohibited Anschluss, of Austria; the geographical abortion under Czech despotism that called itself the "democracy of Czechoslovakia"; Polish tyranny over the Germans in the Corridor and Danzig, to say nothing of Upper Silesia, etc.). Being morally and generally realized as such, the Versailles settlement was also foredoomed to failure, as the suffering peoples continually would clamor for redress.

[...]

>So the tragedy of Europe was therefore this: that Britain (the leader of the Anglo-French coalition) understood that appeasement was the only rational policy, but, being the country "on top," a victor at Versailles over a vanquished Germany, inexcusably dawdled and delayed in putting this into execution. As a result, Hitler was forced to bluster and threaten, or to appear to do so, in order to win concessions which Britain should have granted a decade earlier. As a result, as each "crisis" developed in the late 1930s it seemed — even to Chamberlain and the British — that Hitler was exacting, by vicious threats, and a step at a time, concessions from a grudging, frightened Britain and France.

>Hitler was put in the wrong in the eyes of Europe and the world, when he was eminently in the right, and all because the British refused to pursue its goal of rational appeasement quickly and single-mindedly

kikes

>remove kebab

well... If you read the new york time you will get a very jewish view. thats a given

Old school Fake News

>Versailles settlement
In lay terms:

Cunt bankers wanted their pound of flesh from the Gemans after WW1. The repayment was unjust and impossible.

Hitler said fuck that shit. I'm fixing it up. got voted in. told the bankers to fuck off.

Jews inside Germany tried to oust Hitler. then the shit went down.