The misunderstood great man — Neville Chamberlain's logic and wisdom in handling of Hitler's unbounded expansionism

Jan 2015
5,372
Ontario, Canada
Actually, all l have seen from you in sources is Nazi propaganda articles. His dismissal of these sources without any back up from reputable sites is well founded.

As for known atrocities against ethnic Germans which did take place the only one that I have been able to find is an incident which took place after war had broken out at a place called Bydgoszcz where at most 400 were killed.

It was this incident which was the basis for the initial propaganda claim of 5.800 ethnic German deaths, which was later increased to 58,000 in a propaganda report published in 1940.

I have found no reputable source which states that mass killing of ethnic Germans took place in Poland before war broke out.

Bloody Sunday (1939) - Wikipedia
Not a single time did I cite Nazi propaganda. Above I posted one of the books cited by Tokugawa.

So far all Pugsville has done is:
>"source every single statement you've ever made"
>Tokugawa posts sources
>"you just believe random guys on the internet"
>I post a relevant excerpt from one of the sources
>"the sources are wrong because it's German propaganda"
>I face palm

There were multiple incidents. Bloody Sunday is the most talked about.

"Meanwhile, Goebbels’s propaganda machine had gone into overdrive to persuade Germans that the invasion had been inevitable in the light of a Polish threat of genocide against the ethnic Germans in their midst. The nationalistic military regime in Poland had indeed discriminated heavily against the German ethnic minority in the interwar years. At the onset of the German invasion in September 1939, gripped by fears of sabotage behind the lines, it had arrested between ten and fifteen thousand ethnic Germans and marched them towards the eastern part of the country, beating laggards and shooting many of those who gave up through exhaustion. There were also widespread attacks on members of the ethnic German minority, most of whom had made no attempt to disguise their desire to return to the German Reich ever since their forcible incorporation into Poland at the end of the First World War. Altogether, around 2,000 ethnic Germans were killed in mass shootings or died from exhaustion on the marches. Some 300 were killed in Bromberg (Bydgoszcz), where local ethnic Germans had staged an armed uprising against the town’s garrison in the belief that the war was virtually over, and had been killed by the enraged Poles. These events were cynically exploited by Goebbels’s Propaganda Ministry to win maximum support in Germany for the invasion." - The Third Reich at War chapter 1

So you are basically claiming that the Poles must have killed at least 5,000 because that is the least of the Nazi claims used to justify their invasion.
This places a level of trust in Nazi propaganda that is at best laughable and at worst disturbing
I'm saying that there is reason to believe that up to 5,000 or 6,000 Germans were killed.

No the number given of 5,000 is not the 5,800 that died on Bloody Sunday. It is the total estimate of dead in Western Poland. Perhaps 6,000 total if we include other areas of Poland.

Now an unnecessary point to make my case but which I'll do anyway.
Even if I was relying on the WW2 German sources it wouldn't have mattered because the propaganda source you are referring to was not published until 1940 which did inflate 5,800 supposed deaths near Bromberg to 58,000 or 60,000. The original figure was not intended as propaganda, this was an actual study conducted by the Germans on Bloody Sunday which they eventually exploited for propaganda usage.
 
Last edited:
Nov 2010
7,559
Stockport Cheshire UK
The annihilation of Poland is the priority. The goal is the removal of living forces, not the reaching of a certain line. Even if war should break out in the West, the annihilation of Poland remains the priority. Considering the time of the year, a quick decision is required.
I shall provide for a propagandistic reason to unleash the war, regardless of whether it is credible or not. The victor is not asked at a later stage whether he told the truth or not. In beginning and conducting a war, what matters is not right but victory.
Close heart to pity. Brutal proceeding. 80 million people must get their right, Their existence must be assured. Greatest harshness. Quick decision is necessary. Firm faith in the German soldier. Crises must only be attributed to commanders having lost their nerves.
First requirement: Advance to the Vistula and the Narev. Our technical superiority will break the nerves of the Poles. Every new Polish force forming must be immediately annihilated. Continuous attrition. New German frontier according to healthy criteria, eventually a protectorate as a buffer area. Military operations must not take these thoughts into consideration. The utter shattering of Poland is the military goal. Pursuit until complete annihilation.
Conviction that the German Wehrmacht is up to the task. Unleashing will yet be ordered ...
source;
Source of quote: Ernst Klee / Willi Dressen, "Gott mit uns”: Der deutsche Vernichtungskrieg im Ostenthere a summary of Hitler's statements at the afternoon meeting on the Obersalzberg on 22.8.1939. The document referred to is Nuernberg Document 1014-PS, IMT, Volume XXVI.
 
Jan 2015
5,372
Ontario, Canada
source;
Source of quote: Ernst Klee / Willi Dressen, "Gott mit uns”: Der deutsche Vernichtungskrieg im Ostenthere a summary of Hitler's statements at the afternoon meeting on the Obersalzberg on 22.8.1939. The document referred to is Nuernberg Document 1014-PS, IMT, Volume XXVI.
Which in itself doesn't disprove that the killings of Germans happened.

Not sure what you are getting at.
I'm assuming that you are using this to challenge the notion that the war in Poland occurred over these incidents. Frankly I'm not sure if it was the motivator, though I don't think it was, but it was certainly a factor. What he is referring to here was an immediate casus belli. Which does not necessarily require for said casus belli to be false.
 
Oct 2010
8,318
Which in itself doesn't disprove that the killings of Germans happened.
Nor foes it prove anything. Burden of proof is on
Not a single time did I cite Nazi propaganda. Above I posted one of the books cited by Tokugawa.

So far all Pugsville has done is:
>"source every single statement you've ever made"
I really ibhject to this total misrepresenatation. I adsked eachof your for sources to one specific claim mafde by each of you, I did not reuqest you source every single statement you're ever made,
But 1 statement.

This is a massive misrepresentation.

And I repeat for thrid time none of the sources listed addressed teh very specfic claim I was questioning.

>"you just believe random guys on the internet"
The source he prodivied was some reandom guy on the intenert. It's not like Tokugawa read these books,


>I post a relevant excerpt from one of the sources
It;'s not a relevant except it only addressing events after the war started which is not teh matter that is being debated. It is irrelevant.


>"the sources are wrong because it's German propaganda"
The soucre was based on an germany army report produced during the war under the Nazi regime. I did not say it was wrong, but suspect, not a good source, teh germany army in 1940 is somewhat under the control of the Nazi regime, and the report was produced for propaganda purposes.

Of course none of this is sasuctaul relevant, as teh piont under diuicsusion is pre war events, and I only requested sources fo two specific statments neitehr of which have had any material supporttingthem produced.

Yeah why? You don;t think that cliam in debates shoud be subject to any validation or examination. All oteh rposteres should just tak eyour word for it?

You have a problem with an evidence based approach to history?



There were multiple incidents. Bloody Sunday is the most talked about.

"Meanwhile, Goebbels’s propaganda machine had gone into overdrive to persuade Germans that the invasion had been inevitable in the light of a Polish threat of genocide against the ethnic Germans in their midst. The nationalistic military regime in Poland had indeed discriminated heavily against the German ethnic minority in the interwar years. At the onset of the German invasion in September 1939, gripped by fears of sabotage behind the lines, it had arrested between ten and fifteen thousand ethnic Germans and marched them towards the eastern part of the country, beating laggards and shooting many of those who gave up through exhaustion. There were also widespread attacks on members of the ethnic German minority, most of whom had made no attempt to disguise their desire to return to the German Reich ever since their forcible incorporation into Poland at the end of the First World War. Altogether, around 2,000 ethnic Germans were killed in mass shootings or died from exhaustion on the marches Some 300 were killed in Bromberg (Bydgoszcz), where local ethnic Germans had staged an armed uprising against the town’s garrison in the belief that the war was virtually over, and had been killed by the enraged Poles. These events were cynically exploited by Goebbels’s Propaganda Ministry to win maximum support in Germany for the invasion." - The Third Reich at War chapter 1
If the local Germans staged an armed uprising, then it's hardly like putting them down with armed force is a war crime.

Going to quote stuff can you do so properly, Title , authors name


I'm saying that there is reason to believe that up to 5,000 or 6,000 Germans were killed.
I did not bring this up for debate killings during the war is outside why the war happened.

Now an unnecessary point to make my case but which I'll do anyway.
Even if I was relying on the WW2 German sources it wouldn't have mattered because the propaganda source you are referring to was not published until 1940 which did inflate 5,800 supposed deaths near Bromberg to 58,000 or 60,000. The original figure was not intended as propaganda, this was an actual study conducted by the Germans on Bloody Sunday which they eventually exploited for propaganda usage.
reports on supposed deaths of ethnic Germans was not usual German army report. Who ordered it and why? How is it not propaganda?
 
Oct 2010
8,318
Which in itself doesn't disprove that the killings of Germans happened.

Not sure what you are getting at.
I'm assuming that you are using this to challenge the notion that the war in Poland occurred over these incidents. Frankly I'm not sure if it was the motivator, though I don't think it was, but it was certainly a factor. What he is referring to here was an immediate casus belli. Which does not necessarily require for said casus belli to be false.
It's a complete and utter certinaly to the war in Poland did NOT occur over these incidents,

They occured AFTER the war started and as such it owuld be impossible for them to have been repsonsible for something happening before,
 
Likes: redcoat
Nov 2010
7,559
Stockport Cheshire UK
Which in itself doesn't disprove that the killings of Germans happened.

Not sure what you are getting at.
I'm assuming that you are using this to challenge the notion that the war in Poland occurred over these incidents. Frankly I'm not sure if it was the motivator, though I don't think it was, but it was certainly a factor. What he is referring to here was an immediate casus belli. Which does not necessarily require for said casus belli to be false.
You have provided zero evidence of any large scale killings of ethnic Germans by the Poles in the lead up to the war, even if we take the initial German report at face value this only mentioned killings which occurred after the outbreak of war.
 
Jan 2015
5,372
Ontario, Canada
It's a complete and utter certinaly to the war in Poland did NOT occur over these incidents,

They occured AFTER the war started and as such it owuld be impossible for them to have been repsonsible for something happening before,
Well, according to the historiography anyway.

The specific incidents like Bloody Sunday occurred after September 1. There were incidents involving partisan warfare before that.
 
Oct 2010
8,318
Well, according to the historiography anyway.

The specific incidents like Bloody Sunday occurred after September 1. There were incidents involving partisan warfare before that.
And you have some sort of evidence or source for this claim? (yes I am being so unreaosnable as for you to actually subnstainiate your claim, a rather routine occuerance on his board, you're been here long enough you should know that)
 
Jan 2015
5,372
Ontario, Canada
It's a complete and utter certinaly to the war in Poland did NOT occur over these incidents,
Can you please substantiate this claim. What exactly was the reason then?

They occured AFTER the war started and as such it owuld be impossible for them to have been repsonsible for something happening before,
I really don't think this is true. Can you give me a few sources for this?
 

Similar History Discussions