Was WW2 in Europe Justified?

[Redleg]

After a loss in WW1, Germany had the Treaty of Versailles forced upon them. In this treaty, Germany was made to take full responsibility for WW1, pay virtually never-ending reparations to many European nations(mostly France), and cede land that was German - including Prussia - to several nations. Also, Germany was restricted from having anything resembling a strong military.

True

It was clear through the writings and opinions of the leaders of the time that Germany was to be made weak for an indefinate amount of time.

Again True

Germany was essentially punished for fulfilling her alliance obligations just as France, Russia, and Britain had done.

Again true

To me, this justifies the attack on Poland, which would not cede areas that had a majority German populace such as Prussia that were unfairly given to them. The overly harsh punishment of Germany also justifies the crushing of France and the British in France, as they were the major enforcers of the unfair treatment of post-war Germany.

Wrong - Germany signed the Agreement that ended the war - they by treaty had to fulfil their obligations under it. Was it done to punish the Germans - you betcha - but Germany placed a willing signature on the document.

Finally to Russia. After the revolution the victorious allies sent troops to fight the communist forces. After that failed, they maintained a strong anti-communist policy. It has always been the policy of the Western World to fight communism wherever it can. Was the war against Russia was any worse than the proxy wars of the Cold War?

History shows that the German invasion of Russia was worse then the Proxy wars of the Cold War with one exception. However while Germany attacked Russia for many reasons - the systemic killing of civilians by execution because of their religion and race - ruined any legal and moral standing of the German invasion of Russia.

This topic should be separated from the evils of Hitler and relates only to the foreign policy of the time.

That has the smell of revisionist history I am afraid. You can not seperate the evils of Hilter's Regime from WW2 since alot of them happened in the conduct of the war. Hilter killed many civilians based upon religion or race - in his conquest of other nations. Yes conquest of others not for the return of German lands to Germany - if it was only about getting back German Land - the war would have never happened. Hilter had the allies on the ropes through posturing - Germany did not need to attack Poland to get Prussia back.

Was Germany entitled to attack nations that had a stated policy of keeping the country weak?

Only if those policies were in violation of an established treaty. Germany willing signed the armstice at the end of WW1 - so they were obligated to follow the treaty through its completion.

How would you feel if your neighboring countries kept your country militarily and financially weak simply because your country lost a war it did not start?

Hold on - Germany while didn't start the war - it was Austria and Russia. Germany chose to attack into France.

Was the response toward the Versailles enforcers justified after what they did to Germany?

No - Germany lost the war.

Ask yourself this question - was Iraq justified to ignore the ceasefire agreement in which they willing signed to end the first conflict?

or ask it this way. Was the United States justified in enforcing the ceasefire conditions imposed on Iraq - a ceasefire Iraq willing signed?


It will help clear up any thoughts about Germany being justified in attacking Poland.