Peace between Axis and Allies

General WWII era German military discussion that doesn't fit someplace more specific.
User avatar
Rosselsprung
Enthusiast
Posts: 539
Joined: Tue Mar 08, 2005 8:25 pm

Post by Rosselsprung » Sun Mar 05, 2006 3:54 pm

Well, in response to the original question about return of territories to their respective owners, there's a very simple and straightforward answer to that. Even if demographics, census results, history, or anything else says otherwise. All those disputed territories in Central and Western Europe have been passed around more times than a basketball. So, the answer as to whose land is it? Whoever owns it at the moment. The only groups with a "real" claim to those lands are the Cro-Magnon and Neanderthal peoples who discovered them.

sid guttridge
on "time out"
Posts: 8055
Joined: Thu Oct 10, 2002 4:54 am

Post by sid guttridge » Mon Mar 06, 2006 8:18 am

Hi Guys,

The problem here lies in the use of the word "fair" in the original question.

While absolute fairness for all is a eutopian fantasy, there are greater and lesser degrees of settlement that were historically available as a precedents for peace in 1941.

Germany's 1914 borders weren't "fair" to millions of Poles, French and Danes.

Versailles, although imperfect, was "fairer" as there were fewer Germans left in neighbouring Poland, France and Denmark than there had been Poles, French and Danes in 1914 Germany.

Thus, if "fairness" is to be a criterion, then I would suggest that the best place to start is with the Treaty of Versailles of 1919, not the borders of 1914, as suggested in the original post on this thread.

Another question altogether is: what peace terms between the Axis and the Allies were practicably achievable on 21/6/41. That question probably deserves a separate thread.

Cheers,

Sid.

P.S. I think we are probably all agreed that it is good to notice the presence of a moderator, even if we don't necessarily agree with him on everything. This is a definite step forward.

User avatar
Tom Houlihan
Patron
Posts: 4301
Joined: Mon Sep 30, 2002 12:05 pm
Location: MI, USA
Contact:

Post by Tom Houlihan » Thu Mar 09, 2006 8:01 pm

Alright, I went ahead and split the thread. For those interested in following the Sid/Pirx discussion on Poland's borders, the new thread is entitles "Curzon and Poland," in this section.

As for the original thread, let's stay on-topic, and civil.
TLH3
www.mapsatwar.us
Feldgrau für alle und alle für Feldgrau!

pzrmeyer2

Post by pzrmeyer2 » Sun Mar 12, 2006 6:24 pm

6/21/41

To Germany: 1937 borders, plus Austria, Sudetenland, Eupen/Malmedy, Danzig, Memel, Sudtirol. minority rights guaranteed in Siebenburgen

To Denmark: Nordschleswig

To Poland: Westpreussen, Teschen

Plebescites: Eastern Poland (b/t Poland, Lithuania, USSR)
Oberschlesien (Poland/Germany)
Bohemia-Moravia (Czechia/Germany--German speaking areas)
Alsace-Lorraine (France/Germany)
Slovenia (Yugoslavia/Germany/Italy)
Transylvania (Hungary/Romaina)
Vojvodina (Hungary/Yugoslavia)
Southern Slovakia (Hungary/Slovakia)

Independence/Anschluss Referendum:
Luxembourg
rump Bohemia-Moravia, ie Czechia


oh, and permant Annexation of Ireland and Australia by the UK :D

Opa
Supporter
Posts: 191
Joined: Mon Oct 21, 2002 3:24 pm
Contact:

Justice is not of this world, alas

Post by Opa » Sun Mar 12, 2006 9:15 pm

I agree it would have been a fair treaty and avoided much grief to Europe. Even the more Frankeinsteinisch creations of Versailles--Yugoslavia, Czechoslovakia, do not exist anylonger--not without costing my family great sorrow, alas.

But fairness would require to go back in history, and we can't. Justice is not of this world, alas.

But hopefully in 100 years, we'll all be happy Chinese, so this sorry tale and the grief it causes will end. If the Vertriebenen cannot live in the villages of their ancestors, I'd much prefer Chinese to do so than some grinning Czech postwar-profiteer of ethnic cleansing. :D
Honny soit qui mal y pense!

Pirx
Associate
Posts: 975
Joined: Tue Jul 22, 2003 7:46 am
Location: UK/Poland

Post by Pirx » Mon Mar 13, 2006 6:57 am

pzrmeyer2 wrote:

Plebescites: Bohemia-Moravia (Czechia/Germany--German speaking areas
Bohemia, Moravia and Sudetenland - it is whole Czechia area! In this case there was no town and village in Czechy were was no plebiscite.

pzrmeyer2

Post by pzrmeyer2 » Mon Mar 13, 2006 8:45 am

Pirx,

listed it twice sorry. What I meant was B-M (aside from Sudetenland) should have an independence or Anschluss referendum

Pirx
Associate
Posts: 975
Joined: Tue Jul 22, 2003 7:46 am
Location: UK/Poland

Post by Pirx » Mon Mar 13, 2006 1:18 pm

Bohemia + Moravia + Sudetenland = Czech teritory.
If Sudetenland should go to Germany and rest should have referendum, what stay in Czech hands? Should be anschluss referendum in Prag?

sid guttridge
on "time out"
Posts: 8055
Joined: Thu Oct 10, 2002 4:54 am

Post by sid guttridge » Mon Mar 13, 2006 2:22 pm

Hi przmeyer,

Although I can see some practical problems [i.e. Hitler had already agreed with Mussolini to evacuate South Tirol and resettle its Germans in Poland, and, most importantly, the recovery of West Preussen (aka "The Polish Corridor") was the main stated reason for which Hitler had declared war in 1939 in the first place], there are some reasonable suggestions in your proposal. I think preliminar negotiations may begin.

My first suggestion is to decouple Germany's claims from those of Hungary, as the latter are not vital to German interests.

Cheers,

Sid.

pzrmeyer2

Post by pzrmeyer2 » Mon Mar 13, 2006 7:41 pm

Pirx wrote:Bohemia + Moravia + Sudetenland = Czech teritory.
If Sudetenland should go to Germany and rest should have referendum, what stay in Czech hands? Should be anschluss referendum in Prag?
Exactly! Let the non-Sudeten Austro-Germans and Czechs deceide what is best. I'm sure at the time, if the conditions were right some, not many or all, but some Czechs might have considered it economically advantageous to join with Germany than stay the course, independant and without Slovakia. Think about what an economic powerhouse that GrossDeutsches Reich country would be!

Sid,

You're right we can drop the Hungarians from the discussion. Just thougth I'd open it up to Europe. Bad idea, i'm sure. Soon we'll have Gibraltar & Trieste plebescites...

User avatar
Alex Coles
Associate
Posts: 780
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2005 9:50 am
Location: England

Post by Alex Coles » Tue Mar 14, 2006 11:59 am

The thing is, Germany was a dictatorship. No democratic actions involved. Nothing the people could do. Sid Guttridge, about the german east prussian demands, it was actually a 1 km strip to link Prussia and Germany. Pirx, Slowakia should be granted it's independacnce. Perhaps a dual leadership, Czech-Slovakia leaders like the Austria-Hungary empire. Coming to think, perhaps the A-H could be recreated? Miklos Horty could be temporary leader and it could consist of Slovakia, Austria and Hungary and votes for them to get their land back could take place in their previous possessions.

Pirx
Associate
Posts: 975
Joined: Tue Jul 22, 2003 7:46 am
Location: UK/Poland

Post by Pirx » Wed Mar 15, 2006 5:43 am

1 km strip beetween east Prussia and Germany?
No way.

pzrmeyer2
some Czechs might have considered it economically advantageous to join with Germany than stay the course
Great Poland was 120 years inside Germany and there was no economicall advantage on this province.

Besides i think that Czechs would vote for indenpedence, Germans for join to Germany. Plebiscite could be in Sudetenland, but in Prag? Czechs never agreed to be minority in German empire.

User avatar
Shmeiker
Supporter
Posts: 57
Joined: Wed Aug 25, 2004 2:37 am
Location: Minas Morgul

Post by Shmeiker » Wed Mar 15, 2006 6:51 am

General problem with making plebiscites: what to do if some enclave community would decide to stay in 1 country completely encircled by other communities voting to go to the other country?

Best example would be Lwow in Ukraine (but also other towns in the region) - majority of citizens were Poles. Surrounding land was greatly Ukrainian or Belarussian (although those nationalities were being formed by that time, so here we talk in general terms). You might say: towns do not matter - only land matters. Sorry, but this would be oversimplistic, because industry, culture and other aspects defining cultural/national edge of the people living on particular land was usually determined by towns. However in situation when completely different people occupy towns and villages we come to a serious and complicated problem.

The similar problem was in Silesia - but there it was a question of small counties voting for Poland or Germany - what to do with those who happen to become enclaves? Force them to 1 country or the other?

Or you might say: no towns, no small counties, only big regions ! Gooood, that time most of both Western and Eastern Pomarania would be Polish, because treating them en gross, Poles had majority there. I suppose this would not be liked by Germans - or, using commenst from this thread - it would not be "fair".

---

Idea of "Bohemia-Moravia" plebiscite backed by idea that some Czechs would prefer their country to be incorporated to Germany for economical reasons is more then ridiculous. Such things do not happen. Bohemia-Moravia was Czech by definition so making any plebiscite there would make no sense.

---

There was a referendum in Silesia concerning incorporation of its regions to Poland or to Germany (btw unfairly violated by Germany on numerous occasions). So why to make it again?

---

Idea of "small stripe of 1km width" was idiotic by definition - I do not know a country who would happily allow that to happen. Why should Poles agree to have their country split in two, just to make transport for Germans easier? How do you imagine arranging transport between northern and souther parts of that Polish region? Perhaps by making narror stripes of 100 m through small German stripe of 1km?

This is as ridiculous as if Russia would demand today that Belarus and Lithuania should give them "small stripe of 1km width " to Kaliningrad. Only for transport reasons, of course. Would you also view it as legitimate claim? [btw they did it, but nobody took them seriously]

pzrmeyer2

Post by pzrmeyer2 » Wed Mar 15, 2006 9:39 am

Gooood, that time most of both Western and Eastern Pomarania would be Polish, because treating them en gross, Poles had majority there. I suppose this would not be liked by Germans - or, using commenst from this thread - it would not be "fair".

Please! show us all your proof of this statement. Show me that that there were more Poles than Germans in Stettin, Stargard, Schneidemuhl, Kolberg, etc. in 1920 or 1930 or 1940.

Bohemia-Moravia was Czech by definition so making any plebiscite there would make no sense.


Whose definition? Wasn't Bohmia an Austiran province before 1919? Do you deny the existance of 3.5 million Germans (to about 6 million Czechs)
hardly overwhelming Czech majority. only about 60-40,

There was a referendum in Silesia concerning incorporation of its regions to Poland or to Germany (btw unfairly violated by Germany on numerous occasions). So why to make it again?

Violated by the Germans? Really? see the results in towns like Kattowitz

Why should Poles agree to have their country split in two, just to make transport for Germans easier?

Why should the Germans have to lose WestPreussen to give the Poles sea access?


This was in my opinion a rather light-hearted "what-if" forum. can't we back off the harshness a bit?

pzrmeyer2

Post by pzrmeyer2 » Wed Mar 15, 2006 9:41 am

BTW sorry for my improper use of the Quote function....

Post Reply