@Zooey72:
I am aware of the history of that, but what my point is, is the war and land Hitler desired was in the east. He believed (and had every reason to) that his attack on Poland would not lead to war with England and France. This was not his first land grab. Securing the treaty with Stalin was a ‘just in case’ kind of thing. My argument is that had England and France let Germany have Poland Hitler’s next target would have been Russia. You could argue it would leave his western front exposed if the French decided to attack, but in all likelyhood if the French and English did not come to the aid of Poles and Chec’s they certainly would not go to war for the USSR. The best case scenerio would be for Germany to have attacked Russia, beaten them almost to death, than France and England attack Germany from the west and for the allies to keep pushing east until they take Moscow. That way the 2 biggest evils of the 20th century anhilate each other with a min. cost to us non savages.
You are 100% correct: the war Hitler wanted was in the east. He did not want war in the west. He saw no potential benefit to war in the west.
In 1939, Franco-British military spending exceeded Germany’s. You may also recall the fact that in 1939, France had promised Poland that if Germany were to go to war against Poland, France would almost immediately launch a general offensive against Germany. While Hitler wasn’t privy to the secret negotiations between Britain, France, and Poland, it was becoming increasingly obvious that after Munich, Chamberlain and Daladier had resolved to go to war against Germany. The false promises they’d made to Poland about a mythical French general offensive were intended to create the diplomatic situation necessary for the war they wanted.
The Western democratic politicians were also very open to the idea of sitting down at the table with the Soviet Union, and carving up Europe between them. However, Stalin rejected their proposals. He regarded both Nazi Germany and the Western democracies as equally enemies. His objective was to foster war between Germany and the West. A war which would bleed both sides white. Only after that had been accomplished would he launch his invasion of Europe. Accordingly, he ordered communist parties in Western democracies to promote “anti-fascism.” The democracies’ “anti-fascist” foreign policies would–it was hoped–cause the democracies to go to war against Germany, while the Soviet Union stayed neutral.
Hitler was well aware that the Soviet Union was not ready for war in '39 or '40. He also regarded war with the Soviet Union as inevitable. For him, the war with the Western democracies was an unwanted distraction. Every year of delay would make victory over the Soviet Union less certain. From his perspective, the Nazi-Soviet Pact would allow him to secure his western front, thereby allowing him to focus his military efforts on the east.
but in all likelyhood if the French and English did not come to the aid of Poles and Chec’s they certainly would not go to war for the USSR.
This is far from certain. Communist influence in France was far stronger than Polish influence. One of my friends is from France. He informed me that up until Germany went to war against the Soviet Union, there was no French resistance. The French people–or at least a significant subset thereof–were more interested in fighting for communism than for their own country.
That way the 2 biggest evils of the 20th century anhilate each other with a min. cost to us non savages.
The Soviets were far, far crueler than the Nazis. Prior to the war, the Nazi German government was guilty of a few thousand murders, the vast majority of which were committed by people acting without orders. In contrast, the Soviet government murdered about 20 million people before the war began. Bearing that in mind, I’d like to alter your best-case scenario for the moment; with the United States invading the Soviet Union from the east–from its Pacific coast.