[Political Interest]

I see, their interests clashed in many ways. They did not have a common direction.

[fuser]

Of course any super power 'continental country' was not in interest of Britain and her empire. Any British Fascist that supports German Nazis over British Empire is deluding himself/herself for being a nationalist/fascist.

[Far-Right Sage]

The fact remains that the whole of the British Empire was not sought by any Axis power, and all Britain achieved after six years of conflict was the loss of the whole of the British Empire, the wrecking of the British economy, and submission to satellite status of the United States.

[Preston Cole]

The fact remains that the whole of the British Empire was not sought by any Axis power

Not even Italy, though? Sure, Italy didn't want the whole empire, but Mussolini certainly viewed it as a pain in his ass for not being able to unite Ethiopia-Somalia with Libya.

[fuser]

Without German consent, Italy's design on British Empire were meaningless.

[Far-Right Sage]

North Africa was always destined to be an Italian zone of control in a renewed Italian colonial empire. with the Vichy French colonies only being allowed to remain up until Operation Torch for political reasons on the continent. This is only one zone of (former) British influence, however (as it relates to the British holdings in East Africa).

[Rich]

The fact remains that the whole of the British Empire was not sought by any Axis power,

Hitler had no issue with the Greeks, but he still subjected it to a brutal occupation. Hitler was not just not just bullying and aggressive he was demented. While he lived no peace was secure. We should have gone after him sooner not tried to weasel out of a war even lomger.

and all Britain achieved after six years of conflict

It shouldn't have taken six years. France should never have fallen. British troops should have been on the German border ready to attack. It only took so long and cost so much because of incompetence, lack of will and lack of aggression. The last thing Britain needed was more peace.

was the loss of the whole of the British Empire,

Much of the Empire lasted into the 1960's, Britain had already partially given up Egypt and Iraq. The Sun was setting on the empire, irrespective of our participation in WWII. but I fail to see how acting like a bunch of pansies would have prolonged the empire. No doubt events like the fall of Singapore helped undermine it, but then with such cowardice and incompetence how did Britain deserve to have an empire?

the wrecking of the British economy,

The health of the British improved during the war. The social health and cohesion of Britain improved remarkably. Its passed now, but in the sixties and seventies it was a standing joke amongst the young how much the older generation enjoyed the war. It was called our finest hour for a reason and you suggest we should chosen peace for a few more consumer goods. Really FRS you've become the most dreadful peace-monger. You're worse than the leftie liberals.

It and submission to satellite status of the United States.

I wish! Some satellite. Where was Britain when Americans were dying for freedom in the mosquito ridden jungles of Indo China? But any way American dominance was inevitable and way preferable to kissing Hitler's arse.

[Daktoria]

An Anglo-Yugoslavian alliance would not have prevented Slobodan Milosevic from coming to power.

No point. *Hiccup*

[Varg]

Hitler considered the English people "disguised Germans". If Great Britain lost all its influence as a global super-power, the solely responsibility rests upon its governors. Hitler would certainly make a good agreement, advantageous for both countries.

Unity Mitford was much more sagacious(and pretty) than Churchill.

[Section Leader]

It shouldn't have taken six years. France should never have fallen. British troops should have been on the German border ready to attack. It only took so long and cost so much because of incompetence, lack of will and lack of aggression. The last thing Britain needed was more peace.

Replace "Britain" with "Germany" and "France" with "Italy" and you've got something straight from the mouth of Adolf himself, well done, you've just adopted Hitler's mindset.

Much of the Empire lasted into the 1960's, Britain had already partially given up Egypt and Iraq. The Sun was setting on the empire, irrespective of our participation in WWII. but I fail to see how acting like a bunch of pansies would have prolonged the empire. No doubt events like the fall of Singapore helped undermine it, but then with such cowardice and incompetence how did Britain deserve to have an empire?

So the only way of deserving an empire is to throw it all away and destroy it over the affairs of a foreign country with whom we have no direct conflict of interests?

The health of the British improved during the war. The social health and cohesion of Britain improved remarkably. Its passed now, but in the sixties and seventies it was a standing joke amongst the young how much the older generation enjoyed the war. It was called our finest hour for a reason and you suggest we should chosen peace for a few more consumer goods. Really FRS you've become the most dreadful peace-monger. You're worse than the leftie liberals.

What exactly do you mean by "improved"? The Second World War saw the utter decimation of the British economy and the impoverishment of the British people. My grandparents grew up in a bombed out wasteland with only just enough food to stay alive when only 20 years earlier their country had been the wealthiest and most influential in the world. They didn't remember the war because they were only young children when it ended, all they remembered was being born into the sheer terror of bombing raids and having not enough food or clothing. "Our finest hour", what tommyrot, a propaganda term coined by an obese drunken oaf who had slaughtered thousands of men in the First World War through his ineptitude.

I wish! Some satellite. Where was Britain when Americans were dying for freedom in the mosquito ridden jungles of Indo China? But any way American dominance was inevitable and way preferable to kissing Hitler's arse.

I don't want to be dominated by ANY foreign power, be it American or German.

"Dying for freedom"? Don'tcha mean dying for the American client state of South Vietnam which was in practice a puppet of Washington and inflicted just as much brutality as it's northern neighbour?

[Rei Murasame]

It was called our finest hour for a reason

Yes, for lame propaganda purposes.

Where was Britain when Americans were dying for freedom in the mosquito ridden jungles of Indo China?

More like they were dying for freedom from the jungles of Indo China. They'd have been better off if they also found the time to take a war to the tendrils of international finance, but somehow the Allies never manage to get around to doing that.

[Section Leader]

More like they were dying for freedom from the jungles of Indo China. They'd have been better off if they also found the time to take a war to the tendrils of international finance, but somehow the Allies never manage to get around to doing that.

Many American soldiers, especially the conscripts, would have sooner shot their own officers than go out on patrol, the US Army was so demoralised and war weary by the early 1970s that they resorted to simply pounding North Vietnam with high explosives, and cleared out when that didn't work.

[Smilin' Dave]

I'm not familiar enough with the ideology of Fascist British parties, but wouldn't siding with Hitler essentially got against the old British obsession with maintaining a balance of power in Europe? That was the realpolitik reason for supporting Poland, a buffer between Russia and Germany. Letting Nazi Germany run riot in Eastern and Western Europe would spoil that balance of power, and quickly leave Britain playing second fiddle. Especially if Nazi Germany or Italy start taking former European colonies, which could unbalance the British overseas empire. None of which probably does the British economy a lot of good.

Might have been more likely to see something like the situation with Spain, where you have a nominally Fascist government sitting out the war because it wasn't really in their best interest and there wasn't much they could do about it practically anyhow.

[Section Leader]

I'm not familiar enough with the ideology of Fascist British parties, but wouldn't siding with Hitler essentially got against the old British obsession with maintaining a balance of power in Europe? That was the realpolitik reason for supporting Poland, a buffer between Russia and Germany. Letting Nazi Germany run riot in Eastern and Western Europe would spoil that balance of power, and quickly leave Britain playing second fiddle. Especially if Nazi Germany or Italy start taking former European colonies, which could unbalance the British overseas empire. None of which probably does the British economy a lot of good.

Might have been more likely to see something like the situation with Spain, where you have a nominally Fascist government sitting out the war because it wasn't really in their best interest and there wasn't much they could do about it practically anyhow.

Oswald Mosley's policy was to leave Stalin and Hitler to disembowel each other and then politically and militarily dominate whichever side finally won. He certainly didn't believe in fighting with Germany.

[Potemkin]

Oswald Mosley's policy was to leave Stalin and Hitler to disembowel each other

Okay so far....

and then politically and militarily dominate whichever side finally won.

See, that's the tricky bit. Whichever side won would be in de facto control of continental Europe. By that time, it would be too late for Britain to do anything about it. The only reason Stalin didn't end up in control of western as well as eastern Europe is because the Western Allies fought against Hitler as well.

He certainly didn't believe in fighting with Germany.

Unfortunately, Germany believed in fighting with Britain.

[pugsville]

You also got to factor the cost of defense spending. 1938-39 Britain was rearming furiously. It wasnt that sustainable I remember some book saying mid-1940 was the crunch either move to war footing with massive dislocation in the civilian economy, political cost or cut back and fall behind.

[Prosthetic Conscience]

My grandparents grew up in a bombed out wasteland with only just enough food to stay alive when only 20 years earlier their country had been the wealthiest and most influential in the world. They didn't remember the war because they were only young children when it ended

Maybe this is your problem - you're too far away from it to have the faintest understanding about it. My parents were old enough to understand it - my uncle fought in it. He was old enough to remember his German second cousin, before the war, being a anti-semitic little shit, whose parents had to listen to the BBC in secret in case he mentioned it at his Hitler Youth meetings (both the father and the son died on the Russian Front, but the mother told my uncle about the radio after the war). And my parents fully understood that, if we had collaborated with an anti-semitic genocidal regime, we'd have no self-respect as a nation whatsoever.

I'm sure that you can understand that anyone who contemplated co-operating with Hitler would be looked on as scum, can't you?

[Preston Cole]

I'm sure that you can understand that anyone who contemplated co-operating with Hitler would be looked on as scum, can't you?

Well, you collaborated with the more murderous and far more anti-European USSR, so you're in no position to call Nazi collaborators scum.

[Rich]

Well, you collaborated with the more murderous and far more anti-European USSR, so you're in no position to call Nazi collaborators scum.

Collaborating with the Soviet Union was the right thing to do. One can be an anti Communist and still celebrate the liberation of Auschwitz by Stalin's forces. After the fall of France Churchill did his best to encourage a war between Germany and the SU.

[Section Leader]

Churchill was completely insane, he was plotting to turn the tables on Stalin before Germany collapsed and siding with the Reich with Hitler still in office.

This just goes to show how much of a lying cretin he was, 10 years of railing against Hitler overturned so he can start another war against the Soviets.

Maybe this is your problem - you're too far away from it to have the faintest understanding about it. My parents were old enough to understand it - my uncle fought in it. He was old enough to remember his German second cousin, before the war, being a anti-semitic little shit, whose parents had to listen to the BBC in secret in case he mentioned it at his Hitler Youth meetings (both the father and the son died on the Russian Front, but the mother told my uncle about the radio after the war). And my parents fully understood that, if we had collaborated with an anti-semitic genocidal regime, we'd have no self-respect as a nation whatsoever.

I'm sure that you can understand that anyone who contemplated co-operating with Hitler would be looked on as scum, can't you?

Quite frankly, I do not care about the fate of the European Jews under Hitler, I'm not antisemitic but whether 6-10 million were shot or gassed is of no consequence to me, I care about my own people and my own country, and I have no particular desire to give up all what we had built up over the centuries for the sake of a few million foreigners. The wartime generation were propagandised and brainwashed to a ridiculous extent, they were brutalised and had their personalities so utterly restructured that they were effectively 50 million mouthpieces for the Ministry of Information.

Collaborating with the Soviet Union was the right thing to do. One can be an anti Communist and still celebrate the liberation of Auschwitz by Stalin's forces.

Stalin reused the camp at Auschwitz after the war for his own persecutions.