Why it was right to fight World War Two

So here's my argument of why it wasa right to fight World War Two.

If Britain, France and the USA had not stood up to Germany in 1939 and 1941, then Germany would have taken Poland. The fact was that Germany's leadershp actually stated in 1939, in internal discussions, that Danzig was not the only desire, that they would find another reason to carve up Poland, if that want failed. So the certainty ism, that if Britain and France and the US had not stood up to Germany, then Germany would have dealed with the USSR to carve up Poland. Well what would happen then, well look what was happening to the Jews in Germany at the time, look what happened immediately after the invasion of the Cezexchs, and Poles, Jews were rounded up straight aaway and Polish intelectuals. And German plans started to ciolonise parts of Poland.

So we have it that in that case, Germany would have taken Poland and started colonising the land.

Added to this there was another Nazi policy which was to take the Ukraine, and parts of Russia, and to beat the other allies.

So it is very liklely that if Germany had sucessfully taken Poland, then the Nazis, would then have planned their conquest of the USSR. There were 2 key factors here, and one was that they would have feared a invasion by France, In this situation they would have to plan to do the same as they did in 1914, and 1940 in reality, which is to invade France, beat it, then invade the USSR and conquer it. And hope that Britain just acvcept this. Well if you believe it was wrong to fight for Poland, then I am sure you would claim it would be wrong to fight for France, and the USSR, but even if not, the British army was not that strong, so would have been minor in this affair.

In this case, Germany would then have beaten France, just like before, at it's chosen time. And surely it would have won again, as the French general, wanted to surrender in 1940, and woukld have in any otehr year, as they were anti-Communists, alone, believing in liottle else. So Germany would have conquerred France doing what it did in otehr times, maybe with allies.

Then it wiould have invaded the USSR, and gone a long way to beating it.

But still Britain and the US would not be at war.

Japan, would then probabaly have taken the SOuth East Asian colonies, and so start imposeing slave system, upon their peoples,. just as bad as French colonialism.

So the likley hood, is that could have caused the Pacific War, as the US would then stop selling oil to Japan, fearing it's millitarisnm, so Japan would attack the USA. at Pearl Harbour.

This would be followed by the USSR using it's manpower, to stop the German and other armies, in Winter, as before, and so then go back an forth.

But surely in thsi new war situation, the Soviet Union would have carried on doing well. Surely Spain would not have had to fear Britain and would have sent forces into French colonies in Africa nanexing them, and surely as a Fascist state, they would have had no fears of imposing new ways, different forms, of forced labour, and so revolst would ovccur and many deaths. Surely Britain would either have been attacked by Japan in the Far East, or would have just seen the US invaded by it, and the Dutch lands; in Indonesia, soi the Japanese, would have taken Indonesi,a nd the Phillipines, and Britain would be fearing in arms both Germany and the Japanese. So would have to up arms, spending causing a recession in Britain, and have no US aid, indeed the US economy would now falter with a hard war to fight with Japan. And Britain woukld falter with less trade with farnmce. Yes it could sell arms, to Germany and the USSR, but doing so, would just increase the lengh of their war, Added to this Communist Soviet agents would surely attack bases aiming arms for Germany and be risibng up aceross Europe, seeing Frenc, and other eevolts have to be crushed by the Germans across Europe. Added to this then, the Sovuiets would be on the back foot.

But every so often would come back and opush the Germans back, the Germans would be killing off populatiosn across Europe, of Jews and Gypsies, which would harm British trade by their being less money in the World Economy.

Then the Soviets as in 1945 would be winning, but not by as nmuch as in 1945, so the Geermans, woukld start firing rockets, at them, and big guns, maybe helping them push back in the warm, surely this would sen dthe war on for a bit longer.

Then the Sovietsm, as is the cae, in war, would develop rockets, as their is a pro-nazi lie going about at the moment that rocjkets were a idea totally dreamt up by the Nazis, actually in the 1930s, the Soviets broke old rocket records, and tehn Germany retook the lead again, So surely the Soviets would have had rockets too, so both would be firing rockets at eachother.

What would be the end story of this.

Well I wonder, but surely there would have been allot of deathsm,

And I predict what would have happened is this,

A the German .economy and Soviet economy and European economy would be ruined by rockets hitting towns across Europe, maybe even a few straying into Britain. This would have caused the British economy to collapse, And more impoprtantly the whoel of Europe's ecopnomy to collpase, there would be bno US marshall planm after thsi war to restart a European boom, as they would be finishing off Japan, at this moment, maybe alliging with the USSR.

But anyhow what would then have happened.

Well surely if the war had lasted longer, then it would be more likley a epidemic like flu would develop.

Like in 1917, in World War One, when a flu virus spread arounf the world killing millions.

Added to this the Germans eventually would develop atomic bombs and drop some over Soviet territory.

The epidemic would have spread to Britain killing like the 1917 Flu many people, in a world depression.

THis atomic bomb could have been fired by a rocket, and missed Moscow,. then another one,

And surely this would have spreasd the diseases evebn more. And surely they would have fired another atom bomb, and maybe the Soviet Union would then have evacuated all it's cities, or surrendered, but seeing how many had died allready and knowing the German plans, for enslaving the Soviet people, surely they would have fought on, and Germany would have had to have aimed to fdrop 10s of atom bombs, a very difficeult thing to creatye,. I think the first German atomic bom,b usage would be 1948.as people say that they were in 1945, as far behiond as the US was in 1942,. The USSR developed their bomb via espionage in 1948. lets say they would have again in 1949. So then they would fire nuke bombs towards Germany in rockets too. The Japanese knew the Americans were doing this

Soo then nuclear bombs would have gone all over the place, And surely the Soviets would have dropped chemical weapo0ns, on Germany in the event of atom bombs hitting them, So these chemicals would have spread to Britain and more places. Surelye th e radiation of all these bomsb would have killed more Brits than Wordl War Two, never mind a wartime, epidemic, and recession. So my concluiosn is that in the end, the Germans, being allied with Italy, Romania, Finland, Hungary, Soviet minorities, Bulgaria, and Spain, and the Swedish royals, they surely would have beaten, a nuclear hit USSR, alone, eventually. And then enslaved eth population, and used powers to maek Britain accept it's policies of killing off non-whites, gays, and such, Just like when the US and Britain won WW2, then the whole of Europe adiopted liberal democarcy, Surely if Nazis had won they wopuld have adopted race killingm, killing gays, gyopsies, and sucgh as it would have seemed to have been correct, the empire would have stayed, and Bruitain would have seen more deaths than in WW2, as of less world trade caused by a long war. And surely the epidemical disease would spread, and kill loads, and be stirred up bya recession, and Nazi principles, of not caring so much about social ways, Like in Germany in the 1930s most Germans were little better off in 1939 than 1933, despite economuic growth, so that would have spread disease, and Germany fell beloe Britain's life expectancy under the Nazis. So surely they ignored social policy and would have been a breeding ground for disease. So more Brits would have died of not fighting Germany in World War Two, perhaps ,

Here is my list of possibles

Effects of a new Wartime depression 100-500,000 deaths

Post war depression 200-500,000 deaths

Wartime epidemic 100-500-000 deaths

Post war epidemic 100-500,000 deaths

Atomic radiation 200,000 deaths to no peopole alive

Copying Nazi policies Million deaths, as of Nazis using power to get BUF in power in Britain and do it's race cleansing policies, sio killing nminorities and socialists

Fighting independanmce revolst in colonies 10-100,000 deaths or Japan,

Less acre about medicine long term, more about nazi policies 100,000 deaths by 1970

Beuing invaded by Germany 2 million deaths

Communist revolt against not fighting Germa ny 10,000 deaths

Being bossed about by Germany after World War Two and becoming it''s puppet 2million deaths by 2000

And across the world, 200million deatsh in Europe as of atom bombs colonisation of germany, epidemicvs etc, by 2000,

Here are some more sites, there are books and articles on the subjects in many internet places, or internet book shops, bookstores, at the bottom, are lists of which were the worst regimes of the past few centuries.

An Index with links to almost all our sites.

A site on the El Nino Famines that killed 10s of millions of Indians, and Chinese and others in the 19th Century

The Highland Clearances and it's full terribleness

A site on the Belgian Congo, and how the king of that land killed 10s of millions of Congolese

Why the French Revolution was good

The most evil regimes of the 19th Century

Get a World War Two in Europe Map Mousemat

A site on 1640s Britain

Worst 18th Century regimes

What were the nicest regimes ever

The Best regimes ever in terms of achievers

Worst 17th Century regimes ever