Re: Appeasement

In article <7mb44399ifabc04eu88u3pi1068mo4hqdq@xxxxxxx>,
Brad Meyer <bradm110@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Certainly, but not so much as external ones. The "radicalization" of
Germany post 1918 is not especially dissimilar to the radicalization
of Palestine post 1948. In both cases, successful leaders played on
the "victimhood" of the country and the people. The notion feeds on
itself.

Yes, but it is important to look at what the leaders actually did.

In the case of post-WWI Germany, the military leaders of the war
swore up and down that the German Army had the situation in hand,
when backstabbed by the civilian revolt and peace accords. (Never
mind the fact that the German Army was on the verge of total collapse,
and that the contacts with the Allies had been made on Ludendorff's
schedule.)

If the military leaders had actually accepted some of the responsibility
for the defeat, and grudgingly accepted the civilian government,
things could have gone a lot differently. There still would have been
a great deal of resentment, but not to the historical level.



--
David H. Thornley | If you want my opinion, ask.
david@xxxxxxxxxxxx | If you don't, flee.
http://www.thornley.net/~thornley/david/ | O-

.