• Before posting anything about the COVID-19 virus, please read this first Click Here

Rudolf Hess - why was he held in Captivity - 1941-1987 for so long?

colm from clonmel

PI Member
Joined
Nov 26, 2016
Messages
1,240
Likes
1,459
Location
Belly of the Beast
Do you have any grasp of basic facts?

1. Regarding Hitler’s various reassurances......

Hitler was also on record in September 1938 stating that the Sudetenlands marked the end of german territorial ambitions....

“I am thankful to Mr. Chamberlain for all his trouble and I assured him that the German people wants nothing but peace, but I also declared that I cannot go beyond the limits of our patience.

I further assured him and I repeat here that if this problem is solved, there will be no further territorial problems in Europe for Germany.”

Within 6 months the German troops invaded what was left of Czechoslovakia and 6 months after that Poland’s turn came.

2. Your assertion that Hitler “had the military wherewithal and ability to invade and subjugate Britain he didn't.”

Did he? He tried and failed. Reminder....the Battle of Britain was a defeat for Germany. Even if the Luftwaffe had achieved superiority over southern England and attempted invasion would have remained a very risky proposition.

3. “the sneaky and cowardly Usa who whilst pretending neutrality were arming the British.”

Roosevelt made no secret of his support for Britain and the fact that it was supplying weapons to them. He broadcast to the nation in his December 1940 fireside chat that America was “the Arsenal of democracy” but it was well known long before that that hundreds of American aircraft were being supplied to the British and French. Nothing sneaky about it.
Hitler wanted more territory but at the same time the empire that the sun never set on, is excused from moarlity?

Did they conquer by tapping on the door and asking to come in or kick the door off its hinges?

 

Black Azrael

PI Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2019
Messages
288
Likes
83
Hitler wanted more territory but at the same time the empire that the sun never set on, is excused from moarlity?
'Moarlity'? As in moar! More!

Oh, and illustrated with a pretty-piccy, Janet-and-John-on-wikipedia, graphic, too! Which shows the Dominions (including, as it was from 1938, Éire...a sovereign, independent, democratic state) as parts of British Empire? Obviously news takes a long while to reach Clonmel.

I don't see how that post #169 advances any argument relevant to this thread. It's main application is the EA Poe subscript.

However, in 1938:
  • the word 'decolonisation' was in use;
  • a significant tranche of the British commentariat and of public opinion was looking to losing those remaining ties of empire; and
  • there was a regular rail service from Cairo to Jerusalem, via Gaza.
Not quite "Happy days', but the penny was dropping.

Meanwhile, in 1938, with the full support of Rudolf Hess as Hitler's deputy:
The German occupiers of the Sudeten region treated the Czechs spitefully. Families who had lived in the same house for many
generations were expelled without household goods or farm animals. SS Einsatzkommandos — a newly formed unit which later, in occupied regions of Poland and the USSR, organized mass murders were manning the checkpoints to be sure the Czechs took nothing with them. When Hitler, on a tour of inspection, noticed Czech refugees being given bread and soup from German field kitchens he asked General Reichenau: "Why do we waste good German bread on those pigs?" In fact the bread was good Czech bread. [page 148]​
 

Nebuchadnezzar

PI Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2018
Messages
258
Likes
57
....and back to Hess. Given that peace approaches were made and publically rejected in mid 1940 when things were at their bleakest why would an official peace offer via Hess in 1941 be suppressed for so long? The rejection of a deal with Germany in 1940 would at least be more understandable than a rejection in 1941. The theory that he was incarcerated for many decades and then assassinated to keep such a peace offer secret makes no sense.

Excuse me for quoting myself but for some reason I cannot edit this post.

I meant to say.....

‘acceptance of a deal in 1940 would at least have been more understandable than acceptance in 1941.’
 

parentheses

PI Member
Joined
Oct 30, 2015
Messages
2,199
Likes
4,689
....and back to Hess. Given that peace approaches were made and publically rejected in mid 1940 when things were at their bleakest why would an official peace offer via Hess in 1941 be suppressed for so long? The rejection of a deal with Germany in 1940 would at least be more understandable than a rejection in 1941. The theory that he was incarcerated for many decades and then assassinated to keep such a peace offer secret makes no sense.
It would be a huge revelation if the British were proven to have been conducting peace talks with the Germans in 1941.
 

The Field Marshal

PI Member
Joined
Oct 2, 2018
Messages
8,173
Likes
7,175
Why would it? There were at least some sort of peace discussions during 1940 and the earth did not quake then.
You are apparently entirely indifferent then to the possible prospect of peace between Britain and German in 1940.
Had such a peace been achieved most of the devastation caused by WW2 would have been avoided.

How sad that you defend this monstrous British empire drenched in the innocent blood of millions occasioned by its reckless warmongering foreign policy in 1939 -40 and also 1914.
 
Last edited:

The Potato Mystic

PI Member
Joined
Mar 17, 2016
Messages
8,601
Likes
14,468
....and back to Hess. Given that peace approaches were made and publically rejected in mid 1940 when things were at their bleakest why would an official peace offer via Hess in 1941 be suppressed for so long? The rejection of a deal with Germany in 1940 would at least be more understandable than a rejection in 1941. The theory that he was incarcerated for many decades and then assassinated to keep such a peace offer secret makes no sense.
I don't think it requires much imagination to figure out some possibilities - if only to speculate.

If the British peace party was real and anti-Churchill, in close proximity to the royals and was looking to illicitly negotiate with Germany, then they'd cover that up rather than ignite some internal establishment civil war.
 

Nebuchadnezzar

PI Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2018
Messages
258
Likes
57
You are apparently entirely indifferent then to the possible prospect of peace between Britain and Germany in 1940.
Had such a peace been achieved most of the devastation caused by WW2 would have been avoided.

How sad that you defend this monstrous British empire drenched in the innocent blood of millions occasioned by its reckless warmongering foreign policy in 1939 and also 1914.
I’m not indifferent at all. I think it would have been a catastrophe. Peace on Nazi terms would have been a monstrous peace and even then a short lived one.
 

Nebuchadnezzar

PI Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2018
Messages
258
Likes
57
I don't think it requires much imagination to figure out some possibilities - if only to speculate.

If the British peace party was real and anti-Churchill, in close proximity to the royals and was looking to illicitly negotiate with Germany, then they'd cover that up rather than ignite some internal establishment civil war.
That’s pretty much what happened in 1940....so what?
 

parentheses

PI Member
Joined
Oct 30, 2015
Messages
2,199
Likes
4,689
Why would it? There were at least some sort of peace discussions during 1940 and the earth did not quake then.
Because Hitler was preparing for the largest military operation in history in spring 1941. If the British were making peace approaches at the same time it might be inferred they were doing so in order to encourage him along the path of attacking the USSR.
 

The Field Marshal

PI Member
Joined
Oct 2, 2018
Messages
8,173
Likes
7,175
I’m not indifferent at all. I think it would have been a catastrophe. Peace on Nazi terms would have been a monstrous peace and even then a short lived one.
Unfortunately you continually exhibit the knee jerk and delusional paranoia exhibited by English press anytime the word Hitler or Nazi is used.
Any peace settlement between warring countries requires give and take.
Britain rejected every single reasonable proposal presented by the German govt to either resolve the Polish question or the situation arising after Britain’s declaration of war on Germany.

You have the nerve to criticise Germany when the war declarations that caused world wars one and two were both presented and generated by Britain.

Your arrogance is breataking and out Hitler,s Hitler.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom