Why did Britain not do anything when Hitler broke the Treaty of Versailles?

I continue to object to the question,because it implies 2 non proved elements
A) that Britain should do some thing:my question is :why should Britain do something ?
B) that Britain could do some thing :my question is :was there any thing Britain could do ?
My conclusion is:
1)there was no serious reason for Britain to do some thing
2)there was no possibility that Britain could do any thing
All the rest is the usual hindsight tittle-tattle,that Britain had a unique opportunity in 1936 to repel/eliminate Hitler ,and prevent WWII.

 

Of course, that is because the Outer Space Treaty does not prevent putting weapons that are non-WMDs into earth orbit or space, but only bans putting any and all weapons on celestial bodies.

Thus, the USA carrying out it's "Star Wars" program is in full accordance with the Treaty.

As per

 

IMHO:

1) As we are in 2012 we know that GB should have took many actions... in fact the Foreing Office studied carefully the possibility of taking actions: documents from the The National Archives

The Foreign Secretary describes a meeting he has had with the French, Belgian and Italian governments (FO 371/19892)


2) Financial support ... politics ... .. some military support.

(my post above)

 

Not to derail the thread...but the following....

1) As we are in 2012 we know that GB should have took many actions... in fact the Foreing Office studied carefully the possibility of taking actions

Made me snigger...hey I'm British and as perfidious as any Brit apart from Historian who's more perfidious than me...The foreign office invented the word perfidious...I'm still trying to get through their actions before the Falklands war and finding perfidiousness everywhere..the FO were always...are....and always will be experts in such perfidiousness...If you are looking to them for answers I'd look elsewhere..they don't do answers they do causes...and like Nelson...they SEE NO SHIPS...

 

A)For the reasons the military clauses were made a part of the ToV?
B)Yes, support her ally France. That's the one with the big army the UK didn't have.

1)They were already concerned about the Luftwaffe weren't they? Why not stop this possible threats before it grows even bigger?
2)See B) They could have supported France.

Hindsight? The demilitarisation of the Rhineland was done with forsight.

 

Reply
About Britain:
1)As Britain had no armed forces to fight on the continent,
there was no reason for Britai to be involved in a war on the continent by taking the initiative
Britain had all reasons not to be involved in such war
no one had any reason to ask Britain for help :France would not ask ..Denmark,Holland etc for help
2)About the ToV:the fact that the remilitarisation of the RL was a violation of that treaty,is irrelevant:for Britain,Germany could violate as much as it wanted the ToV,as long......a these violations
were no danger for British interests
did not result in a war
About France:
there were 2 possibilities
1)the remilitarisation was endangering French interests,and,than,France had to take the initiative:=invading Germany
2)the remilitarisation was no danger for France,thus,France should do nothing .
What did France ? NOTHING
The politicians were asking Gamelin to do something (a very unwise thing to do),who,of course,was putting the responsability on the politicians :they should declare a general mobilisation,because the peace army could do nothing. The politicians,were searching an other scape-goat,and found him :the British :they would ask the British to do something instead of the French,the British could and thus would do nothing,and the French politicians could blame Britain (the elections were imminent,and,it is always usefull to blame foreigners for your own shortcomings.
The result was that the whole thng was transferred to the League, a first class funeral .
2 post-war analogies:
The Cuba crisis :would the US ask ...France,Britain,...:would you do something,because we are in danger? And,if YOU will take the initiative,we will follow ?
The Falklands :would Thatcher ask ..France:would YOU do something ? And,if YOU will take the initiative,we will follow you? And,when France would say "non",would Thatcher do nothing and blame the French ?
No,Thatcher had balls(she was the only of the cabinet with these things ),while in 1936,the French did nothing and asked other people the solve the problem .

 

More points:
in march 1935,Germany announced it had an airforce (violation of Versailles),that it would build a surface fleet (violation of Versailles) and that it would reintroduce conscription (violation again):no one did anything,thus,why all the fuss about the Rhine Land ?
About the French politicians :there are 2 opinions
1)the negative one :they were irresolute people,only concerned about getteing reelected and filling their pockets (thus politicians)
2)the more positive one :they were honest (let's not exagerate,more or less honest,IMHO,less) people,who knew that France no longer could dominate the continent and maintain Versailles,that France could not sustain an other 1.5 million deads,that the only thing to do was to withdraw behind the Maginot Line,and,for the rest,let things go the direction they would go .
As France was a democracy,and,as the voters only wanted safety (=defense,not attack),French politicians were following the electorate

 

No,Thatcher had balls(she was the only of the cabinet with these things )

I aim to address that remark in another thread shortly...Don't know about balls, she seemed to have a short term memory loss problem where the Falklands are concerned.

 

First: I'm NOT argentinian and I do not sympathize so much with them. They have all the defects of the Spaniards, they believe (only God knows why) superior to the rest of the world, and the worst: They are much more cute than the Spanish average of the same age. Second: our tax evaders, drug dealers and people like these hide the money in Gibraltar... AND YOURS TOO. Third: I'll not expend a second asking for the rock. And Fourth: you and your money are welcome, here in the MED.

And the "SHIPS" were there, in the Rhineland, but they wanted not to see them. The decision was guided by the sincere desire to maintain peace, to avoid the hazards of a new war that could caused Stalin's intervention in Central Europe and unfortunately proved miserably wrong.

And yes the french should had gone alone to war. But I guess the Blitz proved that there were not only the French interest involed.

I am also of the opinion that Hitler was responsible for WWII.

 

The blitz proved Germany will fight against anyone who had the temerity to declare war on them...as we did...Then again they were quite capable of blitzing anyone who had not declared war on them too...I spend my money in Spanish areas often..or used to...Gibralter then is going to be a tax haven for your folk for a while then...hang on...doesn't Spain have similar areas in Morroco still? Or is that different?

I quite like the Latino's.....I especially like the food and vino...

As to the ships...they were seen as in Falklands way before any invasion...the subsequent perfidiousness of the FO then went into overdrive as usual and allowed if not caused the problems....Story of our FO from beginning to end...As you will see at this moment in Syria and our FO Haig...Running around...wanting stuff...pleading...bleating...but not actually willing....

 

It would be very stupid to take cover from our coast guard (guardia civil) in a spanish harbour. There are NO off shore enterprises in Ceuta and Melilla ... there are more than ten per inhabitant in the Rock... YOUR tax evaders ...go there too.

WWII casualties 450.000 Brittons died these years. Obviously it´s very easy to say what they should have done 70 years ago. And ...I am also of the opinion that Hitler was the only responsible for WWII (Europe).

 

Two other reasons for Britain's refusal to be involved in the RL crisis have not been mentined
1)The Dominions were hostile to a British continental commitment
2) the Chiefs of Staff were warning the government that Britain should not be involved in a conflict with AND Germany,AND Italy AND Japan .As at the time of the RL crisis the war in Ethiopia still was lasting ......