Immaterial to the question at hand. You’re soft-peddling Nazi policies by trying to present the Poles as being “just as bad” which is patently false on its face. The Poles may have nationalistic and opportunistic bastards, but, lacking such quaint devices as Einsatztruppen and concentration camps, they are readily several orders of magnitude less than the Germans.

OC: “I’m not trying to rehabilitate Nazism, just pointing out the hypocrisy of some of Nazi Germany’s enemies. ”

Sorta like when the plaintiff in a lawsuit tells you its not about the money…

France was obligated by treaty to stand by the Poles — one failure re: Czechoslovakia by France could be seen as the result of negotiations, but once you have two data points, you officially have the start of a trend.

Taking your point of view and extrapolating, what do you think happens? Poland falls, a new Russo German border is established whilst the West grumbles and goes back to sleep. The Winter War in Finland will still happen, as will the invasion of the Baltic states by the Russians. Not sure about Denmark and Norwary and the Lowlands, although with France’s serial abandonment of allies, you may get a more Germano-centric Europe as a consequence — better to come to an understanding with the Germans than risk invasion. Germany and Italy and Russia all get more time to arm… France and England, like as not, will maintain the status quo — France will continue to rely upon the Maginot line and England on her Navy.

I don’t think the UK and France went to war over Poland, per se — their utter lack of effort to actually do anything would be a good example of that, despite the weakness of the German western frontier. I think they went to war out of twin concerns — German appetite for lebensraum was greater than the West’s tolerance of appeasement as a political solution and the recognition that war was, given the first, an inevitability.

I’m not trying to rehabilitate Nazism, just pointing out the hypocrisy of some of Nazi Germany’s enemies.

Sure, so long as you weren’t particularly educated, in political office or otherwise deemed “unacceptable” to the new regime.

Germanisation was relatively mild, for Poles, in the Nazi-occupied Polish region called Warthegau.

The difference between the League of Nations and a plastic Jesus on the dashboard on a car is a matter of cost. You might have faith, but actual results are a matter of belief.

OC: “From one perspective, Germany wasn’t actually acting any differently than Poland when they invaded in 1939.”

Sure… if you gloss over the Einsatztruppen, the execution of potential resistance, the forced movement of Poles as industrial labor in Germany, the movement of Germans to establish communities / colonies in Poland under Himmler’s agrarian paradise fantasies, the force adoption of Aryan-looking Polish children into German families, etc.

OC: “The casus foederis used by UK and France to start WWII can been seen as mere cynical anti-German prejudice, especially as the USSR was allowed to occupy and then control Poland in the aftermath of WWII. ”

It was the proverbial “last straw.” Having guaranteed Czechoslovakia’s security prior to selling them down the river, a repetition was to be avoided. The Germany’s first bite of Czech territory was a tragedy, the absorption of the rest farce.

The really unfortunate aspect is that by appeasing over Czechoslovakia, the UK and France lost the chance for an ugly small war, exchanging it for a war spanning the European theatre.

From one perspective, Germany wasn’t actually acting any differently than Poland when they invaded in 1939.

The casus foederis used by UK and France to start WWII can been seen as mere cynical anti-German prejudice, especially as the USSR was allowed to occupy and then control Poland in the aftermath of WWII.