What reason is there to think that the Nazis would have treated a country like Poland differently if it surrendered without resisting? They made clear their view of the rights of Poles (none) and the purpose of the invasion (replacement of the Polish population with German settlers) for a while before the invasion. At least some of the actual plans and directives for this had been drafted before the invasion as well. I could give you references if you like, but unfortunately I’ve loaned away one of my main sources, a book called The Wages of Destruction. I’ll have to see if I can find an ebook copy if you want specific refs.
In brief, a country that wants to offer better terms to enemies who surrender will publicize this fact and offer good terms of surrender. Germany didn’t do this, instead they publicized their leadership’s view on races and human rights and might makes right. Why not believe they meant what they said?
Exactly. For ‘racial’ reasons alone, Austrians and Danes would get an easier deal than Poles or Ukrainians.
Also, while I find your (taw) posting here and at your blog enlightening, I cannot help but feel you ignore that history teaches us only partial derivatives.
True, Denmark got a sweet deal, but your only comparison is ceteris paribus. We do not know the result if every single country subject to Nazi aggression had chosen to yield. The result may definitely have been less lenient for the Danes.
Finally, I believe it’s commonly accepted that Hitler intended to attack the Soviet Union no matter what, and that he did not expect UK and France to actually go to war over Poland.
What reason is there to think that the Nazis would have treated a country like Poland differently if it surrendered without resisting? They made clear their view of the rights of Poles (none) and the purpose of the invasion (replacement of the Polish population with German settlers) for a while before the invasion. At least some of the actual plans and directives for this had been drafted before the invasion as well. I could give you references if you like, but unfortunately I’ve loaned away one of my main sources, a book called The Wages of Destruction. I’ll have to see if I can find an ebook copy if you want specific refs.
In brief, a country that wants to offer better terms to enemies who surrender will publicize this fact and offer good terms of surrender. Germany didn’t do this, instead they publicized their leadership’s view on races and human rights and might makes right. Why not believe they meant what they said?
Why not believe they meant what they said?
Exactly. For ‘racial’ reasons alone, Austrians and Danes would get an easier deal than Poles or Ukrainians.
Also, while I find your (taw) posting here and at your blog enlightening, I cannot help but feel you ignore that history teaches us only partial derivatives.
True, Denmark got a sweet deal, but your only comparison is ceteris paribus. We do not know the result if every single country subject to Nazi aggression had chosen to yield. The result may definitely have been less lenient for the Danes.
Finally, I believe it’s commonly accepted that Hitler intended to attack the Soviet Union no matter what, and that he did not expect UK and France to actually go to war over Poland.