Why Didn't Britain Make Peace After the Fall of France? (Short Animated Documentary)

[@survivor686]

Who knew "Get Ready, Everybody. He’s About To Do Something Stupid" was a valid military strategy

[@schoolssection]

What makes a military strategy "valid"? Historic precedence? I doubt it. The very idea is STOOOOPID.

[@bradleywhite7285]

Lenny knows his shit

[@garymussell6543]

Sadly this was the same strategy employed by Republican opponents of Trump in 2015-2016.

[@yuichitwong9629]

@@garymussell6543 Yes, because a man amasses significant wealth through sheer incompetence (straight face)

[@nicolebadham8511]

Lol

[@merrittanimation7721]

Britain at this point: "We don't have to win. We just have to wait till they lose."

[@Itachi951000]

And win they did ended up doing.

[@StratMan9009]

@@Itachi951000 And what a victory it was. Lost their Empire, became the US's lap dop, and got to live in fear of Soviet invasion for the rest of the century. What a win.

[@QWERTY-gp8fd]

@@StratMan9009 didnt end up like france.

[@v_cpt-phasma_v689]

@@StratMan9009 LMAO 'became the US lap dog' literally nothing suggests that this is true? Britain invaded the suez canal directly going against the US, Britain refused to join the vietnam war and sat laughing as the US got stomped because of their cockyness.

[@rms1034]

@@v_cpt-phasma_v689 and faught and won the Falkland war despite US protest

[@franciscoflamenco]

I love how Italy joining the war on the side of Germany is a plus for Britain and not for Germany.

[@Tommi414]

Sure… which is why Britain was waiting for Germany to fuck up… it all makes sense.

[@bankaltthree9139]

It was in that the italians were notably lead badly by generals, and under equipped to fight a modern war, lack of airplanes tanks trucks, hell by the time they were in it their tanks were outdated and too light to fight other tanks. Having italy join the war meant germany now had to ensure italy stayed in the war, and that meant pressing their interests. Italy was losing in africa, failed in greece. failed to control their own sea. In short they brought nothing to the table and ensured germany couldnt attack russia early 1941.

[@cisium1184]

Again, Britain's reasoning can be traced to the experiences of WW1. The Italian Army in WW1 had been a barely organized rabble, and its generals had proven themselves either incompetent or more preoccupied with political advancement than with winning a war. The Italians had actually been worse than the Austrians in many respects, and really didn't make much progress until the Austrians were forced to shift troops to the Carpathian front. Indeed much the same dynamic had happened on the Italian front in the Austro-Prussian War of 1866.

[@bankaltthree9139]

@@cisium1184 britians reasoning based on WW1 was thrown out pretty quickly when France was overrun in months once Germany was ready, Italy had observers who were in Spain, they had recently fought a colonial war in Africa. They should have known better. So I agree that the British had ample expectations from WW1 that the Italians would have a poorly lead army. The Italians were not prepared for a modern war at all.

[@looinrims]

No, the Italian navy destroyed more ships than they themselves even had to begin with, not to mention the damaged ships

[@B3FMandCProductions]

"Bringing two monumental allies into the conflict and tipping the scales" is honestly such a badass line

[@The_whales]

It’s basically saying, they wants to move a big amount of dirt but accidentally cause a landslide

[@charleswhitefullbusteruchi1972]

what would have happened if only one of them joined, or better yet, if one of them joined the axis

[@TylerMarkRichardson]

​​@@charleswhitefullbusteruchi1972 Better????????

[@shronkler1994]

it really is. great power diplomacy in general is really fascinating to me, we're looking at the clashing of utter titans

[@nattly6340]

@@charleswhitefullbusteruchi1972 us would have never joined the axis, and if russia had it wouldnt really have changed too much as germany was still going to be bombed into the ground

[@omercanasik6]

Man that "Germany will do something stupid" idea was brilliant.

[@kaykhosrow3263]

Hello kind sir, may I ask why are you a Turk, and even more curiously, why are you named Ömer?

[@omercanasik6]

@@kaykhosrow3263 I do not know if you are serious with this question but I will answer your curiousity: Yes I am Turkish and my name is Ömer. Because I am born in a Turkish family and my family named me after my great great grandpa.

[@looinrims]

They didn’t do anything stupid in the contemporary views But muh hindsight warrior

[@that_imperial_kingsman442]

@@omercanasik6 Why your great great grandpa? Tell us about him.

[@milckop2972]

@@omercanasik6 im curious now

[@paprus5972]

"The idea was that, like in ww1 with austria-hungary, Germany would have to constantly bail them out" I mean, yes

[@acmiguens]

And while not at war, they're still bailing out other European nations to this day

[@paprus5972]

@@acmiguens yes.

[@cynicat74]

"We can easily take Greece!" - Mussolini, shortly before begging the Germans for help invading Greece

[@paprus5972]

@@cynicat74 I mean. *Thats exactly what happened* (Any Italians reading this, I love you, but Mussolini was an idiot.)

[@idcgaming518]

@@paprus5972 yes, but when the invasion of Italy happened, Mussolini had warned the Germans ahead of time that he believed Italy was the target, but instead of preparing to defend their southern flank, the Germans moved a large amount of their defences over to Greece. So it is partially Hitler's fault that Italy fell.

[@connorgolden4]

Because being on a island gives them +100 defense.

[@ArpanDe]

Germany expelled einstein And didn't have a A bomb

[@garybrown2039]

That is so true it hurts. And I’m sure the German military was feeling said pain.

[@ethanjohnson9016]

Add in the navy and raf and you end up with a 1000× multiplier on defence and it only costs a -10% disadvantage to ease of trade.

[@JJaqn05]

The US being on a whole different continent gives them +2000 defense

[@chudchadanstud]

@@JJaqn05 The USSR just being the USSR gives them 2,000,000 defence points.

[@ludovicdisson3668]

I will always remember what my History teacher said about Italy during WW2 when it invaded Greece : "Military-wise, Italy, well, wasn't exactly the Roman Empire anymore"

[@merlynjep]

I bet that 1940 Italy would hold its own against 4th century Rome.

[@skylinesenpai5554]

@@merlynjep Submachine Pistol goes brrrr

[@spagoot]

@@merlynjep tbh id put money on rome

[@akhasshativeritsol1950]

It's actually an interesting thought experiment. Italy fought a war with the much more poorly armed Ethiopia, whose army was ~350,000 on the low end, comparable the Roman army at its greatest extent. Italy won their war, but fared notoriously poorly. So, could Rome's strategy, effective logistics, discipline, and martial attitude turn the tide in a similar war? ... Ehhhhhh... I want to say yes, but without some avenue to procure modern weapons, Rome would probably be dead in a straight fight. Ethiopia only lasted as long as they did because Germany was supplying them with modern weapons. The Roman empire was also much bigger than Ethiopia, so depending on the geography of the conflict, maybe Rome could pivot to asymmetric warfare while they rearmed with scavenged modern weapons, but they'd need to throw out a lot of the tactics that were what made them successful

[@RAFMnBgaming]

@@akhasshativeritsol1950 I think tactically speaking too, technology had changed war a lot and it's changed more still today. If you dropped the romans into the napoleonic wars, they'd probably be able to adjust in good time, but anything post ww1 and the rules of war are just not the same. Like, flanking and chokepoints and high ground and some of that terrain usage stuff is all still important and always has and will be, but how the hell do you even figure out how to deal with machine gun emplacementsm, or hell, artillery and bombers, if the most deadly ranged weapon you're used to dealing with is a volley of flaming arrows?

[@murph3292]

the idea of just waiting until your enemy does something stupid is brilliant

[@sevenprovinces]

It's quintessential Sun Tzu.

[@dw620]

It IS a good strategy but I suspect the Brits must've had a crystal ball to know it was worth fighting on. (I'll point to the use of the 1958 CND logo in 1940 as proof... ; )

[@alienworm1999]

They had that luxury by virtue of being on a massive island with an enormous navy protecting it The French, Polish, Czechs, Slovaks, Dutch, Norwegians, and Danes did not.

[@Wolfeson28]

They one-upped Napoleon's "Never interrupt the enemy when he's making a mistake" with their own "Just wait until the enemy makes a mistake".

[@090giver090]

@@dw620 They actually had a crystal ball. It was called Bletchley Park :)

[@edsonreistad5095]

As Napoleon said: "Never inturrupt an enemy while they are making a mistake"

[@mirzaahmed6589]

Why didn't he follow his own advice?

[@ReaperCH90]

@@mirzaahmed6589 giving advice to others is easier than following your own

[@tomben6180]

Pretty sure that predates Napoleon and gets attributed to every leader ever.

[@Enruler]

@@mirzaahmed6589 Please elaborate on what mistake Napoleon's enemies did that he interrupted.

[@LaDeXi]

That was actually in Art of War by Sun Tzu.

[@rainerminusunfug]

In hindsight, this was a tremendously good assessment of the situation by the brits. Keep in mind how bad humans usually are at predicting the future, let alone how wars will progress and turn out.

[@the_tactician9858]

@yabghus WW2 was very much an economic war too. Goebbels called out to the German people that this would be a ´Totaler Krieg´, not merely fought on the battlefield but in the factories too. In fact, the economic strength of both the Soviet Union and the USA was what helped tip the scale in Allied favour. Remember that economy is a lot more than money, it also encompasses resources and tools available to you.

[@snazzle9764]

@yabghus Yeah, they sure did "bait" Germany. Like Angus is saying, your stupid "ploy to crush Germany for good" theory doesn't work if Germany is now more powerful than the country it unconditionally surrendered to. The Allies had total control completely dismantle or severely limit German Industry, but ended up totally relenting on even limits in the early 50s. The sending of 1.5 billion dollars (15 billion in today's money) to rebuild Germany also screws your theory.

[@jwil4286]

key phrase: "In hindsight" generally, don't rely on your enemy to screw up.

[@anguswaterhouse9255]

@@jwil4286 They had good reason though given they heard radio operators saying shit likr kill stalin and the US supported Britain when Brazil hinted it would koin the Axis

[@jwil4286]

@@snazzle9764 there actually was a plan to deindustrialize Germany: the Morgenthau plan. This was abandoned because the land alone could only support about 60% of the population (so 40% of Germans would starve to death). It's been theorized that if the Morgenthau Plan had been enacted, some combination of the following would have happened: 1. the end of WW2 would not have been the end of Nazism as it was known under Hitler (yes, Nazis still exist today, but they're a fringe; Nazism would have been martyred under Morgenthau's plan, not delegitimized) 2. Germans likely would have looked east for guidance instead of west. 3. Massive amounts of suffering would occur in central Europe. 4. The EU wouldn't exist. 5. Germany never would have reunited (the plan called for a North Germany and a South Germany).

[@itsmealex8959]

1:48 Little fun fact of history, this sign might appear to be a gag, but the British actually did deploy buoys that explicitly banned German submarines from entering certain waters along the southeastern coastline of Britain. These signs were quite effective since the Germans did not want to violate the signage, which is why most of their submarine raids took place further out at sea and in places like the north Atlantic.

[@USSFFRU]

Professionals have standards

[@marksavage1108]

Those buoys had mines attached at u-boat operating depths, and British ships had the coordinates of these underwater bombs.

[@The_whales]

@@USSFFRUAtleast they are polite to the buoy

[@kevinhong4018]

Where can i read more about this?

[@buddermonger2000]

​@@marksavage1108Well it seems those buoys had teeth

[@luispablogonzalezv4522]

Lord Halifax: rejects the position of PM Also Lord Halifax: why are you not listening to me?

[@beaubutts84185]

He would not have had the votes to enact his agenda. Churchill's wing of the Conservative Party plus the Labour Party opposition under Clement Atlee would have had the votes to defeat any peace deal Hitler would propose regardless of what Halifax's tories could do.

[@luispablogonzalezv4522]

@@beaubutts84185 yeah, that makes sense

[@wanderinghistorian]

Can't play with the toys unless you get in the sandbox, Halifax.

[@skadoink1736]

My understanding was it was because Halifax thought that Churchill would screw up and thus he (Halifax) could then become PM in a much stronger position. Could be misremembering though....

[@seamonster936]

@@beaubutts84185 And he was squeamish about leading a government from the Lords. Which as you said would have made pursuing his agenda even more difficult with the ant-appeasement Tories and Labour in the Commons.

[@Captain_Yorkie1]

"I'm on an island, you are not. I have big navy, you...not so much I don't have stalin as my neighbour, you do. I'll wait." Britannia, probably.

[@lisatapp5785]

“You got it in one.”

[@lisatapp5785]

“Britannia got that navy yeah we rule the waves!”

[@PrivateMcPrivate]

"You don't have American Lend Lease" "Your ally Japan is stupid and cares for nothing except for themselves"

[@kkon5ti]

Star ⭐️ lin, what a cutie

[@Charlie-xz8dg]

Rule Britannia Lads!!🇬🇧🇬🇧

[@hanifloka130]

Britain: "We'll wait for 2 years till they do something stupid" Axis Powers: *does some very stupid things ahead of schedule* Britain: *dancing old guy meme*

[@pinktea8951]

@@jessesinclair3861 Aah yes "smart". guess what happened? Germany lost the war, was reduced to rubble, torn in half and occupied by the Soviet Union many years.

[@jimmymfs4314]

@@pinktea8951 If the ussr would have attacked first, things probably would have been way worse for germany, as the allies were no were near ready for an invasion of France. Then again, germany could have had a better chance of defending on their territory, until they would run out of fuel that is

[@jimmymfs4314]

@@jessesinclair3861 Yeah, which is why i believe that germany definitely could have held the soviets even if the soviets were fully mobilised and prepared, that is, until they would run out of supplies, like u said

[@jeffslade1892]

Didn't do nothing. Beat the Germans out of North Africa before the Yanks eventually turned up. The war there was about getting to middle-east oil. Broke the Luftwaffe and gained air supremacy too. The German war against Russia was about getting to Balkan oil. Aiding Greece was also about stopping the Germans getting to the Balkan oil. WW2 was about controlling the oil, as was WW1, Balkans and middle-east.

[@placeholdernameisplacehold7671]

@@jessesinclair3861 I would agree, striking first was the right thing to do militarily, as the Soviets were planning an attack. Of course, it only delayed the innevitable soviet victory on the eastern front. However, the smart thing to do, would be to try to surrender and appease the allies. There was no way the Germans were ever going to win fighting a war on two fronts on its own. Their only hope is to end the war early and hope the allies go after the Soviets with their help.

[@Lowdo1549]

Watched a really good documentary on WW2 and apparently a French reconnaissance pilot saw all of the German artillery moving in to France along a single track muddy road, moving painfully slowly because of the bottleneck and road conditions.(the German’s planned that route with an element of surprise) The pilot reported back and the French command dismissed his claim and thought he was a defector and was trying to move the Air Force away from key positions. That or he had gone crazy. I don’t think recon flights had cameras at that point so he couldn’t prove it. If the historian in the doc is correct with this claim, the French could’ve stopped WW2 before it began, eliminating all of their tanks. That’s crazy. Sorry for the waffle, I found it interesting :)

[@ethanwood6832]

In 1939 when the war first started, the French actually launched an attack into the Siegfried Line in the Saarland. However it wasn't a good effort with vigor. Several German commanders apparently admitted that the Heer only had 20 divisions on their Western border, and if the British and French would have attacked in force, there wouldn't have been anything to stop them from driving to Berlin. As most of the German Army was busy attacking Poland at this point. One commander said that it would have been over in a few weeks.

[@techpriest8705]

unsure about that, reconnaissance planes had cameras even back in ww1, but hey it's a neat story for the time and does summarise the ways the french high command were useless at the start of ww2

[@Lowdo1549]

@@techpriest8705 tbf I just assumed that bit 🤣 the historian said the rest. I incorrectly filled in the gaps

[@techpriest8705]

@@Lowdo1549 fair enough, cool story tho!

[@ashaide]

That would probably be the five Panzer divisions moving through the Ardennes. The reason why it wasn't or just sparsely defended was nobody thought you could push a modern mechanized army through such a route. But that EXACTLY was what Fall Gelb was all about. They thought the Germans would either try to push through the border with France itself or, like in World War I, use the Benelux as an invasion corridor. For the former, that was what the expensive Maginot Line was for. The latter had the bulk of the Allied armies at the time. And, indeed, the Germans appeared at Benelux! Most excellent! And then some French recon pilot made true Manstein's worst nightmare: finding the ACTUAL invasion force in the long, tight confines of the Ardennes. But French Central said, non. Cannot be. You cannot push that many tanks through the Ardennes. I forgot which military historian pointed it out, but had the French GHQ listened, or at least tried to send some sort of spoiler air raid to that force in the Ardennes, maybe WW2 would have started out differently.

[@tencorgmail4075]

"The British strategy of letting the French get punched in the face until Britain could arm and train up an army." - The best description of the Western European front of WWI and WWII I've ever seen.

[@jayasuryangoral-maanyan3901]

tbf it was also the french tactic in WW2, big part of why they lost everything so quickly

[@knowlove4128]

Too bad for those out of their ever loving mind, that the variables exist even if the summary skips them...makes the variables incognito at best...

[@tisFrancesfault]

@@jayasuryangoral-maanyan3901 Not really. In many respects the French strategy was sound. Arguably a big failing was more the fault of the Belgians not allowing the BEF and french force sto hold the Rhine. But in simple terms both armies were out manoeuvered.

[@mungulor]

I hate this point though - Britain sent the BEF (Britain's only real army that could be deployed from the mainland at the time) to Europe to assist in holding the Germans back. The BEF suffered massive casualties and miraculously escaped via Dunkirk whilst the French tried to cover the retreat. The idea that the UK just let France do the fighting is pretty much horseshit

[@jhayanraeperalta6862]

France in ww1 and 2 is the "ill hold him off and you guys go get help" guy in movies

[@ordinary_magician]

Britain after mid 1940: “All my friends are dead”

[@R-H-B]

Neville Chamberlain vibes to some Uzi to numb the pain

[@jimmysavile69]

"-but my children are still alive"

[@afwhite888]

Portugal on the phone: "That's what you get for trusting in the French"

[@sionsmedia8249]

@@jimmysavile69 Half a world away, but still there technically.

[@canuckster24]

... Time to invade Iceland.

[@classcommie]

Britain: "They'll probably invade the Soviet Union or try declaring war on the US." Germany: "Is it too much to ask for both?"

[@saundyuk]

@Matt Olivier We like our language - we decided we didn't want to bother learning the language of anyone who can't even make a decent cup of tea.

[@JeroenDoes]

@Matt Olivier If the UK made peace then the USA would have no place to do its attacks from. Maybe the Japanese would not even have bothered attacking pearl harbor. In any case, it would have left the Germans free to use all their force against the Soviets. I am not sure this would have changed the outcome of that war but it would have been different at least.

[@Scarz3ny]

@The Aristocrat then why didn't he send the Luftwaffe to Britain after the fall of France?? They could of flattened the place within days

[@mikespearwood3914]

@The Aristocrat Hitler admired the British, and his deputy (literally second in command of Germany!) flew solo to Britain to talk sense to the Brits, and hopefully start a coup to overthrow the main warmonger Winston Churchill (zio-backed!).

[@gamezdude5544]

@Matt Olivier Neither did the mass murder of millions of people and the bankruptcy of Europe. Both guaranteed if the war were to continue. Mao would look cute in comparison to Hitler if such vileness was allowed to continue unhindered.

[@LCTesla]

Britain: just wait till they provoke the Soviet Union or USA or something Axis: provokes both Britain: LMAO

[@soeunmom8791]

The best comment i ever read💀

[@kalekkakmdkekjaakwkmdb8506]

THE GASLIGHTING IS INSANE. Are you aware that the UNITED STATES provoked germany and japan? Do you think pearl harbor was for nothing? No. The united states was shooting german vessels with direct orders from FDR in an attempt to provoke germany into a war. As for the soviet union? It had a mass amount of troops on the german border in an offensive position, sources show they were planning an offensive into the balkans and germany in late of july 1941 Please dont be a victim of your own propaganda or dont be a parrot

[@sb17899]

It's more funny when you realize that both the Soviet Union and the USA were the ones who were doing the provocations, and the Axis still fell for it even knowing it was basically an unwinnable situation.

[@kalekkakmdkekjaakwkmdb8506]

@@sb17899 USA were absolutely provoking. Curious to know your views on when/how the soviets were doing the provoking though?

[@huyanhpham1445]

@@kalekkakmdkekjaakwkmdb8506I agree. The US did sanction/embargo the Japs, but Soviet Unions were just chilling

[@calthepal312]

"the opportunity of defeating the enemy is provided by the enemy himself"

[@powersettingsm7172]

"Whatever you do, Don't reveal all your techniques in a youtube video. You fool, you moron."

[@Skel1001]

@@powersettingsm7172 “I have met multiple enemies that don’t die when shot, so what do I do, shoot them again”

[@poland8752]

Sun Tzu Art of War

[@ytuberrRolid397]

"How did the Orthodox Church React to the Protestant Reformation?" Just putting out a topic idea for consideration

[@Toonrick12]

They were mostly meh about it. "Not my branch, not my problem."

[@novaterra973]

As the above comment said, mostly meh, with some entertaining the idea of allying with them against the Catholics but others seeing them just as heretical. It helped that the Orthodox and the Protestants mostly lived away from each other - except for the Baltic and Finland, I think.

[@Admiral45-10]

They didn't care, but liked Protestants - mostly because Polish Kingdom and Great Duchy of Lithuania were Roman-Catholic and if they could make an alliance with Protestants to punch Roman Catholics in the face - so be it (e.c. in 1654)

[@1993Redemption]

I mostly would love to hear about confirmed cases of orthodox leaders blustering about how "right" their version of Christianity has always been and how that is why the Catholics are having reform problems and they are not.

[@enokun74]

@@1993Redemption it's not like the Orthdox church has never had it's own heresies and schisms

[@DarkApostleNoek]

"We will stay out of it for now. Either Germany gets hurt or France gets hurt. It's a win-win situation" - Britain, I am betting.

[@lucabedancinggamermomenets9134]

Knowing Britain they let france fall on purpose (this is a joke and I know how france fell)

[@jonomoth2581]

But don't forget British foreign policy for the previous millennia was usually based on annoying the french

[@lisatapp5785]

France isn’t that bad ish I mean they’re not as bad as Hitler

[@australianword3812]

@@jonomoth2581 no no, British Foreign Policy was and still is to create a disunited Europe

[@Floristini]

@@australianword3812 Hence why they couldn't allow Germany to conquer or control literally all of Europe.

[@frenchbaguetteintelligence]

Britain: Oi! No one beats France but me!

[@camm8642]

prussia did that more decisively then the british ever did

[@banh_mi857]

“After all, Why shouldn’t I keep fighting?” -Winston Churchill

[@southwestsaxon]

Churchill was racist screw him and britian from a londoner

[@whatonearth9809]

Churchill the Legend 💪🏻👏🏻

[@southwestsaxon]

@@whatonearth9809 the racist 👎🏾

[@carterjones8126]

@@southwestsaxon You live in London because we're **not** racist.

[@southwestsaxon]

@@carterjones8126 english ppl are racist you just like to pretend ur not cos ur scared but lets face facts yeah. why else u think england is still like 80% white??

[@SmoothOthello]

I swear to god that "kill Stalin" intercepted message had me laughing so hard

[@darthball2723]

Bruh you ain't the only one

[@Arcgymnastics]

@Matt Olivier bet you’re a blast at parties

[@dieantischeisse]

Fun fact that Hitler privately made it very clear that he wouldn't execute Stalin if he was captured, he would personally 'debrief' him and lock him up in some castle in Bayern until he died of old

[@romeersharma2488]

Unrelated but I personally think it is funny that the base of allied operations was that close to Germany

[@timonsolus]

@@Arcgymnastics : There is no need for military historians to be a blast at parties.

[@michaelhoffmann2891]

As Sun Tsu never actually said: Never interrupt your enemy while he is making a mistake. (thought apparently Napoleon did say something kinda sorta like that).

[@dorionite1378]

It’s bad manners.

[@owenowen212]

Never heard this being credited to anyone other than Napoleon Bonaparte

[@sirdiesalot2975]

@@michaelhoffmann2891 It's definitely a quote from Napoleon Bonaparte and not Sun Tzu. It's one of his more famous addages. Google just auto-completes the query, "never interrupt your enemy when he makes a mistake" with Sun Tzu on the end because lots of people have thought that it's a Sun Tzu quote and have entered into Google as such, not because it is actually a Sun Tzu quote. That's just how search engines work, they take the most frequently enterered queries and offer them as auto-completions to anything you type into them whether they're right or wrong.

[@michaelhoffmann2891]

@@sirdiesalot2975 I know that, you know that. You DO also know that I wrote "as Sun Tsu never actually said", yes? You know, feeble attempt at humour? Why do I even bother on KZbin when I should know better. /facepalm

[@euntaelee1526]

Wait, i thought Bismarck sayed that XD ?

[@bigpapamanman1550]

2:35 "but that it simply had to hold out until about 1942 until Germany made a mistake, which it did in 1941."

[@MacTac141]

So Britain’s strategy was “Let’s wait for Germany to do something stupid” and it actually happened ahead of schedule. Nice! Warning: Only enter the comments if you have a hazmat suit

[@Patriotic_Brit]

waiting for the German AI to fuck up in HOI4

[@ATOQ777]

Germany did the right thing, it was a preemptive strike since the USSR had plans to betray Germany since there were preliminary mobilizations at the border. Had the USSR attacked first, Germany would have been crushed even worse than in our timeline.

[@BoopSnoot]

Except that's total historical revisionism, and the answer as that as always only a handful of powerful people actually make all the major decisions for a country, and the UK is no exception. Churchill had power, and he was always a war monger. Germany themselves went to great lengths to avoid attacking civilian targets in the UK (except an accident due to a navigation miscalculation during a night mission) and had contacted the British three times to sue for peace, all of which Churchill squashed. Remember Germany DID NOT declare war on the UK nor wanted it, it was the UK that declared war on Germany, same as France. Germany's main ambition was to fight the communist and jewish leadership and secure oil and food in the East as just prior to Hitler taking power they were literally starving, and audio tapes released after the war showed that war on two fronts simultaneously was a disaster they never wanted and when France declared war their only hope for success was to quickly circumvent the maginot line, invading the low countries bypassing it to the North. If France had never declared war on Germany, its unlikely Germany would have ever bothered to attack West.

[@TS111WASD]

@@ATOQ777 The USSR did not have plans to betray Germany, to the point where Stalin initially refused to fight back and had a mental breakdown. Hitler was just a belligerent idiot and Germany had no chance.

[@porkcjop4167]

@@BoopSnoot you do understand that germany’s end goal was the control the entire world right? and what were france and the uk meant to do, wait until germany was big enough to easily destroy them?

[@boop53]

2:02 is this a simpsons reference lol, where Homer is sitting at his desk at the nuclear plant and everyone else watches him saying “he’s about to do something stupid.”

[@Ahmed-ef3bg]

Yes 😂😂😂

[@donniebooshae3880]

I can see that now you’ve mentioned it haha

[@richardhobbs7360]

Must be

[@bikinisforever4163]

Only Hi tler was a genius. The greatest economic turnaround in modern history. And unlike others, he didn't need a war to do it.

[@killbotter6998]

@@bikinisforever4163 He was an economic fool. He basically did a speedrun to kill the german economy.

[@acchaladka]

Seriously tho, as a history student this is a brilliant summation. I have rarely been so struck with quality of analysis on this channel (because I’ve known less about other topics). All to say: wow, not a word wasted. Well done.

[@lxndrlbr]

Now a follow up question: should Hitler have kept his word with Stalin and just eat up and divide continental Europe, do you think pacifists movements and non-interventionists USA would have attacked directly? Was the Reich under economic stress (and the boot of the Gestapo) so much that it could not have stabilized?

[@saint4life09]

@@lxndrlbr Peace between the USSR and Germany was pretty much impossible. Even if the whole "Stalin would've attacked later anyway" isn't true, it would require Hitler himself to have a massive change in personality and beliefs. He was always intending to attack the USSR. He viewed them as his main enemy and "Jewish bolshevism" as the greatest adversary of his German Reich. This is without mentioning that Germany was relying on Soviet resources, something that was pretty untenable since he obviously didn't trust the Soviets to just keep trading with him forever while he solidifies his control over Europe and Italy conquers Africa/Middle East.

[@Muckylittleme]

Left out the small matter moral principle which bought Britain into the war in the first instance, that Britain in waiting and allowing France to be punched in the face was having its Cities bombed daily and its people were on basic rations for years. Is there anything Millennials don't subvert and twist?

[@Tenebraeification]

​@@Muckylittleme The United Kingdom declared war on Germany before Germany had even began their bombing campaign, so no Britain didn't join the war out of some moral outrage over being bombed, they joined the war because at that point they and France had to honor their guarantee of Polish sovereignty. The video even makes visual reference to the bombing campaign at 0:12 and 1:47, so I'm left befuddled of what your little anti-millenial spiel was aimed at, the channel, the user Accaladka even though he made no mention of what you're babbling about?

[@Muckylittleme]

@@Tenebraeification Strawman. Nobody said Britain joined the war after being bombed. They joined the war because Germany invaded Poland and made it clear Hitler was a warmonger who would never be satiated until his fascist "1000 year Reich" or third Reich was established, That agreement was forged on a moral basis and did not need to made nor did it need to be honoured. The fact you want to dismiss any notion of a moral dimension to the allies part in the war perhaps suggests a lack of moral ambiguity within yourself. Perhaps you have no personal moral revulsion to Nazi Germany and the deeds of the SS - for if you did then you would surely be able to emphasise with the idea that people of time who were threatened by it felt it much more strongly.

[@Paul_in_Thailand]

I love your channel and I love the way you summarize such a complicated piece of history perfectly in such a short time. Thank you for your videos.

[@KaiserMattTygore927]

"Let's piss off two of the largest and economically powerful countries on Earth" -Axis

[@miniaturejayhawk8702]

Actually Germany was the second strongest economy at the time.

[@blank1673]

@@miniaturejayhawk8702 Nope the UK had the second biggest economy, Germany was 3rd and the USSR 4th

[@dragooll2023]

@@blank1673 1. USA 2. Germany (With occupied territories) 3. USSR 4. UK (1940-1941) 1. USA 2. USSR 3. Germany 4. UK (1942-1944)

[@dragooll2023]

@@blank1673 If we count the whole british commonwealth, the UK would always be above Germany.

[@yourlocalramen1660]

@@dragooll2023 Agreed, and counting the commonwealth makes 0 sense considering most of those commonwealth countries were defacto independent.

[@filipdevillard720]

I love that you recognised the involvement of Polish mathematicians in the cracking of the enigma code at 2:09

[@Pietroszz]

Most important part of the video

[@54356776]

The Polish are extremely well recognised in their contribution to the war by the average Brit. The Polish had worked out how to read the messages and shared this with Britain but cracking the enigma code was a daily effort by many people. At the outbreak of the war the Germans were changing the code on a daily basis.

[@marcinkrz3140]

@@HerewardWake Polish coders also gave allies Enigma copy's and also after escaping Poland they worked closely with Turing and his team it's also pretty funny story how Polish coders got their hands on Enigma to begin with

[@alganhar1]

@@marcinkrz3140 Yup, the Polish cracked the original Enigma machine pretty quickly, unfortunately in early 39 the Germans changed their Enigma machine, giving it more possible settings so increasing the number of permutations by at least one order of magnitude. While the Polish Codebreakers were brilliant, the Poles lacked the cash and expertise to build the Bombes in the kind of numbers they required, though they did come up with early designs for them. The Polish Codebreakers moving pretty much in their entirety to the UK after the fall of Poland meant that their critically important expertise and experience was right where it needed to be. While i think the British would have broken Enigma eventually even without the Poles the knowledge and skill of the Poles ensured the British were able to break German messages reliably at least a year, and possibly as long as two years before they would have been able to do so without that vital Polish help. So yeah, the contribution of the Polish Codebreakers to the Allied efforts most definately cannot be understated, though they are often overstated, as many do not realise the Enigma machines were upgraded several times during the war, especially the Kriegsmarine variant. Each time they were upgraded the codebreaking effort essentially had to start again from scratch....

[@B355Y]

@@alganhar1 spot on mate. I came to post a similar comment but yours is better than I could articulate lol

[@Franktds1980]

Legends say that Lenny's phrase "He is about to do something stupid" is inspired in Churchill and his thoughts about Germany

[@lisatapp5785]

“Us Brits we know stuff!”

[@andknuckles101]

@@lisatapp5785 You really do like replying to every comment that mentions "Britain"

[@samwilkinson2534]

Churchill probably got that quote from his cabinet cause they kept saying that about Churchill.

[@karlmorgan8580]

Damn I love this viewpoint. I’ve seen so many retellings of this but honestly this is such a practical way of looking at the history.

[@owenhammond1880]

"There were many politicians that thought fighting on was foolish." *Cuts to JUST Nevil Chamberlin getting sided eyed by everyone in the room.*

[@axelpatrickb.pingol3228]

Neville Chamberlain was still popular amongst the MP's despite the setback of the Munich Agreement (which was found out later it was never meant to succeed as advertised; only delay the inevitable for Britain to prepare)...

[@andknuckles101]

@@axelpatrickb.pingol3228 Well that's debatable. I find it strange how Chamberlain made such a massive thing of the agreement to the British public, telling them it was to be "peace for our time" and that. If he knew Germany would break the agreement he wouldn't have made such a move that would most likely turn the general public against the current government, because of all the lies and false promises of peace

[@NRProductionss]

Yeah, that's wrong, Nevil Chamberlain actually supported Churchill against Halifax and supported continuing the war as he knew better than anyone Hitler wasn't to be trusted.

[@danghostman2814]

This really isn't the either/or that people present it as; Chamberlain thought he could deal with Hitler and stave off war indefinitely. Once it turned out that Hitler was completely willing to lie to him as well, Chamberlain was alongside the "Well, it's going to be war" crowd.

[@nick0875]

@@axelpatrickb.pingol3228 It is not like the Germans were ready for war in 1938 so they got lucky with the Munich Agreement as well.

[@jeffhask367]

Short answer: Churchill Long answer: Winston Leonard Spencer-Churchill

[@lovablesnowman]

Good lad

[@number1kenyan]

0:03 history matters should continue making posters like this in his art style lmao

[@Red-hh7dm]

It's the same person/people

[@scottishbikerseumas5317]

I’d buy a T-shirt or two. A ‘suspicion face’ and an ‘a bit dead’ frame with legs being two personal favourites.

[@MooseMolestr]

it would also be neat to have a custom one

[@antekustura5874]

BRU STOP SWEARING

[@rustomkanishka]

"And even if, which I do not for a moment believe, this island or a large part of it were subjugated and starving, then our Empire beyond the seas, armed and guarded by the British Fleet, would carry on the struggle, until, in God's good time, the New World, with all its power and might, steps forth to the rescue and the liberation of the old." Pretty damn clear in his speech. Keep sea lanes open, just hold out long enough, and don't worry, America and Canada will help us.

[@walterkronkitesleftshoe6684]

Canadians yes, but Americans? They were only too happy to be profiting from BOTH sides of the conflict, busy bleeding major competitors dry whilst bloating their own finances.

[@cattysplat]

...Eventually. America was making insane bank trading to both sides as a neutral country and would likely have stayed so, if Japan didn't bomb Pearl Harbor.

[@sichere]

Churchill secretly met with the US President and gave him the old "chose a side" speech and came up with the Atlantic Charter. America was profiting from sitting on the fence and was not a friend of the Old Empire. Britain even resorted to invading Iceland to keep the Sea lanes clear.

[@theckstyles]

Adding the part about Britain helping smaller nations that were attacked is a really important inclusion of strategic nuance. Time has really swept away much of the strategic thought that went into planning the war boiling it down to good guys vs bad guys. Reading actual historical works on the first or second world war, it really is shocking how much effort was used to draw the United States in while in American history it is always taught as, "this one action lead America to enter the war." Britain and the Allies literally planned for years and had multiple contingences to try and entice the United States to join.

[@Rowlph8888]

Yes, but Britain is still majorly to blame, in essence,it harmed itself by internal betrayal and conflict. British companies were selling goods to Germany for several years before the war, which were clearly being used to militarise. The elite knew this, but did nothing because it was making money. Also, The British elite, were reluctant to mention Germany's mobilisation, because they knew it would be unpopular, due to you how jaded the British public were following World War I, and the party in power wouldn't risk not being re-elected. The usual selfish elite mentality of those in government. This video is humorous and portrays Britain as Savvy and Germany as f**k ups, but in reality, modern history is simply a shit show, number of f**k ups, from Britain, when it was always in the ascendancy and the power balance was under its control, which led to both world wars happening, when both of them were totally avoidable, if Britain had simply acted earlier, in each case. They were far more powerful than Germany, but just allowed Germany to draw level and then outpace them and they had several years to stop this, in each case. You see the parallels now in the USA, complacency, arrogance has led to other powers in the world, increasing in influence, when their cups in each case, it was totally avoidable by the united states as wellStart the warbird

[@richardhorrocks1460]

I also wonder how many white Americans would have wholly supported a similar genocide of black people as Hitler's of the Jews...? The British and the Yanks being the good guys is nowhere near as clear as it seems now. The Nazis had to be VERY bad to make us seem so good. In reality, neither of us were too far from the Nazis. The Germans were just bitter and angry enough to act on the worst impulses.

[@rrwholloway]

There are wonderful quotes from Churchill about how he wooed the US into the war.

[@Gungho1a]

At least germany declared war on the US, saved their politicians having to do the job.

[@FrankBrown-c5l]

The "Allowed" sinking of the Lucitania by a German U boat got America into WW1. It's escort ships were still tied up in Liverpool docks the Top Sea Dogs knowing that the Lucitania was sailing up the Irish sea with known about German subs patrolling the area. Pearl Harbour finally got America into WW2. American admiralty in Washington knew that the Japanese fleet was sailing in the direction of Pearl but didn't inform Pearl's commanding officer of it. The American ships were not battle ready, guns capped, steam boilers barely ticking over, most of the crews on shore leave, all ships sitting targets. Both events were orchestrated to get the American people fired up and accepting joining the fray. Until then on both occasions American people were quite content on their country profiting from the "Lease/lend" of armaments to the allies. But the American government alongside the Military Industrial complex could see more profit in sending the nations young to fight and die, and so America was FINALLY drawn into the war. Which of course they are fond of portraying, on film and in history books, as them winning those wars. Late to the party both times.

[@Longshanks1690]

Cos there were beaches, streets, hills and landing grounds still to fight on.

[@maximilianolimamoreira5002]

thankfully, yes,I would not like to see an Europe ruled by nazis going on forever.

[@StratMan9009]

@@maximilianolimamoreira5002 Yes half rule by the Soviet Union and the other half puppeted by the US was much better. Not to even mention that Hitler offered to totally pull out of all conquered western territories in exchange for peace.

[@Longshanks1690]

@@StratMan9009 Unironically, yes. Wtf is up with this comment section and all it's Wehraboo Nazi apologists today?

[@blackpowderuser373]

@@Longshanks1690 Send in the SAS to deal with them, Your Majesty.

[@StratMan9009]

@@Ben-ek1fz Citation needed. There is no historical evidence that Germany wished to puppet the west. As for the Soviet Union yeah they had to go but as history has shown that was always going to happen whether it was in the 40s with Germany or in the 90s with America. I don't understand why it couldn't have just been gotten over with in the 40s.

[@Direphalanx]

“What could go wrong” sign hitler was holding for the eastern front had me rolling. Never change history matters

[@robertrichard6107]

The 'Operation Sea Lion' to invade UK was a head fake to throw Uncle Joe off guard, and show France how Napolean should have done it! Besides, Hitler didn't want to bother the German Royals of the UK, Balfour had been signed, on with the Holy Cost!

[@encycl07pedia-]

Never change, History Matters.*

[@the98themperoroftheholybri33]

What everyone overlooks about Britain having its empire is yes they did, but sending resouces and men from the empire to Britain or the continent was a risky task, mostly due to German Uboats. So great Britain was very much alone. Also Hitler was furious Britain didn't join the axis, he had admired the British for their empire building, the fact a small island managed to conquer somewhere like India impressed him, plus he viewed the English as fellow Germanic people and many of the high command loved the idea of the "English country gent"

[@mito88]

very much alone with the US right behind

[@paganphil100]

@@mito88 Not when the war started (1939).

[@mrcaboosevg6089]

@@mito88 US didn't make much of a difference in the fight until they along with Britain invaded Italy, in North Africa they were more or less canon fodder. The Eastern war is a different story

[@cynicat74]

According to his second book, Hitler said the UK would have to "lose their Jewish influence", whatever the fuck that's supposed to mean. Honestly, kind of crazy to think anyone followed that nut-job

[@dusk6159]

​@@mrcaboosevg6089The UK was great and its many fights essential but the US (aiding US, still not fighting) was key to the UK, and involved in the West, as much as it was with its other material to the USSR, and to anything holding up against the Axis' onslaught.

[@paulreeve3824]

Just to be clear though, Britain wasn’t sitting on its hands. Among other things it fought in Norway and France, endured the blitz and won the Battle of Britain, all in 1940. All that ‘waiting for a mistake’ took a real national effort and sacrifice.

[@himaro101]

Don't forget North Africa.

[@bigbad25]

@@looinrims well apart from winning that whole North Africa thing and winning the battle of the Atlantic.. oh and keeping the axis out of the middle east oil fields... breaking the enigma code with the Czechs help that pretty much screwed Germany long term... oh and never having one successful German spy in the entire UK... so winning the intelligence war. oh and supplying ristence groups all over Europe... oh and the main thing is she didn't have defeatist tools like you giving in and asking for peace with the dam natzis

[@looinrims]

@@bigbad25 none of that was in 1940 or declarable in 1940? Also the US had to hold your hand/provide most of the equipment for you to do most of that too, all you have to do is see the order of battles and the whole Torch thing Btw the USA sunk 2/3’s of the submarines, so the British didn’t win in the Atlantic, the US did

[@bigbad25]

@@looinrims ah I see the first part you decide it only applies if it happened in 1940 and then you Ignore eveything I said and just picked the battle of the attlantic with the Americans that didn't join untll 1942....so ignoring eveything I just said saying it don't matter unless it's 1940 then contrition yourself. Well congrats on being a lazy troll.... couldn't even get that right.

[@looinrims]

@@bigbad25 the original comment was about 1940, so you’re just moving the goal posts bro Also I mean…nothing I said was wrong? 90% of what you said requires the asterisk of “the USA provided all the equipment manpower and leadership and did most of the fighting” just like the battle of the Atlantic Cry all you want but by wars end more than 2/3s the submarine losses were caused by the Americans, not the British But regardless again, the OP and this whole video is about 1940, it’s just British fanboys love to paint themselves as doing everything despite requiring free shit from the Americans from 1940 onwards Oh finally just in case you forgot lend lease started in 1940, so…read a book? I’m not sure what to recommend here

[@GrafSchocola]

I would also like to mention George Orwell, who spent much of his time campaigning around Britain to raise public support for the war. While it probably didn't affect the British government, it did help convincing the people to keep on fighting.

[@flochforster88]

He ironically helped create the world he earned us against in his 1948 book (1984) so.

[@spagoot]

@@flochforster88 are you deluded

[@mr.mintman7545]

​@@flochforster88 you're illiterate, stop claiming to have read things you obviously haven't.

[@spagoot]

@@J5X7 once again, are you deluded

[@captain_hammer]

@@flochforster88 I'd say that by helping to raise support to fight the most evil authoritarian state that ever existed, he helped prevent his vision of 1984.

[@Taurineg]

Britain in 1940 is basically the main anime character who won’t give up and eventually somehow won because of reasons.

[@Mkrause762]

It’s not like the Germans ever had a chance at successfully crossing the channel

[@robertwood4678]

yeah lets just completely forget the battle of britain and get all our information from comedy youtube videos

[@tesstickle7267]

@@Mkrause762 the most the Germans got was the channel Islands, which was a huge mistakes because they got trapped on them lol the royal navy sailed around them and left the civilians under occupation. Wasn't any point fighting to retake the Islands, just sit back and wait lol the poor Germans would have seen thousands of ships sailing past and knew how screwed they were lol

[@arandombard1197]

Nah, they just looked at the situations and realised that, while they couldn't win, they couldn't lose either. They also knew time was on their side so a war of attrition would eventually be a victory. The outcome was guaranteed from that point.

[@jimpickins7900]

Europe: unites under 1 power. Britain: how many times do I have to teach you this lesson old man?!

[@h0ckeyd]

I do love that line "alone"...."alone with the biggest empire the world had ever seen"....the empire's forces were and would come and to suggest we were a tiny island about to be swallowed by Nazi Germany is a bit of a silly one.

[@dovetonsturdee7033]

But in 1940, the Dominions and Empire were, aside from Canada, not able to send military reinforcements to Britain in order to oppose any invasion attempt. As the Royal Navy held total maritime supremacy in home waters however, the issue never arose.

[@encycl07pedia-]

LMFAO. Yeah, all those soldiers in India and east Asia could just hop on a few 747s that didn't exist yet and be there in a few hours... It's not like they'd have to walk/drive/ride horses at agonizingly slow paces (compared to today) to be in a position to defend England from German aggression.

[@mrcaboosevg6089]

Britain wasn't in direct control of most of the dominions, they did in fact join because they wanted to. It was more a commonwealth, hence the name

[@alanbeaumont4848]

The British stand is especially epic, because the money ran out even before France fell and Britain fought on using credit. It's the opposite of realpolitik, which would have encouraged peace, instead being a moral decision which consequently ended the British Empire.

[@cynicat74]

The only problem there is that you'd be risking a European Hegemony, under Germany, which goes exactly against British foreign policy of always aiding the weaker nations, to prevent anyone getting too strong.

[@edelweiss7928]

Immoral decision*

[@kiwitrainguy]

In early 1941 Britain had just about run out of money. Lend-Lease allowed them to keep on fighting. Without it Britain would have been forced to sue for peace with Nazi Germany. If Britain had done this I'm sure that part of the deal would be to put the Royal Navy at the Axis Powers' disposal. Hitler wouldn't have had much use for it ("On land I am a hero but at Sea I am a coward"), but the Axis Power that could have used it was Japan, even if the Royal Navy ships were manned by Japanese Seamen. Being part of the British Empire, Australia and New Zealand would then be allied to the Axis Powers so Japan could use them as bases and for supplies. Things in the Pacific could have turned out very differently.

[@izder]

@@cynicat74 and here we are with eu dominated by germany

[@VinnyUnion]

​@@izder Germany always comes back one way or the other.

[@roobouncer3146]

2:02 Damm i wasn't expecting PERSPECTIVE nice job

[@nadirdridah2001]

Damm only minites ago this has 20 likes

[@poke-champ4256]

way to high qualtity for this damn

[@HistoryMatters]

Did somebody order a third dimension?

[@theonly802]

@@HistoryMatters getting advanced over here

[@DC-hy2rg]

perfectly timed Simpsons reference too

[@loveless8241]

Hold out till 1942 until Germany made a mistake; which they did in 1941. I love this channel so much.

[@rohiths3554]

They didn't. Ussr was industrialising

[@encycl07pedia-]

@@rohiths3554 Barbarossa needed more planning and prep than Germany gave it. Just packing winter clothes would have been a huge boon to the German war effort there.

[@JohnPepp]

@@rohiths3554 - Stalin was shocked that Hitler attacked his country and I read he was at his retreat house at the time.

[@derpydood]

@@encycl07pedia- From what I've heard(so take with a grain of salt) Germany planed to invade the U.S.S.R. earlier in the year, but Italy trying and failing to invade Greece put that on hold, and instead of waiting to try Barbarossa next year they just took a crack at it in the middle of summer.

[@InceyWincey]

That was actually much more informative than I expected it to be.

[@rickypoon6406]

Lolol that "Try Not to Die" poster. Love this channel!

[@nightblade3709]

I clicked faster on this video than the Blitzkrieg

[@britishenough7690]

Holy up how

[@DanS044]

That makes a full one week window... I don’t see how this is considered fast in term of KZbin video links loading

[@nightblade3709]

@@DanS044 I mean you're completely right lol

[@Puckosar]

That joke is pretty overused and tired at this point

[@robbieaulia6462]

@@Puckosar Soldier, do not give up now. It's only a few hours until we reach our homeland. We just gotta wait for the fishermens.

[@Numba003]

Invading the USSR being described as “something silly” is the sort of historical flippancy and accuracy that I’m here for lol. Stay well out there everybody, and God bless you friends.😊

[@controlleddemolition9112]

I'm not sure it was as silly as it was predictable or even inevitable. The question is whether "standing pat" on the gains they made through 1940 was ever a viable option for Nazi Germany. Leaving Britain and the USSR alone and giving them time to arm themselves while the US was also getting prepared to join the war wasn't likely to lead to sustained peace. How do you stand pat while war has been declared and your most powerful enemy in that war has refused to negotiate a peace settlement? Could they have defeated Brtiain completely rather than invading the USSR? I suppose that is a legitimate question, but it wasn't going to be easy. There was that English Channel, the Royal Navy and the RAF to consider. Britain's global economy was still stronger than Germany's, and they had to get there first to win a decisive victory.

[@ddc2957]

ControlledDemo you’re right it wasn’t going to be easy but IMO Germany would’ve been successful in a straight fight with the Brit’s, & the Brits mayve suspected as much.

[@controlleddemolition9112]

@@ddc2957 Certainly, in a land war, it would have been "no contest", especially in 1940 or 1941. However, the British weren't about to fight that war anywhere except on home ground, and the Germans were no match for the British at sea and completely unable to establish air superiorty, a necessity if they hoped to invade. It seems that Germany's plan was to win by getting Great Britain to negotiate for peace on favorable terms. Operation Sea Lion wasn't well conceived to begin with, and they lacked the ability to carry it out. You're right that the British feared an invasion. They had contingencies in place to move the government to Canada and try to fight on from there if Great Britain was overrun.

[@KaiserMattTygore927]

@@controlleddemolition9112 Well, keep in mind they had momentum and surprise and still stalled, stalemated and eventually were kicked out of russia. it wasn't necessarily a forgone conclusion but even when they had almost every card they still lost, just wasn't a good plan.

[@controlleddemolition9112]

@@KaiserMattTygore927 True, but then, in hindsight, one could then say the same about the invasion of Poland, which led to the declaration of war. It was an ill-conceived plan predicated upon quick and total victory. Even one major setback would spell doom. My point isn't that invading the USSR was a bright idea. I was arguing that it was the only option available in 1941. They couldn't bring the UK to the peace table. They couldn't defeat them in the air or at sea, so they couldn't invade. If they simply waited, leaving the USSR alone, their defeat was even more inevitable. They needed to take the Red Army out and gain access to more resources to have any hope.

[@tysonreed4763]

The part with Churchill skipping through the flowers had me dyin!

[@the94thminute]

I was wondering why Lord Halifax had a glove on, and subsequently found out he didn't have a left hand and wore an artificial one, hence the Luke Skywalker style glove. It's little things like that in the videos which I love - plus gotta love that Simpson reference also! :)

[@DrGonzo94]

Really nice, I did not know this

[@tomfoulds2604]

any idea how he lost his hand?

[@DominionSorcerer]

@@tomfoulds2604 Being born. Literally. He was born with a left arm so incredibly atrophied that he didn't have a hand.

[@tomfoulds2604]

@@DominionSorcerer cheers mate!

[@Loki7430]

Genuinely one of the best and most concise summaries of the military strategy I’ve heard. These videos are excellent.

[@gigaflynn_]

"we will fight them on the beaches, and on the landing fields, which they will never reach, because we still have an imperial truckload of Spitfires and the World's largest Navy."

[@dickmonkey-king1271]

I didn't realise just how many Spitfires were actually built... 22,000!

[@tedwarden5803]

And twenty two miles of sea full of treacherous currents and unreliable weather.

[@gigaflynn_]

@@tedwarden5803 and mines, don't forget the sea mines.

[@robertthompson1460]

Pretty much, if it reached the point that operation sealion was possible, Britain would have already lost as that implies the RN is out for the count and so the U-boats could just starve Britain to surrender.

[@Spygon]

@@robertthompson1460 Really with the guidelines Germany set for Operation Sealion to be put into motion. It pretty much needed Britian's military to be completely destroyed or fighting somewhere that wasnt the British Isle (That would have never happened) to be actioned. Operation Sealion is one of things when someone asks did you have a plan for it and you do but you know its never actually going to happen.

[@28pbtkh23]

I think that Baldrick must have been in the cabinet: "I've got a cunning plan."

[@Apeksim]

And for once, it's actually cunning and not stupid.

[@ultru3525]

@@Apeksim nah, it's still stupid, but also effective

[@germanvisitor2]

"I fear your plan has to wait, Baldrick. But whatever it was, it was probably better than my plan to get out of here by pretending to be insane."

[@BetaSalvationMOVED]

new history matters video, YES

[@venicejustvenice3424]

Fucking Agree

[@bruh____784]

@@venicejustvenice3424 ikr

[@somerandomdude444]

Every time he makes vids hhe always makes my day go better

[@bm-ey8pm]

Totalyy agreed

[@pelicaspc2172]

I love how simplistic yet improving the animations are and the questions these videos answer. Keep it up

[@Halal_Butcher]

"Wait for germany to do something stupid" Japan:I got you!

[@jbrown8601]

Lol

[@IdntknowWhy]

japan was the worst axis member ever

[@thevirtualpug3d868]

@@IdntknowWhy That goes to Italy.

[@mrcaboosevg6089]

@@IdntknowWhy Japan did the only thing it could do, they were being strangled by the US. Italy however tried to reform the Roman Empire but did nothing but hand Britain, France and later US victories

[@Rowlph8888]

@@mrcaboosevg6089 it's all about timing. As you said, Japan needed to do something, but it could have waited until the axes had won on all fronts, except the USA, then it would have been easy to defeat the USA, without the other allies, helping them. in the video he states that Britain didn't think it could defeat Germany on its own. in 1937, Britain, was probably still the greatest military power in the world, but the only reason why it didn't think that it could beat Germany in 1939, is because Germany was irrefutably the greatest military power. "In the world." by 1939, because that is what happens, when the entire population of a country, as large as Germany is focused on rearmament and military entirely, by a despot, who will kill anybody who thinks otherwise.Whereas, the other countries were still sleepwalking, due to the handover from the brutality of World War I if the US ddidn't have its geographical advantages, and faced Germany alone, in 1939, they would have been in exactly the same losing position as Britain, and in fact probably worse, because they did not have the colonies to aid them.

[@nikoladd]

“Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake.” - Sun Tzu, The art of war.

[@techpriest8705]

(that was Napoleon btw)

[@micahistory]

Even with so many odds against them, it's crazy how the UK just kept fighting anyways

[@SithCats]

They had a lot going for them. They still had the strongest navy in the world, which the Germans would have had to get past in order to invade them. They live on an island which hasn't been conquered by outsiders in nearly a thousand years. They had a globe-spanning empire from which to draw resources and people. I mean, Germany was on a roll and had most of continental Europe at its disposal, but Britain was definitely not weak by any means either.

[@micahistory]

@@SithCats yes

[@arandombard1197]

@@SithCats And add to that the fact that Germany was currently occupying a large number of countries, all with resistance forces and all ready to rise up, meaning Germany had to commit military forces to occupation. Any territory the UK 'takes' is just liberated territory and those people will JOIN them in the fight. It's already an uphill battle at that point.

[@stephenbielec200]

Germany never understood Naval power and it's multiple influences on events, be they immediate or long term. Rommel admitted 'getting it' and even marvelled when his Afrika Korps ran of of petrol, food and water. Humble respect from the man.

[@koenwaalde]

@@SithCats that thousand year part is not true, with the glorous revolution the dutch did invade Engeland, altho with support from inside, they hated their king as much as my people did.

[@hfar_in_the_sky]

"So what are the Germans planning next?" "Invade the Soviet Union." "...Seriously?" "Yeah. Should we do anything about it?" "Help them along?"

[@theresgottabeagermanwordfo903]

Britain is the kind of chess player that just waits until his opponent blunders

[@lisatapp5785]

“Good at wars and a chess see we got talent!”

[@zakir2815]

That's my strategy until I blunder 1st

[@galatheumbreon6862]

We are like that lol

[@matpk]

@@lisatapp5785 Compare 1930s Nazi Germany Vs 2020s Communist China IN YOUR NEXT VIDEO!!

[@tip00former1]

Just a stupid line right? I suppose 😎

[@nirvanachile24]

I had no idea that Lord Halifax had an artificial left hand until I noticed the gloved hand in this video and looked it up. Details like this are what put this channel over the top. Nice work.

[@JimmyaKaTheK]

The visuals were really good on this one I really liked it

[@idek6585]

0:42 2:15 Why is characters prancing around in a field so simple yet so memorable

[@Elitist20]

And the side-eye.

[@GopaiCheems]

I was about to comment "one word answer: Churchill" but I was thoroughly re-educated with this video

[@letsburn00]

People have such a simplistic view of history often, partly because if they have 10 historical eras to teach you in school, you only can get the roughest simplest outline. Especially when they are making public announcements but privately saying other stuff, people on KZbin make a lot of the public stuff. It's most hilarious reading pro-nazi youtube comments who see America saying nice things about Stalin and say they were all commies. When really in the later half of the war the allies were all quietly screwing each other over to get more stuff and preparing for the cold war. Churchhill was a part of the whole thing, but more like he was simply speaking more. But he was a massive asshole as well, just very much less than Hitler and Stalin.

[@PoochieCollins]

@@letsburn00 : on that note, it's a shame we didn't have the crystal ball to know that it'd have been good to let Russia fall or take it out ourselves. Would've avoided 2/3rds of a century's worth of problems, and counting.

[@letsburn00]

@@PoochieCollins The thing is that hindsight is what it is. But very often, there are people saying that obsessively short term thinking is a bad idea. They are just silenced. This occurs in government and the private sector all the time. America totally gave anticolonialism over to the Soviets because it was so obsessed with keeping Belgium, France and Britain on side in Europe. The chaos in Africa was a clear result. Same with Iran. Under the Reagan Admin, there were CIA people who were fired because they said Pakistan being allowed to make nukes was dangerous. The short term objective (Afganistan) was lost. It even has weird effects like the design for the space shuttle being ruined because of a mission to grab spy satillite films and possibly a Soviet satellite. In the end the cold war was won without it, but the shuttle design was still messed up forever. In the overall scheme though. The Soviets were an opposing force. Some level of organised opposition was required. I feel that the cold war as simply another great game(the USSR was the successor state to the Russian empire remember), with ideological differences not the critical matter needs to be looked at better. Including Self interest by the major powers explains so much more than blaming ideological ones exclusively for the soviet-western schism.

[@mk_gamíng0609]

@@PoochieCollins Taking out Russia is no simple feat. Due to the size of it you would have to spend quite a few A-bombs to wipe them out in one fowl swoop. Taking Russia by conventual means is pretty much a VERY stupid idea

[@FiredAndIced]

@@letsburn00 The study of geopolitics is the reason why we tuned in to some of the famous KZbin personalities like the Caspian Report (though not itself unbiased). Geopolitics looks at a country's state of things and their desire for power equivalence against a potential adversarial state. It matters not what ideology or socio-economic models were used, it simply looked at how a country is faring against its immediate neighbours and then more importantly later on, global outreach.

[@wilkywilky7814]

The reason we didn’t give up is because of Churchill, he probably wasn’t a good politician and not to everyone’s liking (the reasons why after the war he was voted out ) but he was exactly the type of leader we needed in our darkest hour, to lead us and rally up the British public behind him. It was his grit and determination to never surrender.

[@andym9571]

He was a brilliant 'politician' . Thats the point.

[@willkp50]

@Scarlet Dani genocide is pushing it mate

[@criert135]

@Scarlet Dani If you want to completely twist and distort facts you might see it as a “genocide”

[@micahistory]

Britain's greatest asset in the war was their intelligence and by knowing the axis plans, it helped them a huge deal

[@dusk6159]

No doubt about it. Even over their naval modern equipment.

[@sapcavax7806]

2:02 Simpsons and History Matters, what a time to be alive

[@ryanstritch1805]

Took me a couple of rewatches to get it but the simpsons reference at 2:01 is top notch

[@JimmyAgent007]

Ah, I knew I would find someone else who noticed if i read the comments.

[@blackpowderuser373]

Ooooh. Didn't get that at first. Good one.

[@genius11433]

I haven't watched The Simpsons in a long time; what's the reference?

[@flamingarrow2474]

What

[@gmailquinn]

@@genius11433 same here

[@CaptainphoenixofficialYT]

And this is why Britain had the largest and longest standing empire.

[@pridelander06]

1940: *UK stands alone* 1941: US and USSR: "On your left."

[@grosvenorclub]

The bombing of Pearl Harbour was two years after the start of WW2 , that's a long time to stand alone without any allies , except for the commonwealth of course .

[@jbrown8601]

The U's united

[@TorreFernand]

random question: when someone says "on your left" do they mean they want you to move to the left, or that they want you to move to the right?

[@pridelander06]

@@TorreFernand I think just be aware that they're passing you on the left so you're not caught off guard

[@Jagzeplin]

i wish my middle and high school social studies classes were just us watching history matters videos. i probably would have retained more of it

[@disunityholychaos7523]

our online class let us watch youtube videos of various history channels (mostly on topic schedules for example mine is US History we go to industrial era Teddy roosevelt, spanish american war, Progressives/muckraker era, WW1, roaring 20s-Al Capone valentines massacre, Great depression & dustbowl, WW2, Post war reconstruction & cold war tensions/red scares atomic bomb-space race & mccarthism to korean war we are at currently) im just watching now to flex on my teachers to give their TIL moment, maybe they forgot a little and i made the class interesting in our online class chats

[@mrcaboosevg6089]

@@disunityholychaos7523 Does America teach any history that doesn't involve the very limited history of the US?

[@disunityholychaos7523]

@@mrcaboosevg6089 actually we do, but depending on the courses you settled on its very large subjects to focus on i cant list them all but i can give summary. 1.) World histories- from ancient world history like europe (rome, vikings, greece,uk & ireland,etc). Eurasia (russis, mongols/silkroad) and Asia every dynasties/wars from china, japan history, south east asia to oceania (australia/NZ) 2.) Geography history- geopolitics,flow of trade,etc 3.) social studies history- regarding history of policies on society be it american or international inspirations, laws, foreign policies links and the shape of our foundations (like constitutions or learning departments to various goverments styles some kids dint even know what monarchy, republic, dictatorhsip or oligrachy is) 4. Cultural history- corporated in world languages (spnish class, french class,etc) or school history programmes (pride to black history month, international exchange programes or partnerships). 5.) Fieldtrips- some are local places to out of country trips (from what i heard some kids gone to japan/europe i guess?). my only experince is going from museums (holocaust/Dc museums) & city/rural fairs (some educational park i cant remember) to amusement parks (hershey park). that would be depending on school, location and time. i been on private catholic middleschool in maryland (2015-17) and public in highschool (2017-2021 3 yrs in person and online 2 in half due to pandemic). yet its very all good quality in my place, i may be biased due to my favorite subject as a history,true crime fan & geopolitics nut girl who immigrated in the US & naturalized citizne since. plus my family being spread out internationaly its no wonder i knew alot of stuff that interested me regarding history. i guess any school subject is history and there are ongoing battles of Gop wanting to change education in the US due to their fear of Critical race theory & the book burnings in the south/red states. yet many of the young are well versed/critical to find & look any information be library books, internet memes or some slept/forgot their subject in semester and revisted it on college further which the subjects are well more diverse & detailed depends on your choosing which to take. we even had homework to research & teach/present my class one time of any history of our choosing to even made conlusions of our selves on the information taught. the teachers whether be young (milennial) & old (some gen x guy) are very open minded and creative to teach and ask permision to us if we want the subject further. yet must met the time table of a week or 2 for the next subject and again.

[@FHIPrincePeter]

It was a good overview - and addresses an important question. Would love to see a more in depth analysis, considering you covered the important points in 3 mins you've done very well.

[@Im_AFK_Btw]

Axis: I've taken France, you have no more countries to aid you now, you cant possibly win! Britain: You've triggered by trap card! "Stupid leadership" *Hitler declares war on USSR *Pearl harbour forces America to join the war *Italy "the soft underbelly of Europe" not having any factories or money Axis: "NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO" *Blows up.

[@JakubWojciechowski933]

One day James Bissonette won't be there anymore and the patreon credits will never be the same.

[@powersettingsm7172]

you didn't need to say that...

[@jamesbissonette8002]

Hopefully not anytime soon!

[@YankeeFromArizona]

@@jamesbissonette8002 yoooooo

[@comph2686]

“And we’ll fight them with the butt ends of broken beer bottles because that’s bloody well all we’ve got!” -Winston Churchill

[@comph2686]

Yes, I did learn this quote from Hearts of Iron IV.

[@robbieaulia6462]

@@comph2686 Well then my good sir, I see that there is no reason to judge you. uNlEsS i'M a BoOmMeR.

[@illiteratethug3305]

"Mr Prime Minister, WE ARE SAVED, I have just received a message from James Bizonette on Patreon" "Then what are you blahdy-well waiting for, get the tanks built man!"

[@Siptom369]

"We shall fight them on the beaches!"

[@artemius8442]

"[...], we shall never surrender." :)

[@thefrenchareharlequins2743]

"And we will fight them with the butt ends of broken beers bottles because that is all we bloody well got!"

[@blackhatfreak]

Burp

[@onur97able]

Meanwhile UK in 2021 air is racist

[@khukri_wielderxxx1962]

We shall fight them in the halls!

[@scottstallings5029]

IT'S ABSOLUTELY AMAZING. I ALWAYS WONDERED THIS. GREAT WORK!!

[@jbrown8601]

Germany, trying to go out on the weekend and do its thing: Italy, the broke homeboy tagging along: Japan, the hot head that always starting fights.

[@jimpickins7900]

Europe: unites under 1 power. Britain: how many times do I have to teach you this lesson old man?!

[@goopguy548]

People say Japan made a stupid move, but in truth they were forced to go to war, since America was threating to cut any oil from them if they didn't pull out of China, Japan's pre-emptive warning strike at pearl harbor would have been enough, and if British and soviet troops weren't at play, America would have fell to Germany and Japan, even without Italy's help

[@ballsdeep9400]

@@goopguy548 America wins no matter what lol, they took no damage and and had the strongest economy. That won the war since Europe was in shambles, attacks the USA just made them actually attack instead of lending aid

[@Kaiji...]

Germany: "ARE YOU READY TO FIGHT!?" Britain: "No, no, go ahead and do whatever you want." *sips tea*

[@number1kenyan]

0:38 I don’t know why but these characters holding signs kill me

[@emmiannon1266]

The best one was in a video when he said that charlemagne may have been illiterate and he just had him holding a sign covered in scribbles instead of words

[@geisaune793]

“Bringing two monumental allies into the conflict and tipping the scales” That line gives me goosebumps for some reason haha

[@wizardcat5220]

"Through the strategy if letting france get punched in the face until Britain had got ready an army (in two years)" Gotta love that line

[@Caniewaak]

2:01 that's a solid Simpsons reference right there. Well done.

[@alanfulcher460]

Ohhh I had to re-watch that a couple of times before I got it. Very nice

[@xcheese1]

"Get ready everybody, he's about to do something stupid."

[@Kanbei11]

Angry Germany, you're fired!

[@manicdgr]

1:14 Finally my dream came true. A history matters drawing of mr. Gamer Mosley

[@Hand-in-Shot_Productions]

Can someone explain _why_ Mosley is a gamer?

[@Буянзул]

@Hand-in-Shot Production There is a running joke on the internet that people who think playing video games is a personality trait are often bigoted, and satirically use the word gamer as a synonym for war criminal and fascist.

[@Буянзул]

@@Hand-in-Shot_Productions Come over to r/Banvideogames and find out ;)

[@manicdgr]

@@Буянзул Please tell me you don't support this...

[@Буянзул]

@@manicdgr That place is obviously a joke, how on earth did you fall for it.

[@statistic2343]

I got mad respect for the British to make this decision. I respect the British people and their nation.

[@jd7634]

2:19 Fighting battles in order to get Good PR, now THAT'S dedication.

[@writerconsidered]

Never interrupt your enemy when they are making a mistake. Apparently Britain took that to heart.

[@gonkmaster717]

In a word: Churchill. Edit: Yes, I am aware that "Winston Churchill" are two words. Edit 2: "Winston" is gone.

[@Iemonaide]

that’s two

[@conmanalbuquerque3116]

that's two words

[@khat1942]

In two words*

[@BreadWinner330]

Should just be Churchill

[@kakkacarmenelectra7229]

Because we aren’t cowards!! INGERLAND, INGERLAND!! 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿

[@mnichy888]

This is a brilliant distillation of a great great deal of information. There are a lot of interesting tidbits you didn’t dig into (I suspect on purpose) because your overall explanation is succinct enough to convey the key points: peace was not an option because Hitler had repeatedly demonstrated his inability to abide by his treaties, and Hitler was more-or-less continent bound and would overstretch his resources, while GB could theoretically replenish itself indefinitely. Really nicely done 👍

[@joofbing]

"Holding on until something happens" strategy. Worked nicely :D

[@Kerriangel]

Hitler: France has fallen, now let’s try and invade Britain. Churchill: YOU PICKED THE WRONG HOUSE FOOL

[@youraveragescotsman7119]

Royal Navy: *Exists... Menacingly.* RAF: *Also exists.*

[@powersettingsm7172]

Hitler again: "ah sorry about that, do you perhaps know where stalins house is then?"

[@PoochieCollins]

@@powersettingsm7172 hahaha

[@AndrewMitchell123]

very noice man

[@diarradunlap9337]

@@powersettingsm7172 Hitler: *Invades the Soviet Union and stretches his logistics to near breaking point* "We'll knock it out after the winter." Churchill: "Yep! There's that stupid move I was waiting for." Japan: *Attacks Pearl Harbor and starts war with the United States of America* Hitler: *Learns of Pearl Harbor* "Well, let's declare war on the Americans!" German General Staff: *facepalms* Stalin to Churchill: "You were waiting for *ONE* stupid move by Hitler? He just gave ya a *two-fer* "

[@ethanrohitmir7818]

01:18 Churchill wearing an bandolier carrying his cigars on it, I love it.