14 December, 2013

Document Shows Britain Was Ready to Declare War on Germany Before Hitler Invaded Poland

Posted by Socrates in Britain, court historians, England, Flying Tigers, history, History for newbies, Hitler, Japan, Socrates, World War II at 5:06 pm | Permanent Link

Not surprising. Despite what the court historians say, the “allies” were actually warmongers. For example, America planned to attack Japan months before Japan attacked Pearl Harbor, but the Japs beat America to the punch with the Pearl Harbor bombing [1].


[1] America’s Flying Tigers air squadron began training in Spring 1941 to attack Japanese troops in Burma and/or China, which was sort of funny since America was not yet at war with Japan. (Japan didn’t attack America until December 1941)

  • 14 Responses to “Document Shows Britain Was Ready to Declare War on Germany Before Hitler Invaded Poland”

    1. fd Says:

      Hitler said that Churchill was looking for a reason to declare war on Germany and he finally found it in the name of Poland. Nothing was said about Russia invading Poland.

      The Federals on the Potomac didn’t wait for Pearl Harbor. In 1939, Washington was supplying Britain with enormous amounts of money and war appliances to be thrown against the German people.

    2. Howdy Doody Says:

      Any one who had merchant seamen in their family or knew heard the stories of military supplies loaded and shipped to England.

      In June 1941, the navy parked just off Iceland told them to surrender or be bombarded.

      June 1941.

    3. Howdy Doody Says:


      Movement Madness

      Published on December 14, 2013 by Carolyn in Saturday Afternoon with Carolyn Yeager

      Dec. 14, 2013

    4. CW-2 Says:

      People forget that Churchill was NOT prime minister at the time Britain declared war on NS Germany. Neville Chamberlain was prime minister and he wanted peace with Germany but he was under enormous American and jew pressure to force a confrontation with Hilter. Many in Chamberlain’s own party were keen on accommodating German expansion so long as it was directed at the Soviet Jewion.
      Chamberlain eventually succumbed to jew pressure and the promises war monger FDR made about material aid. Of course, once war was declared NO aid was forthcoming, it was a big con. Remember, Lend Lease was 2 years away. FDR and his jews made sure that Britain would be bankrupted by their rapacious demands before any supplies arrived. In exchange for 20 clapped-out 1917 vintage destroyers Britain had to surrender the British Virgin Islands. Later FDR made the British government expropriate privately owned British assets in America and Argentina and sell them at bargain price to ‘approved’ US companies. Also as security for further supplies of materials and food stuffs the gold reserves of South Africa were handed over to US Treasury for ‘safe-keeping’.
      With friends like that who needs enemies.

    5. Nom de Guerre Says:

      It’s hard to believe than once upon a time, the American public actually believed a causus belli had to be an attack. Nowadays the Zogs tactic is so blatantly false, just do the attack yourself, or hire some other thugs to carry it out.
      Dr. Oliver made some interesting observation about America, the older America that is the period from 1776-1861: he said the so called revolutionary war was America’s one and only civil war. Not the so-called Yankee war of aggression, which was more like a jihad by the religious whackos.

    6. jake Says:


      From Alex Wellersteins Nuclear Secrecy blog. US started to develop firebombs with maximum effectiveness when used against typical German and Japanese civilian houses and infrastructure two months before Pearl Harbor.

    7. Tim McGreen Says:

      The US was prepared for a war against Japan as early as 1920. Washington knew that the Japs were eventually going to expand their Empire and that Japanese expansion would pose a threat to the Dutch East Indies, British Hong Kong/Singapore and the US ruled Philippines. So the Pearl Harbor attack came as no surprise. Conveniently enough, all of the US Navy’s aircraft carriers were out to sea at the time of the attack, leaving only those old WW1 era battleships to be sunk by Japanese planes.

      Maybe if Washington wasn’t so hostile towards Tokyo the Japs wouldn’t have joined the Rome-Berlin Axis. But FDR wanted war because his Jew Deal wasn’t getting the USA out of the Depression. In fact the American Depression started all over again in 1937, while Hitler and Mussolini were busy rebuilding their countries’ economies. And they were doing it without threatening US or British interests.

    8. Tim McGreen Says:

      Funny how we always hear about Chamberlain’s “appeasement” of Hitler at Munich, but we never hear anything about Truman’s appeasement of Stalin at Yalta. Would any of those Jewish establishment historians at Harvard, the NY Times or PBS care to tell us why that is?

    9. Howdy Doody Says:

      Read Hedeki Tojo’s last written statement on the war and the West.

    10. John Q. Republic Says:

      Hey, Tim:

      I hear lots of crickets.


    11. fd Says:


      SPEECH OF MAY 4, 1941


      “The most unscrupulous men of the present time had, as they admit today, decided as early as 1936 to involve the Reich, which in its peaceful work of reconstruction was becoming too powerful for them, in a new and bloody war and, if possible, to destroy it. They had finally succeeded in finding a State that was prepared for their interests and aims, and that State was Poland.”

      “The man behind this fanatical and diabolical plan to bring about war at whatever cost was Mr. Churchill.”

    12. Tim McGreen Says:

      JQR, I hear them crickets too. The Libs and the You-Know-Whos are real good at ignoring all opposition with their wall-to-wall “silent treatment”. But of course it was the dying FDR who gave Eastern Europe to Stalin at Yalta. Truman finished the job several months later at Potsdam.

    13. John Q. Republic Says:


      Yes, quite true.


    14. Howdy Doody Says:



      She-grow appointed to the second highest command in the US navy

      Support This Site

      Woman Nominated for Second in Command in Navy


      KARL D. writes:

      Obama has named a black woman as a four-star admiral, second only to the Chief of Naval Operations.

      As a commenter wrote at The Daily Mail, “Our military has become a Broadway production.”

      Laura writes:

      Once again it is entirely acceptable for a military woman to be insubordinate. Navy Vice Adm. Michelle Howard is quoted as saying that the Navy is sexist. I call that insubordination. She also calls sailors who question the wisdom of women in command “knuckleheads.” The inescapable rule is that women in the military end up fighting the military.

      Howard has probably been the beneficiary of much favoritism – and even so, at the very moment she is nominated to the second highest position in the Navy, she still accuses the military of sexism. Of course, the military is sexist and should be sexist, but she thinks that’s wrong.

      Also look at this absurd image, which captures just how ridiculous the idea of women in command is. Here we see a short, stocky woman among men. Also listen to her soft, feminine voice in the video in The Daily Mail, and tell me that she can command effectively.

      She is also clearly of mixed race, but will count as a black for political purposes.

      That 1945 “victory” has been just great, can’t get enough, haa.