What was the real "nonpolitically correct" reason for the start of WWII?

Answer 1

Hitler loved power and hated Jews. He was a brilliant speaker and was able to play on a broken Germany's fears and longing for importance.

Answer 2

WWII was far to complex a phenomenon for there to be one single reason. Historians might disagree, but here are some (II don't agree with some of these):

1) The Treaty of Versailles (that ended WWI) was far too punitive and harsh. It "blamed" Germany (and Austria-Hungary) for starting the war, forced an already-bankrupt Germany to pay crushing economic reparations (further ruining the economy), and created resentment in the hearts of the German people. 72 million dead people later, the world was at peace.

2) Hitler was a greedy, megalomaniacal (yet highly charismatic) idiot. He was also one of history's worst generals.

3) The German people elected Hitler, failed to recognize how dangerous he was, and (more or less) supported his imperialist policies.

4) The League of Nations (the predecessor to the oh-so-effective United Nations) was utterly ineffective. Likewise, the great powers (principally France and Britain) chose to appease Hitler, instead of opposing his obviously expansionist policies. Examples:

Hitler totally ignored the Treaty of Versailles, for one thing. He expanded the German army and navy FAR beyond what the Treaty allowed, annexed the Sudetanland (an ethnically German part of what was then Czechoslovakia with an advanced arms-manufacturing industry), united Germany and Austria, and permitted Germany to re-militarize of the Rhineland (an area on the Franco-German border demilitarized to serve as a buffer between the two nations).

These events took place over the course of several years, and at ANY time, the Allied Powers could have stepped in and nipped Hitler's ambitions in the bud. Nobody had the nerve (read: cojones) to do anything about it, and the result was a tragedy the likes of which the world has never seen.

5) The French were not psychologically capable of fighting another world war. They had lost practically an entire generation of young men in WWI, and as a result, planned on fighting purely on the defensive in the next war. When the German Army thundered across the Polish border on September 1, 1939, the French Army could have marched right into Berlin almost unopposed. Instead, the French stood fast behind the Maginot Line, which took the Germans approximately 12.587 seconds to breach after they got done crushing the Poles.

6) The Russians (back when they were the Soviet Union) were, if anything, even more culpable than the British and the French. Whereas the Brits and French only failed to oppose the Nazis, the Russians actually COOPERATED with them.

Per the Molotov-Ribbentrop Treaty, the Germans and Russians entered into a non-aggression pact (one step away from an outright alliance), and agreed to carve up Poland between them. Big mistake. A year or two later, when Hitler was done beating up on France, the Germans attacked Russia. The Russians lost at least 20 million people (military and civilian), and some historians estimate Russian losses as high as 30 million.

Answer 3

~So what, exactly, is the "politically correct" cause? Don't load your question unless your load it with live ammo.

As to the war in Europe, the Draconian terms of treaty of Versailles at the inconclusive end of WWI was the leading cause. Read up on what Woodrow Wilson was saying during the negotiations for details. As is so often the case, when someone with a brain lives in the White House no one listens. This is probably because it is such a rare event.

Had France and Gr. Britain not been so intent on exacting revenge, it is doubtful that the Great Depression would have been as severe, particularly in Germany. But for the total collapse of the German economy, it is doubtful that a demagogue like Hitler could have or would have risen to power. But for Hitler's quest to restore Germany to her pre-treaty status, it is likely that the "War to End All Wars" may have been the last global war (depending on what form of government resulted in Germany and how that Berlin related to Moscow) or at least the peace would have lasted for more than 2 decades.

As for the war in the Pacific, above all else Japan needed vital resources that Gr. Britain and the US were unwilling to share. Neither the US nor Britain were about to give up any part of their empires in the Pacific, Indonesia and Asia. Petroleum, rubber and steel were strategic commodities that the western powers did not want heading to Japan in meaningful quantity. That, coupled with ridiculous, non-confirmable and unenforceable arms limitations agreements intended to guarantee Japanese military inferiority made war between Britain and Japan and China and Japan all but inevitable. The US might have been able to stay out of the conflict had Washington treated Tokyo and London with some parity, but that wasn't about to happen. Had things been different in Europe, the US may have treated Japan more fairly, but that is doubtful. On the other hand, had the war in Europe not been raging on the Eastern Front, the Soviets may have taken an active role in a single front war against Japan and the war would have ended far sooner. By the same token, had the war in Europe not started, there would not have been an alliance between the Soviets and Britain and the US (and France), so the Soviets would not necessarily have joined in the fight against Japan at all.

As with all wars, the leading cause of the Big One comes down to dollars and cents coupled with national hubris and intolerance other nations sharing the pie.

The US telling North Korea and Iran that they can't have nukes is reminiscent of the limitations placed on Japan and her navy. See how we learn from history? With the 18 Ohio Class subs we've got floating around, 14 of which carry 24 Trident II's having at least 8 MIRV'd warheads with an accurate range of not less than 4,000 miles (that's 2688 targets anyplace on the globe from just 14 boats) and four more subs with 154 Tomahawks apiece (each capable of hitting multiple targets) it is no wonder we don't N Korea or Iran to be nuclear capable. Such a threat they pose. Just like in the 30's, the US is demanding that the rest of the world accept the US right to arm itself to the gills and with sufficient destructive power to terminate life on earth while the rest of the world has to sit back and watch and not develope any defense systems or MAD capability. That policy didn't work in the 30's with Germany and Japan and it won't work today. By analyizing the Korean and Iranian (and Iraqi) response to US foreign policy now, you can clearly see why Germany and Japan went to war then.

Answer 4

The simple answer is that Adolf Hitler started it. People in Germany at the time, even though Hitler had wide public support, were not at all enthusiastic about it, and his generals were absolutely dead-set against the idea. They figured Germany would get creamed, and they pretty much got that one right. But, do as the boss says.

Answer 5

Hitler wanted more land for the German people so he invaded Poland.
That ticked off the French and Brits so they declared war on Germany.

Answer 6

The Vatican...
was behind Mussolini..Lateran Accord of 1929...
http://www.shoaheducation.com/lateran.html

and was instrumental in Hitler's "Third Reich" (1,000 year reign)
Hitler signed the " Concordant with the Church of Rome" 1933... http://www.spurgeongems.org/rb-14.pdf


JAPAN and the Papacy:
"The Vatican accepted de facto diplomatic relations with Japan last week, despite U.S. and British protests (TIME, March 23) (1942). Tokyo broadcast that Ken Harada, former counselor of the Japanese Embassy in Paris, had been appointed Special Minister to the Vatican and that Archbishop Paolo Marella, Apostolic Delegate to Japan since 1937, would have "full diplomatic privileges."" above from..: http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,777719,00.html

from (below): http://www.reformation.org/vatican-and-japan.html
"Admiral Yamamoto was credited with planning the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor on Dec. 7, 1941.........
One of the most important Japanese Catholics in this period was Admiral Yamamoto who was the first convert to Catholicism in 1893 at the French Marianists' School in Japan. He had traveled widely, especially in Europe. In early 1938 Yamamoto had told friends in Rome that conflict between Japan and the United States was inevitable because of the clash of races and of commercial interests; that Japan was preparing for war; and when the first blow would be struck. it would be a terrific one"


great quote here...
http://www.spurgeongems.org/rb-14.pdf
"The lesson and warning of history is that undemocratic regimes whose
leaders owe allegiance to the Pope or practice “the lofty principles of the Papacy”
pose a threat to individual liberty, and carry out religious persecution.
For example, the inquisition was alive and well in the Balkans in the 1940s.
“Convert or die” was the choice on offer to 900,000 Orthodox Serbs in the
new state of Croatia, run by Nazi puppet Anton Pavelich and Roman Catholic
Primate, Archbishop Alois Stepinac. 200,000 were “converted”; 700,000
who preferred to die, were tortured, shot, burned or buried alive. This appalling
persecution, carried out mainly by Ustashi priests and friars “for the triumph
of Christ and Croatia,” included many of the worst atrocities of the
War; certainly the mutilations were horrific, the savagery terrible.30"


Our own government, now praises the Papacy on a regular basis..including Bush..

"On behalf of all Americans, Laura and I send our heartfelt best wishes to Pope John Paul II. The Holy Father is in our thoughts and prayers, and we wish him a speedy recovery and return to the service of his church and all humanity."
(above) from: http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2005/02/20050224-11.html


His Holiness Pope John Paul II, a devoted servant of God, has championed the cause of the poor, the weak, the hungry, and the outcast. He has defended the unique dignity of every life, and the goodness of all life. Through his faith and moral conviction, he has given courage to others to be not afraid in overcoming injustice and oppression. His principled stand for peace and freedom has inspired millions and helped to topple communism and tyranny. The President awarded the Medal of Freedom to the Holy Father on June 4, 2004, at the Vatican.
(above) from: http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2004/06/20040618-13.html

Laura and I offer our congratulations to Pope Benedict XVI. He's a man of great wisdom and knowledge. He's a man who serves the Lord. We remember well his sermon at the Pope's funeral in Rome, how his words touched our hearts and the hearts of millions. We join with our fellow citizens and millions around the world who pray for continued strength and wisdom as His Holiness leads the Catholic Church.
(above) from: http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2005/04/20050419-7.html

Answer 7

Revenge and lust for power