Was Germany's 1939 declaration of war one of the greatest military mistakes in history?

[PODS96]

Generally the declaration of war is justified by the idea of ​​doing everything to defeat the evil Nazis, however, seeing the options that the allies had, I think they chose the worst.

The military correlation was terribly unfavorable to the Allies, Poland simply could not stand up to Germany, and France was doomed to defeat because she had half the population of Germany.

In my opinion, there were 3 options, from best to worst, that they could have taken:

1- Give Danzig to Hitler and negotiate a moderately independent Polish state: I think the evidence (read ultimatum of 1939) that Hitler had no problem with letting the rest of Poland remain independent, he was only interested in Danzig and the corridor. This probably would have prevented the war.

2- Declare war together with the Soviets: There will still be millions of dead and the Soviets will probably keep a territory very similar to OTL, but the war ends sooner and less bloodily.

3- Declare war without the Soviets: Well, we already know the result. France defeated and the Soviets winning at a stratospheric cost in lives.

Opinions?

[wm]

Britain and France declared war because their ally was attacked, and they solemnly promised in writing they would do that.
They promised it because the British and French people supported and even demanded it.
As it was a purely defensive alliance, with the sole goal of deterring Hitler from aggression, the choice "war/no war" wasn't theirs.

[Gorque]

1- Give Danzig to Hitler and negotiate a moderately independent Polish state: I think the evidence (read ultimatum of 1939) that Hitler had no problem with letting the rest of Poland remain independent, he was only interested in Danzig and the corridor. This probably would have prevented the war.

Sure, either as a vassal state or a member of the Axis, and now Moscow is about half the distance away.

[PODS96]

Britain and France declared war because their ally was attacked, and they solemnly promised in writing they would do that.
They promised it because the British and French people supported and even demanded it.
As it was a purely defensive alliance, with the sole goal of deterring Hitler from aggression, the choice "war/no war" wasn't theirs.

Yes, but the mistake was giving that guarantee to the Poles, it is very likely that the Poles would have given Danzig if they had not been backed by Great Britain.

Even if this was not the case, the Polish cause was a lost cause just as the Czech was, Poland could not resist and France did not have the capacity to launch a major offensive in the short time that the Polish resistance lasted.

The declaration of war made no sense.

[wm]

The Polish cause wasn't a lost cause because Poland exists, and Hitler is dead.

And it wasn't even about Poland; French military planners assumed months before the war that Poland couldn't be saved (except by winning the entire war). And the British did the same later.
Poland was just a line in the sand. The sole goal was to deter Hitler from aggression.
You couldn't deter him by giving him more and more.

[Steve]

Bravely or stupidly the Poles made the decision not to accede to Hitler’s requests prior to receiving the Anglo French guarantee. It would appear that at first they thought Hitler was bluffing. If not then in spite of the huge military imbalance they were apparently prepared to stake their countries future on somehow surviving a war and retaining Danzig and the corridor. Going down the same road as Hungary and Rumania was the least bad option for Poland.

After the guarantee negotiations were no longer possible because Hitler decided to destroy Poland. If the allies had not drawn the line at Poland where would it have been drawn? Should they have encouraged Hitler to move east and into conflict with the USSR?

There was no possibility of an alliance with the Soviets against Germany. The Poles viewed the Soviets as a threat and Chamberlain was lukewarm to the idea. The allies would not agree to what Stalin wanted as his price while Hitler did agree to what Stalin wanted.

On August 13 Smigly-Rydz approved the formation of an Intervention Corps (see link below) in case the Germans seized Danzig. Presumably if the Germans had seized Danzig there would have been large scale fighting very likely leading to full scale war. But on August 30 the Corps was dissolved.

https://pl-m-wikipedia-org.translate.go ... _tr_pto=sc

Danzig had passed into German control before the breakup of the Intervention Corps. The link below shows some 1,500 men of the SS Heimwehr Danzig openly parading through the city on August 18. Clearly the Germans had driven a coach and horses through the provisions of the Versailles Treaty but Poland did nothing. As Danzig was virtually under German control on August 18 what would have happened if Hitler had moved in the regular German army and declared it reunited with the Reich? With half of his demands satisfied he could have called off the September 1 attack and waited to see if the Poles would start a war.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O8MC5baxH-k

[wm]

Churchill.png

[wm]

The Polish people wouldn't accept any concessions, so it's pointless and ahistorical to propose they should have.

After the British guarantees Stalin had no reason to join the Allies; in fact, it would be stupid and counterproductive.
For the simple reason, the guarantees gave his country safety, but at the same time made war between his enemies likely and desirable.

The only possibility was to go to Stalin and say: Listen, Joe, let's give the guarantees together. If not, we will do nothing; Hitler will take care of Poland, and then he will take care of you.
But even this would be preempted by the Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact - because the pact gave Stalin more for less, i.e., without fighting.
And the problem was the British and the French people (and many of their leaders) wouldn't accept "do nothing." They wouldn't accept such naked cynicism.