Britain's guarantees prior to WWII. There were strong antiwar sentiments
in both France and Britain between the wars but both "guaranteed" the
safety of various nations. See for
examplehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglo-Polish_military_alliance
Several treaties went into effect after WWI, see
http://www.mapsofworld.com/world-war-i/major-treaties.html But neither
Britain nor France maintained the military strength to enforce them.
The US congress backed away from Wilson's guarantees and refused to
ratify them.
"Pacifism" was considered a viable political position. It gave Hitler a
great head start in Europe and Japan the same thing in the pacific. The
U.S. made guarantees as well, in the Philippines and in China and then
didn't maintain the necessary military force. The British and French
guarantee to Poland seems especially heinous because those Poles hold a
grudge. However, pacifists are few and far between today. Britain is
no longer pacifistic in its politics. A military guaranty from Britain
today would be honored.
Lawrence
On 6/27/2016 7:37 PM, david ritchie wrote:
On Jun 27, 2016, at 5:15 PM, Lawrence Helm <lawrencehelm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:lawrencehelm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
Britain's signature didn't mean much in World War II but I suspect it will in the future.
You know what you mean, but we the audience are left in the dark. Signature on what? Lend Lease?
David Ritchie,
Portland, Oregon
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com <http://www.avg.com>
Version: 2016.0.7640 / Virus Database: 4613/12503 - Release Date: 06/27/16
