>John,
>
>>It absolutely would have. Hitler relied on the West's complete aversion to war to re-arm. If France and England had shown some muscle he would have backed down.
>
>It is easy doing the aftermath, but you have to realise that time people were tired of going into another war. Europe already had been a battle field for many years where many, many lives were lost. Europe was trying to use more diplomacy to control those matters and even WWII did not change that. It strengthened the opinion that better diplomacy should be used to solve conflicts. This is the reason for the birth of the EU. Europe is tired of getting into wars, again and again costing millions of lifes.
>
>This is a lesson that the US has not learned (yet). They never have losts so many human lives in a single war as did fall on european battlefields. Imagine the US having a battlefield where 6 million lives are lost (russian casualties alone in WII). Would they not do anything to prevent that in the future?

Walter, I think your last paragraph is a load of bollox. The US rues the fact that they lost so many of their own boys' lives fighting European wars (let's face it - bringing liberty to you occupied countries especially). I think you have an absolute neck to use this to have a pop (again) at the US. If it weren't for them you wouldn't have the luxury to sit there typing this rubbish, without your German gebieter looking over your shoulder. You say Europeans were tired of constantly warring - don't you think the US was tired of stepping in to sort it for you.

Terry

...