Sorry SUZANNE: You are right. RE Auschwitz _ OOPS !! you're quite right. Slight case of brain-fade there. And I'm damned if I can remember the name(s) of the concentration camps that DID exist prior tpo the start of the war (from about 1935 onward if my memory serves me aright this time)
The Turnip winter is also recorded fact - the point i was trying to make (in as short a time and space as possible and as simply as "truthasheseesit's" tiny mind would allow) What I should have elaborated was the civil destruction which accompanied WW2 with bombings etc did not occur in WW1: certainly food shortages occurred as they did in other war-affected nations but the level of destruction / internal-refugee-creation / non-combatant peril was absent.

However to get back to "truthasheseesit's" pathetic points:
1. Lloyd George did NOTHING to ameliorate the French revenge-motive and is thus as guilty. The US President can be forgiven in that he voiced objection AT THE TABLE via representatives and was discounted because "America only helped to finish the war not fight it" - a George-cedited statement BTW.

2. Yes, Hitler DID want Britain to stay out of the war and had his eyes turned eastward; but his plans included England and he drew them up PRIOR to the invasion of Poland as he was fully aware that Britain and France would declare war on him if he persisted with the invasion to recover the Danzig corridor (and the rest of Poland). In fact several histories: including those by Ronald Heifferman and Dr. J. Fredriksen acknowledge that this was what Hitler desired - that Britain and France would be the ones DECLARING war; thus making THEM the aggressors and not him. Thgus Hitler could then invade both as a matter of securing his rear (Western) flank against invasion - simply put, he was then given tacit leave to invade them as a matter of "self-defence". A spurious reason, but in the strictest legality, a correct one !!!!
The end result was he did just that and took a totally new and unfamiliar battle-style with him and achieved in 6 weeks what four years of bloodshed had failed to do two-and-a-half decades earlier.
His biggest mistake then was to attempt to knock out the RAF before invading England, when he SHOULD have simply followed the Dunkirk 'refugees' back across the Channel.

3. "Truth" wrote: "Australia was made in Britain's image and is the sole reason that Australia is so successful today, with democratic rights and a good standard of living. You should be a bit more kinder to us. You owe us so much."

What a crock of bullsh*t! Australia was NOT made in Britain's image. It was created as a desperate bid to get rid of your criminal, social and political undesirables after you got your arses kicked out of America for bloody high-handedness. The British treated the convicts as animals and no better and never intended for Australia to anything more than an 'ocean-encircled, wall-less gaol'.

The reason Australia is so successful today is NOT because of Britain - it is because of Australians and their desire to BE Australian and not British. Certainly, our parliamentary and judicial system owes its form and stability to the British model but that is only because it is what we inherited and it seems to work well enough within its limitations.
As an Australian, I have NO desire to be kinder to you - you dumped our ancestors here to "sink or swim" - out of sight out of mind -, You have dragged us into one conflict after another requiring our lives and blood and then your leaders turn around and refuse to let our men return from Africa to defend Australia against possible invasion with the words to the Australian PM - "Australia is unimportant at this stage; the mother country is where our defences should lie. Australia will be returned to us after we have defeated the axis powers in Europe and then ther Pacific"!
Your government, after treating us as nothing more than a nation of servants for 150 years was then willing to sacrifice its entire population. So don't give me "You owe us" - we owe you bugger all.

As for my German and English heritage; I am neither ashamed or ignorant of them. They were not pertinent to the point I was making -another point that went straight past your small-minded parochial mind-set. BTW - my English heritage would scorn and abuse you for that comment about "owing you" - they would be disgusted. Fortunately (and I converse regularly and freely with agreat many English friends and family who would agree with me here) I am aware that your tiny-minded outlook is very much a minority opinion.

Now forgive me if I ignore you from this point on - I have broken my own prime rule "Never argue with an idiot - he will simply drag you down to his level and beat you with experience (and the people watching on may not know the difference)" - So from here on I am not ignoring or being rude to you - you are simply too insignificant to be bothered with.
M