Marco Posted 17 July , 2004 Share Posted 17 July , 2004 Kristof, Apologies are not really needed but kindly accepted anyway. All I wanted to do was to point out the huge difference i.m.h.o. between the two. I certainly can take criticism aimed at the Dutch. It was for instance typically Dutch (and dumb) to be wanted to be patted on the back for taking in so many Belgian refugees, but at the same time demand money for every last one of them after the war. Speaking of strange and/or dumb ideas: what do you think of the fact that Belgium officially demanded parts of Holland (Limburg) because we stayed neutral? I certainly don’t want to stir up more but: the word concentration camp wasn't so bad like the German camps BEFORE WW2. I would myself tread softly here too. It’s off-topic and I have only read a few books and saw a few documentaries but I tend to think that more went on in British Boer war camps then just locking women, children en men up and sending them home after the war. From what I know now these camps (I’ll avoid giving them a name) can not be compared to even the worst Dutch internee camp. I’ll go and get my helmet now… Regards, Marco Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bkristof Posted 17 July , 2004 Share Posted 17 July , 2004 I certainly can take criticism aimed at the Dutch. It was for instance typically Dutch (and dumb) to be wanted to be patted on the back for taking in so many Belgian refugees, but at the same time demand money for every last one of them after the war. Speaking of strange and/or dumb ideas: what do you think of the fact that Belgium officially demanded parts of Holland (Limburg) because we stayed neutral? That is so! It was not only because of the neutrality, maybe a bit... But some of the other reasons was also: -Trade with Germany (also with the allies, but that was not bad... ahum, ahum ) -The encampment of Belgians -Sympathy and hosting the German Kaiser -Several problems with the harbors, the Schelde river (otherwise in 1914 the Brits could help earlier, if that would make a bit of a difference) - Taking the rest of what we wanted in 1830 Result: more trouble... In 1919 (i believe so , can be later) the Dutch army was even making plans to "defencively invade" Belgium. But finally they didn't because of the strong, the good trained and modernised Belgian army. Incomparing the "old fashioned" neutrality army of Holland. I don't know when excactly the hostilities ended, but i am glad there was no second war. There are NO innocents in wartime, except the victims of the war. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andigger Posted 17 July , 2004 Share Posted 17 July , 2004 In 1919 (i believe so , can be later) the Dutch army was even making plans to "defencively invade" Belgium. This seems very odd Kristof... not dounting you, but could you expound on this a little bit for those of us who have no clue as to why the Dutch would need to have made a pre-emptive strike at Belgium. It sounds like a very interesting tale. Andy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aurel Sercu Posted 17 July , 2004 Share Posted 17 July , 2004 Andy, Yes, I know it seems odd, but Kristof certainly is correct. However, I don't remember the details. Only that some time (or years) ago sources were found in the archives confirming that indeed shortly after the Great War there had been Dutch plans to invade Belgium. Aurel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Dunlop Posted 17 July , 2004 Share Posted 17 July , 2004 The Germans and the Dutch (mainly throught the promptings of the Germans) were concerned that Britain might try an amphibious landing north of Antwerp via Dutch territory. In response, the Germans developed 'Fall K', which was a plan to invade Holland and secure the north bank of the Scheldt. Holland set about strengthening their coastal defences in area and the size of the army was increased. I know of no Dutch plans to invade Belgium, but this does not exclude the possibility. Robert Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bkristof Posted 17 July , 2004 Share Posted 17 July , 2004 i am certain there were plans. But this was only known some 10 years ago... It was top secret. A dutch historian dicovered it in the archives. I don't know if their is an article somewhere on the net. I search for it. greets, kristof Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
derwisj Posted 18 July , 2004 Share Posted 18 July , 2004 Hello, in the book "Ieper" by Richard Heijster on page 176 there is a short phrase telling that in 1919 the netherlands made plans to invade their "southern neighbour" (Belgium) pascal bastiaens Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now