EGFEY - Eurobank

[TwoCitiesCapital]

These types of things are always cast as "rich vs. poor" but in reality this a a situation of productive / responsible vs. nonproductive / irresponsible.

 

Ah, yes, the "productive / responsible" Germans who irresponsibly lent to Greece, but when the loans soured, they shifted them from German banks to EU taxpayers. Hey, that's really productive and responsible. NOT.

 

The German taxpayers will take a big hit if and when Greece defaults, to the tune of $80 or $90 billion or so. 

 

Lending to a neighboring country who needs money turns out in hindsight to have been a bad decision obviously.  But IMO when a loan default occurs the irresponsibility largely lies with the entity that does not pay back the money loaned to them.  I suspect that some of the young posters on this board have never stood in the shoes of a creditor, but you think about things a little differently when it is your hard earned money on the line that is not being paid back.

 

So that's why the U.S. banks were made out to be villains in 2008 and the people who borrowed the money to buy the mortgages they couldn't afford were largely treated as victims? Or is predatory lending not considered in your comment?

 

The fact of the matter is that Greece has largely been insolvent for years and EVERYONE has known it. The last default should tell you how ridiculous this saga is: Greece defaulted on it's private debt so it could be eligible for more loans that would leave it more indebted than it was prior to its default. It was a game of extend and pretend and that was supposed to fix all of it's problems.

 

Fast-forward a few years and now Greece needs a bailout from the same institutions that lent it money in the first place to repay those very loans? I was under the impression the EU and IMF could do basic math and that the "loans" were simply bailouts by another name to be more politically palatable. It appears I may have been wrong as it does seem that the EU expects to be repaid on them which begs the question: are they really that stupid?

 

"Hey Greece, you don't have enough money to pay your loans so I've got an idea! Default on your current loans and take an even bigger loan from me at super, super attractive rates. If you ever have any trouble paying that loan, I'll be happy to extend more to you with certain strings attached." Either this is predatory lending at it's finest, a bailout by another name, or European politicians are just really, really stupid.

 

 

 

 

[Charlie]

"On Europe, Buffett said he thought the Germans and others shouldn’t give into Greece’s demands for debt relief. He said that would be encouraging bad fiscal behavior that could get the Euro in further trouble. He said Europe would be better off cutting Greece loose if it had to. And Buffett gave his own folksy spin on the situation.

 

“If you have a dog peeing on your carpet, you do not want to start giving it a bunch of dog biscuits,” said Buffett."  ;)

 

http://fortune.com/2015/03/02/warren-buffett-i-would-have-passed-keystone/

[wachtwoord]

These types of things are always cast as "rich vs. poor" but in reality this a a situation of productive / responsible vs. nonproductive / irresponsible.

 

Ah, yes, the "productive / responsible" Germans who irresponsibly lent to Greece, but when the loans soured, they shifted them from German banks to EU taxpayers. Hey, that's really productive and responsible. NOT.

 

The German taxpayers will take a big hit if and when Greece defaults, to the tune of $80 or $90 billion or so. 

 

Lending to a neighboring country who needs money turns out in hindsight to have been a bad decision obviously.  But IMO when a loan default occurs the irresponsibility largely lies with the entity that does not pay back the money loaned to them.  I suspect that some of the young posters on this board have never stood in the shoes of a creditor, but you think about things a little differently when it is your hard earned money on the line that is not being paid back.

 

I truly don't understand why anyone would lend to any nation state if the posessions and land of the country is notbthe collatoral. Just lend to companies instead.

 

Just so we're clear: I consider all possessions of Greece  are collatoral which should be seized and divided amoung the creditors. If tanks are needed for this so be it.

[Rainforesthiker]

Quote from TwoCitiesCapital:

"So that's why the U.S. banks were made out to be villains in 2008 and the people who borrowed the money to buy the mortgages they couldn't afford were largely treated as victims? Or is predatory lending not considered in your comment?"

 

So you are comparing a poor / lower class semi-literate American family being encouraged to take a bad loan relative to the PhD economists that are running Greece?  Really?  I can certainly see predatory lending in the former case - most of these people did not understand the loans they were receiving.  In the latter case, not so much.  The Greek government officials are at least on par with their European counterparts in terms of sophistication / education.  More likely this was predatory borrowing then predatory lending.

[Rainforesthiker]

The German taxpayers will take a big hit if and when Greece defaults, to the tune of $80 or $90 billion or so. 

 

Ah, but the banks won't. Such a nice play.

 

Lending to a neighboring country who needs money turns out in hindsight to have been a bad decision obviously.  But IMO when a loan default occurs the irresponsibility largely lies with the entity that does not pay back the money loaned to them.  I suspect that some of the young posters on this board have never stood in the shoes of a creditor, but you think about things a little differently when it is your hard earned money on the line that is not being paid back.

 

You make the classic mistake of equating a loan from person to person to Greece situation. It is not the same. A country is not a person. You cannot resolve recession with permanent austerity. You cannot take country's sovereignty just because it owes you (try it with Argentina or Venezuela, good luck). To get out of the perma depression, country has to default and devalue instead of extend and pretend. And BTW, if Eurocrats allowed Greece to default and then provided help to it, it might cost less than the whole extending and pretending charade.

 

But actually even for person there are BK rules that might be less onerous than what Germany is trying to impose on Greece.

 

And BTW, do you think that, for example, Detroit should have been cut off the USD when it said that it was BK? Perhaps that was the right thing to do, no? That would have taught it a lesson: "If you default, no dollars for you, make your Detroit-drachma currency!".

 

Yes not the same, but more similar than different; when you borrow money, whether as a person or a country, you should do your best to try and pay it back.

 

"You cannot resolve recession with permanent austerity."

That seems to be one of those blanket types of absolute statements that is unprovable and should not be made.

 

"You cannot take country's sovereignty just because it owes you"

That is not what is happening.  The European countries are saying that, hey, if you want to borrow MORE money from us, you have to take steps to put your affairs / fiscal house in order to make it more likely you will be able to repay the loan.  Which of course is eminently reasonable. 

 

Detroit should have been required to take steps to change its overspending ways as a condition for receiving financial assistance, much like Greece is now.  I guess I am old fashioned in believing in the concept of personal responsibility for one's actions, whether you be an individual or a government.  Buffett's analogy of the peeing dog is quite appropriate.

[Eye4Valu]

Curious why Prem is constructive on Greece. He has been quoted as saying Greece has several advantages. I wonder what he thinks they are. He is obviously ignoring the message from the crowd, which appears quite negative. The crowd seems to think Greece and Euro are hopeless. Prem sees opportunity. Quite interesting really. Were any of the posters on this board long EGFEY throughout the recent crises? What is their input? I suspect the majority of the comments on this thread are coming from people with no position. Nothing wrong with that. But might be interesting to hear the long view.

[Jurgis]

"You cannot resolve recession with permanent austerity."

That seems to be one of those blanket types of absolute statements that is unprovable and should not be made.

 

Well, after the great recession, we pretty clearly know that stimulative measures work and austerity does not. If you do not believe that, look at USA vs Greece, Spain, etc. If you still don't believe it, then there's no point for further discussion.

 

So you are comparing a poor / lower class semi-literate American family being encouraged to take a bad loan relative to the PhD economists that are running Greece? Really?

 

So you are telling us that the PhD economists will be the ones suffering from the austerity Germans inflict on Greece? Really?

 

Don't have any illusions that austerity will mostly hit the "nonproductive / irresponsible" who exploited the system and defrauded it. No. It will hit mostly the people who are in the country because they have no other option (emigrate) and who were not smart enough to exploit the system and then move the money offshore.

 

You say that all Greeks should take responsibility for the actions of their government and fraudsters? This might seem noble to you, but it is terribly naive. I doubt many people in US believe that they have responsibility for the actions (and debts) of their government. In more corrupt countries even fewer people do. Rich can find ways to escape the responsibility and the poor are left under the gun to "take" it. That's how it goes.

[randomep]

 

I just read the first mention of the drachma but Tsipras. Tsprisas said "we do not have enough reserves to make a return to the drachma".  Finally, some plausible explanation.  So posters on this board who say Greece is better off with Drachmas, should address the reserves issue.

 

 

[meiroy]

 

I just read the first mention of the drachma but Tsipras. Tsprisas said "we do not have enough reserves to make a return to the drachma".  Finally, some plausible explanation.  So posters on this board who say Greece is better off with Drachmas, should address the reserves issue.

 

My understanding of that is that by changing to the Drachma they still would not be able to maintain current standard of living. But they cannot do that anyhow by continuing to borrow endlessly. It's a choice between bad or worse, not bad or good. Greece is a semi-failed state, far closer to Russia than to Spain or France. (so for the person who asked why is this such a big deal, it's because it's not about Greece, it's about Portugal, Spain, Italy, or rather the impact Germany has on these countries due to various reasons.)

 

[cwericb]

Been in the credit industry for my whole life.

 

It takes two to get someone into financial trouble. The person who borrows and the person who grants the credit. This has been proved over and over and it’s not rocket science. But many, many lenders refuse to take responsibility for their part in the equation.

[Spekulatius]

The German taxpayers will take a big hit if and when Greece defaults, to the tune of $80 or $90 billion or so. 

 

Ah, but the banks won't. Such a nice play.

 

Lending to a neighboring country who needs money turns out in hindsight to have been a bad decision obviously.  But IMO when a loan default occurs the irresponsibility largely lies with the entity that does not pay back the money loaned to them.  I suspect that some of the young posters on this board have never stood in the shoes of a creditor, but you think about things a little differently when it is your hard earned money on the line that is not being paid back.

 

You make the classic mistake of equating a loan from person to person to Greece situation. It is not the same. A country is not a person. You cannot resolve recession with permanent austerity. You cannot take country's sovereignty just because it owes you (try it with Argentina or Venezuela, good luck). To get out of the perma depression, country has to default and devalue instead of extend and pretend. And BTW, if Eurocrats allowed Greece to default and then provided help to it, it might cost less than the whole extending and pretending charade.

 

But actually even for person there are BK rules that might be less onerous than what Germany is trying to impose on Greece.

 

And BTW, do you think that, for example, Detroit should have been cut off the USD when it said that it was BK? Perhaps that was the right thing to do, no? That would have taught it a lesson: "If you default, no dollars for you, make your Detroit-drachma currency!".

I feel bad for the Greek people but they really brought this to themselves. How could they go into a negotiation with a pretty much binary outcome and not even have plan B (exit and introduction of the New Drachma)? Their government was not prepared to do this (not even an attempt was made), I they really had not choice but to accept the raw deal? And how the Greeks even expect a better deal, the way their current lead ship was behaving and pretty much negating every single promise ever given?

 

What their government should have done after the referendum is to prepare for an exit from the Euro and then let it go head or tails. I think they may even  a deal to sweaten the exit by the EU (who are more or less glad to let them go). An exit from the EU and the Euro would have the Greeks decide their own destiny, they could chose to default in a restructuring of by inflation. It would have been tough too for the Greeks but with a better chance of recovery in the long run. As it seems, they were not willing or able to do this, so now lose control of their own fiscal policies. They may be mad about the German now,  but really should be mad about their own government, which apparently likes to gamble without holding even cards in the hand, not even weak ones.

[TwoCitiesCapital]

Curious why Prem is constructive on Greece. He has been quoted as saying Greece has several advantages. I wonder what he thinks they are. He is obviously ignoring the message from the crowd, which appears quite negative. The crowd seems to think Greece and Euro are hopeless. Prem sees opportunity. Quite interesting really. Were any of the posters on this board long EGFEY throughout the recent crises? What is their input? I suspect the majority of the comments on this thread are coming from people with no position. Nothing wrong with that. But might be interesting to hear the long view.

 

I've got a small position in Eurobank that was established at prices that were around 1-2x moderately normalized earnings. I might even add to it as this situation develops and when the stock starts trading again.

 

Basic reasoning is that at 1-2x earnings they fully reflected the pessimism and risk of the situation and that if it didn't go wrong then you have a good position in a bank that has generally earned sizable NIM spreads and ROE. Basically, it's a coinflip - lose a little bit of money or end up with a decent amount in a highly profitable bank, but I definitely thought the possibility of a Grexit was overblown and that we'd reach an 11th hour deal (as can be seen from all of my previous comments).

 

I'm just surprised that Greece is on the losing side of that deal...

[kiwing100]

 

Will Eurobank need a recapitalisation?

 

If so, does anyone know what will be the impact of a recapitalisation of Eurobank and the impact on existing shareholders? 

[SharperDingaan]

This sounds really sick, but we don’t think they will have a problem getting funds to recapitalize.

 

The ECB is being forced to keep the Greek banks afloat, and it is the ONLY lender there is. It is expensive, there is no end to the drip, and they know they are not going to see the money again. Funding a one-time deal, to facilitate a switch to Drachma, is actually a central bank obligation; and they would be happy to do it - to escape the drip. It would very likely also come with an IMF agreement to extend term on whatever defaulted Greek debt they have at the time.

 

If the write-offs & term extensions come to pass; 1-2 years out, all their major banks are probably going to be a very good deal. Simply because they are the primary distribution channel by which the population obtains their currency to buy the everyday necessities of life. There is also the very strong likelihood that following recapitalization they would be tightly ring fenced, temporarily regulated by a neutral third party (BoE, BoC, etc.) until they are back on their feet, and would have some of the highest capital ratios in Europe. We are long term bullish on Greece and hedged our National Bank shares in anticipation of a nationalization & future recapitalization, following which we would probably re-enter. So far, it has been the right decision.

 

Those who can quietly help them in these acute days of need, are very likely going to benefit from it for many years to come. The relationship between Canada & Holland, following WWII liberation, being a good example.

 

It is truly extraordinary to have both the IMF, and one of the major global central banks standing in the deadbeat’s corner; fighting tooth and nail for them. It is an indication of just how abusive this process has become, and how serious an impediment it has now become to ALL of us moving forward again.

 

The real problem is the Euro-zone and the refusal to recognize that a political and currency union are NOT the same thing. The technical economic problems, and their solutions, have long been known; the difficulty has been the lack of political will.

 

We see the problem as being one of attitude; and we don’t really see it changing until dumber is cut loose. Make it a choice between losing power, or losing a minister - and the decision is obvious.

 

SD

 

[Jurgis]

I feel bad for the Greek people but they really brought this to themselves. How could they go into a negotiation with a pretty much binary outcome and not even have plan B (exit and introduction of the New Drachma)? Their government was not prepared to do this (not even an attempt was made), I they really had not choice but to accept the raw deal? And how the Greeks even expect a better deal, the way their current lead ship was behaving and pretty much negating every single promise ever given?

 

What their government should have done after the referendum is to prepare for an exit from the Euro and then let it go head or tails. I think they may even  a deal to sweaten the exit by the EU (who are more or less glad to let them go). An exit from the EU and the Euro would have the Greeks decide their own destiny, they could chose to default in a restructuring of by inflation. It would have been tough too for the Greeks but with a better chance of recovery in the long run. As it seems, they were not willing or able to do this, so now lose control of their own fiscal policies. They may be mad about the German now,  but really should be mad about their own government, which apparently likes to gamble without holding even cards in the hand, not even weak ones.

 

Did you read Varoufakis' interview? ( One source: http://www.newstatesman.com/world-affairs/2015/07/exclusive-yanis-varoufakis-opens-about-his-five-month-battle-save-greece ) Apparently he had plan B and was prepared to issue IOUs, haircut the debt and seize Bank of Greece. But he was voted down by Tsipras and co.

 

I agree though: they should have had plan B and they should have enacted it when it was clear that the negotiations are not working.

[Spekulatius]

I feel bad for the Greek people but they really brought this to themselves. How could they go into a negotiation with a pretty much binary outcome and not even have plan B (exit and introduction of the New Drachma)? Their government was not prepared to do this (not even an attempt was made), I they really had not choice but to accept the raw deal? And how the Greeks even expect a better deal, the way their current lead ship was behaving and pretty much negating every single promise ever given?

 

What their government should have done after the referendum is to prepare for an exit from the Euro and then let it go head or tails. I think they may even  a deal to sweaten the exit by the EU (who are more or less glad to let them go). An exit from the EU and the Euro would have the Greeks decide their own destiny, they could chose to default in a restructuring of by inflation. It would have been tough too for the Greeks but with a better chance of recovery in the long run. As it seems, they were not willing or able to do this, so now lose control of their own fiscal policies. They may be mad about the German now,  but really should be mad about their own government, which apparently likes to gamble without holding even cards in the hand, not even weak ones.

 

Did you read Varoufakis' interview? ( One source: http://www.newstatesman.com/world-affairs/2015/07/exclusive-yanis-varoufakis-opens-about-his-five-month-battle-save-greece ) Apparently he had plan B and was prepared to issue IOUs, haircut the debt and seize Bank of Greece. But he was voted down by Tsipras and co.

 

I agree though: they should have had plan B and they should have enacted it when it was clear that the negotiations are not working.

 

I read this but also take it with a grain of salt. If Tsipras indeed voted the plan down, he bears a lot of responsibility - well he bears a lot of responsibility anyways, because he is in charge. Tsipras pretty much is a big hindrance, he irks everyone he is dealing wit in the EU, yet does not seem to be able to make hold decisions either, always appearing like a victim.

[Jurgis]

Spekulatius, yes, I agree that is a clusterf&*k from both sides and obviously the information is one sided.

[Rainforesthiker]

Quote from Jurgis:

"Well, after the great recession, we pretty clearly know that stimulative measures work and austerity does not."

 

That is very interesting.  Let's explore that a bit. 

 

I would posit that the U.S. will eventually come out of a recession regardless of any government policy; these things are cyclical, subject to the nature of the economic cycle; confidence would eventually come back, etc., etc.  Perhaps without certain government polices it would take longer for the recession to end.  Perhaps certain government polices make it worse.

 

We don't want to make the classic mistake of confusing correlation with causation here.

 

So the real question is not whether certain government polices bring the country out of recession, but whether these policies hasten the end of the recession or lessen the pain somehow, or perhaps whether they prolong it.

What we do know is that:  1) we in the US have had fiscal stimulus on a massive scale, more so than after past recessions; and 2) the recovery in the US has been slow and anemic relative to recoveries from past recessions.

The above alone might prevent someone from making a blanket statement that "we pretty clearly know that stimulative measures work." 

There are many that argue the fiscal stimulus has actually delayed the recovery.  I saw an interesting article that calculated the amount of interest income savers would have earned had interest rates remained "normal" the past 6 years, and that amount alone would have been quite stimulative in the private economy.  I tend to think these academics at the Fed greatly overestimate their ability to control anything in the economy (illusion of control bias).

 

Really these things are not provable; there is no way to go back in time and see what would have happened in the US without all of the stimulus.  There is no way to tell if certain countries (such as Greece) would have remained an economic mess with or without austerity or stimulus.  So making such a blanket assertion that "we pretty clearly know" something like this raises my intellectual red flags.  You MAY be right, but may not be.

 

As Mark Twain said  "It's not what you don't know that gets you into trouble, it's what you know for sure that just ain't so."

 

The other question is whether the purported benefit of all of this stimulus in supposedly hastening the end of the recession is worth the additional debt load and potential after-affects (such as inflation down the road, harm to savers, etc.).  As Buffett has said, this is a grand experiment. 

 

[Rainforesthiker]

 

So you are telling us that the PhD economists will be the ones suffering from the austerity Germans inflict on Greece? Really?

 

Don't have any illusions that austerity will mostly hit the "nonproductive / irresponsible" who exploited the system and defrauded it. No. It will hit mostly the people who are in the country because they have no other option (emigrate) and who were not smart enough to exploit the system and then move the money offshore.

 

You say that all Greeks should take responsibility for the actions of their government and fraudsters? This might seem noble to you, but it is terribly naive. I doubt many people in US believe that they have responsibility for the actions (and debts) of their government. In more corrupt countries even fewer people do. Rich can find ways to escape the responsibility and the poor are left under the gun to "take" it. That's how it goes.

 

I don't entirely disagree with your statements above (except for the naive insult); but I think they miss the point.  Someone is going to suffer here; it is unavoidable.  The real question here is WHO should suffer.  Should the people who live in the underperforming country that is living above its means suffer?  Or should the citizens in the neighboring countries suffer having to keep bailing them out.  At least the people who live in Greece have some ability to affect change in their own country and their own government; based on the recent referendum a majority believe that nothing should change in their bankrupt country, which is somewhat baffling.  Yes a lot of innocent hardworking Greeks will suffer; that is certainly a shame; but IMO better them than innocent taxpayers in other countries.  Perhaps this will be the impetus for change in Greece.

 

I also think the US may have its "Greece" moment at some point in the far future.  And yes I think US citizens will and should suffer as we have continually voted in politicians who spend recklessly, and as a whole current US citizens have benefited while placing huge debt loads on future generations. 

[Jurgis]

Someone is going to suffer here; it is unavoidable.  The real question here is WHO should suffer.  Should the people who live in the underperforming country that is living above its means suffer?  Or should the citizens in the neighboring countries suffer having to keep bailing them out.

 

The suffering is not symmetrical, so your question is not well constructed.

 

You could argue the same way for Versailles reparations and against Marshall plan.

 

BTW, your question is not well constructed for another reason too: Greece is BK. There is no way the lenders are getting their money and interest back. The only question is whether they face it right now or extend and pretend. And how much pain is inflicted on Greece in the meantime.

 

I am not saying Greeks are innocent. I think it's a clusterf&*k on both sides - somewhat also how it was in US real estate bubble. It's worse with Greece though. In some sense, my ideal plan would be: write off debts, install independent uncorruptible government, that wields both Marshall plan and tough reforms. But I'll call myself naive (so you don't feel insulted  ;) ), since this is not realistic. I just think that the current plan is almost the worst possible, since it is almost everything opposite to what I think good plan would be.

 

Take care

[Zorrofan]

Someone is going to suffer here; it is unavoidable.  The real question here is WHO should suffer.  Should the people who live in the underperforming country that is living above its means suffer?  Or should the citizens in the neighboring countries suffer having to keep bailing them out.

 

The suffering is not symmetrical, so your question is not well constructed.

 

You could argue the same way for Versailles reparations and against Marshall plan.

 

BTW, your question is not well constructed for another reason too: Greece is BK. There is no way the lenders are getting their money and interest back. The only question is whether they face it right now or extend and pretend. And how much pain is inflicted on Greece in the meantime.

 

I am not saying Greeks are innocent. I think it's a clusterf&*k on both sides - somewhat also how it was in US real estate bubble. It's worse with Greece though. In some sense, my ideal plan would be: write off debts, install independent uncorruptible government, that wields both Marshall plan and tough reforms. But I'll call myself naive (so you don't feel insulted  ;) ), since this is not realistic. I just think that the current plan is almost the worst possible, since it is almost everything opposite to what I think good plan would be.

 

Take care

 

So, if i may paraphrase Winston Churchill, we can count on the EU & Greece to do the right thing after all other possible options have been exhausted?  You have a good idea though, too bad politicians have to be involved  :D

 

cheers

Zorro

[MrB]

Just as the rich rule the poor, so the borrower is servant to the lender

[wachtwoord]

Someone is going to suffer here; it is unavoidable.  The real question here is WHO should suffer.  Should the people who live in the underperforming country that is living above its means suffer?  Or should the citizens in the neighboring countries suffer having to keep bailing them out.

 

The suffering is not symmetrical, so your question is not well constructed.

 

You could argue the same way for Versailles reparations and against Marshall plan.

 

BTW, your question is not well constructed for another reason too: Greece is BK. There is no way the lenders are getting their money and interest back. The only question is whether they face it right now or extend and pretend. And how much pain is inflicted on Greece in the meantime.

 

I am not saying Greeks are innocent. I think it's a clusterf&*k on both sides - somewhat also how it was in US real estate bubble. It's worse with Greece though. In some sense, my ideal plan would be: write off debts, install independent uncorruptible government, that wields both Marshall plan and tough reforms. But I'll call myself naive (so you don't feel insulted  ;) ), since this is not realistic. I just think that the current plan is almost the worst possible, since it is almost everything opposite to what I think good plan would be.

 

Take care

 

Greece is NOT BK. They have a shit ton of gold. Further they posses art, historical artifacst and a ton of land. Claim all and divide amoungst the lenders.

[kab60]

And then what? Creditors earn interest because there's a chance they won't get their money back. I'm pretty sure they did not ask for Akropolis as collateral. The idea of confiscating Greeces gold, art, whatever reminds me of the Versailles pact and look what happened to Germany in the 20ties and 30ties. Sure, Greece won't start a world war but it would be fuel for nationalistic pigs. Both sides bear a responsibility for this mess, but unfortunately it will be the public who pays more so than the private creditors who knew and calculated all along that they would be bailed out. Greece are in need of major reforms - and a major debt haircut.

 

 

 

 

[TwoCitiesCapital]

Creditors earn interest for the temporary use of their capital. What you say is nonsense.

 

That Versailles comment shows you're good at repeating what you were taught in school (by socialists). WW2 started because the UK and France were fucking pussies (giving Germany Czech republics defences and condoning the occupation of Austria) and because the USA didn't give a fuck.

 

Somewhere, I think you left out the aggressor and the aggressor's motivations. A war certainly can't be the fault of nations who didn't start it nor those who didn't participate until it was half way over....