Return PolishForums LIVE
  PolishForums Archive :
Archives - 2005-2009 / History  % width 95

Any apologies about Sikorski's 'murder'?


Trevek 26 | 1,700  
17 Feb 2009 /  #91
Both Britain and France turned out to be absolutely useless allies, first failing to provide any military help whatsoever and then selling Poland out at every possible turn, they did help a few odd groups of soldiers but by and large there was no political or military help for Poland.

Hmmm, might b worth remembering Britain was in a poor state militarily as it had been running down it's armed forces throughout the 1930's and wasn't really ready for a war. France might not have offered much help and I suppose allowing Germany to occupy thm wasn't very helpful (what were they thinking?). Silly Britain for declaring war.

I do agree about the sell-out, tho'. I think both UK and US just allowed themselves to be totally shafted by Uncle Joe.

Incidentally, wasn't it David Irving who popularised the idea of British sabotage to Sikorski's plane? The man who claims Hitler was innocent because there are no documents to say he knew about Holocaust (and says Churchill is guilty of Sikorski's murdr because there are no documents).
IronsE11 2 | 442  
17 Feb 2009 /  #92
I do agree about the sell-out, tho'. I think both UK and US just allowed themselves to be totally shafted by Uncle Joe.

Once again, I fail to see what leverage Churchill and Roosevelt had against Stalin. The Red Army had all but defeated the Nazis in Europe before The Western Allies even landed at Normandy. Stalin had Eastern Europe in his possession. Even if Eastern Poland hadn't been promised to Stalin at Tehran, it would have taken nothing short of a war with the USSR to wrestle it from him. Stalin held the cards.

Incidentally, wasn't it David Irving who popularised the idea of British sabotage to Sikorski's plane? The man who claims Hitler was innocent because there are no documents to say he knew about Holocaust (and says Churchill is guilty of Sikorski's murdr because there are no documents).

True. David Irving is a joke. Nothing he says should be taken seriously as it almost totally agenda driven. Indeed, he should not even be considered a historian.
sjam 2 | 541  
17 Feb 2009 /  #93
I do agree about the sell-out, tho'. I think both UK and US just allowed themselves to be totally shafted by Uncle Joe.

Was this really a sell out by UK and USA?

It should be taken into consideration that the Polish government-in-exile did not really help thier country as well as the could have especially after Sikorski's death. Sikorski was the only person with the gravitas to present Poland's views to the Allies. After Sikorski's death the disunity and infighting between the various political factions within the Polish government-in-exile that Sikorski had tenously held together just made Poland's situation even worse--the other allies had lost faith in Polish government-in-exile's ability to reach a common and united front about anything let alone reaching a post-war accord with the USSR.

However, Sikorski actually published his own proposal for a Polish post-war border settlement with USSR very much along the lines that that the 'Big Three' eventually agreed upon! So had Sikorski lived, post-war Polish borders would closely resemble that of today even without the 'Big Three'. The other allies knew about Sikorki's vision for post-war Poland it was not a secret from them!

Now if there was a reason to get Sikorski out of the picture I personally believe it would have come from right-wing elements in Sikorski government who were totally opposed to any dealings with USSR especially over border issues. Given that Sikorski was thinking of giving up Polish territory in the East in exchange for new ones in the West it is more likely that any threat to his life would have come from these elements rather than from Britain or USSR, in my opinion.

Also, had Sikorski's desire that all of the Polish forces in USSR (released after the amnesty) should fight alongside the Red Army in the liberation of Poland from the eastern front been realised then the political situation on the ground in Poland might have been different than it turned out. However General Anders opposed Sikorski's plans and ignored an order by Sikorski on the limit of Polish forces that would be allowed to leave USSR. Anders was reprimanded for this disobedience and reminded by Sikorski that he was commander-in-chief and not Anders, but the deed was done and we will never know if Sikorski's plan was the better one.
OP Harry  
17 Feb 2009 /  #94
Now if there was a reason to get Sikorski out of the picture I personally believe it would have come from right-wing elements in Sikorski government who were totally opposed to any dealings with USSR especially over border issues. Given that Sikorski was thinking of giving up Polish territory in the East in exchange for new ones in the West it is more likely that any threat to his life would have come from these elements rather than from Britain or USSR, in my opinion.

Surely you can not mean that Poles murdered Sikorski?! Everybody knows that it was the British/Soviets/Jews/CIA/Illuminati/Masons who killed him!
sjam 2 | 541  
17 Feb 2009 /  #95
Surely you can not mean that Poles murdered Sikorski?!

I actually don't believe he was murdered—but I most definitely believe it is more likely that some Poles had better reason to want to see Sikorski out of the way than anyone else. The Sikorski conspiracy stuff is mildly entertaining though ;-))

Archives - 2005-2009 / History / Any apologies about Sikorski's 'murder'?Archived