Return PolishForums LIVE
  PolishForums Archive :
Archives - 2005-2009 / History  % width 50

Norman Davies on the Warsaw uprising


MrBubbles 10 | 614  
1 Aug 2008 /  #1
"Churchill took Mikołajczyk with him to Moscow in early October to resume the Polish-Soviet talks postponed for two months. In the course of a dramatic meeting with Molotov, it was revealed that a year earlier at Teheran Churchill had secretly proposed the Curzon Line as a basis of the future Polish-Soviet frontier. In other words, all the territorial plans and negotiations throughout 1944, which had poisoned relations with Stalin, and had minimised the chances of his co-operation during the Rising, had been conducted on false assumptions. Churchill, shame-facedly admitted his fault, but later turned his rage on the Polish premier whom he had so inexcusably misled. This must be one of the most discreditable episodes of Churchill's career. Mikołajczyk soon resigned; and the close alliance between the British and Polish Governments ceased to function."

warsawuprising.com/paper/davies1.htm
ukpolska  
1 Aug 2008 /  #2
And the point? Isn't it about time to stop nitpicking on who's to blame, as it's like playing in the playground of history.
OP MrBubbles 10 | 614  
1 Aug 2008 /  #3
You don't like History?
ukpolska  
1 Aug 2008 /  #4
History is a great love of mine, but to post something just to be controversial is rather weak I find.
OP MrBubbles 10 | 614  
1 Aug 2008 /  #5
to post something just to be controversial is rather weak I find

What do you find controversial about this post? Please say.
ukpolska  
1 Aug 2008 /  #6
I would be more interested in why you posted it?
OP MrBubbles 10 | 614  
1 Aug 2008 /  #7
It is the aniversary of the Warsaw uprising and Norman Davies has written an interesting article about a period of History that has hitherto received little attention in British History books. Norman has a good reputation and most of his pieces are well researched and even handed.

But of course, if you'd read the article before you started sounding off about it you'd know this already.
ukpolska  
1 Aug 2008 /  #8
But of course, if you'd read the article before you started sounding off about it you'd know this already.

Then I will leave you to your debate ;)
OP MrBubbles 10 | 614  
1 Aug 2008 /  #9
thank you. you really should read it, you know...
ConstantineK 26 | 1,259  
1 Aug 2008 /  #10
I feel so sick of that historian! He is just a partial and poor compilator, I hardly can name him as historian!
Ozi Dan 26 | 569  
2 Aug 2008 /  #11
MrBubbles

A good and timely post. I think the real message Norman tries to convey in this book is that of the fighting spirit of the Poles at the time of the Rising. Their sacrifices rise above the petty socio-political wranglings of Churchill, Roosevelt and Stalin.

I felt sorry for Churchill and the other British bumblers during this period. For all their professed noblesse, they failed miserably, and in doing so, merely gave greater focus and clarity on the AK's selfless courage. As to the British who never gave up on their allies, we remain grateful.
SeanBM 35 | 5,808  
2 Aug 2008 /  #12
MrBubbles

Good post.
OP MrBubbles 10 | 614  
2 Aug 2008 /  #13
Thanks!

I feel so sick of that historian! He is just a partial and poor compilator, I hardly can name him as historian!

Your point of view is duly noted. Please specify what you disagree with in the article. Was it to do with his portrayal of Saint Josef of Georgia?

I think the real message Norman tries to convey in this book is that of the fighting spirit of the Poles at the time of the Rising. Their sacrifices rise above the petty socio-political wranglings of Churchill, Roosevelt and Stalin.

Amen
z_darius 14 | 3,968  
2 Aug 2008 /  #14
He is just a partial and poor compilator, I hardly can name him as historian!

See, history is to a large degree a process of compiling facts. But I know how you feel. You are certainly used to the much more creative and custom made history so popular in Russia.
Borrka 37 | 594  
2 Aug 2008 /  #15
I feel so sick of that historian! He is just a partial and poor compilator, I hardly can name him as historian!

Right my friend.
The only true historian is Mr Mukhin.
Urrraaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa !
ConstantineK 26 | 1,259  
2 Aug 2008 /  #16
I don't know who Muhin is, never read his books as I did Davies's. So I could conclude that all his books represent his deep russophobic views.
Borrka 37 | 594  
3 Aug 2008 /  #17
deep russophobic views

Dear Constantine, probably the entire Universe is Russophobic.
ConstantineK 26 | 1,259  
3 Aug 2008 /  #18
So, it means only that we will fight with entire Universe! And don't hope on mercy.
Logan McCloud - | 39  
3 Aug 2008 /  #19
Aye. But in Scotland we eat Ready Brek for breakfast each day so you'll be no match for us wee laddie
OP MrBubbles 10 | 614  
3 Aug 2008 /  #20
And don't hope on mercy.

Good to see you're doing so much to try and break these stereotypes about Russians, Constantine.
southern 75 | 7,096  
3 Aug 2008 /  #21
Really the British counted on Stalin's cooperation during Warsaw uprising when they had never officially informed him what was going to happen?
anglicy 1 | 5  
6 Aug 2008 /  #22
i read god's playground and rising44 i think without norman davies many here wouldnt know anything about poland.

the disaster, therefore, was a joint one. any obective reviewer of these grave failings must judge every single member of the allied coalition to hold a share of the responsibility. in essence, the tragedy of the warsaw rising resulted from a systematic breakdown of the grand alliance. (davies rising 44)
Harry  
8 Aug 2008 /  #23
I felt sorry for Churchill and the other British bumblers during this period. For all their professed noblesse, they failed miserably, and in doing so, merely gave greater focus and clarity on the AK's selfless courage.

Idiot. Churchill was the leader who wanted the USAAF bases in Ukraine to be used to supply Warsaw. Roosevelt was the one who stopped them from being so used.

Go back to school little boy, and this time try to learn something while you are there.
celinski 31 | 1,258  
8 Aug 2008 /  #24
Idiot.

So look who's back, cheerful as ever.
Ozi Dan 26 | 569  
8 Aug 2008 /  #25
[quote=Harry]Idiot Harry/quote]

Ah, I see the PF's resident card sharping, charlatanic, tourist-flyer peddling hand puppet has re emerged after licking his wounds from the drubbing I gave him a few months ago.

Your infatuation with referring to me as a little boy who needs to go back to school has raised eyebrows. I suspect my colleagues would find it strange me donning the drab grey uniform and polishing apples for the teacher, but hey, a mandate from you is as good as any.

Seriously Harry, have the grace to keep yourself locked in your own dungeon of self importance and delusion. I face angry egotistic people like you everyday and believe me when I say that you hardly pose a challenge. Riposte?
celinski 31 | 1,258  
8 Aug 2008 /  #26
try to learn something while you are there.

Does the hospital know you got out? Must have chewed through your ropes.
Harry  
12 Aug 2008 /  #27
<the same old tired sh!t yet again>

How surprising to see that you completely ignore the facts in my post and instead fill your post solely with insults. Nice of you to admit that you can not argue with the truth.

By the way, you may wish to polish your insults somewhat: your attempts to combine the usual ones have resulted in words which are moronic even by your standards. "tourist-flyer peddling"? Dear boy, fliers are by definition free. Just because you pay money for them when people offer the things to you doesn't mean that other people do too.

Does the hospital know you got out? Must have chewed through your ropes.

Congratulations on making it through an entire post without bleating about how your family blah blah blah.
Babinich 1 | 455  
12 Aug 2008 /  #28
Churchill was the leader who wanted the USAAF bases in Ukraine to be used to supply Warsaw. Roosevelt was the one who stopped them from being so used.

Go back to school little boy, and this time try to learn something while you are there.

Did 'Uncle Joe' have a say in all of this? If so, what was his position on letting Allied planes supporting the uprising land in Soviet held territory in order to regroup before retuning home to their bases?
Harry  
12 Aug 2008 /  #29
His position was that he wouldn't let them use those bases "since the Soviet Government do not wish to associate themselves either directly or indirectly with the adventure in Warsaw." Churchill telegrammed Roosevelt on August 18 but didn't get a reply until August 24, the reply was "My information points to the practical impossibility of our providing supplies to the Warsaw Poles unless we are permitted to land on and take off from Soviet airfields, and the Soviet authorities are at the present time prohibiting their use for the relief of Warsaw.

I do not see that we can take any additional steps at the present time that promise results." (Please note that the British and other Allies were by August 24 supplying Warsaw from Southern Italy).

Churchill sent another telegram on August 25 saying "If he will not give any reply to this [message requesting the use of bases in Ukraine] I feel we ought to go and see what happens. I cannot conceive that he would maltreat or detain them [Allied aircrews]."

Roosevelt's reply came on August 26: "I do not consider it advantageous to the long range general war prospect for me to join with you in the proposed message to U.J. [Uncle Joe]."

The strange thing about these telegrams is how much Poles tend to want to forget about them. Go round the Warsaw Uprising museum and there is no mention at all of these telegrams. Which is odd, given that from August 26 onwards the Uprising was doomed.
Grzegorz_ 51 | 6,161  
12 Aug 2008 /  #30
The strange thing about these telegrams is how much Poles tend to want to forget about them.

What do you mean ? These are obvious things.

Archives - 2005-2009 / History / Norman Davies on the Warsaw uprisingArchived