Return PolishForums LIVE
  PolishForums Archive :
Archives - 2005-2009 / History  % width 290

WW2: Britain Declares War on Germany to Save Poland


Harry  
7 Dec 2007 /  #181
How much misinformation can you spread!

The reality of the situation was exactly the opposite of what you claim: Churchill wanted to support the Poles Roosevelt didn't want to upset Uncle Joe! Look at the communication about the Warsaw Uprising and use of the USAAF bases in Ukraine to supply the Home Army in Warsaw

"The Soviet refusal launched a crescendo of telegrams between Churchill, Roosevelt and Stalin. August 20th, Churchill and Roosevelt send a joint message to Stalin urging him to let their planes land.

August 22nd, Stalin responds with a denunciation of the handful of criminals in Warsaw.

August 35th, Churchill asks Roosevelt to join him in another impassioned plea to Stalin. To Roosevelt he proposes to send the planes and see what happens.

It is at this moment that Roosevelt makes a fateful decision. August 26th, Roosevelt to Churchill. "I do not consider it advantageous in the long term general war prospect for me to join you in the proposed message to Uncle Joe." "

Read it for yourself at transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0507/24/cp.01.html

More from that same source
"DAVIES: Roosevelt's refusal to act is probably the key political moment in the writing. The western allies had a lot of cards they could have played. They were supplying the Soviet Union with colossal amounts of transport, ammunition, military supplies, and if the president had intervened he may have well had a response.

They didn't even try it.

Whether the effort would have succeeded, whether Stalin would have backed down, we'll never know. What we do know is that Roosevelt wouldn't even support Churchill in some half-hearted efforts to put pressure on Stalin. But Roosevelt was preoccupied with beating the Nazis on the Western Front and he knew that Soviets had so far borne the brunt of the battle against the Germans. He did not want to risk losing them.

KENNEDY: This is very much on Roosevelt's mind that he cannot really afford to antagonize the Soviet Union in any way. The basic strategy of the United States, a war of attrition where most of the attritting would be done by the Soviets. And indeed, the Second World War took over 20 million Soviet lives. Took fewer than half a million American lives."

Even after the end of WWII Churchill was planning an attack on the Soviet Union to liberate Poland!

BTW: what could the USA have done? Well which was the only country in the world with nuclear weapons in 1945? If the USA had said "All Soviet troops out of Poland or Moscow gets nuked" might something have happened?

Go read some history books before you come here dragging names through mud and making the USA out to be the heroes of every situation.
celinski 31 | 1,258  
7 Dec 2007 /  #182
was exactly the opposite of what you claim:

I stand corrected. Thank you, Carol
southern 75 | 7,096  
7 Dec 2007 /  #183
If the USA had said “All Soviet troops out of Poland or Moscow gets nuked” might something have happened?

I will tell you what would have happened.Soviet forces would conquer the whole of Japan,would keep Austria,would invade Italy,Finland and would take over the whole german coast with Hamburg etc.

Americans had only 3 atomic bombs ready in 1945 and Soviets knew that.They dropped two in Japan.They had no atomic bomb in 1944.Soviet spies knew everything about US nuclear programm.

The americans were very considerate and they estimated losses.Had they supported the claims of the exiled polish goevernment hundreds of thousands of Americans would have to die in the war against Nazis cause the Soviets would halt their operations which were conducted in many cases in order to relieve the pressure from western allies.

Even after the end of WWII Churchill was planning an attack on the Soviet Union to liberate Poland!

Exactly this attack waited one million soviet soldiers with 5000 tanks stationed in Eastern Germany.The perfect reason to invade the West.

he western allies had a lot of cards they could have played.

The only card they could have played was Hitler himself but they had broken up connections to him irreversibly.
Zgubiony 15 | 1,554  
7 Dec 2007 /  #184
Im not sure if this was previously posted, but ww2.pl is some info on PL co-operation with GB during the war
Harry  
7 Dec 2007 /  #185
Pity that site keeps on repeating the same old tired lies:
"Polish soldiers were not invited to participate in the victory parades in London and Moscow in 1945."

Of course it would have been pretty difficult for Poles to participate in the London victory parade in 1945, given that there wasn't one.

Polish servicemen most certainly did participate in the Moscow parade. Here's photograph of them being led by Gen. Karol ƚwierczewski:

Polish servicemen most certainly were invited to participate in the London parade. The ones which represented the government of Poland didn't bother to turn up and the Free Polish forces refused to participate.
celinski 31 | 1,258  
7 Dec 2007 /  #186
Free Polish forces

I wonder why they wouldn't?

victory parade in 1945

certainly did participate in the Moscow parade

This may have been Moscow Poles, May 1945 as Poland was occupied by Soviets

ww2.pl/apps/?command=fotografie/pokaz

Carol

Britain may see their actions different, please watch from Polish perspective.

Carol
Harry  
7 Dec 2007 /  #187
I wonder why they wouldn't?

They felt insulted because not enough of them had been invited.
southern 75 | 7,096  
7 Dec 2007 /  #188
Celinski try to find out why Hitler kept such enormous troops in Warsaw while his western front collapsed in Normandy.
wildrover 98 | 4,451  
7 Dec 2007 /  #189
such enormous troops

I would like to know also why the troops in Warsaw were bigger than any others in the German army......
celinski 31 | 1,258  
7 Dec 2007 /  #190
[quote=celinski] I wonder why they wouldn't?

Opps, This is the clip on the parade that was about why we were not "invited to the parade".

Carol, USA
Bartolome 2 | 1,085  
7 Dec 2007 /  #191
That's odd, the Polish army were quite happy to invade Czechoslovakia.

Yeah, it's a thing that puts shame on Poland. But if 'Heroic Soviet Army' stationed in your country, you'd HAVE TO BE happy to do anything what Moscow would say.
celinski 31 | 1,258  
7 Dec 2007 /  #192
Quoting: Harry
That's odd, the Polish army were quite happy to invade Czechoslovakia

What is the date, I thought Poland was communist then, No? Before you blast me Harry, I am not sure of the date so I admit I just may be wrong. Carol
Bartolome 2 | 1,085  
7 Dec 2007 /  #193
1968. Dark times, and definitely under the heel of USSR.
isthatu 3 | 1,164  
7 Dec 2007 /  #194
The fact is, if GB knew they couldnt mount any assault from the West why did they contract with the Poles at all and form an alliance? I'll let you answer that.

Er,OK,lets look at this way,hypotheticaly;GB and France leave Poland to Hitler,both countries say,"stuff it,why waste our boys lives for those guys the other side of europe who ,actually,have never done anything for us in the past(blah blah,stopping communism in 1921......) and are in no position to do anything for us now". "We" let hitler invade without declaring war,no change,the panzers still roll east and the Tanki still roll west a fortnight later. Ok so far? Right,then,instead of having an enemy in the west to take care of(remember,"we" have stayed out of the war) hitler only has his main event to plan and build up for,the conquest of the Soviet Union. No one to fight in the west,Hitlers plans are not delayed and he is able to invade "Russia" on his schedule.(remember,all this time the remnents of the Polish Govt'and armed forces are still interned in Romania,as britain and france are not allies,and,oh gosh yes,Romania is allied to the nazis by now). the nazis also have more time and energy to shape the former Poland into their vison of the greater german reich and eliminate more potential enemies. The war in the east well that could have still gone either way,probably with an eventual german victory over the Red Army,but at the very least a stalemate as ,without Britain still(or ever having being) in the war the USA has no reason to interfere in a European war. Where would all this have left Poland,either crushed under Germany or to this day still a vassal state of the USSR.

As to why Britain formed an alliance with Poland,with hindsight,lord knows,all WW2 did for Britain was bancrupt it and cause the speedier loss of world influence it had enjoyed,for good or ill ,for the last 3 centuries. As to why the alliance,it was formalised only weeks before the panzars rolled,Polands high command had made all sorts of overly optomistic statements about being able to hold out against the nazis so Britain had no reason to belive on sept' the 3rd that Poland would collapse so rapidly,especially as the French were sworn to launch a land based offensive within 2 weeks.

I agree - GB really couldnt have done anything more. They really tried and the results speak for themselves.

If this is sarcasm my above answer covers it neatly I think. If not,sorry bout that :)

The 'anger' directed toward GB I think moreso comes from the notion that GB had all of the rest of WW2 to do something positive to assist the Poles, but nothing happened. Poles looked to GB for support and got none. The balance sheet of what Poles did for GB as opposed to what GB did for Poles is heavily stacked in Poland's favour. That gives the Poles the standing to question what GB did for them.

Well,again,where to start,how about giving the Poles the means to fight the Germans,freely,and without political interference as those in the east faced.

How about a home for your govt in exile which maintained autonamy and even its own SOE section( the only allied nation entrusted with a completely indipendant hand in this), all the RAF flights in support of your underground govt and army in Poland itself,yes,even the 200+ british and commenwealth flyers who lost their lives trying to resupply Warsaw. Never mind the home given to all those who had to stay out of Poland after the war.Sorry,but without Britain involved Polands soldiers would have rotted in romanian internment till the nazis got their hands on them.

After the slaughter of the first war there was no great desire to go at it again with Germany , and had it not been for that agreement we would have stayed out of the war untill France was attacked...

This should never be underplayed,but,I doubt france would have been attacked had she also stayed out of the way,hitlers eyes were always east.

This was the national tragedy.There were polish soldiers in british uniform,polish soldiers in german uniform and polish soldiers in soviet uniform.There were not many choices these years.

not stricktly true, they may have worn British style uniform,and been equipped and armed by the British but,and this is a big but,they were in the Polish not British army.

Celinski try to find out why Hitler kept such enormous troops in Warsaw while his western front collapsed in Normandy.

He didnt,at the time of the august uprising troop levels in the city were down to a token force,mostly made up of second line police reservists etc. The reason the rising ran into trouble was that the germans had no problems reinforcing their troops as the eastern front proper was only a matter of miles away.

Anyway,what has the Warsaw uprising got to do with britain in 1939?
Incidently,where do you think all the build up support for the rising came from,yep,thats right,Britain, Polands underground army sent its finest to train in britain,they then returned to Poland and formed the cadre's to train the wider home army. If this was on topic in the thread I could have posted plenty of links re britains material contributions to the rising,but its not,so I wont. They are however widely available on the net.

Quoting: celinski
What is the date, I thought Poland was communist then, No? Before you blast me Harry, I am not sure of the date so I admit I just may be wrong. Carol

1968. Dark times, and definitely under the heel of USSR.

Indead,and being as the option was, "help us invade them or we invade you" I cant say that its right or proper to bring this up,especially in this thread. (of course,he may have meant when pre war Poland did a little border re aranging at the same time gitler marched on Prague??...)
Grzegorz_ 51 | 6,161  
7 Dec 2007 /  #195
Er,OK,lets look at this way,hypotheticaly;GB and France leave Poland to Hitler,both countries say,"stuff it,why waste our boys lives for those guys the other side of europe who ,actually,have never done anything for us in the past(blah blah,stopping communism in 1921......) and are in no position to do anything for us now". "We" let hitler invade without declaring war,no change,the panzers still roll east

Not really. You are forgetting that If one thing had been changed in the past then the future would have been much different. In late 30's Polish government was in fact showing the middle finger to Adolf. They wouldn't have done that If had known that they have no allies.
isthatu 3 | 1,164  
7 Dec 2007 /  #196
So what,do you really think hitler cared whether your govt' liked him or not,he was still intent on wiping you off the map on his way to moscow.

They wouldn't have done that If had known that they have no allies.

yeah,crack on with the hogwash G'. so ,these Non existent allies who let all your soldiers reform on their lands......god, you really dont get it do you? If you'd had "no allies",as falkster says,you'd be speaking german now,if your bloodline hadnt been wiped out 30 odd years ago....

This really is like debating with a bunch of high school kids who have maybe seen a few war films......or shooting fish in a barrel.atleast the fish know when theyre shot....
Grzegorz_ 51 | 6,161  
7 Dec 2007 /  #197
LOL ! And you expect serious discussion ??
isthatu 3 | 1,164  
7 Dec 2007 /  #198
this ocasionally happens...I live in hope,but reserve my "serious" discusion for slightly more educated environs.Ones where people forget which country they happened to be spat out into and discuss history not as some form of my countries better than/more hard done by, than yours.....
Grzegorz_ 51 | 6,161  
7 Dec 2007 /  #199
and discuss history not as some form of my countries better than/more hard done by, than yours.....

But that's exactly what you do. Besides you play a smart ass but you don't really understand many things. It's not that nazis in case of Poles had some completely illogical determination to exterminate the nation no matter what (like in case of Jews). They simply saw Poles as a force, which was standing on their way and that was the reason. And without "alliance" with France and UK It could be possible that Poles wouldn't have stood on their way as Polish governmant obviously knew that Poland had no chance fighting Germans alone.
celinski 31 | 1,258  
7 Dec 2007 /  #200
If you'd had "no allies",as falkster says,you'd be speaking german now

Is the only discussion you know insulting others. Please think before you type. For the size of Poland and what they were facing they did some amazing things. I guess some of the bullies better learn from history, yes they were out numbered otherwise Germans may have to learn Polish. Numbers spread throughout the world are watching and Poland shall never be a slave to communism. God Bless Poland. Carol
isthatu 3 | 1,164  
7 Dec 2007 /  #201
It's not that nazis in case of Poles had some completely illogical determination to exterminate the nation no matter what

Yes they did,1975 was the date set as when there would be no more Poles alive,dont kid yourself G, you know hitler wanted the complete destruction of Poland,good god man,he bangs on about that in Mein Kampf almost as much as he twitters on about jews and venerial disease.

And without "alliance" with France and UK It could be possible that Poles wouldn't have stood on their way as Polish governmant obviously knew that Poland had no chance fighting Germans alone.

Do you really think they would have given up Danzig and the corridor? Dont be soft man, The nazis always wanted westeren Poland for them selves.What do you think they were going to do,bypass Poland on the way to "Russia" and leave you guys alone,the land of dzerzhinski et al? Or maybe you would have come to an arrangemnet and handed over 3 million of your people to the nazis....nope, I stand by all I say and leave your comments for wider judgement.

Is the only discussion you know insulting others. Please think before you type. For the size of Poland and what they were facing they did some amazing things.

what are you twittering on about now, everyone knows that lots of poles did some pretty impressive things in ww2 but what on earth has this got to do with british /Polish relations in the 39 period? remember were not talking about grandpa's shed here.....

Numbers spread throughout the world are watching and Poland shall never be a slave to communism.

crumbs,a bit late with that arnt you,the huge numbers of Polish americans did diddly squat for Poland inww2,why should anything change now or in the future,you all talk the talk but stay safttly tucked up the other side of the atlantic and let your european cousins rip each other apart.And BTW ,Carol, It was Polish communists who ran Poland ,not your blessed ukrainianes or russkies,but Poles.Not that this has much to do with the thread,but ass I said to you somewhere else you do seem to have some almost evangelical agenda that sees you popping up all over the forum with comments about kressy and such like......
Grzegorz_ 51 | 6,161  
8 Dec 2007 /  #202
Yes they did,1975 was the date set as when there would be no more Poles alive

Go drink tea, lick qeen's ass and go learn when General Plan-Ost was created.
celinski 31 | 1,258  
8 Dec 2007 /  #203
the huge numbers of Polish americans did diddly squat for Poland inww2

It is because of WW2 I am here. If not for WW2 what do you think the population in Poland would be today. Just think I could be there to help protect Poland. Carol
Maxxx Payne 1 | 196  
9 Dec 2007 /  #204
BTW, happy Indipendance Day Finland :) (not sure from who your celebrating about but,ho hum...)

thank you, Poland won the war but lost their independence (sort of) Finland lost the war but maintained their independce (partially at least). Following the right path as Poland did is not the easy way.

I have never received any bad-mouthing of Finlands participation in WW II from either British or Polish so I guess they understand our situation at the time.
Puzzler 9 | 1,089  
9 Dec 2007 /  #205
Following the right path as Poland did is not the easy way

- Very true, brother.

I have never received any bad-mouthing of Finlands participation in WW II from either British or Polish so I guess they understand our situation at the time

- No hard feelings or bad-mouthng on our part at all. In fact, in Poland we admired you for giving a good thrashing to Stalin's Russian army. You beat the crap out of them. A brave nation you are, real warriors.

:)

Go drink tea, lick qeen's ass and go learn when General Plan-Ost was created

- Come on, Greg, there's no reason to be so offensive. Especially because isthatu is a really good guy - cool, knowledgeable, and not Polonophobic at all. You've shot some Britophobic crap at him; should he now reply in kind with some Polonophobic crap? He'd have the right to do that. Let's be friendly and respectful or less so towards the right people. It's definitely right to be friendly and respectful towards isthatu.

Cheers, Greg and isthatu.
:)

PS. Greg, isthatu. - God bless Her Majesty for Her kindness towards the Polish people.

And God bless English tea - the best tea on earth.
:)
southern 75 | 7,096  
9 Dec 2007 /  #206
What do you think they were going to do,bypass Poland on the way to "Russia" and leave you guys alone,the land of dzerzhinski et al?

Look how easily they bypassed Sweden on their way from Norway to Finland.

They simply saw Poles as a force

As a workforce to be more specific.

probably with an eventual german victory over the Red Army,but at the very least a stalemate as ,without Britain still(or ever having being) in the war

Red army defeat would mean the death of England.Hitler would move his entire force to occupy the island if the British did not accept his terms.For sure GB would compromise.Without Soviet Union the war was lost for the West.

Yes they did,1975 was the date set as when there would be no more Poles alive,dont kid yourself G, you know hitler wanted the complete destruction of Poland,good

He did not want to exterminate the Poles.Only to eliminate the intelligentia and use Poles as slave-workers for the Reich.Polish workforce was considered an important factor for the Reich's prosperity.

of the august uprising troop levels in the city were down to a token force,mostly made up of second line police reservists etc. The reason the rising ran into trouble was that the germans had no problems reinforcing their troops as the eastern front proper was only a matter of miles away.
Anyway,what has the Warsaw uprising

Warsaw had no military significance for the Germans.They fought fanatically for it in order to cause clash between GB,USA and Soviet Union regarding the help to polish resistance.They wanted a heavy conflict between the allies that would lead to the dissolvement of alliance.
Ozi Dan 26 | 569  
9 Dec 2007 /  #207
Er,OK,lets look at this way,hypotheticaly;GB and France leave Poland to Hitler,both countries say,"stuff it,why waste our boys lives for those guys the other side of europe who ,actually,have never done anything for us in the past(blah blah,stopping communism in 1921......)

Thanks for your detailed response. Notwithstanding the 'hypothetical' nature of it, I think you're pretty close tot he mark. Paraphrased, the GB govt did not have the guts or the temerity to honour their promise. That's it really isnt it? Put the shoe on the other foot, and I think it's safe to say the Poles would have acted differently. Big call, but there it is.

If this is sarcasm my above answer covers it neatly I think. If not,sorry bout that :)

It is and it does answer it well.

Well,again,where to start,how about giving the Poles the means to fight the Germans,freely,and without political interference as those in the east faced.

How about a home for your govt in exile which maintained autonamy and even its own SOE section( the only allied nation entrusted with a completely indipendant hand in this),

These were token offers. The assistance given tot he SOE by the Poles far outweighed any benefit derived by the Poles. With the exception of a few men and women of conscience, it seems apparent that Poles were merely used as a convenient tool. As I said, the balance sheet of Polish contributions to the GB contributions is heavily stacked in Poland's favour. As to 'giving' Poles a place to live, give me a break. After their usefulness and novelty wore off (starting from the end of the B of B), many were despised, ridiculed and made to feel as though they had no home.

As to rotting in Romania, Poles flocked to England regardless of GB governement intervention -they were under the mistaken belief that sacrifice for GB would be paid in kind. Dont fantasise that it was the GB that let them out of their pens.

As to giving the Poles the means to fight freely and without interference, what do you mean? Oh, I know - they were used where and when the allies needed them and kicked ass wherever they went but without any iota of gain or benefit flowing back. As to the Frantic airdrops, those individual pilots were heroes, and with solemn respect to their memory, I would hazard to say that they would roll in their graves if their individual courage and selflessness was attributed to any checklist of GB's contributions suggestive of a governmental mindset or policy/doctrine of assistance for Poland.

I live in hope,but reserve my "serious" discusion for slightly more educated environs.Ones where people forget which country they happened to be spat out into and discuss history not as some form of my countries better than/more hard done by, than yours.....

Now this is plain disrespect to the forum. By inference, you say that every forum poster is not on an intellectual par with you. Now's the opportunity to retract my good man.

As to the second sentence, this is a "polish forum". This means that you will encounter Poles, or persons of Polish extraction (such as me) discussing and argiung all things Polish. Given the fictions, fallacies and fantasies surrounding Polish history, ytou will come across people who will offend your sense of how a historic discussion should proceed. You see, until very recently (and in some cases not yet), the documents/notes/memos surrounding what actually happened to Poland were locked up. In some cases they were destroyed or went missing. A prime example is BIP's archive, which was delivered to the GB govt at the finale of the war and was 'lost'. Poles didnt have the luxury of a long unbroken chain of documented history, untainted by interference and redrafting by other countries and cultures. We're still discovering what really happened. I suggest you read Norman Davies Rising 44 if you havent already.

I wonder why when discussing history Poles seem to focus on being 'hard done by', or what their achivements are. Maybe it's because despite all the achivements the Poles were in fact hard done by relative to other countries. It's particularly galling when a lot of the achievements were made for the beneift of others who did not have the gratitude to repay in kind. In that sense, I think Poland is arguably unique in the world.

I look forward to your retraction and response.

Cheers, Dan
Puzzler 9 | 1,089  
9 Dec 2007 /  #208
Ozi Dan

- Good God, that is a very good very eloquent post, Dan. I'll be awaiting isthatu's reply with great excitement.

Cheers.
:)

and that the real turning point in the battle was made by the North African tribesmen of the Free French further down the valley

- Looks like the usual westernist putting-down-the-Poles propaganda. It used to be quite naughty (and silly) in Britain and US. I remember something similar - the claims that the Polish-Russian war of 1920 was won thanks to the French. Norman Davies has demolished this myth in His White Eagle Red Star. Perhaps the Polonophobic Cassino myth needs a similar treatment?
isthatu 3 | 1,164  
9 Dec 2007 /  #209
Not a problem. No,neville chamberlins govt had no guts,by the time GB had a govt with the guts to fight a war it was May 1940 and the Bltzkrieg had rolled west.

Put the shoe on the other foot, and I think it's safe to say the Poles would have acted differently. Big call, but there it is.

How? By invading germany,no offence to the heros of bzura et al but Poland was in about as good a position as GB to attack Germany at this time.

As to rotting in Romania, Poles flocked to England regardless of GB governement intervention -they were under the mistaken belief that sacrifice for GB would be paid in kind. Dont fantasise that it was the GB that let them out of their pens.

I dont think I ever implied it was the GB govt that released them,(infact,most went to france first from romania),in my hypothisis of a war without GB or Fr involvement I simply stated fact,where would they have gone too from Romania?

After their usefulness and novelty wore off (starting from the end of the B of B), many were despised, ridiculed and made to feel as though they had no home.

All I can talk about are the many dozens of families in my small town and the hundreds of others in the larger town near me who were welcomed with open arms by the locals(yes,the govt wanted people out,no question,but this was everyone,not some form of "polonophobic" conspiricy) and have had the red and white flying on our local war monuments for the last 60 odd years.

As to the Frantic airdrops, those individual pilots were heroes, and with solemn respect to their memory, I would hazard to say that they would roll in their graves if their individual courage and selflessness was attributed to any checklist of GB's contributions suggestive of a governmental mindset or policy/doctrine of assistance for Poland.

ok,so why do you think its any different to your rather distastfull premise that there should be some sort of tally of who did what for who? Is the british life lost over warsaw any less worthy than the Polish life lost over london? I attempted to respond to your idea that somehow you can take the deeds of individuals and try and see who did more for whom ,maybe I came up short,maybe its just something that can never be equated,The starting premis is,GB only went to war at that time because of its alliance with Poland and France,we all lost,britain 360.000+ lives,each one ,cold hard fact,only lost because we went to war because Poland was invaded.Yes,Poland lost many many more people,so if you can reduce it to a tally of deaths then,you win(lose),frankly though,I prefer to leave comparisons of suffering to a certain other group of people.

No reflection needed,I stand by my words,of course there are people on here with great amounts of knowladgebut,and this is a huge big but, there are also always jingoistic idiots,with very little knowladge beyond that gleaned from war films who seem to ruin the level of debate/discusion.If you notice,the person who started this thread hasn had much to say...so I rest my case there m'lud.

As are we here in GB,as you may or may not know,the secret of enigma for example only came out in the mid-late 70s,many things are still top secret here.

No your Bip papers wernt lost,they will have been destroyed,simple,along with many historical records pertaining directly to britain. Do you not think that here in the UK we were not flooded with Yank propaganda,or more specifically anti Soviet propaganda,down playing the war in the east here as much as it was over played the other side of the curtain. Yes,I understand the idiosyncracies of Polands troubled history as much as an interested outsider can,but I still say a Pole who spouts nonsence is as bad as a Brit who thinks "we won the war" on our own should maybe just read more and type less.

I suggest you read Norman Davies Rising 44 if you havent already

rather battered and bruised it is too, though even ole Norm is open to debate( the photos of 2nd armd captioned as airborne spring to mind,as well as one or two fictional streets that members of the home army association have never heard of) and dont get me started on his bloomin anoying Mr K' this and DR A' that,grrrr:)

I wonder why when discussing history Poles seem to focus on being 'hard done by', or what their achivements are.

Yes,doesnt play well to "stiff upper lip" british audiences. We prefer the older stereotype we used to have in Brritain of the " Plucky Pole" or the "Galent airmen" etc etcnot the whinging type,especially as most people in Britain who know their history know a lot more about the Poles than Poles maybe think we do.

It's particularly galling when a lot of the achievements were made for the beneift of others who did not have the gratitude to repay in kind

sorry,what do you mean,pay inkind? How,were we meant to start WW3 against,what was to all intents and purposesa Soviet union with a Polish ally,to liberate Poland for "our" Poles? A Pole invented the hand held mine sweeper,much used by all forces in the desert campain and elswhere,so what,a yank invented the sherman that Poles drove on the way to defeating Germany.How do you mesure up acheivments in wartime then "pay in kind"?

In that sense, I think Poland is arguably unique in the world.

well,some could say this,I wouldnt myself,unless you mean unique in not realising that ww2 was a combined effort by many nations and no one nations contributions outwayed,or played a significant role in the defeat of germany( i would hazard a guess at the T34 tank,but without its christie suspension ......) above any others,and to say so just seems to be trying too hard at patriotism.

and that the real turning point in the battle was made by the North African tribesmen of the Free French further down the valley

Looks like the usual westernist putting-down-the-Poles propaganda. It used to be quite naughty (and silly) in Britain and US.

Not at all Puzz' every school boy in britain (when kids cared about these things) knows it was Poles who eventually captured monestery Hill from the gerry para's so calm down,it isnt a bbc conspiricy ;)

What it is infact is the usuall "westernest" put down of non white participation in WW2thankfully this is slowly changing. I never claimed the Poles didnt capture Monte Cassino,all I pointed out was the imple fact that cassino had lost all strategic significane by the time it fell as the road to Rome had already been opened.Rather than being pee'd off at me for pointing this out,get pee'd off at Freyburg and Alexander for waisting Polish lives against a figurehead objective.

hate to disappoint you,but the polish /soviet war hardly figures on the radar in this country.....although,yes,I have read the book,interesting to read about so many Polish divisions entirely equipped with British uniforms and rifles :)

A prime example is BIP's archive, which was delivered to the GB govt at the finale of the war and was 'lost'.

sorry dan,just an add on to this,they were not lost by the GB govt,rather by one of the " Cambridge Spies" off the top of my head I would have to guess at Kim Phillby,working in the forgiegn office at the time and a puppet of the NKVD/KGB, I think this is discussed in breiff in the appendix of Red Runs The Vistula" but,having lost that in the june floods someone else will have to confirm this for you....
southern 75 | 7,096  
9 Dec 2007 /  #210
Simply at that era Poles had lost the right to decide for themselves.

I do not think these 360000 Brits were lost for the liberation of Poland.

Archives - 2005-2009 / History / WW2: Britain Declares War on Germany to Save PolandArchived