Return PolishForums LIVE
  PolishForums Archive :
Archives - 2005-2009 / History  % width 168

Poland has paid £68 Million for helping UK in WW2


Frank 23 | 1,183  
9 Jan 2007 /  #31
I did mention interest....but......not up to total 40 billion in the end....yet the interest rate was only 2%...aw well there goes my accountancy career....:(
Wayc00lio 2 | 57  
9 Jan 2007 /  #32
OMG - I got it totally wrong! I was out by a factor of 10! I found the link and it was 4 bn pounds! I'm sure they said it was 40 bn!!!!! You were right Frank.

Sheesh - I must pay more attention!!!!!
Frank 23 | 1,183  
9 Jan 2007 /  #33
Way...its ok...its ok...honest...........!!!...I believe ya...but the rest of the world doesn't ...lol
Frank 23 | 1,183  
9 Jan 2007 /  #35
Way....look twice...type once...good motto....:)
Wayc00lio 2 | 57  
9 Jan 2007 /  #36
Damn right there bud LOL
Amathyst 19 | 2,702  
9 Jan 2007 /  #37
I took time to read a bit of Polish history tonight and it would appear that they were quite shafted after all that they did....
Frank 23 | 1,183  
9 Jan 2007 /  #39
No-one is saying the weren't.....to a degree and in the times that they were....but perhaps seek history sources from France/Poland/Germany and Russia to arrive at some understanding .......whose do you believe..........then arrive at ones own conclusion....
ogorek - | 165  
9 Jan 2007 /  #40
Frank - do you have your own conclusion?
Riff - | 61  
10 Jan 2007 /  #41
I think France and Russia should pay their war debt back right now with interest. They act like they don't owe the USA anything. What about all the money to rebuild France after the war. Plus, the USA could use that money to fund it's police action in Iraq.

america charged for every bullet fired during the first gulf conflict... despite starting it themselves...

Did you ever hear of a country called Kuwait?
BubbaWoo 33 | 3,506  
10 Jan 2007 /  #42
Did you ever hear of a country called Kuwait?

yup... your point being...?
Babylon 16 | 192  
10 Jan 2007 /  #43
UK paid Poland or Poland paid UK????
Amathyst 19 | 2,702  
10 Jan 2007 /  #44
no one paid anyone
ogorek - | 165  
10 Jan 2007 /  #45
Quoting: Riff, Post #45
Did you ever hear of a country called Kuwait?

yup... your point being...?

America didn't start it.
BubbaWoo 33 | 3,506  
10 Jan 2007 /  #46
you didnt actully fall for the propaganda did you ogorek...?
Ranj 21 | 947  
10 Jan 2007 /  #47
And what propaganda would that be, BW? If you are suggesting that America started the Gulf War, you need to get your facts straight! Once again, that war can be blamed on your good friend, Saddam---it started months before any coilition forces bombed Iraq.
Matyjasz 2 | 1,544  
11 Jan 2007 /  #48
The French did not fight for Polish independence, but without the slaughter fighting the Germans at places such as Verdun (in WW1, for the historically challenged) Poland wouldn't have become independent.

Partially true. Poland became independent because of the Germany failure in the WWI, the October Revolution and most of all because of hard work of Polish diplomats, that managed to convince France and it's allies that a free, strong and independent Poland is crucial for the political and military stability of European continent. Poland reemerged because it was suppose to further weaken Germany (by taking back lands that used to be polish) and to become a boundary of the western civilization and Bolshevik Russia (the biggest threat to western Europe in the 20th century), primarily to separate Russia from Germany were the idea of communist revolution was becoming more and more popular. If Russia combined it’s power with the German commies the future of Europe wouldn’t look very cheerful.

In conclusion, French soldiers never fought for Poland, as for most of the war the idea of an independent Poland was considered by the western countries as an utopia, mainly because of the position of Germany and Russia that wanted to keep the polish issue as part of their inner politics. The reemerging of my country wasn’t an act of kindness from the side of France that should be thanked for, but it was just pure business and politics. We were precious for French as long as they had some interest in it. They didn’t had any problems with sacrificing their ally Poland for their good in 1925, where they signed the Locarno Treat, that ratified only the boundaries between France, Belgium and Germany, and didn’t said anything about the eastern boundaries of Germany. It was a clear but very delicate sign in which way Germans should expand in the future, mainly in the East (Poland) and not in the West (France). Sad but true.

Wrong! Their military strategists in 1940 were as bad as Poland's were in 1939 - when the Poolish army put in a terribly poor performance. No-one, mind you, likes to tell the Poles that with the army they had they could have done 10 times better against the Germans, because it's history and you can't change it.

Terrible performance? Interesting. Look at the map from the 1939, take into the consideration how long were the frontier line with the Germans, and if you come up with a better plan of defense than the Polish government did I will salute you.

Map

Poles do love to distort things though!

Actually everybody does, not only Poles. The great thing about this forum is that we can all confront our visions of some historical events and myths.

Llooking forward to hear from you. :)
iwona 12 | 542  
11 Jan 2007 /  #49
exactly.

Noone to be really grateful.
War is usually about politics, benefits,influence, own security........
Riff - | 61  
12 Jan 2007 /  #50
you didnt actully fall for the propaganda did you ogorek...?

Saddam was told that all he had to do was withdraw back from Kuwait and there would be no action. If Saddam would have withdrawn his troops his troops would not have been slaughtered. USA did not invade Iraq remember Bubba. The second time around Saddam was told he could leave Iraq with his billions and there would be no invasion. This time he had his people and country destroyed. He was very smart. he stayed and was hung. All this is fiction and propaganda right Bubba.

no one paid anyone

I second that.
Crazy Horse - | 13  
13 Jan 2007 /  #51
A very big mistake was that American forces did not complete the task and destroy Sadam's Republican Guard by pushing on to Bagdad. Unfortunately politicians get to make too many decisions in war resulting in only having tofight them again at the expense of good soldiers.

As I've said before, having had some first hand experience in these things, in war there are no winners, there are no losers, there are only survivors. And that's the group you want to be in.
BubbaWoo 33 | 3,506  
13 Jan 2007 /  #52
And what propaganda would that be, BW? If you are suggesting that America started the Gulf War, you need to get your facts straight! Once again, that war can be blamed on your good friend, Saddam---it started months before any coilition forces bombed Iraq.

as with most americans you have a very nieive intepretation and understanding of the events that lead up to and surround both gulf conflicts... you tend to take at face value what is told to you by those charged with disseination of information to the ignorant masses... the easily lead...

if you find the strength to step away... even momentarily... from the confines that your upbring has impossed on you, and look outside of the box that most americans are holed up in, you will see a very different picture than the one that has been painted for you... a picture that isnt the picket fence apple pie of american dreams but of a very different place that the rest of the world lives in...

USA did not invade Iraq remember Bubba.

as you sit at home, or wherever you are, you are perfectly entitled to believe this.. but when you bring this belief to the rest of the world then you are going to encounter people who will stand up and say, no mate... you have no fekin idea what you are talking about... go home...
Riff - | 61  
15 Jan 2007 /  #53
Dear Bubbanonsense, In Desert Storm the USA did not invade Iraq. If you think they did then you are nonsense. Saudi Arabia seemed to like the fact that the USA got Saddam out of Kuwait. You must have thought that Kuwait was part of Iraq like Saddam did. Yes, Kuwait and Saudi Arabia did pay for alot of the bullets. They wanted to pay and they should have payed. 98% of the world knows this history. What one year old got you believing your propaganda. Even the Arabic media reported that Saddam took over Kuwait. I repeat, have you heard of a country named Kuwait? I conclude that you have never heard of the country named Kuwait.
Giles  
15 Jan 2007 /  #54
Riff, you need to read some Chomsky. Then it will all make sense.
Riff - | 61  
15 Jan 2007 /  #55
you have no fekin idea what you are talking about

Then why don't you be so kind to tell me the real history of what happened.
BubbaWoo 33 | 3,506  
15 Jan 2007 /  #56
riff me ol mukka... if you werent american i might be tempted to take you seriously... go away and educate yourself... spend a little time pondering why possibly there could be such anti-american sentiment... believe me... it has nothing to do with jelousy...

... giles has given you a starting point... go and read some chomsky...
Giles  
15 Jan 2007 /  #57
Thanks Bubba..

Riff I'm not having a go, but history is written by the winners. We now live in a Brave new World, with America and its mercenary states, controlling world finance.

The rich, them against the poor us and most other poor bastards. The point is this until you read alternative historical view points by people like Noam Chomsky (currently a proffersor at MIT I believe, or at least a fellow), you will not have a balanced view point of what is going on nor what has happened before.
Chompy  
16 Jan 2007 /  #58
America always does wars of choice pushed by mass-murdering and corrupt presidents. World War II was none of our business in Europe. FDR used a convenient excuse (the Japanese bombing a Pacific base) to drag us into a war of choice across the Atlantic. We then mass murdered German citizens who never threatened us!

At least in the Gulf we had an economic interest in keeping the oil markets accessable. In Europe we just wasted a lot of American blood killing people who were no threat to us at all and should have worked out their own differences without American hegemony trying to butt it!
anielka 2 | 84  
16 Jan 2007 /  #59
LOL- so how come the famous(or infamous for the German Luftwaffe ) Kosciuszko Squadron- 303 and 301, composed entirely of Polish fighter pilots flew with British RAF- by the end of Battle of Britain, was credited with downing more German planes than any other.9 of it's pilot's were acknowledged as Aces. Alongside, 1700 Polish airmen fought with RAF during WW2.

None marched in the British celebrations, or took part in the fly-by's.
They were (specifically) banned by British Govt. fearing offending Comrade Stalin.
That's gratitude.
An easy read for those interested is "A Question of Honor." or "For Your Freedom and Ours" by Lynne Olson a nd Stanley Cloud.

Same book, different titles.
BubbaWoo 33 | 3,506  
16 Jan 2007 /  #60
None marched in the British celebrations, or took part in the fly-by's.

to our eternal shame

Archives - 2005-2009 / History / Poland has paid £68 Million for helping UK in WW2Archived