PolishForums LIVE  /  Archives [3]    
 
Posts by Babinich  

Joined: 26 May 2008 / Male ♂ 		Last Post: 17 Feb 2013
Threads: Total: 1 / In This Archive: 1
Posts: Total: 453 / In This Archive: 246 		From: Chicago
Speaks Polish?: not quite yet...
Interests: Math, history, science, economics, & hockey

Displayed posts: 247 / page 5 of 9
sort: Latest first   Oldest first   |
Babinich   
14 Jan 2009
History / Poland Betrayed in WW2 [243]

The two countries fought together against Russia. Then in 1921, after the war was won, Poland made a seperate peace with Russia (despite the treaty clearly forbidding that) and seized the western half of Ukraine (the eastern half went to Russia).

Lets talk facts shall we?

The unfortunate matter was that Piłsudski felt the Riga agreement was a disaster. The Riga treaty was negotiated by Jan Dąbski (Poles). By 1921, Piłsudski was only an observer during the Riga negotiations, which he called an act of cowardice. Allegedly, after he left the conference room, he told the waiting Ukrainians: Gentlemen, I deeply apologize to you.

There were many Poles who fought and died along side of the Ukrainians that honored the Petlura-Piłsudski Alliance.

A reminder of the topic: Poland Betrayed in WW2
Babinich   
14 Jan 2009
News / What did Poland get out of the wars and struggles for others? [1108]

As an aside it does make one wonder which faction would want to see Sikorski dead

In April 1943, General Sikorski turned down the Soviet demand that Poland withdraw their plea to have the Red Cross investigate Katyn. Anthony Eden (Foreign Secretary) refused to help and the Soviet Union broke diplomatic relations with Poland on the following day, on the basis that the Polish government was in league with Nazi Germany. Despite the Polish requests for help, the United States and the United Kingdom decided not to put pressure on the USSR.

Emphasis mine... Quite a tell in my book.

I have no problem with the fact that General Sikorski proposed the Oder and Neisse line in the west. The problem is that both Roosevelt and Churchill officially agreed that the eastern borders of Poland would roughly follow the Curzon Line. The Polish government was not notified of this decision (leading to an approximate loss of 48% of Poland's pre-war territory). Very little information was given about the Tehran conference. One of the gems was this was the press release: We await the day, when all nations of the world will live peacefully, free of tyranny, according to their national needs and conscience. This press release pointed to the principals outlined in the Atlantic Charter.

The principals of the Atlantic Charter were adopted by a number of nations including the SU in September of 1941. Both Roosevelt and Churchill had little interest in holding Stalin to the Atlantic Charter.

Thus the Atlantic Charter was not worth the paper it was written on and proved, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that both Roosevelt and Churchill could not be taken at their word.
Babinich   
13 Jan 2009
News / What did Poland get out of the wars and struggles for others? [1108]

From what I have read on Yalta, it would appear that any such attempts to impose allied will on Stalin, were made by Churchill and dismissed by Roosevelt.

I am specifically targeting Tehran in late November of 1943. It was at this conference where Stalin pushed for the the borders of post-war Poland to be set along the Oder and Neisse rivers and the Curzon line.

What if Churchill and Roosevelt made their promise of a second front in Western Europe conditional? Conditional on Polish sovereignty?

Why was Roosevelt so eager to placate Stalin?

Roosevelt was intent on reshaping the post-war world around the creation of new nation-states from the remains of the old colonial empires. Roosevelt felt that Stalin might serve as a key ally in his attempt finish off the old colonial system.

The latter point can be viewed as a slight at Churchill who in all likelihood wished to restore some form of a British Empire.
Babinich   
13 Jan 2009
News / What did Poland get out of the wars and struggles for others? [1108]

What if Churchill had kept to his word, stood up to Stalin and demanded Polish sovereignty? Would it have changed anything? No.

Maybe... Depending on when the confrontation occurred and if Roosevelt backed Churchill.

So if Poland's woes were not caused by this political betrayal, it's hardly worth placing such importance on it. What if Churchill had the political might to put operation unthinkable in to action? Would I have wanted my grandparents to fight The Red Army in a potentially brutal war to free Poland.

The prospect of fighting against the SU would not exist, because the SU would not exist if not for Lloyd George.

Be that as it may, there would be no fight with the SU if the British and Americans were united in facing down Uncle Joe in 1943 because the Wehrmacht was hardly beaten in 1943.
Babinich   
11 Jan 2009
History / Targowice and Bar Confederations [34]

Bar Confederacy was organized by patriotic Poles against Russian domination in Poland, among others. Took place 1768-1772. Was one of the pretexts for Russia, Austria and Prussia to divide Poland in the first partition.

Shortly speaking, Targowica was organized by pro-Russian Poles who decided to turn against their Polish King and abolish the reforms which were to strengthen the country at the end of 18 century. Russians invaded, the King gave up after a short campaign and surrendered the army. Poland experienced the 3rd partition and vanished from the map of Europe for 123 years.

This is how I pretty much remember it. One key fact I'd like to point out is that Frederick (Prussia) exploited this situation greatly by giving council to Catherine (Russia).
Babinich   
8 Jan 2009
Food / What is your favourite Polish meal?! [64]

Yeah, it would appear so but I am conditioned by having eaten this type of food for quite some time.

Chasing the meal with hot cinnamon rice milk is comforting too.
Babinich   
5 Jan 2009
USA, Canada / FIRST POL-AM CATHOLIC (?) PRIESTESS [72]

The Catholic church sets the rules for being a Catholic and the rules they've set include regular church going.

The RCC strongly believes in participating in the Eucharistic celebration with others from the Christian community. In other words; communal prayer.
Babinich   
4 Jan 2009
USA, Canada / FIRST POL-AM CATHOLIC (?) PRIESTESS [72]

That's right... Defending the defensible in the RCC from bomb throwers is my duty and my privilege.
Babinich   
4 Jan 2009
USA, Canada / FIRST POL-AM CATHOLIC (?) PRIESTESS [72]

People tend not to risk their lives and the lives of loved ones for strangers based on "morals" from the bible.

Please, Pope John Paul II risked his life while in Nazi occupied Poland for others.

As for the Pope's apology, that's fine and good. Quite good PR in an increasing hostile media world towards religion.

To say that during WWII the Catholic Church did not help the persecuted is a bold face lie.
Babinich   
3 Jan 2009
USA, Canada / FIRST POL-AM CATHOLIC (?) PRIESTESS [72]

Sorry, it is not wrong to kill; it is wrong to murder.

2) You can empathise with the family and imagine if it were you and help.

If you think it is reasonable to put your life and the lives of your family on the line for a stranger I'd question your reasoning.

3) Using reason does not mean leading lambs to their slaughter.

I have no idea at where you're going here...

What about all the people who were killed in the name of your god?

I must have missed the entire message of the New Testament. People can claim all sorts of reasons for murdering others; religion is often used as the reason for murder.

What about those that killed based on something other than religion like Hitler, Mao, & Stalin? They felt they were being reasonable.

And it is strange that you talk about Nazis with regards to the church.
For it was the church that closed it's doors to the Jews in the second world war and NEVER condemed what the Nazis did!.

Are you saying that if a person does not explicitly condemn an oppressor that this very same person becomes incapable of helping the oppressed?

Sorry, he may have never condemned Hitler outright for fear of retaliation. It sure is harder helping others when in jail or in the grave.

Dr. Joseph Nathan, who represented the Hebrew Commission, addressed the Jewish community and expressed gratitude to those who protected and saved Jews during the Nazi occupation. "Above all," he stated, "we acknowledge the Supreme Pontiff and the religious men and women who, executing the directives of the Holy Father, recognized the persecuted of their brothers and, with great abnegation, hastened to help them, disregarding the terrible dangers to which they were exposed."

At Pope Pius XII death in 1958, Golda Meir sent this message: "We share in the grief of humanity. When fearful martyrdom came to our people in the decade of Nazi terror, the voice of the pope was raised for its victims. The life of our times was enriched by a voice speaking out about great moral truths above the tumult of daily conflict. We mourn a great servant of peace."

amazon.com/Myth-Hitlers-Pope-Against-Germany/dp/0895260344/ ref=sr_11_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1231008620&sr=11-1
Babinich   
3 Jan 2009
USA, Canada / FIRST POL-AM CATHOLIC (?) PRIESTESS [72]

Babinich: It utter nonsense that reason always suggests the good.

How do you reason that out?.

What if in Nazi occupied Poland a Jewish family knocks on a door of a home asking the homeowner to hide his family?

Suppose the homeowner, on rational grounds, decides that the moral thing to do is hide the Jewish family.

Will this homeowner act on this decision at the risk of his life and the lives of his family? Not if reason alone guides him. People tend not to risk their lives and the lives of loved ones for strangers based on reason.

People tend to risk their lives for strangers based on faith; faith in something that supersedes reason.

Babinich: You have to believe that people are basically good in order to believe that human reason will necessarily lead to moral conclusions.

No you don't, you have to reason that it is in everyone's best interests not to kill each other or not to steal from me or my neighbour.

Sorry, when it comes to a moral question, there is no such a thing as a straight forward rational answer. What is the purely rational view on the morality of abortion, the war in Iraq, or capital punishment for murder?

Babinich: that people are basically good.

Any idiot can clearly see that this is not true. Where is the reasoning behind such a fictitious statement?.

Nice parsing.... This is not my contention and you know it.

My contention is that there are times when it can be rational to do what is wrong and that there are times when it can be rational to do what is right.

One has to believe that people are basically good in order to believe that human reason will consistently lead to moral conclusions.
Babinich   
3 Jan 2009
USA, Canada / FIRST POL-AM CATHOLIC (?) PRIESTESS [72]

let's stone this lady, she's unclean. bible says she needs to go.

Where does the Bible say she "she needs to go"?

or maybe they have their own mind and don't need constantine's rules to tell them what's what?

Right...

Reason without God is left wanting.... There are a number of issues where reason fails one such issue happens to be that people are basically good. You have to believe that people are basically good in order to believe that human reason will necessarily lead to moral conclusions.
Babinich   
2 Jan 2009
USA, Canada / FIRST POL-AM CATHOLIC (?) PRIESTESS [72]

In fact the whole idea of blindly following anything is beyond me, religion asks not to be questioned, that it is God's will but that is just blowing smoke.

Yep, the oft repeated argument:

Those who do not believe that moral values come from the Bible or that they be based upon God's moral instruction argue that they have a better source for values: human reason.

It utter nonsense that reason always suggests the good.
Babinich   
2 Jan 2009
USA, Canada / FIRST POL-AM CATHOLIC (?) PRIESTESS [72]

its funny how you cant even get your own family history without sending a good amount of money and some priests are nice and do the respectful thing and some will snub you.. so I dont know how these men who are ordained get ordained when they are not fully capable of being around the public.

Because in the end they are just men; fallible.
Babinich   
31 Dec 2008
News / What did Poland get out of the wars and struggles for others? [1108]

Well? Where did the money come from for the wehrmacht since Germany was such a poor country that everyone had ganged up on and demanded so much money from it and on and on and on.

I think you'd want to look into a fellow by the name of Hjalmar Schacht. Enron didn't think up the idea of setting up phony companies in order to obfuscate the flow of money.

Despite the fact that Poles were giving it legs even before the war started

What are you trying to say?
Babinich   
25 Dec 2008
News / interview with Donald Tusk (Financial Times) [41]

No, I believe there needs to be regulation. I also believe that the regulation be clear, concise, and revisited.

Nothing beats free markets and capitalism.
Babinich   
25 Dec 2008
News / interview with Donald Tusk (Financial Times) [41]

That is not my quote but it is my belief.

Now look at the prime examples of "free" market (here meaning as few regulations as possible) the US and the post-Thatcherite Great Britain - now broke with key industries already gone or about to be destroyed!

No, there are plenty of regulations in the US. Many of them are poor and outdated.

Of course capitalism needs some regulation; otherwise we're at the mercy of the greedy. In the end incentives have to exist for people to lend capital in order for business to get started, for jobs to get created, and for wealth to be accumulated.

Spare me the BS of having the government bureaucrat be the watchdog.. The argument that these folks are virtuous is one that doesn't hold water.
Babinich   
25 Dec 2008
News / What did Poland get out of the wars and struggles for others? [1108]

I am sorry Seanus, I am not making myself clear. I meant to say that the British helped the Soviets solidify power when it looked as if the October Revolution was teetering..

As to your point of using the A-Bomb on Japan it may have been the easy option. Would you rather have had the carnage that would have resulted if Japan itself was invaded?