Return PolishForums LIVE
  PolishForums Archive :
Archives - 2005-2009 / News  % width 200

Poland Remembers start of WW2


Wroclaw Boy  
4 Sep 2009 /  #121
303 Squadron was one of top fighter units in the battle and the best Hurricane-equipped one.

Listen i know Poles well and with all due respect their a bunch of bull shiteing bastads, how many confirmed kills from units out side 303 that observed the dog fights? not alot i suppose.

I can just imagine then getting back to base and claiming five kills an aircraft, and then another squadron saying well actually Nazi 437 was our kill and confirmed then 303 would then say yeh sorry it was 427.

I had a tenant not pay rent for three months on one of my apartments the other day, i issued a court order and he claimed the 1300 PLN / month i quoted him was what he interpreted as annual, so that would have been 108 PLN / month or 27 PLN per week on a luxury apartment. They pull all that shite all the time...
Ironside 53 | 12,413  
4 Sep 2009 /  #122
Ahh the London blitz was a dream i suppose, battle of Britian a myth. Hitler would have invaded had his plans been a success. Action / reaction plain and simple.

What are you about?
In 1939 it has been impossible for German to attack Britain!
They had to invited and conquer France first and then cross a channel.

Really, well why werent we beaten in 39 then hey?

I hope it does answer your question.
Wroclaw Boy  
4 Sep 2009 /  #123
What are you about?

What im about

In 1939 it has been impossible for German to attack Britain!

It was a response to a question, action/reaction.

In 1939 it has been impossible for German to attack Britain!

Thank you for answering the question.

They had to invited and conquer France first and then cross a channel.

If you have an intelligence level would you mind turning it up from 3 to 6, then i may be able to discuss on your level but i cant promise anything.
z_darius 14 | 3,965  
4 Sep 2009 /  #124
I can just imagine then getting back to base and claiming five kills an aircraft, and then another squadron saying well actually Nazi 437 was our kill and confirmed then 303 would then say yeh sorry it was 427.

These are really details and it is irrelevant to part of the topic I got involved with. Whether 303's kills were 126, 621 or just 1, the fact remains - given the same geographic circumstances as those of Poland in 1939, Britain wouldn't have fared much better. We also know it couldn't have done it alone. And it didn't.

It is somewhat understandable that on a Polish forum you will read about Polish contributions to Allied efforts during WW2 and rightly so as they were significant. There was just one country that could have won over Germans without any help, and that was the US of A. The USSR possibly could have pulled a victory too but if so, it would have taken them much longer. None of the European countries was a match for the German war machine.
Wroclaw Boy  
4 Sep 2009 /  #125
These are really details and it is irrelevant to part of the topic I got involved with. Whether 303's kills were 126, 621 or just 1, the fact remains - given the same geographic circumstances as those of Poland in 1939, Britain wouldn't have fared much better. We also know it couldn't have done it alone.

Really but we won against:

Germany
Japan
Italy
Hungary
Romania
Bulgaria
Yugoslavia
Finland
Iraq
Thailand

And it didn't.

But we did
time means 5 | 1,309  
4 Sep 2009 /  #126
the fact remains

Not a fact, but your opinion.
Harry  
4 Sep 2009 /  #127
It is somewhat understandable that on a Polish forum you will read about Polish contributions to Allied efforts during WW2 and rightly so as they were significant.

Unfortunately we also have to read Poles lying about the help that was provided to them in WWII. Poles such as yourself.
Wroclaw Boy  
4 Sep 2009 /  #128
Im of the opinion that Poles should lick our boot heels that we even gave them a chance in 303 squadron to avenge their loved ones. What else would they have done?
Harry  
4 Sep 2009 /  #129
Given that there was only one non-Polish top scoring pilots in 303 Sq. you are wrong.

Thanks for that. Nice to get what you regard as definitive numbers. Unfortunately for you, you have 'forgotten' about (i.e. you are lying about) Group Captain John Alexander Kent, Canadian Flight commander of 303 during the battle, a.k.a. "Johnny Kentowski". He had ten kills in the battle of Britain (nice list here), which, going by the numbers which you provided, makes him the third best 303 pilot. So in reality two of the three best 'Polish' pilots were not Polish! Thanks for your lies though.

Also, given that The 303 Squadron, named after the Polish-American hero, General Tadeusz Kościuszko, claimed the highest number of kills (126) of all fighter squadrons engaged in the Battle of Britain, even though it only joined the combat on August 30, 1940. These 5% of Polish pilots were responsible for 12% of total victories in the Battle.

Yes, there's the problem: they had the most claims. The reality?[o] Although the number of Battle of Britain claims was overestimated (as with virtually all fighter units), 303 Squadron was one of top fighter units in the battle and the best Hurricane-equipped one. According to historian John Alcorn, 44 victories are positively verified, which makes 303 Squadron the fourth best fighter squadron of the battle, after Squadron Nos. 603, 609 and 41, which all flew Spitfires.[/i]

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/303_squadron
Piorun - | 658  
4 Sep 2009 /  #130
Harry you make it sound as the only Poles that flew in Battle of Britain were in 303 Sqn. Looking at specific units you will find that:

501 Sqn Polish aces, Skalski and Głowacki who in a single day on 24 th of August downed 3 109's and 2 Ju 88's. Later on he flew in 611 Sqn.

302 Sqn had two Polish aces of the Franch campaign Główczyński and Nowakiewicz.
39 Sqn another 3 Polish pilots Pfeiffer, Pniak and Własnowolski who later was moved to 607 Sqn. Własnowolski was killed on the day he received posting to a Polish fighter squadron.

74 Sqn another two highly successful Poles Szczęsny and Brzezina known as “Sneezy” an “Breezy” because Brits could not pronounce their names.
609 Sqn mentioned by yourself in the post above had Polish pilots Ostoja-Ostoszewski and Nowierski.

One can go on and on giving an example after example. As for the statistics Britain needed their own heros too and what kills were attributed to one pilot historians now have doubts and dispute the findings like in the case of German ace Helmut Wick whoes downing was attributed to Dundas of 609 who in turn was killed minutes later by Wicks wingman. Historians now speculate that the kill was actually made by Zygmunt Klein a Polish pilot of 152 Sqn.

Dose it really matter who did what? In my opinion no, the only thing I can't stand is how people like you Harry will use anything at your disposal to belittle and downplay Polish contribution to the downfall of Nazi Germany. It's no surprise to me really to see a Jew like yourself manipulate the facts of History. How else would you achieve your goal of milking the money off of Poland. As for the Brits perhaps they should learn more about their own history.
tornado2007 11 | 2,270  
4 Sep 2009 /  #131
I didn't realize Battle of Britain took place in 1939?

so what?? it happened in the war, the RAF still did their thing :) Who cares if it was 1939 or not.

Are you suggesting German forces in 1939 were comparable to Sierra Leone rebels?

with the leadership they had, it may be possible, lol. Obviously i was using an extreme example to make my point.

That'll add up to no less more than twice what you claimed. While I offered a guess based on facts, you did not even offer facts. And even that was not the end. Poles never ceased to fight.

alright then three weeks and a few days, does it make the situation better, did it make the invasion/occupation any less painfull?? no

How about talking about my initial point of looking forwards instead of back all the time??

That's easy.

good for you creating your scenario's in your theatre of dreams, now lets get back to the real world shall we, who was it who was invaded/occupied again??

Youre not realy in a position to comment on that one for sure

when your struggling you always come out with this one, you like it don't you, its like a get out for you, similar to a left handed batsmans slog sweep.

Do you live in Poland? do you know what day to day living entails here and how much communism has affected the coutry on a long term scale?

You know that i don't live in Poland and never plan too either, however i have plenty of Polish friends who i hava asked the same question as i have tried to ask here. The answers i get are very different from those on the forum, some say to me that 'the older generation are stuck in the past' some say 'people are just bitter about it because that is what they grew up with, its different fro younger Poles who just want to get on with their lives' or 'Polish people are so focused on the past that my country will never move forward' etc etc. These are POLES, these are POLES who through generations have lost members of their family, however these are also POLES who want to change Poland and themselves for the better. SUrely this can only be done by looking to the future and focusing on what needs to be done to help Poland grow and meet her potential.

I did like your comment about Brits fighting for other coutries on their soil. I cant find the exact post but it was right on the money.

I also like the way you are battling on with BB, i think he's just feeling a little sour about the fact 'the great war machine' lost the second great world war :)

BB I don't see why you argue all these points, your nation along with the other nations involved in the Axis were defeated, so stop complaining like Arsene Wenger when you've lost a football match :) Whats done is done and whats fun is fun, YOU LOST GET OVER IT.
z_darius 14 | 3,965  
4 Sep 2009 /  #132
so what?? it happened in the war, the RAF still did their thing :) Who cares if it was 1939 or not.

Silly argument.
Poles won battles in 1939 too.
RAF of 1939 not was the same as as RAF of 1940

alright then three weeks and a few days, does it make the situation better, did it make the invasion/occupation any less painfull??

What's up with painful? Of course any defeat is painful.
The point is you lied about the "two weeks flat".

good for you creating your scenario's in your theatre of dreams

If you can present a "theatre of dreams" when referring to actual events and lie while doing that then why can't I do the same referring to a clearly nonexistent scenario?
time means 5 | 1,309  
4 Sep 2009 /  #133
Brits were shocked by some moderate bombing by Germany, whose main preoccupation was the Eastern front anyway . Poland was bombed like that for weeks, and with all the power Germans had at the time.

Lol what a complete tool you are.

The Blitz was the sustained bombing of Britain by Nazi Germany between 7 September 1940 and 10 May 1941, in World War II. While the Blitz hit many towns and cities across the country, it began with the bombing of London for 57 consecutive nights.[3] By the end of May 1941, over 43,000 civilians, half of them in London, had been killed by bombing and more than a million houses were destroyed or damaged in London alone.[4][5]

London was not the only city to suffer Luftwaffe bombing during the Blitz. Other important military and industrial centres, such as Belfast, Birmingham, Bristol, Cardiff, Clydebank, Coventry, Greenock, Sheffield, Swansea, Liverpool, Hull (the most heavily bombed city outside of London), Manchester, Portsmouth, Plymouth, Nottingham and Southampton, suffered heavy air raids and high numbers of casualties.

wiki.
z_darius 14 | 3,965  
4 Sep 2009 /  #134
The Blitz was the sustained bombing of Britain by Nazi Germany between 7 September 1940 and 10 May 1941, in World War II. While the Blitz hit many towns and cities across the country, it began with the bombing of London for 57 consecutive nights.[3] By the end of May 1941, over 43,000 civilians, half of them in London, had been killed by bombing and more than a million houses were destroyed or damaged in London alone.

so what?
Where were the German land forces in Britain following the blitz?
Why weren't they there? Any idea?
Geography was of no help?
time means 5 | 1,309  
4 Sep 2009 /  #135
Moderate bombing?

If the channel saved Britain how come it never saved anywhere else from the British?
Piorun - | 658  
4 Sep 2009 /  #136
Pole being anti-semitic.

Exactly my point, way to go, you illustrate my point so eloquently. How could so many Poles save the Jews and fight Nazism so fervently when in order for your agenda to work so you can gain money you have to show us as collaborators and as anti-semits to the rest of the world. You will stop at nothing, and use any other side to play against us be it Germans British whatever. Besides what statement made my comment anti-semitic? If pointing that out makes me anti-semitic so be it.
wzgrza - | 46  
4 Sep 2009 /  #137
I had a tenant not pay rent for three months on one of my apartments the other day, i issued a court order and he claimed the 1300 PLN / month i quoted him was what he interpreted as annual, so that would have been 108 PLN / month or 27 PLN per week on a luxury apartment..

Way to judge an entire population on one guy not paying rent. hahaha

Harry you make it sound as the only Poles that flew in Battle of Britain were in 303 Sqn. Looking at specific units you will find that:

Well said. Especially the last paragraph, as it is quite a common occurance.

Fcuking hell dont even get me started, believe me.

You could give me 1,000 stories, and it would'nt be enough.

Do you want it all? do you really want to hear it all? Current: my experiences with Polish tenants i got loads.

I obviously wasnt refering to your tenant stories.. but to what I quoted.
southern 74 | 7,074  
4 Sep 2009 /  #138
Battle of Britain had no impact on the war.It was a bluff by Hitler to make GB sign treaty or become Germany's ally before german attack against Soviet Union.
Seanus 15 | 19,674  
4 Sep 2009 /  #139
He's Jew a break :) Poland did a sterling job in the air but thanks to British spitfires largely. Read a respectable author, Aescherson. He compliments, and rightly, the Polish pilots but Poland was ill-equipped to fight a war with Germany. Piłsudki didn't bring about the changes needed to make Poland a formidable force. Yes, he had spirit and was romantic but that will be swept away by practicality and military clout.

Britain and America played a major part in keeping Europe free of Nazis.
Wroclaw Boy  
4 Sep 2009 /  #140
Way to judge an entire population on one guy not paying rent. hahaha

Whos judging a nation?
wzgrza - | 46  
4 Sep 2009 /  #141
Listen i know Poles well and with all due respect their a bunch of bull shiteing bastads, how many confirmed kills from units out side 303 that observed the dog fights? not alot i suppose.They pull all that shite all the time...

McCoy 27 | 1,269  
5 Sep 2009 /  #142
Britain wouldn't have fared much better. We also know it couldn't have done it alone. And it didn't.

sure. brits always try to 5hit over the horizon but seeing not further than the end of their own noses. cant talk withem cause in their heads they are the greatest nation of the universe. wouldnt give a penny for their sorry asses.
Seanus 15 | 19,674  
5 Sep 2009 /  #143
Come on, what do you really think? ;) ;) ;) Stop spinning lines ;) :)
Babinich 1 | 455  
5 Sep 2009 /  #144
When a outnumbered attacking force runs over a bigger army and their whole country in 6 weeks you can call that either "middle finger" or the most humiliating defeat of an army ever!

Shkop,

Bagration - the death of Army Group Center was a greater defeat.

The Germans lost 450K men and AGC's strength fell from 880K to 445K. Another 100K fell in secondary battles (AGS Ukraine). The Soviets lost 178.5K killed and 587K wounded. The Soviets lost 2957 tanks & self propelled guns & 2447 guns and mortars.

Despite these losses the Soviets increased their troop levels from 6,394,500 in March 1944 to 6,500,00 in late fall of 1944. The Germans and it allies lost troops: from 2,460,000 in June of 1944 to 2,030,000 by Nov 1944.

Soviet material for tanks and self propelled went from 7753 on June 1 to 8,300 by Jan 1945. German gains for the same equipment went from 2608 on June 1944 to 3700 by Nov 1944. Over the same time frame Soviet artillery went from 100K to 114K; German artillery decreased from 7080 in June 1944 to 5700 in Nov 1944.
Bratwurst Boy 12 | 11,790  
5 Sep 2009 /  #145
Bagration - the death of Army Group Center was a greater defeat

You still don't get it, don't you!

336,573 Germans vs 1,254,300 Reds

495 Tanks and Assault guns vs 4,070 Tanks and Assault Guns

602 aircraft vs 6,334 Aircraft

2589 Guns vs 24,383 Guns

But still:

Red losses during Bagration:

770,888 men
2957 Tanks
2447 Guns
822 Aircraft


There is nothing humiliating about that defeat...the Germans made them pay! Every german stubblehopper, tanker, pilot inflicted much more damage to the enemy than the other way around.

What a "walk over" for the Soviets, yeah right...

But maybe you really have just not enough brain cells for that...
krakowiak  
5 Sep 2009 /  #146
A reenactment would have been so much cooler....(like with the Grunwald battle)

A re-enactment of the Battle of Westerplatte with Polish casaulities of 15 killed and 53 wounded and German od Est. 200-400 casualties (killed and wounded).

Doubt you would like to see it ;)
Seanus 15 | 19,674  
5 Sep 2009 /  #147
It's depressing to see all these stats bandied about. Still, population reduction served the desires of the power brokers. May they rot in hell for their global engineering.

Laissez faire should be the outcry.
Bratwurst Boy 12 | 11,790  
5 Sep 2009 /  #148
Doubt you would like to see it ;)

Why not??? Surely a whole lot better than those dreary speeches...cool pics for 1jola to make to show to me later!!!
Babinich 1 | 455  
5 Sep 2009 /  #149
There is nothing humiliating about that defeat...the Germans made them pay! Every german stubblehopper, tanker, pilot inflicted much more damage to the enemy than the other way around.
What a "walk over" for the Soviets, yeah right...

Shkop,

The annihilation of AGC was total. The repercussions of this defeat were immeasurable. From this point forward the corrupt Nazi hierarchy went into meltdown. Martin Bormann's orders to the SS to arrest army officer because of his feeling that the General Staff aligned itself with the Moscow Free Germany Committee. Jodl proposed the German General Staff be abolished.

Hitler, now believing that a shock blow to one of the allied fronts would save Germany, wasted men and material in the Ardennes in what was called the Battle of the Bulge.

The Bulge, from the German perspective, was a waste of men and material.

The Nazi leadership disintegrated. Political infighting increased, and Hitler's optimism after Bagration (he thought it was a net positive because the front was shortened) was nothing more that wild-eyed fantasy.

Ironic, German generals had argued for shortening the front in the spring of 1944. For their arguments Manstein, Hoth, and Kleist were dismissed.

This was a total collapse; to argue any other point is foolish.
Bratwurst Boy 12 | 11,790  
5 Sep 2009 /  #150
The point was (the one you seem to miss again and again) is the difference between the performance of the german troops and the polish troops or the british troops and even the russian troops to the french troops.

Everybody fighted and won/lost but did fight well...but the French that is.
That's why the Battle of France gets nicked by historians as the "most humiliating defeat in history".

It isn't the case of the defeat but the "how"...that is so different...
Is your brain really so small???
Just look again at the numbers...you can comprehend them, can't you!
(I'm really starting to doubt).

If the French had fighted like the Wehrmacht in Russia, inflicting 3times the casualties inspite of being hugely outnumbered in men and material (what the french weren't!) the war would had found a quick end then already....

Not to mention that the whole year the Germans were busy in Poland the west flank was nearly totally open and the few german troops there would had been helpless to a french attack...they could just had marched in...it would had been over soon...but they didn't...

Oh and another tidbit you might not know:
Till the surprising (for every professional german officer that is) end of the Battle of France Hitler won against all his adversaries in the german general staff.

Till then he was distrusted and doubted and not a few Generals planned the sure coming debacle against the "grande army" to use as a possibility to be done with this insane corporal.

Well...as it was....this Battle made Hitler to a hero, an invincible war lord and his adversaries were made mute. He got free reign with everything now...no rational arguments worked anymore!

Archives - 2005-2009 / News / Poland Remembers start of WW2Archived