What did Poland get out of the wars and struggles for others?

How is that hilarious seanus?

Waiting and waiting

Why not lift them all out and place them into selected areas of the US? How about that? You seem to like them so much, Hateful Bunch.

Actually I think they would have all been much better off emigrating to the US.

So why wasn't that encouraged? Wanna know why? Simple, American arms firms have made a stack of cash from this war with the PLO and Hamas/Hezbollah. Raytheon (?) and Lockheed Martin have lined their pockets nicely, thank you very much.

How about those Jews bombing parts of America, raping women who contest their right? How about air strikes? America doesn't seem to scramble planes very quickly when needed. They might catch you out.

You lost me. Air strikes against whom, exactly? No, what I meant was, I think America should have accepted European refugees prior to WWII and during WWII if they were allowed to leave. Germany made emigrating impossibe during the war.

One world government. What an impractical and authoritarian piece of crud. It'd lead to all-out war, think about it.

Aha, Hateful Bunch, I see. Assuming that the Jews were not happy with their homes in America and their rights, and they decided to resort to air strikes against Americans, what then? Assuming they went to the US en masse after WWII. Or do you believe that Israel was rightfully Jewish land?

Waiting and waiting

But that would never happen, you see, Seanus, because in the US people are allowed to go to college, get jobs, live side by side, join neighborhood associations, own land, engage in a free society.

There would be no reason to rebel, you see? It wouldn't happen because people are allowed the pursuit of happiness here.

OK so lets just keep it as it is, no wars everybody getting along like a house on fire. I can see why you never succeeded in the business world. I believe its blatantly obvious that the world has problems and that the need to live side by side in harmony is ever more preseant as each day goes by for you to dismiss my ideology as crud really shows how impracticle and negative you can be.

International cooperation and fuller understanding is more important, whilst maintaining national frameworks. Sacrifices have already been made. National legal apparatus in EU countries have agreed that EU Law is supreme.

Sorry, I can't imagine the US and Russia subscribing to such a system. What would happen to the US Constitution?

I'm sorry for coming across as strong, I like your aspirations for harmony and peace, but there are better ways to go about it.

Well dont ridicule my idealogies as LOL or crud its my opinion and thats what will happen in the future maybe not in my life time or even my childrens but it will happen and if not - well god save us all.

US constitution along with the rest of the world has a shite storm heading their way in the form of mother nature aint nothing more direct than that.

Fair enough, you clearly have your reasons. Dashing hope is nasty so I'll refrain.

I have no intention of being pernicious. Living together in harmony, hmm, better alert the Septics that a shite storm is on the way, WB. Get their brollies out!!

As always the scietific approach, youll see sheep.

Scientific approaches creep in again.

Seriously tho, WB. I'm interested in hearing your ideas on world government. It was conceived in religious texts.

If you don't want to discuss it here, maybe PM?

As i said before its not my job, if it were and I would like it to be i'd have some general formats and ideas, as it is i'll leave that to the powers that be. I have general theorologies but most of my time is taken up with putting food on the plate - similar to you i'd imagine.

Let's go hypothetical then. This is a forum, WB, not a political archive or decision-making body.

The powers that be, who? Who should decide on the composition of a world government? How would you protect against rigging?

You'd see absolute corruption!
youtube.com/watch?v=f1bjnkOqT8k
please watch this, WB

Seems appropriate.

I guess you are working hard to put food on your family, WB (a Bushism btw)

Seanus, remember, the US is still considered a Christian nation. Christians in the US, some of them, want to visit holy sites in Israel and vacation there during certain times of the year, during Passover, Pentecost and Easter, during Hanukah and Christmas. It's not just Jewish Americans who have an interest in that area of the world. It's Christians too, who visit there and want guaranteed safety. Israelis try to make the area safer for tourists. Christians in the US want to support Israel because of this. The whole world doesn't have a phobia, you know, and doesn't share the paranoia that grips Europeans.

I haven't lost sight of that fact. That's what it's about, isn't it? Self interest. Me me me, well how lame.

Guaranteed safety, for the hatred spewed out there, you'd be lucky. Safer by bombing people and obliterating the problem?

That's horrible, making the Arabs feel like they are being aggressive there by claiming their land back. God gave it to Jews, did he? That's funny, Israel was only a state in 1948.

I am just saying, not everyone believes these lies. Most Americans do not. Europe has had a history of sending people away, not just jewish people, all kinds of people from all the European countries. Europeans on this board overlook that. What is the deal with Europe getting tired of people and then thinking they should just go away? Go someplace else or worse. It just looks sociopathic.

You want to criticize Israel? Why not criticize the US, Canada, Australia, Mexico, and the list goes on and on and on.
All these places were occupied by people that Europe didn't want. Israel is another one of these places. It's the exact same thing. You don't want people to live in Europe and you complain when they live elsewhere. There isn't any choice, is there?

You are going to criticize the colonies Europe created?
Every single one of these places had indigenous peoples who faced occupation before the Europeans left the boats.

So, to sum up after 33 pages: out of wars and struggles "for others" Poland got exactly what it deserved.

What? - it's own resident penny a pound pamphleteer whose second job is hanging around this forum pretending to spread the truth? I'd hardly call that a deserved outcome.

Apart from the quip I quoted you on, you've categorically failed to provide any response to the topic. I challenge you to do so.

You can't, can you, because you would have done so by now.

Poland got exactly what it deserved from its struggles for others. Poland got nothing because Poland struggled for nobody but Poland. Your pathetic Plastic Pole lies will not change that simple fact.

Let's look at just one example of what you claim was Poland fighting for others, WWII. In this war the Polish armed forces were running away (making what they described as a 'strategic withdrawal’ to the safety of the nearest British military base) even before war was declared. Despite the fact that Poles were giving it legs even before the war started, Plastic Poles like to lie about how Britain did nothing after war was declared. Plastic Poles then bang on and on about how Polish pilots saved the UK in the battle of Britain but Britain did nothing for Poland during the Warsaw Uprising.

Of course the fact is that more than twice as many Brits gave their lives fighting in the Warsaw Uprising as Poles died in the battle of Britain. But Plastic Poles never let facts get in the way of a chance to whine and bitch, just as second generation Aussies rarely let the chance of a bit of casual racism pass them by (as Ozi Dan proves in his posts).

Good to see that as always you refuse to answer any of the questions which I or anybody else put to you.

Germany had to get it's financing from somewhere. A poor country struggling with treaty imposed fines and rapidly deflating currency cannot creat a fighting machine, can it? Don't we need money for that? 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. Rubbish! I don't buy it for one minute. If Germany was so bad off would they have been able to create the wehrmacht, luftwaffe or u boats. Not likely.

If Poland had access to that kind of money, the same kind of money, I am sure they wouldn't have needed the British.

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.


What are you trying to say?

Liar.


Just one example.

Stop lying Harry.


That would be a silly lie to make, wouldn't it. By your own account, the Poms bombed Wilhelmshaven successfully in Sept '39 (another lie, because the link you provided contends it was unsuccessful), dropped leaflets and invited individual Poles to the VE Day Parade.

Further, how dare you appropriate the memories of all those brave Cth. pilots who died for Poland during the airdrops of the Rising by contending that individual acts of courage and selflessness were somehow indicative of the British general attitude toward assistance for Poland as a whole. Have you no shame?

Aside from speculating as to what the Poms could have done for Poland in the strategic/tactical sense, I've mentioned the following before on this thread, but you and your mates ignored it, so here it is in CAPITALS. It sets out what the Poms could have (or, more correctly, shouldn't habve) done for Poland:

1. POLAND WAS SOLD OUT BY THE POMS (AND THE USA) AT TEHERAN.

2. POLAND WAS NOT ADVISED OF THIS. POLAND WAS PROMISED BY THE POMS THAT THEY WOULD, AS THE POMS FIRST ALLY, REMAIN UNDIMINISHED OR WORDS TO THAT EFFECT. SUBSEQUENT EVENTS WOULD SUGGEST THIS WAS MERE RHETORIC TO INSTILL A DESIRE IN THE POLES TO FIGHT AND DIE FOR THE POMS - IT WORKED.

3. NOTWITHSTANDING, THE POMS CONTINUED TO USE POLISH SOLDIERS UNDER THEIR COMMAND FOR END PURPOSES OTHER THAN WHAT THE POLISH SOLDIERS THOUGHT THEY WERE FIGHTING FOR. THE POLES THOUGHT THEY WOULD BE ASSISTED BY THE POMS IN AT LEAST EXERTING SOME LEVERAGE ON RUSSIA. THE CONTRARY WAS THE CASE.

4. REPEAT - THE POMS USED THE POLES, KNOWING THEY HAD STABBED THEM IN THE BACK THOUGH CONTINUING TO USE THEM FOR THEIR OWN IMPERATIVES. THEY DID NOT INFORM THE POLES OF THIS DEAL WITH STALIN AND THEREFORE THE POLES WERE NOT ABLE TO CHOOSE WHETHER THEY WISHED TO CONTINUE TO FIGHT FOR SOMEONE ELSE WITH NO PROSPECT OF MUTUAL GAIN.

5. THE POLES ACTED IN GOOD FAITH. THE POMS DID NOT. THE POLES THOUGHT THE POMS WERE THEIR FRIENDS AND ALLIES. THE POMS CHOSE WHAT SOME WOULD CALL REALPOLITIK OVER AN ALLY. THEY KOW-TOWED TO A FORMER GERMAN ALLY (RUSSIA) AND ABANDONED A PRONE, VULNERABLE AND ESSENTIALLY HELPLESS FRIEND. THE POLES DID NOT.

6. AFTER WW2, POLAND WAS OCCUPIED BY AN ALIEN NATION WITH A PUPPET REGIME. BRITAIN WAS NOT. TENS OF THOUSANDS OF POLES DIED FIGHTING FOR THE POMS DURING WW2 ON THE UNDERSTANDING OF SHARED GOALS, AMBITIONS AND MUTUALLY BENEFICIAL OUTCOMES. THE POMS OBVIOUSLY HAD A DIFFERENT UNDERSTANDING.

7. THE USA WAS COMPLICIT IN THE ABOVE. THE DIFFERENCE HOWEVER WAS THAT THE POMS HAD AN AGREEMENT WITH THE POLES. THAT IS WHY LINES OF ENQUIRY ARE DIRECTED AT THE POMS. YOU EXPECT MORE FROM A FRIEND THAN A FRIEND OF A FRIEND.

8. MANY POMS FOUGHT AND DIED FIGHTING FOR POLES AND WERE DISGUSTED WHEN THEY LEARNED OF WHAT WAS HAPPENING TO THEIR FRIENDS AND COMRADES. HMG ENSURED THEIR SACRIFICES WERE IN VAIN BY VIRTUE OF THEIR POLICY TOWARD POLAND AND THE RUSSIANS (I recommend you make a small sojourn to your nearest ex servicemen's club and speak to one who fought with the Poles - it will foster y our understanding of this theme).


Liar.The word "Pom" is not a racist term, and you are well aware of that. It's akin to "Limey", "Yank" etc. Please stop lying and misrepresenting to try to make me look bad and you look aggrieved. You just look like a goose.

Further, I find your continued reference to the rich aboriginal culture of Australia as being some kind of sport where Australians hunted them quite frankly sickening and you've mentioned it quite a few times on this and another thread. Please keep the implied racism out of your 'arguments'. It's bad enough that you think it OK to use harassing and intimidating language toward women on this forum and now you want to bring racism into it. I won't mention the physical threats you made to me on the that other thread.

For the record, I'm actually first generation Aussie. See how easy it is to tell a lie if you don't bother checking the facts.


The questions as I recall them were in essence the following (with my answers). Please do put any other questions to me that I may have missed when drinking in the words of wisdom from you and your Pomgolian friends on this thread:

1. Q. What else could the Poms have done to help the Poles? A. I honestly don't know, but I suppose they could at least have told the Poles they were fighting for nothing after being sold out by them and to expect that once they stopped fighting for the Poms they may not have a home to go to as it would probably fall in annexed Russian territory.

2. Q. I set this thread up to get a rise out of the Poms. A. You got me. An Aussie never misses a chance to do that.

3. Q. The Poles were invited to the VE Day Parade but didn't bother to turn up, did they? A. Certain individual Poles were invited on the night before the parade when it became apparent tot he organisers that the Communist faction wouldn't show. Saying that they didn't bother to show up is another lie Harry. The invites were cordially declined.

I think that's about it, but refresh my memory if I'm wrong.

Here's the lesson Harry (I seem to have to keep giving them to you) - have you heard of the phrase "not seeing he forest for the trees"? It means not seeing the greater picture because you are so focused on component parts, thinking those component parts, taken in isolation, are the whole and indisputable truth. I think you suffer from this condition. Blind adherence to what you call 'facts', without analysis of the situation and context which usually change the meaning of those facts, is risky. The more you stick to the 'facts', without realising they are just components, the more you start looking like a dill when someone paints the whole picture.

They would have taught you textual analysis at Uni wouldn't they? Oops - my bad - you don't need a degree to slap together and sell tourist fliers, do you?

I had more to dish out, but it's 2009 and a New Year and I thought I'd give you a reprieve from the hammerings you usually cop.

Ozi?

Can I ask you a question?

Imagine Hitler had no interest in Poland, didn't want war with Poles nor Lebensraum.
His dream is to take over the french and english Empires.
Just the day before he directed the Blitz on the british Islands, the Luftwaffe pounding on, destroying much of the totally surprised RAF, U-boats now closing in and threatening to blockade the Islands, starving them into submission.

What do you think would the Poles have done?
Fully knowing keeping out of it would mean further peace the the third Reich as Hitler is absolutely NOT interested in the East and even harbors some sympathies for these people.

(But fully knowing too that taking actively the side of GB would mean total
destruction.)

His hate and bloodlust is solely directed as Germany's long time arch enemies in the West. Bloody revenge for Versailles!

How do you think Poland and the Poles would react. (Yes, they have an alliance with GB)

.................

Just a what if situation here...no hard feelings...

Humm interesting.

Well there was such proposal made by Hitler.

Here is interesting debate: forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?f=54&t=80360&start=45