Return PolishForums LIVE
  PolishForums Archive :
Archives - 2005-2009 / News  % width 1,108

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


Prince 15 | 590  
1 Dec 2008 /  #181
Of course there was annimosity. I am talking from cold caluclated point of view thinking only about Polish interests. Stalin was likley to enter Poland. Finaly he have done so on his conditions in 1944. If we look on numbers of Poles killed by Hitler every aliance which would help to avoid it was good.

If look on numbers of killed people or Warsaw destroyed in more than 90% ... anny other war couldn't be worst.

If we look on Warsaw uprise it was mistake as well and I am not proud of it.

It is funny that the bigest Polish successes were achieved by dyplomacy and people are proud of Warsaw uprising.

Now we are talking about the past not about current politics.
Harry  
2 Dec 2008 /  #182
But you failed to write they were run by Jews.
Isn't how you conveniently offer half truths, and thus end up telling lies.

Were the people who ran the camps all Jews? No, they were not.
Were the people who ran the camps all Poles? Yes, they were.
Are you lying, yet again, when you say that the camps were run by Jews? Yes, you are. What a surprise to see you lying.

On the same note, when some Polish citizen of Jewish extraction achieves something positive of note then he is a Jew. But when a Polish Jew runs a concentration camp then he is a Pole.

To you maybe, to me he's a Pole first and a Jew or a Catholic second (second by a long long way). But just out of interest, how many of 303 Squadron were Jewish?

That sort of twisting is what makes you a liar and a dishonest scribe not worth no more than a spit.

How is it twisting the truth to say that all Polish concentration camps were run by Poles? Must I add that some of those camps were run by Polish Catholics and some were run by Polish Jews in order to make the statement that Poles ran the Polish concentration camps a true statement rather than a lie?

I think you need to learn what a lie is. Here are some examples of lies:
"Poles were not invited to the London Victory Parade."
"Free Poles were not invited to the London Victory Parade."
"WWII lasted only four years."
"WWII ended on May 8/9 1945."
"You are Jewish" (when said to a person who isn't).
"You are homophobic" (when said to a person who works for KPH).
"There is no such thing in history of WW2 as 1943 Warsaw uprising."
These are some of the lies which you have told on this forum, the lies which you have told in just this one thread!

Victory parade in London would have been nice acknowledgment too but we can survive without.

You mean the parade that representatives of both your offcial government and your free forces were invited to attend? Nice to see that some Poles are still trying claim that Poles weren't invited when the facts very clearly show that they were.

Oh, do explain that. Maybe I'll learn something more after all.

You clearly need to learn about history. Go away and do some research about the first RAF raids of WWII.
Kilkline 1 | 689  
2 Dec 2008 /  #183
Both had aggreed that they would cover Poland if Germany attacked.

What does 'cover' mean?

This is article one of the Anglo-Polish Mutual Assistance Agreement:

"Should one of the Contracting Parties become engaged in hostilities with a European Power in consequence of aggression by the latter against that Contracting Party, the other Contracting Party will at once give the Contracting Party engaged in hostilities all the support and assistance in its power."

There is no promise by either country to take military action against an aggressor in the aid of the other.

Even after Poland knew they were betrayed they continued to fight for the very allies that they knew were betraying them. This to me says alot.

The Japanese kept fighting even when they new they'd lost. So did the Germans. Poles werent 'fighting for the allies' anymore than the Brits or Americans were.
Babinich 1 | 455  
2 Dec 2008 /  #184
Here are some examples of lies:
"Poles were not invited to the London Victory Parade."

An official invitation was sent to the Government in Warsaw. Unfortunately, the British had not noticed, until it was too late, that the Warsaw government had not been Britain's wartime ally.

Shortly after VE-Day the Government in Exile lost its recognition (representation of Poland) by Britain.

A last minute invitation was extended but that invitation was declined.

IMO rightly declined...

This is another example of how Stalin outmaneuvered both Churchill and Roosevelt. The latter doing all he could to undercut his British counterpart up until the day he died.
Kilkline 1 | 689  
2 Dec 2008 /  #185
Another myth shattered.
Babinich 1 | 455  
2 Dec 2008 /  #186
Correction, the invitation was extended on the eve of the parade.

Another myth shattered.

Source?
Babinich 1 | 455  
2 Dec 2008 /  #188
Technically you're correct an invitation was extended. Like all complicated matters, when in-depth study is conducted one can see phony that invitation happened to be.

The Government in Exile Poles were not to be recognized for fear of upsetting Uncle Joe.

There is no such thing in history of WW2 as 1943 Warsaw uprising.

Warsaw Ghetto April '43.
Kilkline 1 | 689  
2 Dec 2008 /  #189
Kilkline:
There is no such thing in history of WW2 as 1943 Warsaw uprising.

Warsaw Ghetto April '43.

Incorrect use of quote function.
Harry  
2 Dec 2008 /  #190
An official invitation was sent to the Government in Warsaw. Unfortunately, the British had not noticed, until it was too late, that the Warsaw government had not been Britain's wartime ally.

Shortly after VE-Day the Government in Exile lost its recognition (representation of Poland) by Britain.

A last minute invitation was extended but that invitation was declined.

Source?

But the very simple fact still remains: both representatives of the free Poles and the official government of Poland were invited to the parade and neither bothered showing up.
celinski 31 | 1,258  
2 Dec 2008 /  #191
Contracting Party will at once give the Contracting Party engaged in hostilities all the support and assistance in its power."

What does 'cover' mean?

I guess we can go there. "Cover" would mean, respond and help Poland with "all the support and assistance in it's power". I don't feel this was done and IMHO Poland should have been informed that (for whatever reason) help was not forth coming.
Kilkline 1 | 689  
2 Dec 2008 /  #192
I guess we can go there. "Cover" would mean, respond and help Poland with "all the support and assistance in it's power". I don't feel this was done

Thats an opinion, not a fact. We could argue that Britain actually did much, much more than was required as the agreement was for 'support and assistance' and therefore didnt require Britain to lose its pre eminent position in the world by declaring war on the largest and arguably strongest nation in Europe in the cause of a minor central European nation. Its seems that many Poles on here dont see the war as anything other than a battle for Polish soveriegnty
Harry  
2 Dec 2008 /  #193
Its seems that many Poles on here dont see the war as anything other than a battle for Polish soveriegnty

You need to remember that many Poles think that Copernicus was completely wrong. Copernicus thought that the earth goes round the sun. In reality both the earth and the sun (and the rest of the universe) revolve around Poland....
celinski 31 | 1,258  
2 Dec 2008 /  #194
Thats an opinion, not a fact.

France and Britian were also concerned. With Poland being attacked first did not mean Nazi's were going to stop with them. We must not forget that at this point no one was aware of the secret pack between Hitler and Stalin. When I was reading up on meetings with Moscow and Britian about Poland, Moscow remained un commited. Of corse France, Britian and Poland had the major concern for self.

I guess it comes down to did France and Britian reaction live up to the contract? IH don't know, like you said, there was more going on than meets the eye.

Could Poland have reacted differently, sure they could have turned over the property being asked for by Nazi. That would not have changed a thing. Hitler and Stalin were taking her anyway.
Lomithiel - | 1  
2 Dec 2008 /  #195
For all who doesn't know or doesn't understand history, especially for Harry. This is not about - earth and the sun (and the rest of the universe) revolving around Poland... this is about true, very sad true.

And definitely there was more going on then meets the eye. Think about it.

The first betrayal came with the British guarantee to Poland, after Neville Chamberlain was exposed as a dupe when Adolf Hitler tore up his Munich pact and marched into Prague. As Hitler pressed Poland for the return of Danzig, stripped from Germany after World War I, and demanded rail and road transit to the city across a "Polish Corridor" also taken from Germany, Warsaw, encouraged by British Foreign Secretary Lord Halifax, refused even to negotiate. The Poles were assured that if war came, Britain would be at their side.
But when Hitler invaded Poland from the west and Stalin invaded from the east, Britain declared war on Germany alone. Then, the British sat behind the Maginot Line while Poland was crucified. The British had goaded the Poles into standing up to Hitler though they had no plans to save or rescue Poland. Six million Poles would die as a result of having trusted in a British alliance.

The Betrayal of Poland 1939-1945
my.barackobama.com/page/community/post/lechbajan/CmTW

By Patrick Joseph Buchanan who was a senior advisor to American presidents Richard Nixon, Gerald Fox, and Ronald Reagan.

For all who thinks that British guaranties to Poland were unclear -

British Prime Minister
avalon.law.yale.edu/wwii/blbk17.asp

Neville Chamberlain stated in the House of Commons on March 31, 1939.

"As the House is aware, certain consultations are now proceeding with other Governments In order to make perfectly clear the position of His Majesty's Government in the meantime before those consultations are concluded, I now have to inform the House that during that period, in the event of any action which clearly threatened Polish independence, and which the Polish Government accordingly considered it vital to resist with their national forces, His Majesty's Government would feel themselves bound AT ONCE to lend the Polish Government ALL support in their power. They have given the Polish Government an assurance to this effect. I may add that the French Government have authorized me to make it plain that they stand in the same position in this matter as do His Majesty's Government."

Having secured a guarantee, the Poles now took steps toward coordinating their defensive preparations with the British. On April 4, 1939, Poland's Minister of Foreign Affairs, J√≥zef Beck visited London for talks with Prime Minister Chamberlain and Lord Halifax, the Foreign Secretary. The content of these talks was described in an official communiqué sent from

London to Warsaw on April 6th:

The conversations with M. Beck have covered a wide field and shown that the two Governments are in complete agreement upon certain general principles. It was agreed that the two countries were prepared to enter into an agreement of a permanent and reciprocal character to replace the present temporary and unilateral assurance given by His Majesty's Government to the Polish Government. Pending the completion of the permanent agreement, M. Beck gave His Majesty's Government an assurance that the Polish Government would consider themselves under an obligation to render assistance to His Majesty's Government under the same conditions as those contained in the temporary assurance already given by His Majesty's Government to Poland."

avalon.law.yale.edu/wwii/blbk18.asp

Formal Agreement
worldfuturefund.org/wffmaster/reading/history/polandbetrayal.htm

Shortly thereafter a formal agreement between Poland and Britain was signed which clearly stated "If Germany attacks Poland His Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom will AT ONCE come to the help of Poland."

I WONDER WHAT KIND OF HELP THEY MEANT?
time means 5 | 1,309  
2 Dec 2008 /  #196
WONDER WHAT KIND OF HELP THEY MEANT?

go and see the british and comonwealth war cemeterys thats what kind of help they meant.
lesser 4 | 1,311  
2 Dec 2008 /  #197
By Patrick Joseph Buchanan who was a senior advisor to American presidents Richard Nixon, Gerald Fox, and Ronald Reagan.

I'm surprised that Buchanan who stand for military isolationism admits that FDR indeed betrayed Poland.
Wahldo  
2 Dec 2008 /  #198
I'm not... he's a Republican. ;-)
Bzibzioh  
2 Dec 2008 /  #199
You clearly need to learn about history. Go away and do some research about the first RAF raids of WWII.

You clearly need to stop being ridicules on top of ridicules. RAF did nothing until 1940. Unless you did some secret bombing in September 1939 nobody knows about.
lesser 4 | 1,311  
2 Dec 2008 /  #200
He is conservative, I don't think that he would like to be linked to neocons whom run Republican Party currently. I read one of his books, "Where the right went wrong", anti-neocon publication.
time means 5 | 1,309  
2 Dec 2008 /  #201
p of ridicules. RAF did nothing until 1940. Unless you did some secret bombing in September 1939 nobody knows about.

what is your point?
OP Ozi Dan 26 | 569  
2 Dec 2008 /  #202
But the very simple fact still remains: both representatives of the free Poles and the official government of Poland were invited to the parade and neither bothered showing up.

Neither bothered showing up? The communist government didn't. That is a fact.

The Government in Exile received an invite at the eleventh hour when it was apparent the commo govt wouldnt attend. It was, naturally, politely declined.

What self respecting invitee would accept a second thought last minute invite? One can only speculate as to the value GB/the allies placed on Poland's contributions to the war effort in these circumstances.

I recall you mentioning some Poles did attend. That was in their capacity as integrated member of the GB armed forces.

That context takes the gloss of your spin, doesn't it.

It's strange how your ilk deign to argue the finer points of an invitation if it gives the opportunity to try to cast a bad light on Poland. Keep it coming though - I enjoy the sport.

Remember the lesson given on fact vs opinion in a previous topic? I suggest you revisit. You again gave an opinion couched as a fact. In fact, you've given many opinions. In my opinion, some of the facts you have given have been bare facts, denied of context. As a wordsmith, you'd know it's disingenuous to assert facts without setting out the context.

In your circumstances however I'd suggest it seems malice drives your posts. Anyone with your powers of research would clearly be aware of the context. If you don't account for it, one can only speculate why.

Now, back to the topic. Have you got any examples on it? I would've thought you would have bombarded us with Wiki sourced earthshakers.
OP Ozi Dan 26 | 569  
2 Dec 2008 /  #204
In what sense?

Obviously if you're not of Polish extraction or have an interest in this type of topic then no.

Objectively, you should reread the question I posted at the beginning of the thread for the 'point'.
time means 5 | 1,309  
2 Dec 2008 /  #205
given that you are talking of ww2 then how was poland fighting for others? it seems to me that you like to have a dig at the british.
OP Ozi Dan 26 | 569  
2 Dec 2008 /  #206
given that you are talking of ww2 then how was poland fighting for others?

Are you familiar with Polish history at this time? If not, I'd prefer you to make up your own mind after some independent research rather than me telling you.

Perhaps do a google search on this question. Look up "Anders army". It should be interesting and on point with your question. Also look up Polish 303 Squadron - very interesting.

Try reading books on Poland by Norman Davies too.

it seems to me that you like to have a dig at the british.

I'm an Aussie (Polish dad though, and I identify very strongly with my Polish heritage) - of course I love having a dig at the Poms. Aussies know how to get under their skin.
time means 5 | 1,309  
2 Dec 2008 /  #207
im quite familiar with ww2, but find it pointless to argue the politics from that time.aussies and humour-two words that dont go :-)
celinski 31 | 1,258  
2 Dec 2008 /  #208
what is your point?

Point being the question has been brought up a number of times in this question.

Stalin was likley to enter Poland. Finaly he have done so on his conditions in 1944.

Stalin's military attacked Poland in the East in Sept. 1939.
OP Ozi Dan 26 | 569  
2 Dec 2008 /  #209
im quite familiar with ww2

Then you will no doubt be aware of the Polish contribution.

but find it pointless to argue the politics from that time

Fair enough. You'll find a lot of that here, so you'll probably have to turn a blind eye.

aussies and humour-two words that dont go :-)

I think you mean "Aussies and warm beer", or, more relevantly, "Poms and dental hygiene" or "Poms and sporting prowess". Where do I stop.
Bzibzioh  
2 Dec 2008 /  #210
Its seems that many Poles on here dont see the war as anything other than a battle for Polish soveriegnty

That would be really fantastic if it were the truth.

One question though: Allies won, didn't they? So how come Poland end up being not sovereign at all? What went wrong? Just wondering ...

You need to remember that many Poles think that Copernicus was completely wrong. Copernicus thought that the earth goes round the sun. In reality both the earth and the sun (and the rest of the universe) revolve around Poland....

Hmmm…. and you are saying it isn't? LOL

It’s just another example of this one way system displayed by some Englishmen - they can joke about other nations, look down on them, insult them, etc. but are not ready to bear with the same from the the foreigners…. criticism seems to be too much already.

Britons have it in their nature to patronize and intimidate others, even (if not mainly) through their jokes. Yes, it is a generalization but proved by behaviour of so many people that it is hard to totally dismiss it, I’m afraid.

Archives - 2005-2009 / News / What did Poland get out of the wars and struggles for others?Archived