Foreigners: Please don't buy Polish Land!

ahhhh, its all beginng to make sense now, dzieki lads!

Hello, Frank. Well, so you suggest that we invaded Russia 'on the backs' of the French during Napoleon's times, and that it was foolish? What do you mean by 'on the backs of the French'? Why exactly was it foolish? By the way, in the 19th century, you Irish attacked once Canada from the US territory (and were beaten back mercilessly by the English). Was the Irish attacking Canada wise, or foolish? Oh, and from what I know there were also Irish in Napoleon's army attacking Russia, weren't there? If yes, were those Irish also foolish, or wise? :)

wrong. it was american citizens from the NEWLY formed USofA that...


bivouacbooks.com/bbv2i3s6.htm

they call themselves irish, but its just a branch of the new US's army. forgetting that poland is in iraq, there are polish descendants in america, like the irish also.

the 'called' themselves irish, and may have had irish decent. but it was not irish or ireland.

the same i could say of poles that fought for napoleon against the Russians, unless, they fought for Poland or for france? (the difference being, the 'irish' you mention were american and fought to capture canada for america)

hey maty,


i agree with you, it was a means to an end i think for poland then, the lesser of two evils perhaps, (as napoleon's actions if he won can only be debated at this stage)

The Irish, have fought in lots of countries armies throughout Europe......can I say ususally for the right cause....and more so to make a living, Irish soldiers at various times were highly prized...by many nations...as have been polish soldiers.

As regards the Napoleon thing....they saw it as an opportunity...but it went wrong then...and the Russians like to ensure enemies of all sorts are eventually dealt with....

Foolish is the wrong word....mis-guided, mistimed, failing to take a longer view.....

Daffy, so the Fenians all were born in America? :) By the way, what do you mean by 'forgetting that poland is in iraq' (sic)?

anyperson can call themself a fenian, and if you read the link or knew your history (or in fact, read my post!!) you'd see i said, they could be of irish decent, but that doesnt mean they attacked canada for ireland, they attacked canada as the 'fenians' a name they choose, as an american military unit to conquer canada to become apart of the newly formed united states.


ie ignoring the fact that the polish gov't sanctioned polish troops to be in iraq, lets say it never happend.

you would still find polish and irish surnames on the uniforms of the US soldiers is what im trying to say to you. Yet they both fight for america not ireland and not poland. the US. is that clearer for you?

Why would the Poles fighting the Russkies on Napoleon's side be 'misguided'? So the Irish fighting on the side of many others nations were 'misguided' too? And why do you think we fought 'on the backs' of the French? Do you mean we were sitting on their backs while fighting? :) By the way, the Irish also fought on our, Polish side, in at least one of our national uprisings against the Russkies. Were those Irish misguided? Did they fight on anybody's back?

....so muddled......misguided, because short term gain seemed in their grasp...but in the long term they lost out......Poland seems to have a history of doing this.....

Daffy, from what I know the Fenians fought against the English in Canada on the same principle as we Poles fought against the Germans on the British and American side in WWII. The Fenians fought for free Ireland. Were they 'misguided,' fighting on Americans' backs? :) Why should we ignore the fact that Polish soldiers are in Iraq? Why should we say it has never happened? There are scores of other foreign troops in Iraq: the English, Danish, Japanese, you name them. :)

puzzler, this american 'fenian's were infact the old union and confederate veterans that became apart of the US army in the newly formed US states. they were not irish people who came to fight for Irish freedom. check out the history man, read it, im not lying to you about this. Read the link :)

nothing about irish freedom or fighting for america because they were irish. :) just like the polish in the US army are not fighting for poland - they fight for america.


omg man i was givin you a situation - trying to show you that there would be polish in iraw even if the polish army was not!!

to the real situation, of course! i havent denied there are polish in iraq, that obvious!!! i was talking about Polish people (like irish) who went to america, leaving poland (&ireland) and NOW fight for america, NOT poland (NOT ireland)

do you understand yet?

See...my reference to fighting on the right side...for a just cause.....plus at times...trying to give their English masters a bloody nose in another war arena.....never mind fighting against fellow Irish men who fought for the English.....!

Confused...huh....?....lol

Frank, what do you mean by that 'short term gain' was in their [Poles'] grasp'? Was Poland's independence and freedom a 'short term gain'? If so, then why? So when you Irish fought unsuccessfully, numerous times, during 800 years, for Ireland's independence and freedom, also a 'short term gain' was in your 'grasp'? Were you 'misguided'? Did you have a 'history' o 'doing this'? How about the Greeks fighting the Turks for 500 years? 'Misguided'? 'Short term gain in their grasp'? Had 'a history of doing this'? :)

So, Frank, did the Poles fighting the Russkies on Napoleon's side fight for 'the just cause,' or for the unjust one? Why? Was our, Poles, trying to give the bloody nose to the Germans or Russkies a good thing to do, or not? Poles also fought other Poles in opposing foreign armies, e.g. during WWI, Poles fighting on the German side fought Poles fighting on the French and Russian side. There is a poem, by Slonski, on that.

Puzzler.....its a all relative isn't it.........gaining your independence is great...but being invaded, invading other countries, being de-constructed, re-constructed, liberated, ravished, genocide being committed against many countrymen...just all seems so very tragic...........

Daffy, you wrote: ' forgetting that poland is in iraq, there are polish descendants in america, like the irish also ' (sic). - So by that you meant that you were ' givin you [= me, Puzzler] a situation - trying to show you [= me, Puzzler] that there would be polish in iraw even if the polish army was not ' (sic)? If so, would you explain even further what you mean? Some clarity, please.

:)

i m enjoying your post today!!!!

Frank you haven't answered my questions straightforward. Isn't it so that when the case is about Irish fighting for Ireland on somebody's side, it's a just cause for you, but when the Poles do it for Poland, is an unjust cause for you? Some double standard? If yes, then why? :)

Thanks, espana. How do you do? :)

sure. The topic we WERE discussing was the 'fenians' being irish, fighting for irish freedom invading canada in the US.

I said that, just because confederate and union soliders (of all backgrounds) from a new unit under the JUST created Unites States CALL themselves the fenians. Doesnt mean they were fighting for Ireland. They were fighting for America. so they gave themselves an irish name? alot of americans do that :)

To try illustrate the point, i wanted you to look at it from a polish perspective. there are Polish people in america who are now american. like the irish were. those polish people did what the irish did and some join the army. that army (the US army) went to iraq. does that mean those polish and irish are fighting for poland and ireland? no, they are fighting for america.

I asked you to ignore the fact the polish army was there JUST for the benefit of the example (as you could THEN say, that there ARE polish in Iraq fighting for poland - BUT they are polish, from poland by order of the polish gov't and i wanted you to see that even if they were not, there would still be polish people in iraq in the US army and they are not fighting for polands interest - just america.

does that help?

P...the problem is....Ireland......800 yrs of English rule...........the only real battles fought on its soil involved the loss of small numbers of the population.........leave out the potato famine...for now......

Poland, has been involved in endless....extremely damaging battles/wars/division/domination etc for many hundreds of years......some of its own doing...some as the result of pay back...your great neighbours....etc.....

Nothing like the same numbers or importantce were the wars/battles the Irish were ever involved in.........only 5 million in the country......and now 200000 are from Poland....:)

and your always

No it wont..........IMHO Daffy...:)

The irish fought with the english and some fought against them. during the napoleonic wars. napoleon promised ireland's aide when he conquered europe (which never happend) but he did give ireland little help before that. (all those failed)

and as i said, some fought for the english (25% of the english army was irish) - but it could be well argued it was not all by choice (a smaller minority was)

either way. fighting with or against england was of no use to ireland. It was only when the irish fought the english themselves, in ireland, guerilla warfare, did ireland finally gain its independance. not as spectacular as america or india - but england could nto keep them as they were so far away - ireland was always englands most troublesome coloney but also its nearest :) so they kept tight control of ireland - esp when napolean would find ireland a willing ally! (to invade england on two sides!)

As to the discussion with frank, im confused to the points your both making RE unjust causes???

Hm, daffy, really? In Canadian history books, if I remember it right, it's said that the Fenians were Irish who by fighting on US side against the English in Canada thought they were doing it for Ireland's freedom. Sounds pretty convincing, even more so in the light what you and Frank have said about Irish history, the 800 years of the often hopeless struggles.

Yes...they were at times...and it happened at regular intervals...up-risings, insurrections etc...but eventually as British power waned in the worls/Europe and people realised they had an opportunity to break free...they did to a degree...bar N ireland........its very confusing...Daffy /Puzzler....!

needless to say, they fought for america and lived in america. some were already well established american families of american descent

i dont deny that some were fresh in from ireland. but the fenian name in the US was a nickname, and two rebels setting up an irish republic in exile does not constitute the irish fighting for ireland.

as i said. two rebels, John O’Mahoney and James Stephens

Not unjust causes....Daffy...its the historical, long term reprecussions.......of being on the wrong side, making the wrong decisions...backing the people who can help you least........in the wrong place.....between two great powers.......etc

that makes sense, in that case, just to make it clear to puzzler, the irish too have also supported he wrong side, making the wrong decisions...backing the people who can help you least........in the wrong place.....between two great powers.......etc

napoleon for one! lets not overlook roger casements involved with ze germans. (operating under the enemy of my enemy is my friend. the irish people seriously condemn the nazis before you go into a rant....whoever may go into a rant :))

Re: Napoleon. He's been evaluated quite critically in Poland. He promised us independence for fighting on his side. A huge chunk of the French army consisted of the Poles. Then he used us to do terrible disgraceful things, such as crushing the Spanish and San Domingo freedom fighters. Many of us perished in Spain and San Domingo. That was a big disgrace. Also, he gave us much less than he'd promised; he made deals behind our backs with the Russians and Germans. But at first, there was nothing 'misguided' about our joining him: he was the most powerful conqueror since the times of Julius Caesar and he seemed able to change totally the face of Europe, and even the world. We stood by his side to his very end, for the sake of honour.

Yes..Daffy....but the outcomes for Poland..when making those choices..were...10/20/30 times worse than it was for the Irish........


And in hindsight...it all ...largely went wrong....:(

Didn't Poland once have a French king...so disenchanted did they become with their own?

id have to say i think thats a matter of perspective. ie whats bad to one, is tragic to another.

I agree Poland, being on the continent and between Western Europe and Russia, got alot of unwanted attention for the Polish people. But I hardly think it was polands fault!!!

No matter what, west or east was always going to go through poland to attack one another. and napoleon nearly did that. So i can see puzzlers point on 'at the time it was not such a bad idea' and to be fair, he promised ireland the same.

yes, i agree poland came out MUCH worse than Ireland from the napoleonic wars. but from an irish perspective, it did not help irish goals of freedom.

(hence my 'perspective' point)

Daffy, have I ever said that the Irish people don't condemn 'the Nazis'? I've hoped that in spite of my occasional silliness :) you've thought me wiser than that. But it seems to me, e.g. from reading Irish literature, that you have always been much more friendly towards the Germans than we, just as we have been more friendly towards the English than you.