What British unit liberated Poland in 1945??

Of course they are. However, their influence over Central European countries
is, maybe not non-existent, but quite low (as opposed to Germany who are the
leader in the entire Europe and in our region).


Oh, yes. However if he tried to intimidate or boss around any CE country, he would
most likely be told to f**k off and die ;) They simply don't have that influence here.


Like a CE block inside EU, with the exclusion of Germany? Well, I don't think there
is a need for that at the moment but there is such possibility. Vysehrad Group
(Hungary, Czech Republic, Slovakia and Poland) could tighten the co-operation
and invite couple of other CE countries to join. However, as I said, there's no need
for such solution at the moment.

With power comes influence, right? ;) ;)

Don't be so sure, Sarkozy has ways and means of getting what he wants :(

If you don't create such 'pockets' then the big guns will always hold the cards and legislate accordingly. Don't you remember the gherkins/pickles case where the EU tried to regulate the length and straightness of ogórki konserwowy? What a joke that was!

If tiny countries such as Malta and such impoverished countries such as Moldova can survive, I'm sure Ukraine will do just fine.


And what pays for the vast investment that Poland needs to bring her into the 21st century? What about the pensions of old people, many of which have never earnt 'hard' currency? What about the massive improvements needed to make the railway system up to scratch? Who pays?


Poland can't afford to, that much is clearly obvious. If they could, why does Caritas and likewise have to feed children?

Then again, I'm sure Ukranians living in Ukraine are quite happy to feed their own ;)

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Grunwald
Nevertheless, the translation by Polish chronicles was wrong (no surprise here ;) and "velt" in Grunenvelt means "open country, field". So it would mean then "green field". There is nothing Slavic, Polish or Serbian to it.

@Nathan...


FFS Nathan, I knew I should have put a smiley at the end of that sentence.

I was joking and thought it was quite obvious... oh, well.

And why do we call it Tannenberg???

Hey, I am joking and smiling all the time too. I should have put smiley as well. Well, I thought it was obvious :) Never mind then, I'll try to be more funnier and obviousier next time ;)

Btw, sorry to get into your conversation, my fault.

Don't worry - you're usually one of the obviousiest posters on this site ;)

Thanks for appreciation. (a bit embarrassed Nathan left to make some coffee)

Omg now I get to know I may have Slavic/Serbian/Polish/German/Norwegian/Lithuanian and even maybe some Ukrainian genes :S

Enough! Please spare me! Buhuuu!


Becaouse there were/are idk two villages with that name between the battle in 1410.

Obviously the battle in 1914 was closer to Tannenberg or something like that, and as the German state won. They wanted it to be "the revenge of the lost battle" that before were weren't the mightiest but now nobody can stop us and the Slavs are weaker then us now concept.

the battle in 1410 can be referred to as battle of Grunwald or Tannenberg or even the Lithuanian vrsion wich I can't remember (gotta learn it)

But it's more of who you emphesize with, in Norway it's usely used Tannenberg since the sources come from Germans. But it's sometimes mentioned Grunwald (Tannenberg)

So it really depends on wich language you use :)
(just like with the names of German/Polish cities)

Thanks for giving me yet another chance to show how ignorant you are. I would direct you to a book titled "Poland's Place in Europe: General Sikorski and the Origin of the Oder-Neisse Line, 1939-1943" by Sarah Meiklejohn Terry. In it you will find a memo sent by Sikorski to FDR in December of 1942 in which he proposes that Poland should occupy "the zone up to the Oder and Lusatian Neisse with bridegeheads on the left bank". Also read the text of his public speech in that same month when he addressed Soviet claims to eastern Poland by declaring that the war was "not about borders." Have a look here for more details and read about how his opponents called him an "appeaser".

Do post here again the next time you find yourself in need of a history lesson.

The Brits, and other allies stopped at the Elbe River...The orders came from 'central command' that the Soviets were to have the rest of Central and Eastern Europe...Roosenfelt in Washington DC and Eisenhower in Europe laid down the law.

No Brits ever liberated Poles of anything except possibly money.

will do even better without Polish lands.


I'm sure Poland will do just fine.


Why there need for charity in the USA?
Can't USA afford to feed children?


and ? did you try to make some point here?if so you should try harder because you are not good at it!

But they have no intention of ever giving up Western Ukraine. Even if Ukraine has a bloody split, a Western Ukranian state will be viable - plenty of agricultural land and a massive pro-West majority will ensure swift NATO and EU membership.


Really? So how come Germany is still feeling the financial effects of pouring so much money into East Germany - if the mighty FRG couldn't afford it without pain, what hope does poor Poland have?


Different economic system. You might notice there are no hungry children in Germany or the UK.

This is true, though Russia would certainly engage in sabre-rattling about EU membership. I think such a state would want strong links with Poland, for trading reasons if nothing else. A political/sovereignty link would be unlikely - the Western Ukraine is fiercely patriotic.

And you are right Poland couldn't afford it. There'd be a lot of business opportunities for the two countries though.

I think there would probably be an implicit agreement between Russia and the EU - Western Ukraine (Ukranian, obviously) would go well, West and the Eastern Ukraine (Russian) part would be allowed to join the Russian Federation. Win win situation for everyone, and far more governable.


Without a doubt - I would expect very strong links with Poland, especially as Lviv would probably end up the capital of a Western Ukraine state. It wouldn't surprise me to see a repeat of what happened in Poland with Germans post communism.


I can't see it happening at all - EU and Schengen membership would be as close as it would get. Many Poles seem to believe that Ukranians would happily give up their country - I really can't figure out where this belief comes from, especially as no Ukranian is likely to forgive Operation Wisla in a hurry!


You can see a lot of Polish companies already in Lviv - even crossing the border at Medyka, many car insurance companies there are Polish brands, such as PZU.

One interesting thing to observe on the road between Przemysl and Lviv is the amount of shiny new petrol stations. I was utterly shocked to see that they sell 80 Octane fuel!

Ukraine was and will always be one country - no splits whatsoever. The fact that Soviet era took millions of lives, russified the vast amount of country and implanted a quarter of Ukraine with Russians doesn't mean that Ukrainians will ever let anything like that happen. Regarding the deals being done up there among the West and Russia, I have no doubt. Russia constantly worked and works to undermine international relations of many post-Soviet countries. It will never stop, till it f*cking drops dead. Take Georgia, for example. Great country and great people who want be a normal West-like democracy. It has beautiful resorts, incredible wineries and natural springs of the world renown. Russia - 17 million sq.km; Georgia - 69.7 thousand sq. km. Russia is bigger 244 times for Christ sake! It covers more than 1/9th of the Earth's land! And still it tries to topple democracy everywhere it can and at the same time looks at Europe and the rest of the world and everyone is in awe - how great is Russian soul! What a ridiculous BS!

I just recalled an interesting fact about a guy I worked with. He served in Poland. The Soviet Union sent those soldiers special leather boots (just a simple example), which were not available to guys neither in Lithuania, Georgia, Ukraine nor Russia. The same goes about the Eastern Germany. It was made to keep them happy. The further to the West and away from the beast, the more lenient policy was used and more resources were poured to keep a good image. This still can be felt in Europe, which is always super-excited about the "greatness" of Russian nature. Let nobody EVER in their life experience this so-called greatness.

I'm not certain how you can be so sure - the last presidential election was almost entirely on a West/East split, and it's no secret that the heavily Russian areas in the East would happily break away from Ukraine proper. It might not be on the same level as Belgium yet, but there is plenty of potential for Ukraine to break up in the future.


Ukranians might not have the choice - economic collapse (does anyone believe that Ukraine has paid their gas bills this year?) combined with unrest from the Russian population could easily tear the Eastern part of the country away.


I think East Germans might have something to say about this!

So you think living standards in Poland during communism were higher than in SU because SU tried to have a good image in the West?

So what that there were two candidates and each had almost the same support? Even if a pro-Russian one is elected, what it has to do with the split? The only problem it brings is the instability of the foreign policy, which usually has to be one-goal oriented. The Orange Revolution in Ukraine was not about who would win, it was about the corruption and manipulation during that year's presidential elections, which brought a pro-Russian candidate to the seat.


Russia had a major financial default in 1998. So? Where was the fire? The world lost billions. And what changed? The awe of the soul is still there and everybody's happy.

It consists of 83 federal subjects of people various nationalities. Here you might better make your predictions on split as soon as oil runs out.


I wish they could. But I would like to listen to those who have had a chance to visit the Soviet Union at that time.

This is for all of you who deny that British people died on Polish soil in WW2.

I have been to the Cemetery in Krakow where the British Airmen from the Warsaw Uprising supply missions are burried.

15 August 1944 they were shot down over Polish Territory.

There were British POW's kept in POW camps in occupied Poland who died on Polish soil too.

Do you want to deny these facts too?

Even when faced with the names and dates of deaths of British servicemen and the precise location of their graves, some of the Poles who post here still claim that anybody who says British died in Poland in WWII is a liar!

the question is - what British unit liberated Poland?

The question is: why should Britain have lifted a finger to liberate Poland? In the 21 years from 1918 to 1939 Poland had invaded four of its neighbours and never done a thing to help Britain.

Sure, 89 Polish pilots flew with the Polish RAF squadrons during the battle of Britain but more than a thousand times that number fought with the Germans against Britain. Strangely Poles tend to overlook that fact.

What it has to do with anything? Britain had been empire for a reason and invaded many country's!


Help with what exactly:)
Ask not what your ally has done for you but what you can do for your ally:)
What Britain have done for Poland?


demande satisfaite
Because of fighting the same foe together, because it suppose to be war in defense of democracy, freedom and independence of nations conquered by Hitler inhumane regime.


200 000 soldiers in Polish Army under British command!
Enigma
Intelligence provided by Polish agents in Poland, France and Germany (rockets V-1 and V2 )

Why you keep twisting?

We have formed an Alliance, even though it was a very distant one, because Poland saw it as an opportunity to bash at Germany from both sides, before they had the magnificent weaponry readied. (idiotically abandoning the equal distance politics, between Germany and Russia)

You have not come, Brit, you directed (with your diplomacy) the full German blow towards Poland. I heard the first plans were to take France. I think that our leaders have been bought out, or in any way they have not acted in the interests of Poland a lot.

You played the game of being an ally, while Poland got blitzed. Pity. The largest army, fully equipped against Russians, was not prepared against mechanical power.

What is the worst, before the September attack, out stupid leaders have listened to their foreign allies, and postponed the conscription.

Poland was butchered, then finished off by Soviets, our Jews were killed, (but that's apparently our fault), Ormians, Ukrainians, Lithuanian and other communities cut off the Republic.

Now you rub it in our faces that we are poor and ethnically unified. Well - thanks. Poland today is a sad stump of the former richness. I believe your Western politics as much as the Japan does.

The only state who benefited was the USA, who out of a cheap labour supplier went into a rich country. Or actually - it's France.

No. What is worse is that Poland was living off the hype of one lucky victory (Cud nad Wisłą) and Piłsudski completely failed to organise the Polish forces in any meaningful way. Perhaps the lessons he learnt in WW1 and the subsequent Soviet war were to blame - regardless, he deserves the blame for attempting to organise Poland on a conventional basis.

A guerilla Polish force might have torn chunks out of Germans and Russians.

Poles also don't seem to realise that their resistance was badly organised too. If the AK had again chosen to hold off in 1944, the Soviets would have had to attack. Let's assume the Polish were disciplined enough to simply not take sides - only to viciously chop Soviet supply lines in half as they raced towards Berlin - then Poland might have stayed independent. It's no secret that Soviet supply lines were amazingly overstretched - and if the AK hadn't been routed, they might have had a very good chance of destroying Soviet influence in Poland.

But again - no Pole will ever give a straight answer to this question -

Well, they could attack weakly defended western German border!

The rest of your post is fantasy stuff! :)

Weakly defended? Since when? Have you conveniently forgotten that Hitler remilitarised the Rhineland, which coincidentally, Poland abstained from voting on in the League of Nations?

(and how would an attack on the Western German border prevent an invasion by Russia?)

And yet another Pole forgets that France did indeed invade Germany in September 1939, encountered the German defensive positions and then disengaged, just as he also forgets that Britain couldn't have attacked as it had no troops in places from which attacks could have been made!

Poles tend to be very good at forgetting important facts when it comes to history. My personal favourite is the line about how they were betrayed by the 'west': what goes around comes around and you get what you give. Poland spent 21 years invading and occupying parts of most of her neighbours but then expects the world to be outraged when the neighbours reply in kind!