Has Poland ever participated in any big wars (except WW2)?

Czech and Polish relations were around a regional border conflict, the fighting was local and small time (dont bother with wiki some moron edited it falsely) that you put Poles as aggressors ignoring the complexity of the issue and the fact that the thread requires big wars shows that you're nothing short of an anti-polish prick.

You're a troll, a lousy one too.

Lets list the big ones, i'm copying from wiki since i'm too lazy to write them myself, i'll put corrections where needed.

thefullwiki.org/List_of_wars_involving_Poland

There's loads more too.

It shows no such thing. You are offended by me using a common albiet potentially impartial title of a small conflict: I'd suggest you stop your adhominem attacks and tell me what you think that conflict should be known as. The OP asked if Poland had been involved in big wars: everyone knows that it has, and posted good examples for him. Further to this, I was suggesting a couple of more modern topics if he wanted to narrow his scope to be more in line with the scale of his research project.

I like twentieth-century history: the fact that it was incredibly unkind to Poland, and that small actions such as events in Zaolzie in 1938 were used against Poland on an international level by Goebbels' propaganda machine is very interesting. The extent of Poland's involvement in the 1968 invasion of Czechoslovakia is another interesting topic, because the liberalisations in Czechoslovakia could have spread to Poland and improved things for Polish people much earlier than they eventually did. It reveals a lot about the level of pressure Soviet political and military leaders could exert over Poland at that time.

Another example: the 1951 Polish-Soviet territory exchange isn't well covered in the history books I have, for example. The fact that the Soviets essentially stole 480km2 of nice towns, fertile soil, and rich coal deposits in exchange for an equal area consisting of some unproductive farmland is an interesting historical research topic which reveals a lot about the level of control Stalin exercised over Poland at that point.

But that was an epic fail, no one I know has ever heard of it,and Im a WW2 nerd on a dozen different forums :)

isthatu2


I wasn't aware that everyone has to know about something before it can be a valid topic for discussion on a forum! :)

I never said or intended to imply that :)
It just puzzles me that there are two reactions from Poles when it is mentioned;most have never heard of it,the rest hesitate then make a dozen excuses.......its funny really,because as a brit' Im held responsible on here for the most bizzare actions of British governments from decades and centuries before my birth yet Ive never seen the reverse implications yet some primal reaction takes over in Poles to deny everything yet expect others to confess all real or imagined sins..........ah well,......

I didn't even intend to make a comment on responsibility or right-and-wrong. I just think its historically interesting! I'm happy to admit to not knowing the politically-neutral historical descriptor. Sokrates is astoundingly quick to call me a troll, a prick, and anti-Polish. He's welcome to withdraw those comments - no hard feelings.

Rightly so. It was Brits who invented concentration camps and massacred local societies in their colonies.
Did Brits have any right to do it?
Nope.

Did Poles have any right to be involved in Cieszyn Silesia matters?
Yes.

So? :):):)


Don`t be unwise. What two reactions are you talking about? :):):):)

You don`t know what an annoyed Pole`s reaction can be?

It is not a problem for me to discuss Polish hideous actions like 1938 or 1968.

I thought it is just stupid to provide them as examples of major wars and Sokrates agrees with me on that.


Again, don`t write silly things. Or, try to work on your memory because it is bad. Have you forgotten reading and participating in threads like this one?:

polishforums.com/history/historical-myths-break-41482/ - Polish historical myths - to break or not to break them?

Check this post by a Pole:

pawian


Except I provided them as examples of minor conflicts, because I thought the scope of his topic "major wars involving Poland" was unmanageably broad and I thought he might get more out of doing a narrower topic. I don't think there is any rule here saying "someone who is interested in talking about a sub-topic of something is a troll".

OK, if that was your real intention, then forgive me calling your activity here trolling, please. :):):):):)

However, if you want to avoid misunderstandings, next time don`t point out 1938/68 solely, but go back to 1919 too.

No problem.

I also have no problem 'watching' my words. I just wasn't intending to even participate in a debate about those events.

So because the topic was broad you provided a different topic? Wow :)))))

Sokrates


It was broad so I suggested narrowing it down. You are welcome to withdraw your unnecessary comments about me.
Thanks.

You suggested narrowing it down to a completely different topic?:))))


I'm sorry you're an anti-polish troll who entered here with a bunch of biased remarks and tried to derail the thread, which part of my remarks is unclear?

There is no major war in Europe in the last four centries where polish soldiers have not participated in mass.Even in Napoleon wars Poles were core troops(not just food for cannons).Maybe Poles did not participate in stars wars but it was Reqgan's propaganda.Hitler was sure that Poles were going to fight him and Czechs not going to fight and used these forecasts to his advantage.

Sokrates


If you say so. You should tell my mother-in-law that!


Haha, I entered here with a bunch of remarks about 20th century Polish military history and you proceeded to derail the thread with your breathless accusations of my trollery. I do find the glorious military successes of Mieszko I and Jan Sobieski interesting, but failing to mention them because I chose to discuss a couple of episodes in 20th century history does not make me anti-Polish.

Are you ever going to get any new material? The old stuff is getting so tired.

The way you painted them yes, it does make you anti-Polish.

Czechs invaded polish territory twice, in 1919 when Poland was fighting Ukraine, Russia and Germany and again in 1945 and twice Czechoslovakia had to face the consequences.

You painted Poles as invaders deliberately to suit your anti-Polish sentiments, the situation was far more complex.

Czechoslovakia invaded polish territories in 1919 when polish armed forces were engaged elsewhere, despite the small scale of the conflict the interbellum Poland saw this as a stab in the back which quite frankly it was.

After 123 years Poland rises itself and with its own military might repels all who wanted to carve her up again and suddenly when all of her armed forces are elsewhere Poland finds itself assaulted without cause or provocation, the Czechoslovakian invasion cost both countries dearly as interbellum Poland would never treat with Czechs, in fact it was more than likely to go to war with them.

In 1938 Czechs probed the polish goverment for possibilities of military cooperation but Poles adamantly demanded Zaolzie or no talks would be engaged, the re-capturing of Zaolzie at the time Hitler annexed Czech part of Czechoslovakia while horribly timed was a result of a two decades old grudge, it was unreasonable of Czechs to expect no retaliation and its unreasonable of You to paint Poles as invaders, though you did it deliberately since you're prejudiced against Poland.

Than why go back all the way to 68? It’s obvious 38 is way too complicated for you so let’s concentrate on more recent events. Why not Balkans’ and Polish involvement there? Iraq rings a bell? Perhaps Afghanistan? Tell me what’s the difference between doing Warsaw Pacts’ bidding and NATOs’. Yes you are a TROLL, in a decade or two you’ll make it sound as Poland was the one that stirred **** up in those places and NATO had nothing to do with that. Student of 20th century’s History, My a**.

Actually Czech forces requested that Poland observed the terms of the interim agreement which Poland had signed. And Poland was fighting neither Russia nor Germany at that time.

Funny how your version of history somehow omits the two Polish invasions of Czechoslovakia in 1918.


No cause other than Poland deciding to exercise sovereign rule in disputed territory which it had agreed it would not exercise sovereign rule in. And it was most certainly not sudden: Poland was given more than enough notice with regard to what would happen if she did not keep to her word.


You mean that it was unreasonable of them to expect Poland to keep her word? Well, on that we would agree, given the number of treaties which Poland broke in the years 1918 to 1939.

Actually you're lying, no big suprise there, Czechs used polish sejm elections as an excuse to invade but hey we know you share Rabbits anti-Polish sentiments already.

So we agree that Poland's elections should not have been organised in the disputed areas and that because of those elections Czech forces entered the areas.


And we know that you are an American who pretends to be Polish.

Harry ???

and you prove my point perfectly. Instead of answering any questions as to just why Poland rode the coat tails of nazi germany and invaded czechoslovakia your first,very fekking first reaction is " Oh,well,its your fault,you brits invented concentration camps and blah de blah (BTW,wrong on both counts,Germans,late 19th century in west africa did that,and catholic empires were massacring natives centuries before the british empire....).

Well played that man, point proven with zero effort on my part.

Only a person with strong antipolish bias would accept that as a valid reason for Czech invasion of Zaolzie and hostile stance during Polish-Soviet war. Many Poles talk today about the events of 1938 as a mistake but really I can't imagine how Polish interbellum politicians could act differently back then. For them Czechoslovakia was a greedy, hostile state that couldn't be trusted, a state that would use every opportunity to harm Poland and wouldn't even try to reconcile with Poland, not even apologize for what they did in 1920.


How could Poles invade Czechoslovakia AFTER Czechoslovakian government agreed to give Zaolzie to Poland?
And you know why did Czechs agree to that? Because their fate was already sealed, thanks to their British and French allies. Brits and French made Munich happen, not Poles.

Poles too, unfortunately. If Poland had approached 1919 onwards as a reason to create as many allies as possible in this part of the world, including Czechoslovakia - then Germany would've had quite a large group of countries on all sides that were hostile to any revival of German power.

I've always thought that a Polish-Czechoslovak alliance would've attracted other countries too, such as Hungary and Romania, as well as those who could help in a small way such as Lithuania. Sadly, Polish actions almost from the very beginning put a stop to that.

So Poland acting contrary to her treaty obligations and refusing all requests to act in keeping with them should have resulted in what? Poland was told to stop doing something she had promised not to do or face specified consequences: Poland chose to face the consequences.


Perhaps we could compare the number of treaties broken by Poland to the number of treaties broken by Czechoslovakia?

what would you do delphiadomine?give zaolzie(important for Czechoslovakia only for economical reasons) to Czechoslovakia?Greater Poland and Silesia to Germany, and rest should be split between Russia and Ukraine?seriously tell me, how would You dissolve all these conflicts?

Haha I like this response. Similar type of talk the two have.

PWEI


what???are You aware of the obligations that Czechoslovakia didnt fulfill?Poland agreed to give Zaolzie(were majority was Polish)so Czechoslovakia would help in oncoming war by for example letting the trains with bullets and guns through its territory, of course it didnt happen- Poalnd acted accordingly

Perhaps negotiating a settlement would have worked? Although Poland would then have had to live up to the commitments it made in the settlement agreements and experience shows that Poland was pretty terrible at doing that between 1918 and 1939.


Do you have any links to anything which in any way supports any of that? Or did you just pluck it from the air?