PolishForums LIVE  /  Archives [3]    
   
Archives - 2010-2019 / History  % width 104

Do Poles really blame Britain for Poland becoming Communist after the war?


THE HITMAN  - | 236  
18 Oct 2011 /  #31
I can tell you my family story

And this is where the truth ls the truth. I can back up your arguments Grunwald because I too have similar personal history, not the 5hite propaganda you read in books. ( I can also write a book, but would it get published ? ) But alas, I learnt long ago that some people on here ain,t worth the time of day.

It's very simple: some Polish ex-servicemen are still living at the expense of the British taxpayer, where they have lived since they left the Polish armed forces.

The very same men you mention, who fought for your freedom and the freedom of Europe..... and now you 5hit on them.
THINK ! .......... You might not have been born, had it not been for them.
Oh, and I suppose these ex-servicemen never worked or paid taxes since the end of the war. Let me add, these people have contributed more to Britain than most Brits have ever ....... They sacrificed their lives, and deserve respect.
PWEI  3 | 612  
18 Oct 2011 /  #32
Around 50% stayed, 50% returned.

Can I ask for a source for that? As far as I know, of the 249,000 Poles in the western command forces: 114,000 joined the Polish Resettlement Corps and stayed in the UK; 86,000 returned to Poland from United Kingdom, 12,000 returned to Poland from Italy, 5,000 returned to Poland from Germany, 2,000 returned to Poland from the Middle East (total number who returned to Poland was 105,000); 8,000 disbanded without joining the PRC (includes 2,300 who settled in Italy and 1,200 in Holland); 1,000 "Recalcitrants" ineligible for PRC; 14,000 emigrated to other countries (including what had become the USSR); and 7,000 settled in France.

To the 114,000 PRC members we can add: 31,800 dependants of PRC members brought to the UK by the War Office, 2,400 "Distressed Relatives" brought to the UK (Poles married to UK Citizens), and 29,400 Polish "European Volunteer Workers"
BBman  - | 343  
18 Oct 2011 /  #33
It's very simple: some Polish ex-servicemen are still living at the expense of the British taxpayer, where they have lived since they left the Polish armed forces.

So after the war all of the remaining Poles in the UK went on the dole? No one worked in the UK?
PWEI  3 | 612  
18 Oct 2011 /  #34
Thanks for acknowledging that you are unable to argue against the truth of what I say and so instead you try argue against what I do not say.
isthatu2  4 | 2692  
18 Oct 2011 /  #35
Ahh, I was pulling your chain a bit ,I have to admit. I actually hadnt realised the figure was as high as one third returned.
peterweg  37 | 2305  
18 Oct 2011 /  #36
86,000 returned to Poland from United Kingdom,

Where did you get that figure? From what I'd seen it was a few hundred.
isthatu2  4 | 2692  
18 Oct 2011 /  #37
The vast majority of so called London Poles actually never made it to mainland UK, most were in Italy or NW Europe in May '45,so that leads to confusing figures.
PWEI  3 | 612  
18 Oct 2011 /  #38
Where did you get that figure? From what I'd seen it was a few hundred

Dr Mark Ostrowski, "To Return To Poland Or Not To Return" - The Dilemma Facing The Polish Armed Forces At The End Of The Second World War, angelfire.com/ok2/polisharmy specific data here

angelfire.com/ok2/polisharmy/chapter8.html
PlasticPole  7 | 2641  
18 Oct 2011 /  #39
Some suggested we should have nuked Russia and Japan. That would have put an end to communism without prolonging the war.
michaelduncreek  - | 2  
18 Oct 2011 /  #40
Poland does not blame anyone. If anyone, they blame themselves for relying on the Anglo-Polish military alliance for defense. Even France could not prevent Germany's invasion, so they were pretty useless for Poland. Poland did not bother to upgrade its military, and they knew Germany was building a military machine. They blame themselves for being over-run because they did not prepare. So, after the end of the war, the Soviets wanted Poland, and why not? They liberated Poland, not the English, not the Americans. The Soviets liberated Poland and kicked the ******* Germans back to Berlin, liberating death camps along the way.
isthatu2  4 | 2692  
18 Oct 2011 /  #41
Some suggested we should have nuked Russia and Japan. That would have put an end to communism without prolonging the war.

What with? And,erm,bollox anyway. If the US had been psychotic enough to drop the one or two (google the exact figures) atomic bombs they had after the 2 dropped on Japanese civilians on say Moscow and Leningrad then within about a month at most the Red Army would have been dipping its toes in the English channel.
PlasticPole  7 | 2641  
18 Oct 2011 /  #42
No, because Russia would have surrendered just like Japan.
Mr Grunwald  33 | 2119  
18 Oct 2011 /  #43
Well since the most "we will die for our emperor" country surrendered cause of atomic pressure I see no reason of why Stalin wouldn't.

Although the big question is: Would Roosevelt ever agree to it? Since when talking about KatyƄ he was solely convinced that "the Russians did not do this".

His greatest goal was having the big three together and create 4 global powers which would co-operate and rule the world and even dis-arm all other minor countries. He would be much faster in bombing communist China then the Soviet Union.
PWEI  3 | 612  
18 Oct 2011 /  #44
Although the big question is: Would Roosevelt ever agree to it?

It's highly unlikely he would have had anything to say about nuking the USSR after the Nazis were defeated, what with him being ever so slightly dead.
hythorn  3 | 580  
18 Oct 2011 /  #45
I disagree. the plan would have been to make a few nukes knacker Moscow and Leningrad. then pause and ask Stalin if there were any other Russian cities that they would like to have nuked.

this was a new technology and would you have wanted to play a game to find out how many nuclear bombs the Americans had if you had been Uncle Joe?

Having nuked the Russians, you could have then asked for them to withdraw from CEE. You could have asked them before hand but in a year or so you could suspect that the USSR would have caught up in a nuclear arms race

if additional land forces had been needed, you could have also done the unthinkable and re-armed the Germans to find alongside the Brits and Americans

it is not as crazy as it sounds
sascha  1 | 824  
18 Oct 2011 /  #46
Some suggested we should have nuked Russia and Japan. That would have put an end to communism without prolonging the war.

...and catapulted u immediately on the pole position for the most hated country on the planet. i took a while....but now us is 'on the way'...
hythorn  3 | 580  
18 Oct 2011 /  #47
i took a while....but now us is 'on the way'...

could you have a try at re-writing that please?

I am sure it is a valid point and I would be interested in knowing what you have to say

thanks
hague1cmaeron  14 | 1366  
18 Oct 2011 /  #48
it is not as crazy as it sounds

It's perfectly plausible, all that was needed was an american President with a bit of gumption.
isthatu2  4 | 2692  
19 Oct 2011 /  #49
No, because Russia would have surrendered just like Japan.

Erm, no, because the NKVD knew exactly how many bombs the USA had.....Japan was a tiny bunch of islands all of who's major cities had been firebombed by the USAAF. Russia was about 80% untouched by the war.....slight difference.

So, sorry boys and girls, it never was "plausable" . Completly impossible would be the only valid description.
Of course all this is forgeting the fact that the war in Europe had been over for a couple of months by the time the US commited its attrocities in Japan,well,the atomic ones.
hythorn  3 | 580  
19 Oct 2011 /  #50
US commited its attrocities in Japan

The Americans had had a bellyfull of having to burn out Japanese soldiers out of fox holes as they would not surrender
They would have lost hundreds of thousands of troops if the fighting had progressed to the mainland

the Japs would not surrender

Japanese fighter pilots that were shot down into the Pacific would dive under the water rather than allow themselves to be picked up by the US Navy

Want to talk about atrocities? The Japanese made the Nazis look like boy scouts
isthatu2  4 | 2692  
19 Oct 2011 /  #51
They would have lost hundreds of thousands of troops if the fighting had progressed to the mainlandthe Japs would not surrender

The Japanese were at the point of surrender,negotiations were well under way when Hiroshima was flattened, it was a done deal by the time Nagasaki was destroyed. By then it had very little to do with the war against the Japanes and more to do with the fact that in less than a month of involvement the Soviets had made more impact against the japanese and advanced closer to the main islands than the Western Allies had done in 3 years of fighting.

Want to talk about atrocities? The Japanese made the Nazis look like boy scouts

So I often have to point out on PF........however, Japanese soldiers fighting to the death does not excuse the systmatic firebombing of civilian centres with zero war production capacities.
MediaWatch  10 | 942  
19 Oct 2011 /  #52
Although I have mixed feelings about this topic, as a Polish American, I don't know if I could blame Britain for Poland becoming communist.

Its a complicated topic and the British were in a tough position.

But hey, if its any consolation to Poles, at least Britain let in quite a few Poles right after WWII and in recent years. In my opinion, I think that was a kind British gesture and Poles should not take it for granted.

There might be some bad apples in Britain (like any country) but I generally have no bad feelings towards Brits.

:)
isthatu2  4 | 2692  
19 Oct 2011 /  #53
Britain let in quite a few Poles right after WWII

Ive posted it somewhere on here in picture evidence, but my town Doncaster has every November the 11th since the war( our "Memorial Day") had on the War Memorial Cenetaphs two Polish Flags and two British Flags, most certainly not forgotton.

"They shall grow not old, as we that are left grow old.
Age shall not weary them, nor the years condemn.
At the going down of the sun and in the morning
We will remember them".

MediaWatch  10 | 942  
19 Oct 2011 /  #54
Isthatu2,

I think that is a kind British gesture to the Polish people.

:)

Do you have any links on this or similar things?

I'm glad you posted these type of things before.

TODAY there should be no reason why Brits and Poles should not get along.

In my opinion, I am glad Britain has allowed Poles to live in Britain and to grow up in British culture.
peterweg  37 | 2305  
19 Oct 2011 /  #55
Although I have mixed feelings about this topic, as a Polish American, I don't know if I could blame Britain for Poland becoming communist.

The blame is equally American, they agreed to Stalin's request for Poland without a comment, at least Churchill protested.

How much blame there is to give is another issue. The UK and USA could do anything, the allies had a grand total of seven nuclear bombs at the end of 1945. Not much use on a battlefield as the blast area is tiny, knocking out a few dozen tanks will count for nothing when the Russians had tens of thousands of them, and Japan was completely undefended remember.

But hey, if its any consolation to Poles, at least Britain let in quite a few Poles right after WWII and in recent years. In my opinion, I think that was a kind British gesture and Poles should not take it for granted.

Not so much 'let in' as unable and unwilling to kick them out. Even if the British had tried the army officers and men would have refuse to force them out. The public wouldn't have stood for it either. There was also a labour shortage that resulted in German POW's being kept working as slave labour for several years after the war.
isthatu2  4 | 2692  
19 Oct 2011 /  #56
Isthatu2,I think that is a kind British gesture to the Polish people.:)Do you have any links on this or similar things?I'm glad you posted these type of things before.

If I cannot find anything ,or where I posted the picture on here,I will take a few photos next month at the memorial and then find somewhere to post them :)

edit, found it....will still take some pics of my own next month.


  • Doncaster cenotaph
hythorn  3 | 580  
19 Oct 2011 /  #57
How much blame there is to give is another issue. The UK and USA could do anything, the allies had a grand total of seven nuclear bombs at the end of 1945

after the allies had dropped the first two bombs all it would have taken was to spread a rumour that they had found a new breakthrough enabling them to make a new bomb every week. Then give an ultimatum, if the Russians had not surrendered drop bomb number five.

if you were Stalin, would you be willing to call their bluff?

as for Japan being undefended, it was far from undefended. it was chock full of fanatics just looking for an excuse to create utter mayhem
PWEI  3 | 612  
19 Oct 2011 /  #58
Not so much 'let in' as unable and unwilling to kick them out.

You might wish to note that in reality, in addition to the 100,000+ Polish troops who were serving in Italy or Germany when the war ended, more than 80,000 Poles were brought to the UK after the end of the war (21,000 liberated Polish POWs, 31,800 dependants of PRC members, 29,400 Polish "European Volunteer Workers).

When one knows nothing about a subject, it is not wise to try and talk about it.
retroDog  
21 Oct 2011 /  #59
You guys are aware that decision of not attacking Sowiets resulted in 50 years of Cold War when one wrong decision by either side could have removed human race from a face of the planet?
polmed  1 | 216  
21 Oct 2011 /  #60
They blame themselves for being over-run because they did not prepare.

What a contributing comment of a person whose knowledge about Poland`s II ww participation is null .

Poland started miltary preparations when the NSDAP came to power and Hitler became powerful . It was obvious that the first country to conquer will be Poland, after just reading few chapters of Mein Kampf . But even if Poland had put as much money as Germany for preparations it would have failed only by the one fact that Germany was twice as much populated as Poland .Not to mention that it was the strongest country in Europe military and economically .

Let me give you a link to read about Polish - British relations in a very shortened form .

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polish_migration_to_the_United_Kingdom

During the debate, 25 MPs risked their careers to draft an amendment protesting against the UK's tacit acceptance of Poland's domination by the Soviet Union. These members included: Arthur Greenwood; Sir Archibald Southby, 1st Baronet; Sir Alec Douglas-Home; Commander Sir Archibald Southby, 1st Baronet; James Heathcote-Drummond-Willoughby, 3rd Earl of Ancaster and Victor Raikes.[8] After the failure of the amendment, Henry Strauss, 1st Baron Conesford, the Member of Parliament for Norwich, resigned his seat in protest at the British treatment of Poland.[8]

British society , the king and Churchill himself knew very well that UK owed so much to the Polse and thats why - The Polish Resettlement Act was issued .

Poles formed the fourth-largest armed force after the Soviets, the Americans and the combined troops of British Empire. Poles were the largest group of non-British personnel in the RAF during the Battle of Britain, and the 303 Polish Squadron was the highest-scoring RAF unit in Battle of Britain.

Special Operations Executive had a large section of covert, elite Polish troops and close cooperation with the Polish resistance. The Polish Army under British high command were instrumental at the Battle of Monte Cassino, the Battle of the Falaise Gap, the Battle of Arnhem, the Siege of Tobruk and the liberation of many European cities including Bologna and Breda.

Archives - 2010-2019 / History / Do Poles really blame Britain for Poland becoming Communist after the war?Archived