Poland did reasonably well in land terms out of the postwar settlement

I found an interesting map the Western allies presented Stalin at the Potsdam conference, with different proposals regarding the new Polish-German border, because they feared neither Germany nor Poland could cope with such a radical border shift to the rivers Oder/Odra and Neiße/Nysa:

de.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Datei:Vertreibungsgebiet.jpg&filetimestamp=20080525171255

I once read when Stalin rejected all proposals and insisted on the Oder-Neisse border plus Stettin/Szczecin and Swinemünde/Świnoujście becoming cities withing the Polish borders, Churchill tried in a final step to place the German-Polish border not at the Lusatian Neisse but on the Rivers Bober/Bobr and Queiss/Kwisa which would have left Lauban/Luban and Sagan/Zagan as German cities.

Is it true that Poland had additional territorial claims towards Germany? I read once or twice that Polish lobbyists stipulated for all of the island Usedom/Uznam for instance, even claims for all of Hither Pomerania including the island of Rügen/Rugia were made. The Polish city name Słubice was reserved for all of Frankfurt/Oder and not only for the "Dammvorstadt", the Frankfurt quarter on the eastern bank of the Oder river. Also Poles made claims for the city of Lebus/Lubusz which was an important city of the First Polish kingdom in the Middle Ages. Anybody knows if there is some truth in this or is it just rumours?

You certainly aren't repeating facts when it comes to the Anglo-Polish treaty of August 1939.

As for repeating Communist propaganda, don't worry about it: you are actually repeating Nazi propaganda which the Commies then carried on. Here's a lovely poster which the Nazis produced in 1939 (which used to appear on Wikipedia but seems to have been removed, probably by a 'Polish' editor who didn't like the point which it illustrated):

Nazi propaganda poster

It's a very similar line which they used in France but the French were either wise enough to recognise bullshiit when they saw it or didn't have it repeated enough by the government which followed the Nazis to have it drummed into them:

What Polish claims ?The crux of the matter is that powers above were making decision about Polish borders.
Right Poles had climes but they never give up eastern territories, and definitely they wouldn't give up Lwow.
Poland with eastern Prussia part of Pomerania, upper Silesia and border on the r. Oder in the lower part of your map but with no significant changes of Poland's eastern border.

Harry
What that post is proving except that Germans used propaganda as did everybody?

I wrote about Polish lobbyist groups, Ironside! Plenty of Poles were abroad in 1945 and some of them surely had influence.

1945 was a year in which history could be written and developments, that occured over 700 years, could be reversed. If the allies would have decided to make Rügen, Stralsund, Anklam and Frankfurt/Oder Polish territories then now it would true Polish territory, if they would have said Szczecin remains German then it would be a German city now.

As I said I read about Polish territorital claims to territories west of Oder-Neisse a couple of years ago and I really don't know how trustworthy the source was, therefore I was asking this question.

No: the current Polish-German border was proposed by the then prime minister of Poland. Please try to tell the truth.


It is demonstrating that certain people continue to repeat Nazi propaganda to this day.

Somehow I doubt such groups existed and if they did that had been influential.


I'm not sure but if there were any it would be by National Democracy.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Democracy

Who was making decisions Harry?


Back at you !


Really ? Maybe that German propaganda pointed out the truth ?Why lie when the truth is even more damming?and obvious.

With the decision being 'let the Poles have what they are claiming in the east of Germany.


As it is so obvious to you, perhaps you can explain:
a) Why it is Britain's fault that Germany invaded Poland?
b) The ways in which Britain failed to live up to her obligations under the Anglo-Polish treaty of August 1939.

I do look forward to reading the insults which you hurl in your traditionally futile attempt to hide the fact that you know the true answers to these questions just as well as I do.

No, it was let uncle Joe have his way. He hold all this lands in question anyway, let be practical. We can do nothing without war with uncle Joe, we already sold Poland down the river why would such detail as borders matter?


Because without Britain and France guarantees Poland would have to look for settlement with Germany.
Those two world powers at the time decided to use Poland as obstacle to Hitler progress in uniting Europe. He called their bluff and Poland paid the price!

Talking about propaganda would you explain to me why most of popular take at WWII in British history books states that Britain entered war to defend Poland

Although it is technically true that fail to mention they never delivered that help, If anything Poland and Polish soldiers were defending Britain.
She never did one single thing for Poland.


Failed to pressure France and to use her existing armed forces to assist in full scale attack at Germany whose main forces were busy in Poland.

Small wonder provided both countries were colonial powers used to sacrifice pawns on the world board.

Really? Can you perhaps go into detail as to the price which Poland was sold for? I mean, we all know the price which Poland sold her Ukrainian allies and their country to the USSR for, it's in the treaty of Riga. But how much did the UK get for selling Poland?


You mean the British guarantee which was given on 25 August, i.e. the very same day which the Nazi invasion of Poland started. Interesting logic you show there.


How nice of you to lie about all the brave men who died fighting for Poland. How surprising that you completely ignore the fact that nearly as many British airmen died during bombing raids the day after war was declared, bombing raids which you deny even happened, as Polish airmen died during the Battle of Britain, which you never cease to tell us about. How amazing that you lie about the British airmen who died while flying supplies to the Warsaw uprising.


So you blame Britain for France failing to act further than it did? You blame Britain for French military tactics? That, combined with you offensive lies, shows how pathetic your position really is.

Why don;t you ask Britain to open her archives?


1st of September not the very same day Harry.


Sold my ass, Poland waged offensive to create Ukrainian state, Britain didn't fire a shot in 1939 in defense of Poland.Try and fail is not fault but promise and not deliver it is !


They were fighting for theirs country not for Poland - end off!


I blame them both, they promised help for Poland they both failed to deliver.

So that is a no you cannot tell us the price. OK, perhaps you can tell us what the USSR might have been able to pay at that time?


You overlook the fact that the first act in the Nazi invasion of Poland took place on 25 August. How surprising.


And then sold the Ukrainian National Republic to the Soviets, despite her treaty obligations not to conclude a peace treaty with the USSR.


And yet again you lie about the actions taken by the British before all the Polish forces in Poland surrendered or ran away.


Perhaps you can explain how dropping supplies over Poland is fighting for Britain?
And perhaps you can remind us why Britain was fighting a war against Germany in the first place? Remind us what German action (or rather failure to take action) caused the declaration of war.


And yet again you fail to answer the question of what support and assistance it was within Britain's power to give which was not given. How long will you ignore that question before your position becomes so obviously pathetic that even you can no longer support it?

Harry, to this day there are plenty of French people who can with some justification hold a grudge against Britain. Not even including Dunkirk (which they are wrong about) just look at the Royal Navy slaughtering thousands of French sailors as their ships were sunk in North African ports.


Yes,both held Uprisings against the Germans,luckily for the Czechs though they didnt have a history of p!ssing off the Soviets.

Slightly off topic, but are you aware of what happened to the vast majority of the 140,000 French troops who were taken of the beaches at Dunkirk? Only 7,000 remained in Britain to join Free French forces, the rest went home!

Sadly, it seems that that fact is much like the facts of what happened to Poland during WWII, i.e. inconvenient to national myth, and so almost always overlooked

I'm sure they sold Poland cheaply !


and you overlook the fact that negotiations took a while before being signed.


Yes we were cheated, they never paid, Putin were is our gold?
At lest Poland give it try an honest try. What cannot be said bout others - so **** off!


And yet again you talk rubbish! Where there any major offensive against Germany in 1939 ? No ? how very inconsiderate for your lies!


To stop Germany from taking over Europe !


German military personnel engaged in Poland instead for example British Army ?


Offensive against


Germany together with French army !like about 14 of September !
They have hardly any history at all!

But of course you cannot offer so much as a single shred of evidence of any price ever being agreed.


You are complaining that the bloodmoney which Poland sold her allies for was never paid? Really? I never thought even you could show that little grace.

And no Poland did not 'give it an honest try': giving it an honest try does not mean selling one's allies down the river when one has achieved what one wanted.


Where would you like one to have been? Where was it within the power of Britain to launch one? Britain committed to give all support and assistance it was within Britain's power to give, tell us what could have been given but was not.


Germany had no designs on Britain. The fact is that Hitler viewed Britain as Germany's natural ally and equal partner in the fight against world Bolshevism, as is shown in his books.


Where would you have liked the British military personnel to have come from?


You mean the one which the French army refused to launch on any scale larger than was launched and the one which Britain had no forces in place with which to launch? Yes, that is clearly a very realistic offensive.

Can you offer any evidence that no price was paid?


That is your opinion and to tell you the truth I don't care what you think.


Whenever, you ask and ask and never listen to the answer.


But Britain had designs on Germany.


German military personnel was engaged in Poland against Polish underground instead of being employed against British Army hence British supply dropped from planes were in fact working for Britain.


No in fact both France and Britain decided against lunching such offensive, both.

Now you are being ridiculous even by your standards. You are making a claim, it is for you to prove it, not for me to give evidence disproving it. But if you really want to play that game: can you offer any evidence that the Final Solution was not a Polish plan which Poles paid Reinhard to put forward in order to solve the Jewish problem which the Poles had consider 'solving' by deporting all Polish Jews to Madagascar? Now do you see how stupid your stance is?


I'll ask again: where should the British forces have made a land attack before all Polish forces in Poland had either surrendered or run away? I look forward to you refusing to answer this question until hell freezes over.


Really? And what might those designs have been? And do you have any sources or the slightest bit of evidence to support your claims?


More lies from you: all of the German military personnel who fought against the Warsaw Uprising were fighting on the eastern front.


Nice of you to end on a lie. Britain could not have launched an offensive before all Polish forces in Poland had either surrendered or run away: she had no troops in position with which to launch such an offensive. Britain did not decide against launching one, Britain was unable to launch one.

Not stupider than your request to me for providing evidence.


By the way that your modus operandi on this forum - so do not imply that you have any standards.


Ask your daddy !That is a stupidest question ever even by your standards.


Really ! Look for evidence yourself! Hitler must be stopped - for example!


More BS from you, supplies were being dropped not only during the Warsaw uprising. Anyway are you claiming that the fact that Poles were actively engaged against Germans did not benefit Britain ?


Britain was in close alliance with France.
The treaty of mutual defense signed by France, Britain and Poland - they pledged that if any of the signing parties were attacked the other two were immediately to aid in its defense.

France agreed to lunch full-scale attack within 15 days against Germany along German western border, and Britain promised RAF bombings of German military targets.
About six of September BOTH allies decided that will brake their promise to Poland and sell her down the river.
If Britain was somehow protesting, pressurizing France into action, hell doing her part and bombing German military installations(not one or two skirmishes) or otherwise making hassle I'm sure we would heard about that by now.

No, they both decided to brake their pledge and that is the fact Harry, not debatable fact !Unquestionable fact !
You are just going and going, debating facts, how ridiculous and pathetic individual can get, don't you have self-respect or a shred of dignity ?

Hell, you are not even British ! Why do you want to make Britain look worse in the eye of reader?
1939 is not her fault - blame France! Yalta and post war arrangements not to blame Britain - blame the USA! What kind of inept, tumbling along and will-less country you are trying to picture here? All that empire and colonies, just pure luck and favorable circumstances - is that your standing Harry?

You are the one claiming that the USSR paid Britain for Poland: you are the one who needs to produce evidence to back that claim, otherwise it is just another one of your legion of lies.


Do feel very welcome to post claims which I have made and refused to provide evidence to support.


Why? He is not the one saying that Britain could and should have made a land attack on Germany: you are. So tell us where that attack could and should have been made before the Polish army in Poland had either surrendered or run away.


So the plan was to stop Hitler's agression, not to grab bits of Germany. You fail yet again.


So what: I pointed out your lies about the Warsaw Uprising.


Bombing raids which were launched and which you lie about.


a) Got any sources for that or is it just more of your lies?
b) What was the price of this sale? Got any sources about that?


So unquestionable that you can not even tell us how Britain broke her treaty obligations. Or perhaps you are finally going to answer the question of what support and assistance it was within Britain's power to give which was not given?


Kindly note that I am producing facts (with sources to support them): you are presenting your opinions as facts but when challenged to support them you refuse to do so (because you won't admit that you are unable to support your opinions with facts, hence your refusal to answer the questions put to you).


Yet again, what support and assistance was it within Britain's power to give in 1939 which was not given? Keep on ignoring that question sunshine, the louder you scream while refusing to answer that question, the more amusing a sight you are.

Blabbing again Harry , boring Harry - cannot be bother to make an effort and corner you, just for you to disappear for week or two and then pop up with the same set of BS!

Was there major offensive of combined Anglo-Frances forces against Germany in 1939 - yes or no!
No? - end off!
What you want to discus next Harry ? You progressing decline of hairline ?

And one more time: what support and assistance was it within Britain's power to give in September/October 1939 which was not given?

Where should the attack have been made and with which British forces?

Why do you keep refusing to answer questions? Oh, sorry, we all know the answer to that one.


Thanks for confirming that you have well and truly lost this one.

You writing that wont make it so. Facts are facts!

Yes, with a key fact here being that you have been asked many many times to go into detail about what support and assistance it was within Britain's power to give in September/October 1939 which was not given. The fact that you refuse to go into such detail or to say where a British offensive should have been launched clearly shows that you know all available support and assistance was given and that no British offensive was possible.

The key factor here is your ignoring facts and asking again and again the same question. Would that be your medications ?Did I not answer many times ?

Facts are facts - just read my posts, I have nothing to add!
And you are claiming that Britain is not responsible for breaking her part agreement as well as France you are far and truly gone into another dimension.

Kind of difficult for me to ignore facts when you don't present any. Please try to remember that your opinions are not actually facts.


The fact that you continue to refuse to make any attempt to answer the question tells us all we need to know.


And yet again: can you go into detail about the way or ways in which Britain failed to live up to her obligations in the treaty of August 1939? Or perhaps you can finally go into detail about what support and assistance it was within Britain's power to give in September/October 1939 which was not given? I very much doubt you can.


Do keep on with the insults: they wonderfully demonstrate the strength you know your stance has and will eventually see you get the ban you so richly deserve.

Ironside, it would be nice if you wrote any plausible action by UK land forces.

Lets talk about Lithuanian ally Mr Hitler!


I will not discus with you further. You are right your opinions are not facts, waste of time debating with Harry.

" Ironside, it would be nice if you wrote any plausible action by UK land forces."
He can't, because he knows there is none to write about. That is why he now focuses pretty much solely on personal insults. Sad really.

LOL! You could give him many names, but calling him ally...

stop that nonsense Harry, you have nothing to say and yet you cannot stop posting - madness!


yes lol
youtube.com/watch?v=SCXuP70w3hI