PolishForums LIVE  /  Archives [3]    
   
Archives - 2010-2019 / History  % width 900

WWII - who really was the first to help Poland?


Barney  17 | 1672  
19 Feb 2013 /  #361
What you say is based on your beliefs

What I said is based on sound historical knowledge.
citizen67  6 | 187  
19 Feb 2013 /  #362
Barney (btw. most Brits on PF), I regret to report, you've been brainwashed by the communist propaganda machine and you believe in the invincibility of the great Soviet Union. What you say is based on your beliefs and not on facts. None of it can be proved anymore so let's agree to disagree. Whatever will be said from now on, will be a pure waste of time for both of us.

Maybe the West did over estimate the power of the Soviet Union, but i remember the shock of reading about Stalin and his absolute ruthlessness, and cruelty and his total disdain for the value of the human Lives he had conquered.
Barney  17 | 1672  
19 Feb 2013 /  #363
Yeah The western allies knew that as well so why did they send POWs and others back to the Soviet Union to be murdered?
citizen67  6 | 187  
19 Feb 2013 /  #364
Churchill and the British may have wanted to stab their communist friends in the back but calmer heads prevailed.

The Communist wer never our friends they just wanted to stab us in the back. They wer totally insincere in all of their actions, their joint invasion and stitching up of Little Poland is just one example!!!!
Barney  17 | 1672  
19 Feb 2013 /  #365
The Communist wer never our friends

Of course they were friends and allies of both Britain and the US to deny that is to falsify history.
citizen67  6 | 187  
19 Feb 2013 /  #366
Yeah The western allies knew that as well so why did they send POWs and others back to the Soviet Union to be murdered?

I didn't learn about this until I was 21, Stalin was never taught in our schools and was never represented on our Television, it was just Hitler. Most of Labour Party wer pro-Soviet and secretly worshiped Stalin, and they ran the education system and the TV after the War and still do so right up to now.
Barney  17 | 1672  
19 Feb 2013 /  #367
Stalin was never taught in our schools and was never represented on our Television

Yet you still claim to be British!!!!!
citizen67  6 | 187  
19 Feb 2013 /  #368
Of course they were friends and allies of both Britain and the US to deny that is to falsify history.

Who's Ally? Who was Stalin allied to before he was "Allied" with us? HITLER.Stalin was Hitler most important ally, without Stalin, Hitler couldn't hav started WWII, Hitler's other allies wer, in some cases, a Burden, Mussolini for example.When the Italians cocked-up in Northern Africa, Hitler had to send his troops, and when the Italians cock-up in invading Greece Germany again had to send troops to sort out their mess, meaning hitler had to delay it's attack on the Soviet Union by a month, imagine if they turned up in Moscow one month earlier befor the Winter had kicked in? Imagine. History would be so different.
Barney  17 | 1672  
19 Feb 2013 /  #369
Sometimes I wonder why they bothered having that war when you could have done it all on the back of an envelope
Wroclaw Boy  
19 Feb 2013 /  #370
COMMUNISM WAS A DISASTER FOR EVERYTHING!!!!!! EVEN FOR THE ANIMALS!!!!!!

But YOU said and i quote

COMMUNIST = WORLD'S WORST POLLUTERS!!!!!!!!!

Now youre saying something else, something different just for the sake or arguing.

so that makes Stalin and your Beloved Soviet Union's behaviour alright?

shut up
citizen67  6 | 187  
19 Feb 2013 /  #371
citizen67: COMMUNISM WAS A DISASTER FOR EVERYTHING!!!!!! EVEN FOR THE ANIMALS!!!!!!But YOU said and i quote citizen67: COMMUNIST = WORLD'S WORST POLLUTERS!!!!!!!!!Now youre saying something else, something different just for the sake or arguing.

I think you hav misunderstood something can you explain where the contradiction is?
Wroclaw Boy  
19 Feb 2013 /  #372
ive got better things to do than argue with someone about Stalin.
bostonbill1982  - | 12  
19 Feb 2013 /  #373
It's a really interesting thread. To look at the initial question, I doubt anyone really helped Poland in September 1939, no one could. The British couldn't mobilise in time to help and were too far away to be of much use. Nearby countries had their own problems and obviously Russia had it's own agenda, Germany was hell bent on invading Poland and would have done so anyway. Within Poland there were Poles who helped themselves but too few to combat Germany and Russia. Help was needed before the war in terms of money, munitions etc.. and a bit of foresight about the German and Russian agendas but then the allied countries were hoping to avoid war.

I belive that Britain genuinely tried to help Poland as much as possible during the war and that Churchill didn't want to sell Poland out but was railroaded by the USA. After the horrors of nazi/fascist activity in Europe the USA might genuinely have believed they were acting in the best interests of Europe as a whole, not that it's any consolation to those under USSR domination! Saving you from **** on the one hand to land you in poo on the other!

Rubbish, in terms of population the US has by far been the worst polluter for quite a while now.

COMMUNIST = WORLD'S WORST POLLUTERS!!!!!!!!!

Both the USA and the old USSR now Russian federation have apalling records on pollution,but so do China and many other countries. The environmental issue is not a capitalist/ communist issue it's about all countries looking at energy and resources in a different way!
Wroclaw Boy  
19 Feb 2013 /  #374
The environmental issue is not a capitalist/ communist issue it's about all countries looking at energy and resources in a different way!

Its one issue among many, capitalism speeds up the dwindling of Earths resources more so than communism. 100's of millions of people all buying crap, burning needless fuel driving their huge cars, leaving their power on, eating till they are fat etc etc..

China maybe the single biggest polluter but they have by far the largest population. The USA is the worst and that is the leading capitalist country. Capitalism = worse pollution per capita.
p3undone  7 | 1098  
19 Feb 2013 /  #375
WroclawBoy,yes,for now,but wait until China has all the infrastructure in place.The US will pale in comparison.
bostonbill1982  - | 12  
19 Feb 2013 /  #376
China maybe the single biggest polluter but they have by far the largest population. The USA is the worst and that is the leading capitalist country. Capitalism = worse pollution per capita.

Point taken about size of population but it's useless comparing USA and China they are both capitalist economies.
IMO it's a waste of time arguing whether capitalist or communists are the worst offenders, they offend in different ways. The point is 'do something'. There are no real communist countries now anyway, not that I think there ever really was.
4 eigner  2 | 816  
19 Feb 2013 /  #377
What I said is based on sound historical knowledge.

a little reminder, Barney

No Communists shot you in the back of the head.

was that based on sound, historical knowledge too???
Wroclaw Boy  
19 Feb 2013 /  #378
WroclawBoy,yes,for now,but wait until China has all the infrastructure in place.The US will pale in comparison.

Only because China has billions of people - and rightly so, i dont like it but hey.

Point taken about size of population but it's useless comparing USA and China they are both capitalist economies.

Hardly, China has more in common with Russia than the USA.

IMO it's a waste of time arguing whether capitalist or communists are the worst offenders

Its not a waste of time at all, its constructive. Capitalism is based on infinite resources, un capped growth and seeing as we live on a finite planet, i think we need to look at alternatives.

The point is 'do something'.

Like what? what are you going to do?
Wroclaw  44 | 5359  
19 Feb 2013 /  #379
WWII - who really was the first to help Poland?

the thread seems to be wandering

kaz200972  2 | 229  
19 Feb 2013 /  #380
Point taken about size of population but it's useless comparing USA and China they are both capitalist economies

WroclawBoy,yes,for now,but wait until China has all the infrastructure in place.The US will pale in comparison.

Tend to agree with you both here, unless measures are put in place now, China will be producing vastly excessive pollution and eating up considerable amounts of carbon based fuels.

But to keep to the main question, at the outbreak of war none of the allies were in a position to help Poland much logistically, I suspect the country was not uppermost on their mind anyway.
Wroclaw Boy  
19 Feb 2013 /  #381
ohh look shes posting on a thread were im active because she read my last post and her next move is to ignore me here. Too predictable im afraid.
p3undone  7 | 1098  
19 Feb 2013 /  #382
Sad to say,but I agree with you there Kaz.England was first albeit,not as early as they would have liked to have responded.If Churchill had been in power,and it was within their ability,he would have responded,as soon as Hitler ventured into the Sudetenland.Whether England was concerned with the well being of Poland,well people ave their views.Churchill would definitely have made the move to put a stop to what he knew would eventually come his way,in a big way,if he didn't try to stop him.Churchill had Hitler's number long before just about anyone else did...
kaz200972  2 | 229  
19 Feb 2013 /  #383
Yes I think Churchill was had much more foresight than most of the politicians at the time. Given the horrendous loss of life in WW1, I suppose that politicians were doing anything to avoid war, futile though it was. They should have thought more about the long term consequences at The Treaty of Versailles before landing huge reparations on Germany, personally I think that contributed to the rise of National Socialism, amongst other factors.
p3undone  7 | 1098  
19 Feb 2013 /  #384
Kaz200972, no doubt,this was a key factor.
4 eigner  2 | 816  
19 Feb 2013 /  #385
the key factor was that no one was able to face the Germans , one on one back then and even if the Brits and'or French, tried to help Poland, they would be slaughtered just like anyone else. The mistake they made was to promise help that was never realistic but obviously expected.
kaz200972  2 | 229  
19 Feb 2013 /  #386
Yes obviously an important factor but I think there were several factors leading to the failure to help Poland in 1939.
4 eigner  2 | 816  
19 Feb 2013 /  #387
yeah, there are always multiple reasons for failure or success ;-)
citizen67  6 | 187  
19 Feb 2013 /  #388
the key factor was that no one was able to face the Germans , one on one back then and even if the Brits and'or French, tried to help Poland, they would be slaughtered just like anyone else. The mistake they made was to promise help that was never realistic but obviously expected.

It was a treaty to frighten Hitler, and it worked for a bit until he got Stalin's co-operation to invade Poland and divide it up.
p3undone  7 | 1098  
19 Feb 2013 /  #389
4eigner,I agree with what you say being a key factor.The burden was also a key factor,because it fed the frustration that lead to the wanting of revenge.But what your saying is the number one key factor imo.
Wroclaw Boy  
19 Feb 2013 /  #390
the number 1 key factor was that Germany had been preparing for war since the early 30's, they had been pouring huge resources into war from every aspect, they even had a couple of dummy runs such as Guernica Spain to test their effectiveness.

at the outbreak of war the rest of the world was effectively playing catch up.

Archives - 2010-2019 / History / WWII - who really was the first to help Poland?Archived