WWII - who really was the first to help Poland?

jon357 : "The Poles weren't even invited to the VE parade in London in 1945." "Myths like this (much discussed here) don't help."

It was not a myth, my father was exclude, and was upset that Britain was kowtowing to the Soviets.

The whole issue was a talking point amongst the Polish expats for a long time.

you can read about it in wiki if you have time

Google search the paragraph below.

London Victory Celebrations of 1946

But I agree that discussing this is not relevant to the current topic.

All were eligible to attend - there has been much discussion over the years on here.

The Warsaw Poles were invited and refused to attend because they wanted to kiss Soviet arse. The London Poles were invited and refused to attend because they got the same invitation as the pick of the other non-commonwealth nations, I.e. To parade the flag and march with the air force.

My father was part of the British eighth army .

He was not allowed to march with his comrades in the "British eighth" army because of his polish uniform.

His unit asked, got denied,

No way was he going to march at the back.

He WAS part of the "BRITISH ARMY" and should have been able to march with his British comrades. that's the point he made to me.

He had more British Medals Than Polish, he had put everything on the line fighting for Britain and Poland.

So he was in fact eligible to take part.


Exactly.

"So he was in fact eligible to take part"

I guess you are technically right, but how would you feel if you were part of the world cup winning team, but you weren't able to hold the cup or celebrate with the team mates that you played with.

Point being he was not able to march with the unit that he served under. the commonwealth nations were marching under their own distinct national units

As far as I'm aware, Poles were eligible in the same way as French, Dutch, Belgian and other Non-Commonwealth Allies.

It would have been good if my father had been able to march under his own flag, such as the butch and Belgians were able to, but sadly Stalin had already hijacked Poland and laid claim to its army, Stalin would have used the parade as a propaganda exercise and claim it as part of the Polish army in the east.

It would have been better to march under the British flag to show Stalin that there was still a free polish army in exile.

But i Guess people didn't want to upset Stalin.

Sorry the Dutch no offence meant

The Polish government in Warsaw didn't, hence non-participation. The British invitation was however to all non-Commonwealth servicemen and servicewomen on the same terms.

"The Polish government in Warsaw didn't, hence non-participation"

I'm not surprised Stalin had installed a puppet communist government in Warsaw, the real Polish government was still in exile in London.

The point is the poles were not allowed to march as free poles who were in fact still at war with Russia, they did not want to give the communists any opportunity to make propaganda from the poles marching under their own flag alone, hence the need to march under their Units British Eighth.

Indeed, though by that stage, the Warsaw government were recognised by most countries including the US and France. Not the UK, which has a tradition of recognising countries rather than regimes.


Nobody was 'at war with Russia' in 1946, and the Poles were invited to take part in the parade. There was no reason they would be treated any differently to, say, the Czechoslovakians, who were also invited to take part.

jon357

I agree that they were invited,The problem was that they would not have been given recognition as free poles, and used as propaganda for Stalin,

Very true when you say that the Warsaw government were recognized by most countries including the US and France

My father and his comrades never recognized the communist regime in Warsaw, believe me when I say that they were still at war with them to their graves.

I guess I am talking more of a personal point of view, talking with my father, and other expats at the polish community when I was younger.

Maybe my understanding is not broad enough to compete with historians or wiki, I am always mindful of the propaganda that's out there relating to this period of history.

I would find it very hard to disbelieve when those old soldiers recounted the history of that time, many would be in tears before they finished their story.

As far as I know they had the same status as the Czechs and far better than the Italians who had switched to supporting the Allies - they were ignored.

Personally, I would have made an exception, however massive victory parades are not that easy to organise, and our Russian Allies (which they were whether we like it or we don't) were manipulating the Warsaw government at a time when the former government-in-exile were facing the harsh realities that characterised their existence.


I think I would have felt the same. A lady I know (just about still alive) came as a political refugee from Poland to the UK in 1936. She wasn't unsympathetic to the left however when she made a visit to Warsaw in the 70s, she vowed never to return.

Jon

I agree with the above, I somehow wish that today's politicians would have learned from this history but sadly not.

When you ask In what sense?, I think that the poles still wanted to give Stalin a poke in the ribs from afar, but that's only my opinion.

But they didn't want him to have a nice newsreel with their own commentary proclaiming the victories of the"communist polish army" marching under the Polish flag that they stole or won at Yalta or whatever.

It was a difficult time and yes, I too wonder how much politicians (in various countries) have learned. Closer to the thread topic, it's amazing how some people in Poland still believe that the UK did nothing to help Poland - I suspect this comes from an awful synergy between communist-era propaganda and nationalism.

Jon

You are right since my return to Poland , I have found it all a bit of a tale of two cities,

I have my version from my family and the Polish post war community in the UK, yet in Poland the view can be somewhat different.

I very strongly agree with you when you say some poles in think that the UK did nothing to help Poland, and yes I think this was all part of the communist history reorganization program.

I know from first hand experience what the UK did for us, It gave us freedom, education and healthcare and the opportunity to rebuild our lives, I for one could not ask for more.

Sometimes when I voice an opinion on history in the village where I live , either I get a polite silence or I get told to keep my voice down.

As my wife keeps telling me I am one who can rant about Polish English history a bit .

"....the truth" ? Listen Douglas old chap. History is not a science and 2+2 do not always make 4 in the context of history. It can be interpreted many different ways.


A fact I agree on but completely unnecessary for you to mention in relation to my point. If Britain and the US were resigned to leaving Poland to Stalin then why did they not just let Hitler keep Poland and thereby save so many servicemen's lives. This is why I say that Poland's freedom was not the motive although I admit it was the trigger point.


Well...if we're judging Allied success on their primary goal of "liberating" Poland then it was a failure.

I don't think it was clear to Britain at least that the new balance of power would be between the USA and the USSR. That would've only became apparent in late 43, early 44 when it became obvious that Nazi Germany couldn't beat the USSR. Remember, the USSR had real problems with defeating even little Finland - it wouldn't have been obvious at all that they were capable of becoming a superpower.

On the other hand, I suspect the US was quite happy to see the Soviets take half the responsibility of Europe out of American hands.

If any country helped Poland during the war I would like to know its name.

Britain I would say, during, but especially after.

Polish Resettlement Act 1947 gave British citizenship to over 200,000 displaced Polish troops. (Not many would have survived a return so Siberia) no one else wanted us.

Many more displaced men women and children were also given the chance to live in freedom in Britain.

@ dolnoslansk


Don't apologize dolonslonski, those people are not experts they are a pair of British immigrants known on this forum for their antics and "we know it all" attitude, nobody serious takes them seriously.


They helped those people who were fighting on their behalf, fair enough. In what way all those actions helped Poland?

No,it comes from the fact that UK indeed did nothing to help Poland.Whatever you Brits did was done in your own interest.Hard to blame you for that but don't you tell us that you did something FOR POLAND.


So this is what the UK did FOR YOU!It hasn't however done anything for millions of Poles suffering Soviet occupation in Poland.

National,

When you say "So this is what the UK did FOR YOU!It hasn't however done anything for millions of Poles suffering Soviet occupation in Poland"

Please explain what Britain alone could have done against soviet rule in Poland.

When you say YOU, do you mean me or do you include the other 499,000 poles who lived in Britain while they were in exile.

Do you think that that us poles in exile were no longer part of Poland anymore?

Ultimately, It was the brave shipyard workers from Gdansk, two strong leaders from Britain and the USA, plus a Polish Pope that finally freed Poland from communist rule.

It was Gorbachev that freed Poland, no-one else.

Not that he had much choice economically by that point, but still.

Gorbachev certainly did play a role - things would have surely been different if a Brezhnev type leader had ruled the roost at that time. But it was JP2 that got the ball rolling, then came Gdańsk and Wałęsa, and other contributing to the process were US presidents Reagan and Bush, PolAm sovietologist and US adviser Brzeziński, Col. Kukliński, the first Polish offcier in NATO and others.

Sorry I should have mentioned Gorbachev, he also played his part.

The French attack on Germany was a joke and resulted in a swift withdraw back to the French defensive positions.

By the time the BEF (British Expeditionary force) was in France, it was simply too late..

Churchill was not a saint, but after so many weak leaders he stood out and was in charge when the war ended.
# His first command as Prime Minister was for the boats to leave Calais and the 3,500 men would stand to the last man and they did killed or captured.

He also agreed for the French Navy to be fired on and sunk when the failed to sail to Britain (De Gaulle never forgave Britain for this..), but it was the right thing to do as Germany had plans to use the French flight, although not something you'd wish on your worst enemy, let alone an ally; he also landed in Neutral Iceland to prevent the Germans Occupying it and that was much more questionable, the last notable act was occupying Neutral Iran to allow Russia to be resupplied. (The ramifications of this still has the Middle East in a mess to this day..)

~ Britain had tried to liberate the Greek Islands and the US did not want to do it; this resulted in the last failure that Britain endured during the second world war - lesson learned, do not try something without the US helping.

This also led to all the Jewish population in the Greek Islands being rounded up and being sent to camps, which could have been avoided if the US had listened to Britain. (But the US viewed this as some Empire based quest and was keen not to help Britain maintain any kind of an Empire)

Britain went to war for Poland, lost an Empire (*Better for the world as a whole!) and failed to save an ally.. (Something Britain lives with!)

Britain was humiliated in the end by America and mostly blamed for what the US did.

After all didn't the US recently let Poland down (Again!) after a massive arms deal???

Churchill maintained the air-supply drops to the doomed Warsaw Uprising despite America asking Britain not to do it as it would upset Russia and it was also done from Southern Italy across Occupied Europe without fighter support and with Russian & the German troops shooting at the supply planes.

Britain had planned Operation Unthinkable that would see Britain continue into Russia and restore Polish independence... (America Vetoed this plan.) en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Unthinkable

As the saying goes.. the victor writes the history books and so, please remind me, who is the new Western Superpower since 1945..???

the first was Romania.

Romania saved polish army and polish government and polish gold, by keeping it safe everything and then returning it unharmed

Romania was the first and only country who helped Poland in 1939

Helped? Surely you jest.

read history books: (Remember do not quote more that 100 words from one source - such further posts will be moved to the random chat.


/wiki/Romanian_Bridgehead

so Romania was the country that helped the most Poland in 1939.

Poland mainly still exists now because of romanians helping polish troops , polish government
, polish soldiers and polish gold to safety in 1939.

Imagine what would have happened to Poland if all their government and all their army was exterminated in 1939 by germans and russians.

But they were helped and saved by Romania