PolishForums LIVE  /  Archives [3]    
   
Posts by Sokrates  

Joined: 19 Jan 2009 / Male ♂
Last Post: 1 Oct 2011
Threads: Total: 8 / In This Archive: 1
Posts: Total: 3335 / In This Archive: 1313
From: Poland
Speaks Polish?: Yes
Interests: Many and varied.

Displayed posts: 1314 / page 22 of 44
sort: Latest first   Oldest first   |
Sokrates   
5 Jul 2010
News / Komorowski won Poland's presidency vote? [125]

As I said, Kaczynski has congratulated Komorowski to the victory.

Szwed you need to realise what JK just did was a purely diplomatic move "i have class i can accept defeat" it costs him nothing since the votes aint counted yet, if he lost he's done so with class, if he won he still showed some class, those congrats were a purely PR move.
Sokrates   
4 Jul 2010
News / Komorowski won Poland's presidency vote? [125]

But good news nevertheless - at least Poland will have a president who doesn't use his presidential veto against the elected ruling party.

Thats not good news in any country, having people in power who can't be hindered by anyone or anything is bad even if they're reasonable and solid, PO is neither.

I'm not sure if Komorowski is a good choice.

Neither JK nor Komorowski are a good choice.

Does anyone know if Komorowski is also liberal about 3rd world immigration

No politician in Poland wants to be responsible for opening the borders, Poland is fairly insular as a country and as a society, anyone responsible for opening the floodgates would get destroyed as a politician so his personal opinion doesnt matter, he still wont do it.
Sokrates   
4 Jul 2010
Love / Do Polish men find African American women attractive? [25]

No such thing as american women, blacks, asian and latino chicks tend to have loads of sizzling hot chicks, white girls not so much.

Still most are fat pigs.

Thanks, but honestly, would i feel uncomfortable on my visit?

Only if you're a slow runner.

Seriously though dont expect anything unpleasant, its safe here even for blacks.
Sokrates   
1 Jul 2010
History / Should HMG compensate Poland and/or Polish veterans? [90]

C'mon Shelley, promising direct support, urging to fight on with flase claims of strategic manouvers, what do you call that?

Deliberate misleading of Poland to lay down for the West and buy them time is treason, i can see the strategic logic both France and UK had, its a bloody stupid logic born of cowardice and complacency but logic, from the polish point of view its still abandoning Poland when help, especially by France was perfectly plausible.
Sokrates   
1 Jul 2010
History / Should HMG compensate Poland and/or Polish veterans? [90]

Hmm...I find it odd that Sokrates was suspended as it couldn't have been for his comments here.

I was complementing a moronic example of a female in the polish section, apparently she ran crying :)

Britain seemed to know, more or less, when the first strikes were going to happen and there was information sharing.

Of course it did Poland fed both UK and France information, except that UK and France had a plan that called for sacrificing Poland now and liberating it later, Poland of course was not privy to such details which is why we call it what it was, treason.

Yes, the mobilisation process takes some time but much comes through anticipation and preparedness.

What exactly? Poland was straining its meager industry to its limits to equip its forces, partial mobilisation was executed despite allied insistence, what more could be done? I know anticipation and preparedness sound like such nice terms but it was a specific situation that you can prepare for only in specific ways.

Force France to act? You've got to be joking!

The problem was that France and UK saw polish army was outdated but quite strong, they gave Poland at least 3-4 months of combat so the initial german success convinced them not to help Poland, such success would be harder to achieve with polish army fully prepared.
Sokrates   
30 Jun 2010
History / Should HMG compensate Poland and/or Polish veterans? [90]

He sometimes is decent and that's why many are entering into dialogues with him. Tusk very much included.

No Sean, people enter into dialogues with him because he's the leader of one of the most powerfull countries on this bloody planet, you don't ignore people like that, he's a cold blooded murderer personally responsible for dozens of deaths of East Berlin Germans.

You do it by keeping them in regular training and focussed for the task ahead.

I'll keep it simple and refrain from obscenities since you're one of the few likeable human beings here.

1. Poland had a milion strong army.
2. One milion men have to be notified by mail.
3. One milion men have to leave their jobs, farms etc incurring massive economic loss.
4. One milion men have to be transported to concentration areas.
5. One milion men have to be armed and organised into units in said areas.
6. One milion men have to go to their assigned combat zones all over Poland.

You dont keep one bloody milion on standby, you dont train them 24/7 and "keep them focused" thats why mobilisation is such a big deal, if done too late it might cost you the war, if done too early it can cause ginormous economic losses and Poland was p*ss poor to begin with.

Thats why those western fockwards insistence on Poland delaying its mobilisation was such a big deal, by september 1 more then 400.000 polish soldiers were between stage 1-5 while only 600.000 thousand were in their assigned combat areas, given that Germans attacked with 1.8 milion men every soldier was worth his weight in gold.

So Poland made a mistake by not mobilising? You listened to 'allies'?

Obviously, and the mistake meant much, mobilising fully might have prologned the war for a couple of weeks, this in turn might've force France and UK to actually act instead of playing pretend-war.
Sokrates   
30 Jun 2010
History / Should HMG compensate Poland and/or Polish veterans? [90]

That's what contingency plans are for, Sok! Standby, readiness and all that.

WTF? Sean do you even read yourself sometimes? I still can't rally from the "decent Putin" comment and you come up with more.

How the bloody f*ck do you put 1/35th of your entire nation on constant standby??? It was one milion people for feckssake you either mobilise them or not, there's no contingency plans for this.

Brits and French came and said "dont mobilise" Poles were fully aware of how unreliable France and UK were as allies and there was a real fear of them using any polish refusal as a cop-out so Poland did not mobilise and got screwed even more.
Sokrates   
30 Jun 2010
History / Should HMG compensate Poland and/or Polish veterans? [90]

Firstly, Poland had the right of rejection and could have told Britain where to go.

And potentialy lose an ally, good job.

Also, they had to learn from Piłsudski, their general. He knew what was coming!

And so did Poland, the problem was when, you can't keep a milion men mobilised all the time which means you have to know when to mobilise them, thanks to UK and France when war erupted hundreds of thousands of our soldiers were en route to mobilisation grounds or in the process of being concentrated in said spots.

Had the UK and France not pressured Poland the mobilisation would happen two weeks earlier and the army would've been ready, that could buy Poland at least two or three more weeks.

Why would, or should, the Poles have put their faith in France or the Brits based on recent events (Munich) and events in the not so distant (Polish - Soviet war) past?

Because there was no other choice, polish HQ was fully aware that lacking enough modern hardware Poland is incapable of defending herself on her own, it was "get allies or get destroyed" situation.
Sokrates   
29 Jun 2010
History / Should HMG compensate Poland and/or Polish veterans? [90]

The question I don't understand is why Poland attempted to fight a conventional war in the first place. With two much bigger enemies either side, it would have made much more sense to fight like the Swiss - hit and run.

Because Poland is a large flat plain while Switzerland is all impassable mountains and deep passes?

The main problem here is that Poland was fighting a cordon defence along its entire border rather then retreating to the great rivers, as it is the allies really did a number on Poland promising aid in the way they did.

Reperations though are ridiculous, the western betrayal is so heavily denied and so much time has passed that it'd only serve as making Poland ridiculous.

pland was fully mobilized, actually but the nazis were suprior in nubers and technology

Only 60% of the armed forces were fully mobilised, the remainder were either en route to concentration areas or there already.

To be correct, polish army was fully mobilised but not fully assembled, thanks to the allies again.
Sokrates   
29 Jun 2010
History / Wealth of the Polish nobility [29]

I heard that some Polish nobles were so wealthy that they deliberately slipshod their horses gold horseshoes so they would fall off.

Actually its about some Winged Hussar captains who had their horses lose golden horseshoes in Vienna, it wasnt done everyday, well Zamoyski did that everyday but then again there's a loads of other weird things he did.
Sokrates   
29 Jun 2010
History / 1587-1588 Poland's War with Austria [22]

But would the Polish nobility agree to such an arrangement?

At that time kings still had quite a bit of power, even if he didnt march the entire force out but only the royal army that'd still weaken Poland.

Previous experience suggests that they would be very hesitant.

Yeah but he'd still have access to royal lands, royal army and at least some nobles would follow the king.

And later on when the 7 years war would come about, instead of Poland being simply used as a battlefield for foreign armies

Poland was used as a battlefield only because its destruction in the Deluge and the lack of strong kings, Austria was unable to save Poland from former and unable to provide the latter.

Poland could finally take East Prussia for itself. I doubt if Prussia would be able to resist an alliance of Poland, Austria and Russia.

In the period of 1578 Poland was able to take East Prussia anyway, it did not for a variety of reasons but it could and Austria was again not needed here.
Sokrates   
28 Jun 2010
History / 1587-1588 Poland's War with Austria [22]

I think that the French at worst would Give the Austrians a thrashing, but i doubt if they would be bothered marching all the way to Poland,

The point is however that Austria would just march polish armies into whatever battlefield in Italy or Germany while Poland would get overrun by everyone in the absence of its soldiers.

for the wars with the Turks, there wouldn't be much change there, Poland constantly fought the Turks regardless

Yes but Poland won against Turks at Vienna or on its home soil, fighting Turks in the Balkans where they had their dependent states all too happy to provide 50.000 more men is another matter alltogether.

it would have been different if they had been allies.

How? Hapsburgs were interested in polish money and polish armies but they were completely ignorant in local affairs, the first thing they intended to do was mobilise Poles for a conflict with France which was why they never got the throne, marching 50.000+ soldiers out of Poland would mean its destruction.

At the same time Austria could not offer the same kind of help if Poland got into trouble and Spain, another Hapsburg run country was too far away.
Sokrates   
28 Jun 2010
History / 1587-1588 Poland's War with Austria [22]

but the fact remains that it had little impact in western Europe.

Absolutely it had no impact at all, Polands effort was turned almost completely eastwards, i'm not claiming it had impact, i'm claiming it had leverage.

Poland was not very well known in western Europe.

By the period discussed it wasvery well known in Germany, Italy, England and assorted Islands and France, it wasnt known well at all in Spain.

By allying itself with Austria, it could potentially allow Austria to take the brunt of any potential mistakes,

By allying itself with Austria it would almost ceirtanly be drawn into Hapsburg wars which held no benefits whatsoever for Poland, Austria with its 50.000 mobilisation strength and small territory was guaranteed to use polish power in the Balkans which would inevitably lead to a war with Turkey.

Furthermore in terms of cultural impact, Poland absorbed a lot from the west but even with a few notable philosophers it wasn't able to export much in the cultural realm.

Oh it was but again the problem is that all of it was done eastwards and Austria wasnt really the hub of arts and sciences, even if we accepted your point off the bat you're still letting a small and weak country with conflicting interests run your place and almost ceirtanly draw you into dangerous wars that dont benefit you at all.

Poland at the time had a series of very dangerous enemies, real or potential, Sweden, Turks, Moscow, Crimean Tartars, Austrian enemies were Turkey and France so polish soldiers would be used thousands of kilometers away from where they're needed.

@Nathan wikipedia is a poor source:)
Sokrates   
27 Jun 2010
History / Give back Lwow to Poland and Kaliningrad to Germany - is it possible? [198]

that you are thinking in seconds.

We can get into details Iron there's plenty more similarities.

Bloody hell - thank you for that. I must take a closer look this summer!

You might want to check back alleys too there's dozens of busts of polish artists, commanders or scientists, some even still recognisiable (stand by for pictures gotta dig).
Sokrates   
27 Jun 2010
History / 1587-1588 Poland's War with Austria [22]

You should not take my teaching you a lesson over the Ukraine personally

I'm not calling you an idiot you're a smart creature but the statement about Austria was silly because:

Austria was the most powerful Germanic state at the time,

At the time Poland was more powerfull then all the Germanic states combined together, Austria was about as strong as a single Polish province, Poland had no business in letting third rate european powers run it.

if Poland allied itself with Austria at the time as an equal partner

Its like proposing USA ally itself with Nigeria as equal partners, Poland alone could and did excersize more leverage then any of its neighbours of any two of its neighbours combined.

Poland had absolutely nothing to gain from an alliance with Austria.

would have one foot in West European politics

In 1587 Poland had a huge number of political proxies and whenever it needed it just dictated various countries of HRE what to do, besides Poland at the time was still busily developing and colonising the East and the entire national effort was directed there, Germany was viewed as a poor, relatively barbaric (due to religious hassles) region and generally avoided as political grounds, there was no need or desire to expand into Germany and enough military and economic leverage/german proxy states to excersize any kind of policy.

and it would dominate central and eastern politics.

It dominated central and eastern politics anyway, you're basically postulating that Poland ally itself with a weak little country to gain something it already had without it.

No one in the region did anything without asking Poland, if Poland wasnt asked it was war and as noted Poland by that time did not lose a war for 247 years and it would be another 63 years before the collapse of polish power.

To sum it up Poland didnt dominate the eastern and central politics, it dominated the entire european politics, its immidiate neighbours were completely out of their league in every department and powers that potentially could compete like France or Spain were dependent on polish grain, salt, shipbuilding materials, cattle, meat etc.

If something was too far for Poland to beat the living crap out of it could still be ambargoed into submission so treating Austria as an equal is completely unrealistic, it was not Polands equal and had absolutely nothing to offer Poland on any level.

Too much German blood in their veins

Actually for centuries Germans chose Poland as their motherland over Germany, Duchy of Courland for example.
Sokrates   
27 Jun 2010
History / 1587-1588 Poland's War with Austria [22]

History could have turned out for the better if the Archduke had been elected

Most idiotic statement ever, Archduke was a weak and inefective ruler.
Sokrates   
27 Jun 2010
News / US shouldn't interfere in Polish election (Polish-American Advocacy Initiative) [60]

So it seems like he's in fact Scottish/Irish. But let's for sport's sake assume that he is of Polish descent, that would only be one against 3 Presidents of Dutch descent.

Well the Poles were latecomers.

By the way I seem to remember that Polk is a common Scottish surname.

Lemme dig him up, his gramps came from Silesia.

Anyhow, NYC is in fact the most "Dutch" city of the US and they cherish and celebrate it quite regularily.

Especially during polish parades!
Sokrates   
27 Jun 2010
History / Give back Lwow to Poland and Kaliningrad to Germany - is it possible? [198]

Yeah well, Danzig was to 95 percent German at the last census before the war...you can't get much more Germany than that.

BB only because Germans butchered the Poles to make room, Gdańsk was built and run by Poles untill 14 century but even when Germans first a minority then a majority were present in Gdańsk it was officially under Poland in one way or the other.

We can agree that Germans had a huge contribution to Gdańsk history but no way in heck is it a german city.

David makes a good point about Kaliningrad too, Gdańsk became Danzing only after partitions.
Sokrates   
27 Jun 2010
History / Give back Lwow to Poland and Kaliningrad to Germany - is it possible? [198]

German??????? Germany didn't exist at that time.

German people did exist.

Silesia was a duchy that was very closely connected with Poland by BLOOD.

Untill 13-14th centuries when the majority of the ducal subjects became Germans with the exception of Greater Poland.

I'm well aware of the silesian Piasts and their history its just that in the end the region they ruled was predominantly german inhabited.

to you as you are thinking in seconds, anyway is purely theoretical discussion and my aim is only to convince that Lwów should belong to Poland, that is first step.

The only reason to discuss anything in theory is if its appliable in practice, we have no hope of recovering Lwów if only due to Poland being underpopulated therefore discussing principles is pointless.

Is not the same.....

Germans didnt found Wrocław.
Poles didnt found Lwów.

Germans aquired Wrocław in the 13 century.
Poles aquired Lwów in the 13 century.

Germans developed Wrocław into one of the primary urban centers of eastern Germany.
Poles developed Lwów into one of the primary urban centers of eastern Poland.

Germans lost Wrocław after WW2.
Poles lost Lwów after WW2.

You were saying?
Sokrates   
27 Jun 2010
News / US shouldn't interfere in Polish election (Polish-American Advocacy Initiative) [60]

On the other hand, "Jimmy van Bramen" and "Daniel Dromm" sound pretty Dutch, eh?

It doesnt say they're Dutch though :)))

All Dutch names as Dutch can be.

Roosevelt Dutch?!

M-G (face it, Dutch have more with NYC than the Poles do)

Had :)))

Poles do not enter until about 1850...

Actually Poles enter at the end of the first partition at 1773-5.
Sokrates   
27 Jun 2010
News / US shouldn't interfere in Polish election (Polish-American Advocacy Initiative) [60]

Did you know that NY used to be called New Amsterdam? Guess who founded that city? :)

When it was a tiny village called Manhattan, then Poles took over and look where it is today?:)

nice to know that the Dutch have always been part of the ruling elite in NYC...

Want a nice statistic as to how many Dutch were mayors vs how many Poles i'm pretty sure its on their site? Also current council doesnt have a single Dutchman but it does have two Poles.
Sokrates   
27 Jun 2010
History / Give back Lwow to Poland and Kaliningrad to Germany - is it possible? [198]

David_18Threads: 29
Posts: 412
Joined: Jan 4, 07
Gender: Male

Yes David but these guys were germinised and the crushing majority of Wrocławs population was German, western part of Silesia stopped being polish in 13 century, central and eastern parts remained Polish throught history but not Wrocław.