PolishForums LIVE  /  Archives [3]    
   
Posts by Koala  

Joined: 4 May 2011 / Male ♂ 		Last Post: 19 Aug 2011
Threads: Total: 1 / In This Archive: 1
Posts: Total: 332 / In This Archive: 280

Displayed posts: 281 / page 1 of 10
sort: Oldest first   Latest first   |
Koala   
5 May 2011
News / Poland A and Ukraine B. Compare how far Poland has advanced. [282]

At this point there's pretty much nothing Poland can do for Ukraine. It's Ukraine that has to get their grip together, modernise their country (I don't mean economy and infrastructure, but the legal system, government etc.), then they'll be treated as a serious partner and eventually a EU member.
Koala   
5 May 2011
News / Poland A and Ukraine B. Compare how far Poland has advanced. [282]

koala Yes and if poland as its western neighbour assists then ukraine becomes both a partner and partialy enters polish sphere of influence. There is already high levels of co-operation.

I disagree. Poland has no power or leverage over Ukraine to meddle into their internal affairs. Polish politicians actually tried that a little (after the orange revolution) and failed miserably for a variety of reasons. The big difference between Poland and Ukraine is that after the fall of communism Poland always knew the direction that should be taken - the ambition of every government and almost every opposition party was to join NATO and European Union, which meant that everything that was required to be in these organisations was done as soon as possible (and a lot had to be done - adjusting law to EU standards meant a fast and big leap in modernising the country). There have been different visions how Poland would work within EU, Ukrainians OTOH don't seem to be able to determine where they want to be headed, hence they lose a lot of time and energy bouncing back between different options, not working particularly hard on anything long term.

Actually now Poland has lost a lot of that momentum inthis regardas the current government focuses mostly on current problems, not working on any long term reforms or visions. Kind of disappointing.
Koala   
5 May 2011
History / Poles in the Napoleonic era [224]

Ideas and values (as awesome as they might be) should be spread by models to follow, not by forcing other countries to submission.
Koala   
5 May 2011
News / Poland A and Ukraine B. Compare how far Poland has advanced. [282]

That's bollocks. Ukrainians have been a separate nation as long as a concept of modern nation exists, they surely have their own language, cultures and traditions. And in a grand scheme of things, what achievements does Polish nation have?
Koala   
5 May 2011
News / Poland A and Ukraine B. Compare how far Poland has advanced. [282]

Ukraine is unpredictable, what-more in their historiography (means they teach people that way) Poland is presented along with Russia as as a occupant of Ukraine, maybe a little milder then Russia but only just. Which is a nonsense.

Not really, since Poland was trying to "polonize" (is there a word for it in English? Firefox is making a red underline) the local Ukrainian folk (it's hard to speak of modern nation in XVIIth and XVIIIth centuries), were fighting back insurrections etc. etc. which is precisely what Russians did in Poland in XIXth century which we definitely consider a harsh occupation.

Poland should got what is hers - and which never was ukraine by the way - and that is that, only logical option., if difficult to implement :)

And Germany should regain ziemie odzyskane?
Koala   
5 May 2011
News / Poland A and Ukraine B. Compare how far Poland has advanced. [282]

whatever, We lost more on the east than we gain on the West, and how many times does it have to be repeated that Germans started the war??loosing territory is normal if You lose the war

Poland might have had these eastern territories for centuries prior to World War 2. They are now ethnically Lithuanian/Belarussian/Ukrainian and restoring the old borders makes no sense today. It's a shame that Polish people were moved from there, given how deeply rooted Poles were there, but what is done is done and there's no sense going back to it.
Koala   
5 May 2011
News / Poland A and Ukraine B. Compare how far Poland has advanced. [282]

No one is saying that Poland used to be the most imperialistic state out there, just that Ukrainians might see past Poland as oppressive towards their folk (but clearly it's not comparable to how Russia was treating Ukrainians, which was far worse to my knowledge).
Koala   
5 May 2011
News / Poland A and Ukraine B. Compare how far Poland has advanced. [282]

That would be Poland's problem: Poland was the one that chose to sign the treaties in question. Just as Poland was the one which decided to break the terms of the treaties with Ukraine, Lithuania and Czechoslovakia (twice) in a single 20-year period.

Lithuania and Czech captured ethnically Polish territories when Poland was fighting on multiple fronts with Germans, Russians/Soviets and Ukrainians at the same time. They both got what they deserved, although allying with Germany to capture Zaolzie was extremely stupid.

Would you enlighten me by what means XVIII century Poland could impose so called polonization ? on anybody?

Requiring Polish language on all levels of administration and education could be one of such means (don't know if that was actually the case).
Koala   
5 May 2011
News / Poland A and Ukraine B. Compare how far Poland has advanced. [282]

I can play the numbers game too...
Didn't stop the Poles from "fighting for Silesias freedom" nor speaking of it as "recovered territories".

So now even as there were less Lithuanians or Ukrainians than Poles in the Lwow area please accept and support their fight for their freedom and independence, would you! What's good for the goose..

You play the game, but you play it wrong. The territorial split on Silesia was supposed to be decided by poll, which Germans tried to manipulate by including people who no longer lived in Silesia. Keep in mind that Poles on Silesia had little to zero material support from Polish government - they fought on their own as they did not want to be a part of Germany and putting "fighting for freedom" in sarcastic quotation marks is very disingenious of you. The eventual split of the region mostly reflected actual ethnical split, IIRC Germany wound up with 79% of Upper Silesia.

I agree, well almost:]exceptions would be Lwów and Grodno, It just saddens me because there is not much of Poland in Poland now, I mean the architecture,

Wilno was Polish and deeply rooted in our culture, too. :( (I w Ostrej świecisz Bramie)
But what's gone is gone and we can't claim them to be Polish anymore.

Not this old chestnut again. For the umpteenth time, Poland was fighting neither the Soviets nor the Russians nor the Germans at the time when the Czechoslovaks enforced the interim agreement which Poland and Czechoslovakia had agreed in 1918 (and which Polish forces had broken the very next day by invading territory which Poland had agreed to be part of Czechoslovakia at least until a final agreement was reached).

This is just wrong. The territorial split was again supposed to be decided by poll, but Czech army entered Zaolzie in January 1919 and after a brief period of fights claimed control of the region.

The rest is crap! Where you whine about one Lwow, you got many of great towns and villages from the Germans!

You lost the war that you started. Deal with it.
Koala   
5 May 2011
News / Poland A and Ukraine B. Compare how far Poland has advanced. [282]

Crap! Germans had nothing to fear from a poll....they were the far majority.

And who do you think supported and financed the so called polish uprisings in the coal rich mines? Who wanted them so badly? Warsaw!

The border was to be determined by gmina by gmina case (what's the English equivalent of gmina? County?), not all or nothing. Eastern parts of Silesia were predominantly Polish and obviously the German government wanted those parts as well. These people wanted to be a part of Poland, there were 3 uprisings in 3 consecutive years, they wanted it that much. Is that really so hard to understand?

Support from Warsaw? You've got to be kidding. The situation on the eastern front was so dire that they relly had no resources to commit over a few tiny regions.
Koala   
5 May 2011
News / Poland A and Ukraine B. Compare how far Poland has advanced. [282]

Of course, where your math was met with widespread approval, my numbers were not...surprise, surprise!

You presented them in the wrong context, no surprise here.

And why did they do that? Because Poland was exercising sovereign rule in the disputed area despite having agreed not to.

Parliament election is hardly exercising sovereign rule. The bottom line of the 1919-20 affair is that Czechoslovakia robbed the regions where Poles were ethnical majority of the option to choose their preferred country. How is that OK for local people?
Koala   
5 May 2011
News / Poland A and Ukraine B. Compare how far Poland has advanced. [282]

Actually, yes it is. As was pointed out to Poland, before Czech troops went in.

I don't think so, those people might have chosen deputees to Polish parliament but could have wound up within Czech Republic anyway. The effect was only psychological, of no real importance outside of that.

When one breaks an international treaty, one loses the right to whine about the effects of that action. And let's not forget that Poland first broke the interim agreement the very day after it was signed.

The issue was later resolved peacefully and legally though (but circumstances of that were still dubious). Luckily Poles and Czechs live there together in agreement and mutual respect to this day (unlike eg. Slovakians and Hungarians), so nothing bad happened in the long run.
Koala   
5 May 2011
News / Poland A and Ukraine B. Compare how far Poland has advanced. [282]

Wilno was only Lithuanian in 1920 because Soviets handed it over to Lithuania after they lost in August. They did it only to stirr up a conflict between Poland and Lithuania and succeeded in that goal. In 1919 Wilno was in Polish hands. As quoted earlier, little to none Lithuanians lived in that area - they had pretty much no claims for that territory other than some abstract XIIIth century traditions.

I find it mindboggling that so many people are against a newly formed country unifying all people of the same nationality within its borders.
Koala   
5 May 2011
History / Poles in the Napoleonic era [224]

....then how come that the Poles prospered and grew and expanded Gumishu?

Because Poles being economically active benefited Germans?

Sorry...all political propaganda can't deny the facts. Poles lived well in Prussia, definitely better than under
Habsburg or Russian rule.

Wielkopolska was still one of the poorer regions in Prussia. Poland under Russia was one of the richest parts of Russia. By your logic, Poles were tzar's favorite and most cherished nation.
Koala   
5 May 2011
History / Poles in the Napoleonic era [224]

And what's the difference to any country concerning it's minorities? May I remind you about the venom spit at the joke of the modern silesian organization for more autonomy???

Not giving Śląsk authonomy is mostly due to the fact that of the region's 4 millions inhabitants only 200k or so identify themselves as Silesians. I imagine not giving them minority status is of financial reasons (basically Polish governement doesn't want to give money for opening Silesian schools or cultivating cultural activities), similar to how 2 million or so Poles in Germany today don't have a minority status.

Richer than Prussia???

Rich in what?

Rich as in economically better than the rest of Russia. Basically what I'm saying it was in neither occupants own interes to limit's Poland's economy potential as both those countries benefited from it.
Koala   
5 May 2011
History / Poles in the Napoleonic era [224]

It's about the principle...I can't see any enthusiasm or free support for a growing wish for silesian autonomy...quite the contrary, understandably.
Not to forget that the ethnic cleansing of Germans was all about that question, cementing polish rule in Silesia...

You don't give autonomy to a region because it has a 4% minority that wants that autonomy. That's absurd and no principle can change it.

That was not that hard but no partition was as economically well off and supported than the prussian part!

Again, it was for Prussia's/Germany's own good. Oppression would lead to frequent uprisings, which are an expensive internal war.
Koala   
5 May 2011
History / Poles in the Napoleonic era [224]

Silesia was 2/3 german for centuries...didn't stop Poles from demanding to be "freed" and annexed by Poland.

I feel like we discussed it somewhere already.
Koala   
5 May 2011
History / Poles in the Napoleonic era [224]

The conslusion to that discussion was there was actually a part of Silesia that did not want to be a part of German and fought hard for it. Not at all comparable to the current 4% scattered throughout the entire region.
Koala   
5 May 2011
History / Poles in the Napoleonic era [224]

Problem was it wasn't a "part" but a lose collection of farms and several villages around the urban centres which were predominantly German.

Yes, and farmers from the most urbanistic region in the radius of 500km won against industrialised and more numerous city dwellers. I mean, come on. Inhabitants of the eastern part of Upper Silesia were Poles and wanted to join newly created fatherland, I think you should deal with it and move on.
Koala   
5 May 2011
History / Poles in the Napoleonic era [224]

won?

Won as in captured and managed to secure the territory until truce. And the partisans were fighting not against other Silesians, but against regular German army (however crippled it was at the time). It's time to move on.
Koala   
7 May 2011
Po polsku / W co inwestowac w Polsce? [34]

Mieszkasz w Polsce? Dysponujesz już jakimś kapitałem (wypracowanym bądź odziedziczonym)? Jako nauczyciel, ciężko będzie odłożyć na inwestycje nieruchomościowe.:)
Koala   
8 May 2011
Language / Super fast Polish language learning strategies from internet polyglots [29]

You want to speak Polish in 3 months? Just move to Poland and completely stop using any other language - don't even contact your family if possible. That way, your brain will be forced to switch to Polish thinking and will be bombarded by Polish, in conversations, TV, press, books, etc. Probably unfeasible in yhour life, though. :P Either way there are no quick ways, you have to practice a lot, read Polish books, watch some Polish movies, possibly talk with someone on Skype in Polish. If you can commit a couple of hours every afternoon, you could still learn it relatively quickly I reckon.
Koala   
8 May 2011
Language / Państwo macie ..., pan masz ... [5]

Expressions "panie/pani/państwo + verb in second person" are usually meant to express annoyance at the addressed person and also show disrespect while being somewhat formal. Gramatically they are correct though, as long as they're in the wołacz case.

At least that's how I used it several times and heard it used.