The BEST Guide to POLAND
Unanswered  |  Archives 
 
 
User: Guest

Home / History  % width posts: 330

The Polish Blame Culture!


Sokrates 8 | 3,346
29 Apr 2010 #301
Davies is a biased historian, who is not completely neutral

Could you provide a single statement that by Davies that makes him biased? Of course you can't, you traditionally escape from responsibility for your silly little opinions:)))
Bzibzioh
29 Apr 2010 #302
Well if they were so glorious and strong and good as it's been portrayed here, it would be a piece of cake for them now, wouldn't it?

They were glorious and strong and you are a major ignorant.

Like I care about your opinions.

Judging by the amount of digs you send my way - you definitely do :)

But it's ok if you don't see the sarcasm in that question.

Nice saving face exercise but sadly it's not working on me.
MareGaea 29 | 2,752
29 Apr 2010 #303
Could you provide a single statement that by Davies that makes him biased?

Here you go:

(on "Europe at war 1941-145)

On page 48 Davies speaks of the Russo-Polish war after the Russian Revolution, there is no mention of the Polish attack against Russia, rather Russia was attacking Poland to use it as a stage to eventually attack Germany, this statement is once more repeated on page 137.

A detail error, of which there are many, is on page 108: "With the 6th Army eliminated, the Germans were forced to retreat along the length of their southern lines. Army Group B raced back form the Caucasus to avoid being cut off." It was Army Group A that was in the Caucasus not B.

You need more? I will be happy to provide you with more, now go drown yourself (in alcohol) or do sth else useful.

Judging by the amount of digs you send my way - you definitely do :)

Same could be said about you.

And about the sarcasm, what a lousy way to admit that you didn't get it. Go join that nitwit Sokidoki in his drinking spree.

>^..^<

M-G (tiens)
Sokrates 8 | 3,346
29 Apr 2010 #304
1. Russia was attacking Poland, there were border conflicts and the polish attack pre-empted the russian invasion by days, maybe weeks - Davies' statement is correct.

2. Ukraine was laid to waste in that a huge portion of the nation was starved to death, infrastructure was destroyed to prevent food transportation etc - Davies statement is correct.

3. Kulaks were starved to death or sent to Syberia - Davies is again correct.

4. Man made famines in Ukraine are not "supposed" this word discredits your entire source, its proven they've been enginereed.

All of your sad attempts have been rebuffed, now link us to the site you're quoting, i bet it says Viktor Suvorow or some other charming russian fellow.

Come on kurwa boy give us the link:)))))
Harry
29 Apr 2010 #305
Could you provide a single statement that by Davies that makes him biased? Of course you can't, you traditionally escape from responsibility for your silly little opinions:)))

Allow me: ""Armia Krajowa (Home Army), the AK, which could fairly claim to be the largest of European resistance" from God's Playground: A History of Poland. Davies overlooks the fact that the Yugoslav partisans were double the size of the AK and had more than 50 times more armed full-time member.

Do, as you traditionally do, pretend to ignore this post so you can not suffer the embarrassment of yet again having your arsse kicked by me.

Of course Norman Davies isn't a historian if his point of view doesn't go along yours. Hypocryte bs

It's more that he writes articles about events and gets the year they happened in wrong. And that in Rising 44 he sources information about the German side from "the German Federal Archives in Bonn" while there are no German Federal Archives in Bonn. And that he was denied tenure at a decent US university for "scientific flaws". Shall I go on?

Viktor Suvorow or some other charming russian fellow.

I know Viktor Suvorov and am entirely sure that you wouldn't dare to mouth off at him in person about his work. Although I would pay good money to see you do it (or at least his reaction) But then there are very few people that you'd speak to in person as you speak to here.
frd 7 | 1,399
29 Apr 2010 #306
Non of the sorts. This goes about his previous works as well. Why is Davies so well liked? Because he confirms all Polish myths.

You have no idea about Polish myths.

Shall I go on?

Yes please, I'm quite curious. I'd like to see a good article about his mischievious citings.. surely somebody noticed it beside you?
home.bawue.de/~hanacek/info/earchive.htm
There's a list of federal and administration archives in there, under the link there are 2 archives in Bonn, he could have called one of them federal. Don't get me wrong but it's all a bit too ocluded to cross him out, just because of a citing.
Sokrates 8 | 3,346
29 Apr 2010 #307
Come on MareGaea give us all a link, i think i know where did you take this bs from, this should be good:))))
MareGaea 29 | 2,752
29 Apr 2010 #308
All of your sad attempts have been rebuffed

Rebuffed by whom? You? Nobody takes you seriously, so nothing has been rebuffed so far.

kunikovsreviews.blogspot.com/2007/02/europe-at-war-1941-1945-by-norman.html

But it's also stated in Oxfordjournals (for which you have to subscribe) and a couple of other sources in writing, apparently not online as far as I can see, but if I have time, I will find them.

>^..^<

M-G (tiens)
Bzibzioh
29 Apr 2010 #309
And about the sarcasm, what a lousy way to admit that you didn't get it.

Cos there was nothing to get. You were dead serious.

Nope. Yugoslavia had the biggest resistance army in Europe and in fact, in the world.

Don't you worry: I saved that delightful piece of idiocy for future references :) Gems like that don't happen every day!
MareGaea 29 | 2,752
29 Apr 2010 #310
Cos there was nothing to get. You were dead serious.

Ah, you can now also look in ppl's head? Don't overestimate yourself, you're just a simple bimbo with lousy excuses.

I saved that delightful piece of idiocy for future references

Idiocy because it diminishes the glorious past of the even more glorious kip of Poland?

>^..^<

M-G (it must be hard to swallow that PL is not the best, the most glorious and the most noble in everything)
frd 7 | 1,399
29 Apr 2010 #311
kunikovsreviews.blogspot.com/2007/02/europe-at-war-1941-1945-by-norman.html

Sorry, but it's not a valid source, it has been written by a Russian, he states different things without citing his sources - in a "my dad told me when I was small" fashion. I don't mind spitting on Poland, just try to come up with something better. Maybe an unbiased neutral third side?
MareGaea 29 | 2,752
29 Apr 2010 #312
I stated there is also a source in the Oxford Journals, for which you have to subscribe, which costs money. I could leave a link to that one here, but you'd only get a login screen I'm afraid. As soon as I have time, I will provide more links, but it's not about spitting on PL, it's about a biased historian, because his work previous to his Polish work is being critisised just as hard among historians. But that "my dad told me"-thing, doesn't that also go for most claims here made about Polish history?

>^..^<

M-G (it's called popular science for the masses)
Bzibzioh
29 Apr 2010 #313
Ah, you can now also look in ppl's head?

No, I can read.

Don't overestimate yourself, you're just a simple bimbo with lousy excuses.

Insults. Boring. Plus I didn't offer lousy excuses. That's your specialty.

Idiocy because it diminishes the glorious past of the even more glorious kip of Poland?

Certainly your ignorant comments can't diminish Polish past :)

(it must be hard to swallow that PL is not the best, the most glorious and the most noble in everything)

I love how you desperately try to switch the gears when it gets uncomfortable.
Harry
29 Apr 2010 #314
Don't get me wrong but it's all a bit too ocluded to cross him out, just because of a citing.

Even if we take your explanation that Davies just got the name wrong (such commitment to accuracy!), one of the archives in Bonn is the German Bundestag archive which would be unlikely to have info regarding the Warsaw uprising, especially given that the Bundestag didn't even exist in 1944. The other is the archive of the German foreign ministry, also unlikely to be a source of info regarding the Warsaw uprising.

Maybe an unbiased neutral third side?

Maybe you'd like to address Davies' description of the AK in light of the Yugoslav partisans being double the size of the AK?
MareGaea 29 | 2,752
29 Apr 2010 #315
I love how you desperately try to switch the gears when it gets uncomfortable.

Not at all. I'm not uncomfortable with anything. Funny how you always interpret things according to your own silly little world.

But I haven't seen you contribute anything except reacting to my posts and if you do, it's just bytching and no substantial addition to anything.

And ahwwww, did I insult you? Don't care if I did. Well, just think before you try to insult me, which you try to do over and over again, without success. If I am boring, then so are you, because you're the only one that reacts to it all the freaking time. And if I wasn't interesting to you you simply would've ignored me, like I do with nearly all your posts in reaction to what sb says.

>^..^<

M-G (tiens)
Sokrates 8 | 3,346
29 Apr 2010 #316
kunikovsreviews

So your source is an internet blog by a pro-communist Russian? Nice! :)
Harry
29 Apr 2010 #317
The deafening silence from the Davies groupies about their hero being such a Polonophile that he claimed the AK was bigger than a force which was double the size of the AK and had up to a 10,000% more full-time armed members than the AK tells us all that we need to know about Davies: even his biggest fans can't even try to support him.
Bzibzioh
29 Apr 2010 #318
But I haven't seen you contribute anything except reacting to my posts and if you do, it's just bytching and no substantial addition to anything.

My contribution was calling you on BS about why Polish underground didn't liberate Poland like Yugoslavs did. Which you have no reasonable explanation so far. Just your standard nonsense (changing the focus of discussion) with the advanced-level nonsense ("I was sarcastic") plus some uncreative insults ("you are a sad person'').

I have to run now. Try to come up with more b1ching how mad are you at me for kicking your ass every time :)
MareGaea 29 | 2,752
29 Apr 2010 #319
So your source is an internet blog by a pro-communist Russian? Nice! :)

No, my main source at the moment is the Oxford journal which contains a full synopsis and critique of the work involved. Like said, you have to have a paid subscribtion to it, so if I would link to it, you'd probably only get a login screen. Here's the link, but don't start crying as you usually do when you are being proved wrong:

ehr.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/reprint/CXXII/497/795

So, get yourself a subscription and you can see for yourself. It costs 135 Euro per annum, except when you're a member of the American historical/political society. Then you pay 101 Euros. Last month I renewed my subscription.

I have to run now. Try to come up with more b1ching how mad are you at me for kicking your ass every time

What makes you think that I am angry? For me to become angry there is more necessary and you haven't kicked my ass so far. Because you are just asking questions in return.

Based on the numbers of footmen, AK should be able to liberate PL herself, she didn't because she may not have been as well armed as the Yugo partizans, the biggest resistance army in the world ;)

>^..^<

M-G (tiens)
Sokrates 8 | 3,346
29 Apr 2010 #320
So, get yourself a subscription and you can see for yourself. It costs 135 Euro per annum, except when you're a member of the American historical/political society. Then you pay 101 Euros. Last month I renewed my subscription.

I knew it, yet another made up lie, you know i will not subscribe just to prove you lied again so you chose that source deliberately :))))))))

Got facts?:)
MareGaea 29 | 2,752
29 Apr 2010 #321
Admitting you are wrong simply just isn't in your dictionary, right? I have subscribed to this over 15 years ago as I have benefits of it. But if you're too chicken again, I will get you some evidence that in historian's circles Davies is widely doubted as being reliable.

Edit: and rest yourself assured that this is not about PL, but about him as historian, read the critics on his "The Isles".

>^..^<

M-G (tiens, some ppl do care about their trained profession)
Mr Grunwald 29 | 1,945
29 Apr 2010 #322
Admitting you are wrong simply just isn't in your dictionary, right?

I blame the... wait a minute... he?!

What does Davies have to do with The Polish blame culture?
MareGaea 29 | 2,752
29 Apr 2010 #323
What does Davies have to do with The Polish blame culture?

I don't know.

And who are you anyway?

>^..^<

M-G (hehe)
Marek11111 9 | 816
29 Apr 2010 #324
Poland blame culture is based on facts, but Polish blame culture dwarfs Jewish blame culture.
Seanus 15 | 19,706
29 Apr 2010 #325
M-G, how about more objectivity in acknowledging that Israeli Jews have done very bad things!? Fine, defend a corner but try and see the bigger picture.

Sok, you are talking to a guy who is likely a big fan of Netanyahu and Livni. The former wants to return to the 1967 Six-Day war situation and wheedle even more land. He doesn't know about the ICJ Judgement of 2004 or, if he does, chooses to ignore it.

Yehudi, there is plenty video evidence of bulldozing and are you even aware of the killing ratio? It would take Palestinians some 50 years to kill as many Israeli Jews as was seen in a 3-week period called OCL.
MareGaea 29 | 2,752
29 Apr 2010 #326
M-G, how about more objectivity in acknowledging that Israeli Jews have done very bad things!? Fine, defend a corner but try and see the bigger picture.

Now you're talking a bit rubbish, Seanus. I have on multiple occasions rejected Israeli politics. I do see the bigger picture and have shown more objectivity than the average anti-Israeli poster on this forum.

What annoys me though is that the same ppl who feel so sorry for the poor, poor Palestinians are the same that condemn Islam and Arab ppl. Guess what, Palestinians are Arabs too and a lot of them (not all) are Muslim. It's hypocrite and it comes across that it's just against the Jews again and that they in fact not that much care about the Palestinians.

a guy who is likely a big fan of Netanyahu and Livni

He doesn't know about the ICJ Judgement of 2004 or, if he does, chooses to ignore it.

Is this about me? If yes, shame on you. I am NOT a fan of Netanyahu, but I liked Yitzak Rabin. But I am not in favour of Israeli politics, have even signed a petition saying that Israƫl should stop the building of that dreaded wall (as indeed was ruled by the International Court of Justice in the Hague on the 9th of July 2004) and I have substantially donated for the well being of the Palestinian families (the innocent ones, I mean, I don't support the Palestinian terrorists). I am in fact a little disappointed that you think that I am not objective in this matter. You should know better, Seanus.

Edit: how about your own objectivity?

>^..^<

M-G (tiens)
Seanus 15 | 19,706
29 Apr 2010 #327
M-G, such bunching is really not on. You can't just clump Palestinians, who are fighting for their very existence, in with other rich Arab states that have room to maneuver. What an absurd thing to say! The Muslim world is divided (Shia/Sunni) so less of the labelling of Palestinians as just the same as other Muslims.

I can condemn what is done to them yet criticise Wahhabism as an ideological doctrine of Saudi Arabia. There's nothing hypocritical in that at all. Caring for the Palestinians is natural as they were victimised.

It was about MC, not you. You are at least aware of that judgement and likely support it as, in fact, many Jewish people do.

My own objectivity is most definitely not in question.
MareGaea 29 | 2,752
29 Apr 2010 #328
What an absurd thing to say!

I was just pointing out the hypocrisy that some ppl, I wasn't talking about you, employ by on one hand supporting the Palestinians and on the other hand condemning fellow Arabs. But besides: Palestinians do have a state in forma: it's called Jordan, which population is for a major part Palestinian.

In short, I think I am pretty objective as to where it comes to this subject. But then again, it's not my country, never have been there and don't know anybody there. The only Israelis I have ever met were a couple of hot female students in Amsterdam (who were suddenly all over me after hearing that I was half-Jewish, while being cool and distant before that) and three boys here in Dubs at work. I really have never met more than, say 10, Israeli in my entire life. So what ties should I have with that country? I consider myself Dutch, and I am Dutch. Not Israeli, not Jewish (just a religion imo), not anything else; just Dutch. And I am proud to be :)

>^..^<

M-G (a bit cranky lately, Seanus?)
Sokrates 8 | 3,346
29 Apr 2010 #329
I think I am pretty objective

You're the only one, everyone else thinks you're a lying anti-polish racist:)
MareGaea 29 | 2,752
29 Apr 2010 #330
Well, we know who's saying this, the biggest racist twat on this forum, whom nearly everbody hates, except some fellow depraved souls.

Sokidoki's filosophy: everbody who doesn't agree with me is a liar. Everybody who says sth I don't want to hear or sth that I don't know anything about (which is a lot) is a liar too. And I think it's fair to start calling names under the pretence of "If I shout and curse at them hard enough, they will stop destroying my fake world".

:)

>^..^<

M-G (nobody really takes you serious, Sokidoki. You don't prove anything ever)

Home / History / The Polish Blame Culture!
Discussion is closed.