Did Poland bring on its own destruction in 1939?

youtu.be/6DV20f1d6hI

"We have a Chech guy living in sweden starting a discussion based on fomments the Russian President Putin has made"

Guys?

I just know that at one point Hitler tried to woo Warsaw into an alliance against Russia....seen short sighted it would had made Poland a Nazi ally....with all consequences....not a good outcome in the end either.

And I don't think their fate as Moscow's pawn would had looked differently if they had become an official ally of Stalin before (if that had been possible)....

It was a ****** situation for Poland, I doubt whatever it did that something, anything would had kept them free and whole....it's the fate of their geography!

I obviously didn't watch the video but Putin is generally not trustworthy regarding russian and european history though.....

Most of Europe (including Hitler) saw Poland as Hitlers ally, on the wrong basis by the cause of the Cieszyn/Tesin dispute between Czechoslovakia and Poland.

Czechs saw Poland as a temporary state, which soon be gone from the map of Europe. Polish elite viewed it the same way towards Czechoslovakia (I remember reading a book on the matter of Czechoslovak/Polish possible alliance.

Czechs didn't see any possibility or sense for alliance with Poland until it was too late after the Munich agreement if I recall.

Which is because the Polish leadership followed the concept of Piłsudski which was to balance between Germany (Nazi Germany post 1934) and Russia (Soviet Union) as the most optimal solution thought out by Piłsudski was to be allied with France and U.K regarding the best possible way to react towards any dangers/possibilities created by Germany.

The U.K and French alliance prospect was abandoned fully by Piłsudski after seeing U.K's appeasement politics. So after his death in 1935 his "fanboys" continued his politics and continued to fight among themselves as to who could perceive the best what the "marshal" would had done. Trying to claim his legacy as leader in Poland.

When the U.K gave false guarantees in the form of a diplomatical bluff, which the French followed up with. The Polish political elite quite naively trusted that the French army would follow through with an attack from the west into Germany and the U.K navy dominating the German navy, even on the Baltic with support for Westerplatte.

Which is also why it was paramount to withheld full mobilization cause of English and French demands.

The call on the bluff and temporary co-operation between Hitler and Stalin caught the Polish elite off guard and thought that the Soviet Union with it's communism was Hitlers main adversary. Meaning that Stalin would help Poland out with any confrontation against Germany. Which again is the repetition of the fatal mistake to trust Russians with anything regarding Germany as it also happened the partition (Bar confederacy).

Any Pole with knowledge of history will wisely and true disregard any possibility of Russian help. Especially those on the right wing of politics. No matter their ideological alignments

Not a good source.

The Nazis had made it very plain what they thought of Poland and Poles; there was no ambiguity on the matter whatsoever in their leadership's words or conduct, and the Soviets were secretly conspiring with them.

Poland was in a uniquely vulnerable situation. It had a large army (and a huge army budget) however the odds were against the country.

Nah, they were full of themselves and believed that Poland can singlehandedly win against Germany. Poland was ruled by an authoritarian clique which was largely inconsistent and deluded in their dealing with foreign powers.

They believed as most of Europe that Soviet Union was in disarray and is unable to conduct any major military operation.
Hitler believed that Poland was in his camp.
Polish army was tailored to fight with Soviet Union but believed to be superior to the German Army. It might have been true in 1934 but not so much in 1938, they underestimated power of German economy, and potential of their army. Even though polish intelligence provided them with very detailed and reliable info - however it was tailored by some well meaning (sucking up a-holes) aid-the camps as to their superiors likening.

Standard sociopathic behavior known as 'blaming the victim' Putin's party line about Poland being responsible for WWII is meant to erase Soviet guilt with regard to Katyń, sabotage of the Warsaw uprising and military occupation of the country afterwards...

That was the weirdest occupation ever. Haven't seen one Soviet soldier in my entire life there. I heard that they stayed in Legnica - all 300,000 of them - and that's about it.

And, then, poof they were gone without one shot fired. Those terrible occupiers...In the meantime, like cancer, NATO is expanding and expanding...

Either that dementia or you rarely left you room.

A. Have you seen any Soviet soldiers in Poland? Where and when?
B. Nobody under 25 had dementia.
C. I was all over Poland before I left.

@Novichok
You know that Soviets infiltrated the people's army of Poland? Red army soldiers were inside bases just in case. Others worse people's army uniforms, young people not knowing pre ww2 Polish soldiers had problems spotting the difference. It perfectly shown by you and in the film "Generał Nil"

Of course they did. They would be stupid not to.
My comments are about "occupation". Normal "occupiers" do not hide. Just the opposite. So let's call it "supervision" - as the US did in Germany. Just in case...

In East Germany people guessed that Moscow didn't want to let their young Rotarmists see the comparably good life in the "West" (Poland and East Germany had been the "West" for them?)

They tried to block all unofficial contacts between their soldiers and the civilians with all means....surely not out of concern for the occupied people....

Sure, in my grandma house in 1970', in the woods 70', in Warsaw 80; In Berlin on a train in 80' ah sorry that not Poland.
I wasn't looking ...for them ..

The good citizens of Paris saw them, too. Today, the French regret that they left.
Can you try something scarier than your grandma saying hi to a Russian soldier?

What about being raped by a Soviet soldier?

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_war_crimes#1944%E2%80%931945

Pig ignorant you are.....

What are you? A virgin teenager? Of course, they did rape. And stole. And did many other awful things.
About the numbers...Everybody lies and it's always in one direction. Polish data is as trustworthy as that 600,000 US dead with covid. Then, in a moment of candor, CDC admits only 6% died from covid.

The fact remains that 30,000,000 Soviets died and that it was the Soviets that ended the damn war.
If rapes shock you so much, ask any woman if she would rather be fried like her sisters in Hiroshima. Or Dresden.

BTW, if AK, instead of being an enemy, coordinated the liberation of Poland and, specifically, Warsaw with the Soviets, could their behavior be different?

What are you? I don't know. All I know you're a moniker on a screen.
However you claimed many times you are not Polish but an American and you are very glad because of that. Sure you can voice your opinion on issues here but on the other hand that is only your opinion.

I don't think it need to be debated.
I think you are talking out of your butthole - you had your say now move on.
what do you care about Polish take on Soviet unless you are a Soviet or a Russian yourself?
Polish take on Soviet occupation is a Polish issue and polish affairs you stay out of it. Be consistent and true to your own words.

Nobody give a F what an American, or Russian or who the hell knows what thinks about whether or not Soviet occupied Poland.
Frankly your take on that is extremely stupid.

My take is based on the fact that I lived in Poland till 1966. I listened to Radio Free Europe and Voice of America. I talked to other students at WUT. My father and I talked about politics daily. He lived through the German real occupation and was well informed about Poland after the war.

Now, pay attention. At no time, did anyone I just mentioned use the word "occupation" when referring to the Soviet army being stationed in Poland. Not a single person. Ever. For whatever reason, they stayed away and we never saw any of them.

We did talk a lot about the Jewish and Polish collaborators, the UB, and how to get out. But not about the Soviet "occupation". That term is used only here by the Russia haters.

@Novichok
ever heard of Budapest 1956, Rich - or Prague,1968?? - just don't tell me that these were just examples of friendly help

As much as I heard about Korea and Vietnam. Just don't tell me that these were just examples of friendly help to make them into "democracies".

Where would you rather be?

it don't matter Rich - Soviet Russia was an imperialistic state and it wouldn't let Poland go in 1945 1956 or 1968 (or even possibly in 1980) - that you haven't seen Russian troops on the streets in your youth means nothing

It means that it was not "occupation" as this word is reserved for the occupying army to be everywhere and control everything. The problem here is that you and others are intellectually dishonest because of your Russia hate. It's just a game of words in an attempt to equate the Soviet presence with the German-style occupation with all of its horrors. Those two weren't even close.

Definition of military occupation
: control and possession of hostile territory that enables an invading nation to establish military government against an enemy or martial law against rebels or insurrectionists in its own territory

If the Soviets were "occupying" Poland then the US was and still is occupying Germany. Except that the Soviets are gone, but the Americans are still in Germany, Korea, and Japan. If you want a real occupation, go to Guantanamo and ask if and when the US is planning to get the fu*ck out.

AK units did try that during operation Burza, after co-op battles. AK commanders were arrested by NKVD and normal soldiers forced in to the people's army.

Your rosey glasses about the Soviet Union would had made you a pinkey during ww2...

So what? Even if that is the truth, you haven't seen much have you, you haven't seen Soviets dress in 'Polish' uniforms in high places, you haven't see lone soldiers of underground surviving out there - you haven't seen AK people leaving prison after 10 years or more or coming back from Siberia.

You were petty much unaware of those facts that were happening around you.
so how the hell you dare to make such assumption based on the fact you haven't seen fully armed Soviet soldiers or tanks on every street corner..

I mean its fun and all to debate finer points of what actually 'occupation' means and which definition should we apply to a purely academical question but what your point beside being an argumentative grump?

Occupation - that word convey the fact that Poland was a subjugated nation with a puppet government created by the power and might of the Soviet union force. That same administrative positions and policing were relegated to locals means nothing and change nothing.


Sure if they would they could find themslefses inside an interrogation room. Beside if you take 1960' as your reference point that was a new generation brainwashed by Soviet education and propaganda to a large extent.

Anyway could you please stop bringing up some anecdotal evidence as that is not a real evidence at all. Also when you talk about it you contradict yourself so much that it puts in question all you claimed about yourself.. Not that I care but still if you make it too obvious I'm tempted to abuse you rather that talk with you.


That is what many Germans claims today/
Beside that USA occupation were not the same as Soviet one due to different natures of those countries

So this. To normal people going about their daily lives, life was normal under Soviet control. No lapanki, No mass executions. No fear. No starvation. No tanks in the streets.

To everybody with a brain, that was an improvement. Throwing labels and adjectives around today does not change that reality.
But it is obvious that the hate of Russia is a mental disorder here. To the afflicted Katyn = Auschwitz. Numbers mean nothing to them.
To the sane, numbers are everything. Like the number of Poles executed by (1) the Soviets or (2) their Polish collaborators from 1946 till 1990.
And spare me the crap about the war. In wars, people die. I already know that.

Define normal!
To do that you need some kind od a template you compare it to. IF you compare Soviet Poland from 1956 onwards to Poland under German rule in 1939 - 1944 that yes there was a difference but it doesn't mean that Poland wasn't occupied by the Soviet Union.

It only means that ways, aims and goals of those two totalitarian regimes were different when it comes to Poland. The length of occupation also need to be taken into account.

German occupation of France or Denmark wouldn't fit your template either of what occupation entail if your template is Poland under Germany during WWII.

Do you claim that France (a part of France) and Denmark wasn't really occupied by Germans.????#

See there is the reason I say that your argument here is extremely stupid.
You have something in your mind you can't even formulate properly - you make a half-baked statement and then you defend it with a bunch of wiki quotes not because you care about them but because you want to support your gut feeling about an issue. To make it sound thought out. When in fact you didn't think about it much or at all.

You just blur out your opinion basing it on your gut feeling and claim that is a statement of a genius
No wonder people call you a dumb ass and just give up on you...
Do a better job next time will you!


That is a crap that is thrown around by as-holes that sit safely on the other side of the world. The only thing Russian they have to deal with is a mail order bride from Russia if they are lucky.

In Poland people intuitively differentiate between Russians and the Russian state whichever form it takes! Said Russian state is a messy, inefficient in most fields, authoritarian crappy regime that can't be trusted at the best times.

Especially by those who border it or are not as strong.
There is nothing to admire there, they put all the work and resources they have ( vast land mass and many ores) to maintain their existence as a power. They have nothing left to spare to improve their lives and their country because all the activity and potential is constrained or corrupted in ways that makes Russia not a very nice place to live for so called 'normal' people.

If you choose to call it hate then it is you that have a serious mental problem and this a given.


Well if occupation continues after a war for 40 years as it was the case then number of collaborators or some such would naturally increase. It doesn't make it less occupied if that is your claim..

You get up. Eat breakfast. Take a shower. Go to work. Come back. Eat dinner. Annoy kids. Read. Listen. Go to bed. Notice the absence of any anti-government activities or associations. So secret meetings, no memos or manifestos, no spying for the Americans, either.


How could a man from Mars know that Poland was "occupied" by the Soviets? He couldn't because we couldn't, either. But he would know instantly that Poland was occupied by the Germans.

I don't deny that Poland was under Soviet control. With the Americans close by, they would be stupid not to stay in Poland. I object to using the terms that are forever connected with the Germans. Like occupation. Just as I object to the term Nazis as an attempt to whitewash the criminality of the entire nation that cheerfully supported the war - until Stalingrad.

Again, nobody in Poland ever used the term 'Soviet occupation" or even German occupation. It was okupacja. There was no need to add "German" as it was self-evident and the only one known to the Poles. If you said "during occupation", nobody sane would ask which one did you mean - German or the Soviet.

Yes, there are different shades of occupations. Soviet "occupation" of Poland was such that the use of the word diminishes and insults the victims of the real occupation by the barbarians.

Well in that case France and Denmark (an exmaple) weren't occupied by Germany. . You call yourself a genius I think you are on opposite side of the spectrum.


Lets ask him. Is he your secret friend?


Who are you to object? You can express your opinion but that about it. I don't care what an American think about it. Mind your own business.

Look Soviet occupation wasn't better than German occupation in any shape or form. Was different with different altitudes and aims.
We can argue about details pro and cons but there is no need. However I cannot agree that Soviet occupation wasn't real one or much better than German one.

German one was a war time occupation. When you talk about Soviet you are talking about later stages of their occupation. The initial stage of Soviet occupation wasn't that much better or less barbarian or genocidal than German one. Sure 12 - 20 years in that occupation wasn't so brutal anymore but to say what you say one has to be like you talking about you gut feeling not about reality.

This moronic statement ends this conversation.

Why? After the French surrendered the Parisians for example lived quite well under the german occupation....if not for the Resistance the common citizens had their normal lives back.

It truly makes a difference if its war time or peace time, when the war is officially over....

The Soviets showed their true faces whenever there had been uprisings. No communist rule could have had hold for long in the Soviet Empire without the backing of the soviet troops in these countries.

The fate of the GDR was sealed as Gorbachev said "njet" to the pleading East Berlin dictators to send the tanks in '89.....that's the cornerpoints of an occupation, Iron is right!