The BEST Guide to POLAND
Unanswered  |  Archives 
 
 
User: Guest

Home / History  % width posts: 286

Did British public protest against the sell out of Poland to the Soviets?


rozumiemnic 8 | 3,854
23 Jul 2012 #91
Sandancer, Ironside, we have to move on!
even my dad was only a small child in WW2, and i am no spring chicken.
we know nothing about what really happened in WW2, apart from what we have read in our rather biased history books.
to the OP; realisitically we have NO CLUE if the 'British public protested against the sell out of Poland to the Soviets' - none of us were alive,

(except possibly nunczka....)
however I should point out that as part of the 'sell out', thousands of Polish were offered a home in the UK.
how do we know what real choices our leaders had at that time?
Ironside 53 | 12,420
23 Jul 2012 #92
Ironside, we have to move on!

Yes indeed, I just cannot stand stupidity.
Facts are facts, Poland and Poles suffered unimaginable atrocities during the war, they made countless noble sacrifice to be left for Soviets to digest. Poland still suffer consequences of WWII in a bad way.

And then along come some as hole with a **** for brains and disrespect all those people, or some part-time histrionic(sic!) buff and claims that British suffered accordingly. No they didn't, not generally. Somebody else state that Poles talk all the time about WWII, so do British, my granddad this or that, this town was bombed, there a hole in the ground were German bomber crashed. Fine, in Poland half the country was almost wiped out, do I talk about that all the time? No, almost not at all, only when I'm accosted by an ignorant snotty ****!

Show some respect if you want to be respected in return.
I'm the most reasonable man there is, only specific of PF brings the worst out of me:)
rozumiemnic 8 | 3,854
23 Jul 2012 #93
I do actually agree with you Ironside, both nations suffered in WW2 but cannot be compared, thanks to the English Channel, FGS POland lost 20 per cent of its civilian population. that's one person in five,gone!

I just do not see the point of arguing about it now in 2012 with people who are not interested in history.

ignorant snotty ****!

carry on, carry on.
i just think you are wasting your energy.
Chris R 1 | 34
23 Jul 2012 #94
Let's blame the British for Polands complete lack of ability to be able to defend its borders!

Yes, the Brits and French permitted Hitler to militarize the Rhineland in contravention of the Versailles Treaty, then gave away Czechoslovakia to Hitler without a fight. However, the former offered no real defense against a Anglo-French attack in September 1939. (See General Alfred Jodl's Testimony at the Trial of the Major War Criminals, supra.) The latter created another border which Poland needed to defend against the stronger Nazi's, and could not.

Chamberlain's appeasement strategy was founded on a need to create a strong Germany as bulwark against the communist USSR. That strategy came from the failure of the British to support Pilsudski's goal of reforming the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth such that a political entity existed between Germany and the USSR that would have been able to withstand the combined might of both of them. According to British historian A.J. P. Taylor, the Treaty of Riga determined events in East in WWII, and in some ways it still does, but that is the topic of a larger discussion.
Ironside 53 | 12,420
23 Jul 2012 #95
I just do not see the point of arguing about it now in 2012 with people who are not interested in history.

sanddancer is posting here for sometime, and he is coming back for more, I'm just holding mirror in front of his beak.

i just think you are wasting your energy.

I'm done for a month :)
Harry
23 Jul 2012 #96
" Yes, the Brits and French permitted Hitler to militarize the Rhineland in contravention of the Versailles Treaty, then gave away Czechoslovakia to Hitler without a fight."

Hysterical. Who was closer to Germany and thus far more able to do something about the Rhineland Poland or the UK? But Chris blames the Brits for Poland doing nothing.

But what is even more laughable is the way he whines about Czechoslovakia but fails to mention that Poland took part in the Nazi invasion of that country. Superb white-washing of history!
sanddancer 2 | 58
24 Jul 2012 #97
Yes, the Brits and French permitted Hitler to militarize the Rhineland in contravention of the Versailles Treaty, then gave away Czechoslovakia to Hitler without a fight.

Chris R... are you a politician? Just answer the question. Why do the Poles never protect their borders with an efficient force? Look at GDP spent by the UK on defence. Why should the Poles continually ask the UK for assistance when they arn't prepared to pay for their own defence?
Chris R 1 | 34
24 Jul 2012 #98
Why should the Poles continually ask the UK for assistance when they arn't prepared to pay for their own defence?

Obviously you owe them something.

Ingrate!
sanddancer 2 | 58
24 Jul 2012 #99
Why do the Poles think that their insignificant nation is the be all and end all. The UK owes Poland nothing. Never has done and never will do. The Poles need to sort out their own defence and stop begging for help. You'll soon stop bleating 'Yalta' or 'imperialists' to the British and the US when the Germans or Russians come knocking again!
Chris R 1 | 34
24 Jul 2012 #100
Why do the Poles think that their insignificant nation is the be all and end all.

It must be all of those Brits who come to Poland for their stag parties...
or maybe because of all of the guys like Harry who need to come to Poland to find a girlfriend.

Poles also did invent vodka, crack the Nazi codes and fought on all fronts against the Nazis, then tore down the Iron Curtain.

Try finding another nation that did all of that.

If Poland is such an insignificant nation, why do need to spend so much time posting here?
Wroclaw Boy
24 Jul 2012 #101
Why do the Poles think that their insignificant nation is the be all and end all.

That's easy - patriotism = the right to feel superior based on the lottery that is ones place of birth, or in some cases where their parents were born.

are you patriotic sanddancer? i bet you are....
sanddancer 2 | 58
24 Jul 2012 #102
but trying to stand against the two at the same time was only ever going to end one way

Since 1989 what have the Poles done to strenghten it's defences. It spends a woeful amount of it's GDP on defence. In the event the Poles are hoping that somebody else will bail them out as usual! The UK spent 62billion dollars on defence in 2011 (2.6% of its GDP usd893 per capita) the Poles usd285 per capita! Next time we agree to save the Poles arse we should ask them for payment first.
Ironside 53 | 12,420
24 Jul 2012 #103
Next time we agree to save the Poles arse we should ask them for payment first.

When was the first time? Didn't you do a great job? Do you want payment for that?
sanddancer 2 | 58
24 Jul 2012 #104
1939-1945 we occupied the Germans time and stopped them from wiping out the Untermensch!
teflcat 5 | 1,029
24 Jul 2012 #105
Untermensch!

Could you please clarify what you mean by that?
Ironside 53 | 12,420
24 Jul 2012 #106
1939-1945 we occupied the Germans time and stopped them from wiping out the Untermensch!

OH? And I was drinking tea armed in belief that you are clever enough not to bite it, little did I know.

Did you really? Prove it? How many British regular troops were fighting Germans on Polish soil?What took you so long to bring the fight to Germany?

Isn't it that a fact that you were late six years in delivering what you promised?
Meanwhile Germans killed whoever they wanted in Poland.Shouldn't all destructions and loss of life happening between September 1939 and the end of the war in Poland be your responsibility?

If that treaty would have been private contract you wouldn't stand the chance in the court of law.
Finally the pleasure you evidently feel using the word untermensch isn't a clear indication that you are racist in modern sense of the word. I would say that you are using that word to compensate your own numerous shortcomings.

Germans never really believed that Poles are unter-something they just were mad and vengeful at Poles for refusing their offer of alliance. Otherwise they wouldn't been kidnapping Polish kids to rise them as Germans.

To make it clear.
Britain never acted on behave of Poland. Never done any favours to Poland. Also Your suggestion that somehow Britain single-handedly won war with Germany is laughable at best.
isthatu2 4 | 2,694
24 Jul 2012 #107
Britain never acted on behave of Poland.

Why should it? The British governments job was and is to look after the interests of Britain and the British people. Exactly the same for the Polish Government.

Grow up people,international diplomacy is an adult game not one for children into silly notions of honour.....what did *Polish Honour* achieve for Poland in the 20th century?
sanddancer 2 | 58
24 Jul 2012 #108
Britain never acted on behave of Poland. Never done any favours to Poland. Also Your suggestion that somehow Britain single-handedly won war with Germany is laughable at best

Did I say that the UK single handedly won the War? Tell me why did the UK go to war against the Axis Powers? What about the Polish rubbish of Polish airmen winning the Battle of Britain or a Pope bringing down communism!
Ironside 53 | 12,420
24 Jul 2012 #109
Why should it? The British governments job was and is to look after the interests of Britain and the British people. Exactly the same for the Polish Government.
Grow up people,international diplomacy is an adult game not one for children into silly notions of honour.....what did *Polish Honour* achieve for Poland in the 20th century?

Ask sandancer!

Tell me why did the UK go to war against the Axis Powers?

Traditionally to keep the balance of power in Europe.

What about the Polish rubbish of Polish airmen winning the Battle of Britain

Well, they outweighed the scale a little in your favour. The battle was won by the skin of teeth.

Pope bringing down communism!

That for those who belief in divine intervention and power of prayer.
Harry
24 Jul 2012 #110
If that treaty would have been private contract you wouldn't stand the chance in the court of law.

Really? Is that why you point-blank refuse to ever go into detail about the aid which it was within Britain's power to give to Poland in September 1939 but which was not given?
papieza 5 | 25
24 Jul 2012 #111
I understand why Polish people feel betrayed and I'm not getting into all that about treaties ect but what I don't understand is why only anti-British. If I was Polish I would be Anti-French who surrendered against the Germans or anti-Italian who fought with the Germans. It's these countries who prolonged the war, weakened the American and British armies and strengthened Russia's hand. Why is there no Anti-French & Italian feelings?
Harry
24 Jul 2012 #112
Because the lie which the Nazis spread after invading Poland was that everything was the fault of the British. The communists also found that lie to be useful and so ensured that it continued to be told.
teflcat 5 | 1,029
24 Jul 2012 #113
1939-1945 we occupied the Germans time and stopped them from wiping out the Untermensch!

"We"? Forgive me if I'm wrong but were you even alive in1945?
Let me ask you one more time, what/who did you mean by Untermensch?
Ironside 53 | 12,420
24 Jul 2012 #114
Really?

Really! What troops, air forces and the navy movement occurred in September 1939? I mean British forces.
It is easy to prove really!

what I don't understand is why only anti-British.

It is no anti-British. It is assumption by some Brits that Britain was doing favours to Poland during WWII>
Also denial of the fact that France and Britain done nothing to fulfil their obligation in 1939.
French? Who cares about French? They are though about with contempt or not at all.

Let me ask you one more time, what/who did you mean by Untermensch?

As I said - up-tight pricks! At lest some:)
isthatu2 4 | 2,694
24 Jul 2012 #115
French? Who cares about French?

anyone with any understanding of actual history and not comminist propaganda.
France was the European superpower of the day. France had the large standing army based on Germanys borders. France was the senior partner in the alliance, French generals were in charge of all fo rces in france.

Pretty simple. France is to blame for there not being a land invasion of germany in 1939. They had a million men on the german border, britain had....ZERO.
Ironside 53 | 12,420
24 Jul 2012 #116
anyone with any understanding of actual history and not comminist propaganda.

in public perception of today, sugar cane :)
teflcat 5 | 1,029
24 Jul 2012 #117
up-tight pricks

You talkin' to me?
isthatu2 4 | 2,694
24 Jul 2012 #118
in public perception of today, sugar cane :)

Ok,change that public perception. Its your countries history,its upto you guys to fact check.
There were no British soldiers on germanys borders in september 1939,there were however over a million French soldiers on germanys borders at the time.
They did nothing.
By the time British ground forces had arrived on the continent ,in France,under French command,Poland had already fallen to the germans and Soviets.

n kay,suger plum? :)
Ironside 53 | 12,420
24 Jul 2012 #119
You talkin' to me?

not that I call you that, just commenting undermesch stuff!
isthatu2 4 | 2,694
24 Jul 2012 #120
You talkin' to me?

...the streets are filled with skunkpussies......
I know,I know,see you in the bin,but was worth it for Taxi Driver gag :)


Home / History / Did British public protest against the sell out of Poland to the Soviets?