The BEST Guide to POLAND
Unanswered  |  Archives 
 
 
User: Guest

Home / History  % width posts: 221

Would you classify the Poland's Communist years as a "Soviet occupation" ?


milky 13 | 1,657
6 Feb 2012 #211
Sinn Fein standing in free and fair elections doesn't fit any known definition of occupation.

Well...the native Irish, have now, got equal rights to the unionist, but they still live within an artificial state drawn up by the British to give a majority to the British Unionist living in the six counties.

So it's still occupation.
Poland was occupied by Russia; so what!! if there wasn't a gigantic Russian Army presence throughout; Did the Russian not wipe out the remainder of the elite after the Germans. To install a totalitarian regime in a headless country, doesn't require a big army after the initial invasion.
JonnyM 11 | 2,620
6 Feb 2012 #212
Actually 'drawn up' to prevent a civil war.

The PRL wasn't an occupation for reasons well established in this thread.
milky 13 | 1,657
6 Feb 2012 #213
Actually 'drawn up' to prevent a civil war.

There 'was' a civil war, did you not hear about it..

The PRL wasn't an occupation for reasons well established in this thread.

well established??
Harry
6 Feb 2012 #214
Well give us some examples where the People's army were autonomous, as the only time I have heard of them doing anything was in '68 under Soviet orders.

If the Polish army was entirely under the control of Moscow, why was Moscow planning an invasion of Poland in December 1980? Come to think of it, if Poland was (as you claim) an occupied nation in 1980, how could Moscow plan any invasion of the Poland?!
modafinil - | 418
6 Feb 2012 #215
There was a rolling army of at least 100,000 Soviets in Poland already, how could they invade when they invaded decades before and never left.

Intervention not invasion - The sheepdog barking at the wayward sheep, for the very reason that Poland was becoming out of step and were to be re-aligned due to the weakness of the current Polish leader, approved by the Kremlin, who was found wanting in dealing with the stirrings of the Solidarity movement - the rebellion to gain back civil liberties lost to the Block. It was marshall law that stopped the Kremlin supplanting the People Army. The Soviets got their way.
Harry
6 Feb 2012 #216
There was a rolling army of at least 100,000 Soviets in Poland already, how could they invade when they invaded decades before and never left

100,000 at the most. Not that either way it means that Poland was an occupied country.

So you would consider that GDR was for all of its existence an occupied country? There were more than three times as many foreign troops there than in Poland.

Intervention not invasion - The sheepdog barking at the wayward sheep

Tell that to the Hungarians and the Czechs.
Wroclaw 44 | 5,384
6 Feb 2012 #217
So you would consider that GDR was for all of its existence an occupied country?

i might. as it was russians in charge of germans who were pointing weapons at me when i did border patrol in berlin.
Harry
6 Feb 2012 #218
Of course it was Soviets in charge of German troops: Berlin most certainly was an occupied city.
modafinil - | 418
6 Feb 2012 #219
100,000 at the most. Not that either way it means that Poland was an occupied country.

I can't find a stat. I know by '89 there was 40,000 Red soldiers left.

So you would consider that GDR was for all of its existence an occupied country? There were more than three times as many foreign troops there than in Poland.

It's not the number it was the efficiency of control I was pointing to and that they had a presence as part of a feedback system.

However my entire point on occupation is that the nation that controls the military is the occupier. Just rhetorically, as a percentage, how big was the Raj in India.
Wroclaw 44 | 5,384
6 Feb 2012 #220
Berlin most certainly was an occupied city.

for clarification: it wasn't the east-west division i meant. rather in the west of west berlin, adjoining east germany proper.

with the number of troops mentioned above it seems like an occupation in all but name. it may be considered passive though as a large number of troops were probably confined to barracks. I guess it depends whose eyes you're looking through.
Peter Cracow
9 Feb 2012 #221
let's consider an alternative variant of the history:
In 1940 Germans pull back their soldiers, SS and Gestapo from Polish territory to barracks. They establish Polish goverment with PM Jan Kowalski who speaks Polish wirh German accent. All ministers are Polish origin nazi fans and controll Polish police, (volks)army and whole administration. In any case Germans keep their soldiers close to big cities, but don't let them show theirselves. What more, sometimes Germans respect Herr Kowalski's opinions, try to turn Poles attitude for pisitive, etc.

SAY, WHAT IS THAT?
Occupation, domination, dependance?


Home / History / Would you classify the Poland's Communist years as a "Soviet occupation" ?
BoldItalic [quote]
 
To post as Guest, enter a temporary username or login and post as a member.